I Support Epic Games (about Exclusive Titles)

"

AldarisGrave wrote:

GoG isn't dead, Uplay and Origin aren't dead. What's the difference between them and Epic, well one Chinese overlord for starters and the fact that Epic's only gift to the PC market is FortNite, which the BR bubble will burst and the game will crash hard.

Epic has so little faith in thier storefront that they aren't willing to engage the free market and instead play dirty and buy up a monopoly thanks to Chinese coin purses. GoG doesn't do that, neither does EA and Ubisoft, only Epic.

Exclusive marketing rights is quite common for businesses. More surprised for the hostility. It require a legal binding contract to forbid sales on other distribution platforms. It have to be more attractive and alluring and probably more expensive to secure such a contract.

Could steam or other distribution platform force developers to enter such legal binding contract to sell exclusively on steam? They most certainly could but they would have to offer more attractive contracts and significantly drive up their cost. There is little benefit to do so so they don't.

"

Not sure what you're talking about. Without exclusivity the user has free choice where to buy the games. It's the best option for consumers by far.

More choices does not come at no cost. If consumers think so, they would be wrong. There is sacrifices to be made when the interests of Consumers, the Games, Publishers and Developers are concerned. Opportunity cost is a key concept in economics. Even as Consumer protection is important, companies shouldn't make poor decision in doing so.

You don't chose where they sell it, they do. There is no Scams or Frauds. How about you demonstratively prove how harmful it is rather than a minor inconvenience. The internet is just one mouse click away. When You have to go to another store to get something is an anti consumer practice. Oh The HOrror!

"

Having store exclusivity is not even remotly the same as having DRM. The comparison makes no sense.

You make no sense whatsoever.

"

deathflower wrote:

How about you demonstratively prove how harmful it is rather than a minor inconvenience.

The Epic Games Store is trash compared to Steam. It has barely any features. And its security is shoddy at best. It also gives the user less options.

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

deathflower wrote:

How about you demonstratively prove how harmful it is rather than a minor inconvenience.

The Epic Games Store is trash compared to Steam. It has barely any features. And its security is shoddy at best. It also gives the user less options.

In other words, it’s working. You just don't like it. Convincing you to like it is not my job. Ask someone else.

"

deathflower wrote:

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

deathflower wrote:

How about you demonstratively prove how harmful it is rather than a minor inconvenience.

The Epic Games Store is trash compared to Steam. It has barely any features. And its security is shoddy at best. It also gives the user less options.

In other words, it’s working. You just don't like it. Convincing you to like it is not my job. Ask someone else.

I don't have an acct (yet) but from what I've seen the site is an ugly mess. If they want to compete with the big boys they have to get it to look like someone other than a Chinese school kid designed it.

I think Steam, fucking Origin, and fucking Uplay is enough.

Sorry to hear that GOG is doing crappy financially as they seem like a better alternative to Steam than Epic.

"

Xavderion wrote:

If you think there is a goalpost, it is just your imagination. Chess don't have a goalpost, silly goose.

Well the bottom line is this:

You are marginalizing your own power as a consumer when you take such a binary position on things like this. It's true that exclusivity is not ideal for consumers. But neither is it ideal to have one service dominate the market and dictate its terms to both customers and developers virtually unopposed.

You have to do the calculus for yourself to determine which imperfect situation benefits you the most. And compared to the inconvience of having to buy another console to play a Nintendo exclusive title, making an extra 3 clicks to start up a game in Epic Launcher is a hilariously low price to pay in order to nudge Valve to give both the consumer and game developers a better deal in the spirit of competition.

To me it's basically that simple.

There are better ways than choosing between Valve and Epic. You can buy from BOTH and then also complain to BOTH! And now since they are competeing over your money, they will BOTH be much more liekly to listen. But if everyone gets enraged over a trivial inconvience then you'll never have the oppurtunity to pit both of these giants' interest against one another! By siding with either one, you are just giving away your power as a consumer! Why would you do that? Cuz exclusive? Dosn't seem worht it to me.

I'm not saying it isn't fair to be annoyed by exclusive titles but you've got to be able to see beyond that and see the bigger picture! No situation is going to be perfect. You've got to pick the best option of the two. Are we really too lazy to make 3 extra clicks that we'd willingly marginalize our own buying power just to avoid having to do that?

It's totally different for say, AMD vs NVidia. I know that Nvidia is too dominant, and thus doesn't push out the best products that it can at the best prices either... they just sort of stay just ahead of AMD enough to be able to continue to charge premium prices over AMD... so due to AMD's inability to keep up, the entire graphics tech industry has been retarded because Nvidia has no incentive to give us the best they can possible come up with or to lower their profit margins in order to relive our wallets a bit. But at the same time I'm not going to permenantly gimp my PC with an AMD GPU in order to promote competition between them becasue its much too costly vs my own interests.

But 3 extra clicks... is a bargain of a price to pay on the other hand. It's a no brainer. You just take that deal. You just take it.

Not to mention, as I saidEpic games has a proven track record, they are probably THE most conscientious tech company in the games industry. Which is enough to earn them a bit of protection against demonization in my opinion. And so what that they have a connection to China? Everything is going to have a connection to China soon enough, so you'd better get used to it.

"

BearCares wrote:

I'm not saying it isn't fair to be annoyed by exclusive titles but you've got to be able to see beyond that and see the bigger picture! No situation is going to be perfect. You've got to pick the best option of the two. Are we really too lazy to make 3 extra clicks that we'd willingly marginalize our own buying power just to avoid having to do that?

You're misrepresenting the situation a bit. Yes, there are people who want everything on Steam and hate every other launcher. I'm not one of those people, I use like 5 launchers (mostly for first party exclusives) and I'm fine with it. What I'm not fine with is being forced to use a shitty launcher which lacks basic features just because Epic is moneyhatting some 3rd party devs. That's bullshit.

"

deathflower wrote:

How about you demonstratively prove how harmful it is rather than a minor inconvenience.

The epic Launcher currently contravenes European data security laws, as well as personal data protection laws. that is not a minor inconvenience but an offense. fortunately for epic nobody really cares about this right now.

As long as they don't fix this, they are just a sorry excuse for a company. Even a 2 man company is able to adhere to these simple guidelines. It gets even more problematic as their main "customers" are minors.

GOG is by far the best launcher politics wise. Fortunately for me, epic doesn't really have anything worthwhile for me in their exclusive list. All the games i like are actually sold over other avenues like uplay(shitty launcher but at least they can actually follow laws) or even the ms store (yes even they where able to do it.)

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

BearCares wrote:

I'm not saying it isn't fair to be annoyed by exclusive titles but you've got to be able to see beyond that and see the bigger picture! No situation is going to be perfect. You've got to pick the best option of the two. Are we really too lazy to make 3 extra clicks that we'd willingly marginalize our own buying power just to avoid having to do that?

You're misrepresenting the situation a bit. Yes, there are people who want everything on Steam and hate every other launcher. I'm not one of those people, I use like 5 launchers (mostly for first party exclusives) and I'm fine with it. What I'm not fine with is being forced to use a shitty launcher which lacks basic features just because Epic is moneyhatting some 3rd party devs. That's bullshit.

I'm trying to follow your logic, but I just can't. Somewhere in that short paragraph you got upset enough to say 'That's bullshit' but I'm not exactly sure why.

I dunno, when consumers see two companies going after one another like this they should be rubbing their hands together saying, 'dis gon be gud!'They should be instigating rather than choosing one side over the other. *shrug*