5110

The one who wants to brush aside the fact that a dev was refused access to the store shelf after refusing exclusivity as if the dev himself didn’t actually point that out in the statement he released. There is no reason to believe that devs experience is unique or that they have an intention of changing their strategy.

5111

OK, but who, though? I don’t know who you’re referring to. Not Lunarstorm, because all he said was the statement “wasn’t 100% accurate”.

5112

You’ve basically constructed an impossible standard. They are wrong for going after games that look promising, but the alternative is what? To psychically divine where to find the next indie hit before it’s been shown or even made? And it’s not like a developer has wasted their effort raising the profile of their game if Epic asks to partner. All that work contributes to whatever offer they might get AND the future sales of the game.

5113

Sure, it’s there now which I appreciate. It wasn’t before during some of the more… outlandish claims.

5114

Ahh I did not realize that. Well he disclosed it without being asked, right? That demonstrates he was not trying to hide it.

Honestly it’s ill-advised for an Epic employee to participate in this discussion in the first place. Not because the thread is a total shitshow, although it is, but because it could have repercussions for his employment.

5115

It is 100% accurate because at no point did I ever use the 100% myself, but they are doing this. It’s happening. We know that. Epic is refusing to allow games to even be on their storefront when they refuse exclusivity is an accurate statement. I am not going to stick #NotAllDevs on every statement to reflect the fact i never said it happened a 100% of the time which is not necessary because the Darq dev himself points out the inconsistency.

5116

You don’t know what my standard is… because you never asked. I don’t know how you can possibly think a standard you don’t know about is impossible to obtain without asking what it is in the first place.

5117

That’s not what he said, he just said many games on the store aren’t exclusives, so this isn’t being done with every title. And that is accurate.

5118

This is 100% accurate and I appreciate your awareness of it. I am here because of my personal interests, not professional, this is just an instance when they overlap.

I used to engage elsewhere but stopped when the severe insults and death threats started. The rudeness here has deterred me a bit but obviously not to the point of departure.

5119

You’ve been kinda rude yourself at times in all fairness.

5120

Yep and I’ve apologized where I felt it was warranted.

5121

No reason to leave entirely! But I do suggest perhaps putting this particular thread on mute to protect yourself, if you don’t feel you can restrain yourself from correcting silly posts about insane monitors displaying private financial information and obvious mistakes like saying the company is public.

I may do that myself just because it’s such an irredeemable shitshow, and my job isn’t at risk!

5122

Agreed, per usual with your posts.

I just really wince when I see false information being stated as truth, especially here.

5123

Short of the less than ideal store and the practice of paying people who already promised non EGS exclusive versions of games (Kickstarter and the like), I don’t much care.

Steam has exclusives. Sony has exclusives. XBox. I’d prefer if Epic went the traditional way of getting these exclusives, paying someone to make them from scratch / having an exclusive API that games are built on top of, but at the end of the day an exclusive is an exclusive, it’s just a couple of insanely rich companies duking it out, and neither needs the small guy to get into screaming matches to protect their honor.

5124

Darth, that’s the “wait, so why do you people care?” path. We’ve been down that road many a’ time. They really do care. Just accept it and move on with your life.

We summarize all the various reasons why a person might or might not care in the OP, read that and make up your own mind. You aren’t gonna change anyone else’s.

5125

In that case, doubly up yours. e: The only instance in this thread where the words ‘sorry’ or ‘apologize’ show up in one of your posts is where you’re saying, in essence, “Sorry you don’t have a sense of humor, losers!”, so I’m not exactly in awe of your sincerity here.

5126

I got chewed out for calling him a shill. You know, the dude that literally works for the company we’re talking about? But me saying it was a step too far and I’m a bad person for it.

I don’t think it’s as obvious as you think it is. In fact, I’m betting almost no one here looks at profiles, like, ever. I only look at them as I’m putting people on ignore most of the time. So I look at profiles like once every 3 months or so.

5127

It is possible I have overlooked this behavior… XBOX doesn’t usually have a game sit on their storefront, get discussed on their forums, covered by journalist like it’s an XBOX release and then within the last handful of months, Sony swoops in and takes it, making it a PS4 exclusive.

This is where part of the problem, outside of the promises of being release on one platform with or without crowdfunding, being pulled. Epic’s approach relies on the very entity they claim to want to compete with in order to function… at all. They rely on everyone else to talk about, to distribute information, to even have a storefront to know about these games and at the very end, they come in and offer money to make it all theirs.

Gamers keep saying they want choice, they like niche, they want more than just AAA titles, but then they turn around and say it’s too much, can’t get through all this… so what we let Steam continue to host everything, all the titles we do and don’t like, because whose list would that be if we tried to get to only the likes, let them host the communities that talk about these games for years, decades even, where we chatter about games that would otherwise be easily forgotten or noticed by very few people otherwise. They put up wish-lists not for games we know are going to win, or about to be released, but every game so we can wish-list every single title someone might have even a hint of interest in which gives us access to news or that oh hey i forgot about that game for a year experience and look they have something to say, an actual link to the dev… so that another store that wants the curation process but relies on some other entity to have the burden to take everything so they can cherry pick from it?

This is the ideal? This is what we want? For Epic to ride the train of other efforts and just drop down once in awhile and pick their favorites? And if that wasn’t bad enough, if you refuse their offer, well they don’t want you on the store at all… at least for now, and no, that’s not always the case. Who the heck knows how they make that decision only that they do make that decision.

5128

He posted here because “someone was wrong on the internet” and he compelled to correct it, even though that was a really bad idea. It would have been smarter to not disclose his employer. And now I think he probably left the thread to protect himself, so it’s all moot.

Microsoft and Sony charge license fees, and their licensees have contractual obligations. That will, I predict, be what happens here too-- if you want to publish on Steam you sign a contract saying you won’t pull the game to publish it elsewhere for 3 years or whatever.

Not to rehash, but again I must point out that Epic vs Steam vs GOG vs whatever is just a different icon on my desktop, they all run on my same computer. I don’t have to spend hundreds of dollars upfront to buy a separate Epic computer.

5129

My point was that Peterb called me out for calling an employee of a company a shill (which I didn’t realize he was).

Dude literally is what Peterb said I was saying he was. So I’m saying the whole “It was in his profile” isn’t any sort of transparency really. Neither me nor Peterb realized he was actually an Epic employee.