KevinC
3464
Honestly I expect the exclusive route to work quite well for Epic. People are going to want to get Borderlands 3, and they’ll install the EGS to get it.
Bluddy
3465
Yeah this has been well noted. It’s a huge contrast from the millions they specified for the free downloads from their store. It’s quite clear the sales aren’t amazing, or they would have specified some number with ‘thousands’ or ‘millions’ preceding it. Instead, they found a figure to compare against that they can manipulate to sound good without anyone knowing the specifics.
Yup. It pisses me off no end, but I’ve no doubt it’ll work. If the modern world has taught us anything, it’s that people will sacrifice just about everything in the interest of convenience.
They very quickly walked back the ‘$500 million in revenue from third party titles’ quote.
Probably because everyone selling on the store was like
Price fixing is different than what is being described here.
He misspoke. It was Half-Life 2: Episode 3 which was most definitely promised.
You could say that. This thread is mostly the same 4 people making the same complaints over and over again, assuming they speak for everyone. But most people don’t think of Epic like a spurned lover.
Mmm, the good old “absence of evidence is evidence of absence” canard, with a “oh yeah, and we’re ignoring that evidence for reasons” chaser!
Is the Epic fanclub more unbearable than the Souls or the Undertale one? You decide, because I don’t care about engaging with this level of misconstruction.
draxen
3471
That’s pretty insightful and not something I’d not considered.
KevinC
3472
No kidding. It’s like a strawman massacre in here.
Careful. If you say the word ‘strawman’ in this thread, you run the risk of people laughing at you for telling them they’re misunderstanding your arguments.
jsnell
3474
Given that the discussion was not about price fixing, and given that nobody used the term price fixing, what exactly are you trying to accomplish with that statement? You might as well have said that pink elephants are different than what was being described.
People in this thread claim that Steam has a secret price parity clause that’s preventing Epic from competing on price. Wide-reaching price parity / MFN clauses have been found illegal in Europe for similar businesses. And despite that, nobody (including Epic) has actually filed a complaint about Steam. Why?
Grifman
3475
Maybe I missed it but where has anyone estimated the size or the number or percentage of people that feel the way a number of forum members here feel? I don’t remember anyone saying that their opinion(s) represented the majority or any other proportion. Did I miss something?
For what it is worth I stand opposed to the Epic Games moves… I get capitalism and I get the whole idea. But I really dislike exclusives. I have to admit I love my comfort zone with steam. And I don’t care to run over to GOG (in hopes they will get NOlf or Nolf 2) … But taking games I have wishlisted from one store to another…and then made them exclusive?
No. I will remain the one stolid person that sticks with steam I guess. I have never had a problem with them and frankly I can’t see why I would move over. (uh well, except for the new games on epic exclusive)
Many different comments about ‘gamers’ having long memories re: Epic not shipping PC games for a spawn of years, and ‘customers’ as though they are big aggregate groups, and speculations on the success of titles like BL3 (i.e. how customers as a whole will react). The implication is that it’s wider than just one person’s opinion. That’s my sense anyway.
I don’t think that’s a direct comparison you can make, from a cursory investigation.
Here’s an analogy.
Say you want WalMart to carry your product. After you go to the Walton’s farm and fall on your knees and beg for the right to have your product carried in WalMart, say you make an agreement with Target, who you allow to sell it for half the price.
WalMart isn’t going to stock something on their shelves that’s twice the price of a competitor.
So, they don’t stock it, or you allow them to sell it for the same price.
Is that illegal? You don’t have a right to be stocked on their store at all. You make an agreement to do so, and WalMart takes a specific cut that they negotiate with you, and you take it or leave it.
Isn’t the “begging” analogy incorrect? I thought Steam allows nearly any game to list there?
Also, can we clarify if Steam’s pricing rules apply to the product in all stores, or only to the product when distribution is via Steam keys?
Nah, that’s just what you have to do at WalMart. I’m just having fun with my analogy because… WalMart. And I’m making a point about your rights as someone who sells stuff at one of the biggest stores in the world.
I disagree that Steam is a morally repugnant as WalMart, and find this specific detail of the analogy misleading.
Okay? I’m not trying to make the point that Valve is repugnant. I love the folks at Valve.
I say that a lot.
I AM trying to make the point that they are a store, and they can set whatever rules they want for what is allowed on their store. They are not obliged to stock anything, and they can revoke that privilege for whatever reason.
I agree, you didn’t make that point explicitly, but likening Valve to Walmart squeezing suppliers who must “beg” is quite close IMO.
On the merits - can you clarify in what situations Steam requires price parity?
