No big deal. Game looks like a turd anyway.
But you can toast marshmallows at a campfire. :)
I have that game in the Windows Store! MS gave it as gift for watching the last year E3 conference on mixer.
I honestly thought this was already a known Epic exclusive, but clearly not. Was there maybe some announcement that anything published by Annapurna would be exclusive, or something like that?
Why go with half measures. If you’re going to fuck over the crowdfunding supporters, might as well also fuck over Microsoft. I’m sure they’re just delighted.
Heh, we’ll see. MS Store is a segment of the market so small that maybe it will be unaffected by this. :P
Yeah talk about generic names.
I think the Epic intern responsible for sending the Outer Worlds exclusivity check sent it to Outer Wilds by accident and c’est la vie.
The best way to talk about the Epic Game Store is to actually go out and try it. Which is what I did this afternoon. I installed the Epic Game Store client, purchased a game, and started to play it.
Background, I WANT the service to succeed. I cannot think of anytime when increased competition has actually hurt consumers in the long run. There is plenty of complaint here about games being exclusive to Epic, but plenty of PC games are already de facto exclusive to Valve. Also, the client has tiny, hard to read text and I cannot find a way to adjust it for my higher resolution monitor. Plus, simple economics: more money goes to creating games as oppose to selling games, more games and higher quality games will get made.
So, how does Epic currently compare? Well, their store front does not have a lot of the features I’ve come to depend upon when shopping on Steam. There is no browse by genre, nor any way to filter out pre-order or early access games. The best way to shop is to already know the title of the game you want to buy. Of course, they don’t have nearly the volume Steam does.
There were also no reviews. This made it very difficult for me to “impulse” buy anything. So, we are back to buying the game a shopper was thinking about buying anyways. I ended up buying the walking simulator “Close to the Sun.” The individual game pages looked fine, and the taking my money part went smoothly.
Downloading the game went quickly, as did navigating the library to launch the game (though with only 1 game, it better have).
So, overall, I hope Epic is planning on continuing to update this one, including updates for the text size, which were also tiny and I could not find a way to enlarge. Right now, the store front is not an immediate threat to Valve. It does not have the titles, it does not have the features, and what it does well Steam does slightly better.
On the other hand, the platform is only 6 months old, and the client has a link to their “roadmap,” with some of the lacking features I mentioned planned to be added for the near future.
What I am not worried about, right now, is games being exclusive to the platform. If there is a specific title you want to play, I can’t imagine any consumer would have a worse experience buying it off of Epic Game Store versus Steam. He or she would probably not buy anything else while doing so.
Unless you use Steam features. Workshop, home streaming, family sharing, BPM with the controller configuration and sharing tools, etc.
It’s not the largest group in the world, I know, but it’s hard to not have a worse experience when you don’t have a native client.
Other than the things you just said were worse?
Sounds like Star Control? :D
Also, at least as of a couple weeks ago (last time I looked) the store pages still suck in terms of conveying some basic information. Is the game multiplayer or single player? Does it have DRM? Does it support a gamepad or is it KB/M only? I’m talking something basic like this:
I typically have to pull the store page up on Steam (if it’s listed, of course) to find this stuff out.
I don’t think that’s fair. I think Epic sucks, I think this is a greed move on their part that will end up poorly for consumers, I think their platform is terrible, etc.
But what he was essentially saying is, if you want to just go buy a single game, you know what that game is, and don’t need add-ons, workshop, etc. (i.e. you just want to buy and play a game as it is sold), you’re not really going to notice any worse experience running the game through an Epic launcher than you are a Steam launcher.
And that’s probably fair, as limited as it is. I have The Division 2 on UPlay. I don’t like UPlay either, but it’s really not that hard to click “Play” on The Division 2 on UPlay, no harder than it is for a Steam game.
So, the question is, does a game lose features by going to Epic, if it never was going to use those features in the first place?
Actually, I was curious. How hard is it to run a game on Linux, if it doesn’t support Linux? That sounded like a real legitimate complaint, because Epic doesn’t support Linux, but is it? If a game comes out on Steam, but doesn’t support Linux, does it still run on Linux without any issues?
Valve has put a lot of work into Proton.
I’m sure it’s been brought up before in response to all the “But what has Valve ever done for gamers?” posts, but just in case you missed it. ;)
Epic isn’t directly to blame for studios choosing to screw over their kickstarter backers. They are indirectly at fault, but if I were in their shoes I wouldn’t care either.
Looks like it can be used independently from Steam, which is nice.
Thanks for mentioning this, pretty cool for those that use Linux.
And months have passed and the store hasn’t received any QoL changes. What is EPIC doing? Spend some of that developer bribe money on making the store provide some decent information regarding the games features.