4 ms·

My reason for refusing to give the Epic store money is pretty simple: Paid exclusives are bullshit. Especially when they're used as fodder to promote "competiti

by rstat1 3y ago

My reason for refusing to give the Epic store money is pretty simple: Paid exclusives are bullshit. Especially when they're used as fodder to promote "competition", when such things are anything but.

eddythompson80 3y ago
That’s fair. I view it as just business. It certainly doesn’t affect me or any consumer. It only affects Valve, which I don’t care about. Maybe valve should pay developers more. Epic takes far less than steam does from developers, so I definitely understand the appeal to developers.
- rstat1 3y ago
  It does effect you. Its a reduction of choice that benefits no one. And since there's a vastly bigger audience on Steam vs the Epic Store, I don't really think that split matters as much as people would have you believe.
- therouwboat 3y ago
  It does affect some consumers, without valve and proton, I would probably not be playing many games.
  - zirgs 3y ago
    Proton works for non-steam games too.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- scbrg 3y ago
  > It certainly doesn’t affect me or any consumer. $ ./EpicInstaller-15.17.1.msi bash: ./EpicInstaller-15.17.1.msi: cannot execute binary file: Exec format error Turns out Epic doesn't work on my platform of choice. Apparently it does affect me. Certainly.
  - eddythompson80 3y ago
    Neither does steam on my opened router. This is a nonsensical argument.
    - scbrg 3y ago
      No it isn't. I can play lots of games on my machine. I can't play, specifically, Alan Wake 2, since it's unavailable for purchase either standalone or an a platform that supports Linux. Of course it's their choice where to release it, but saying, specifically, that it doesn't affect any consumer is just plain wrong.
doikor 3y ago
This usually applies but for Alan Wake 2 Epic is the publisher. So your argument is like getting angry at Valve for not releasing their games (dota, cs, half life, etc) on Epic store or GOG.
- rstat1 3y ago
  Well I wasn't specifically thinking about Epic the publisher there, because yes I agree that is dumb and I didn't actually know that Epic was the publisher here. I thought it was just another dumb exclusivity thing.
ThatPlayer 3y ago
The FTC would disagree with you. Generally exclusives improve competition unless it's a monopolist doing it. Which is not Epic in this case. https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/single-firm-conduct/exclusive-supply-or-purchase-agreements https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/gui... As long as storefronts have to compete for games, this is what that looks like. There's not really any way to get rid of exclusives without hurting competition. Would you want a law passed for games to be required to be put on certain storefronts? For storefronts to be required to accept all games submitted to it? Either one would hurt competition by giving too much power to either the game publisher or the storefront.
- rstat1 3y ago
  No I think what I want is pretty obvious. No exclusives. I don't honestly care what shitty storefront something is on, as long as its not limited to one. That's literally my only gripe. Besides publishers are already free to decide where the games they publish go or don't, so I'm not sure where the "too much power to publishers" thing is coming from.
  - ThatPlayer 3y ago
    >I don't honestly care what shitty storefront something is on, as long as its not limited to one. But that's not unique to paid exclusives. That's not even unique to Epic, Valve's own games are exclusive to a single storefront. You should boycott them for the same reason. There is a cost to releasing games on multiple storefronts, forcing games to release on multiple stores only hurts smaller developers. Some smaller developers also skip storefronts altogether. Minecraft and Factorio were initially sold without any storefront. Is that still considered limited to one and therefore an exclusive? >Besides publishers are already free to decide where the games they publish go or don't, so I'm not sure where the "too much power to publishers" thing is coming from. I'm talking about cases where the storefront doesn't want to sell the game. Say the game has adult content, or the game has is just unfinished and not good. If storefronts are required to carry games. Otherwise games that only get accepted to a single store will continue to be exclusive to that single store. Same thing with smaller developers, are they expected to cater to the whim of multiple storefronts to be able to release a game? One of my favorites, Zachtronic's Opus Magnum was rejected from GoG initially.
thaumasiotes 3y ago
A lot of games are exclusive to Steam. People are currently pretty angry about Sea of Stars, which explicitly committed to a GOG release, and then decided not to have one. Return to Monkey Island also released as a Steam exclusive.

by rstat1 3y ago

My reason for refusing to give the Epic store money is pretty simple: Paid exclusives are bullshit. Especially when they're used as fodder to promote "competition", when such things are anything but.

eddythompson80 3y ago

That’s fair. I view it as just business. It certainly doesn’t affect me or any consumer. It only affects Valve, which I don’t care about. Maybe valve should pay developers more. Epic takes far less than steam does from developers, so I definitely understand the appeal to developers.

rstat1 3y ago
It does effect you. Its a reduction of choice that benefits no one. And since there's a vastly bigger audience on Steam vs the Epic Store, I don't really think that split matters as much as people would have you believe.
therouwboat 3y ago
It does affect some consumers, without valve and proton, I would probably not be playing many games.
- zirgs 3y ago
  Proton works for non-steam games too.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
scbrg 3y ago
> It certainly doesn’t affect me or any consumer. $ ./EpicInstaller-15.17.1.msi bash: ./EpicInstaller-15.17.1.msi: cannot execute binary file: Exec format error Turns out Epic doesn't work on my platform of choice. Apparently it does affect me. Certainly.
- eddythompson80 3y ago
  Neither does steam on my opened router. This is a nonsensical argument.
  - scbrg 3y ago
    No it isn't. I can play lots of games on my machine. I can't play, specifically, Alan Wake 2, since it's unavailable for purchase either standalone or an a platform that supports Linux. Of course it's their choice where to release it, but saying, specifically, that it doesn't affect any consumer is just plain wrong.

doikor 3y ago

This usually applies but for Alan Wake 2 Epic is the publisher. So your argument is like getting angry at Valve for not releasing their games (dota, cs, half life, etc) on Epic store or GOG.

rstat1 3y ago
Well I wasn't specifically thinking about Epic the publisher there, because yes I agree that is dumb and I didn't actually know that Epic was the publisher here. I thought it was just another dumb exclusivity thing.

ThatPlayer 3y ago

The FTC would disagree with you. Generally exclusives improve competition unless it's a monopolist doing it. Which is not Epic in this case. https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/single-firm-conduct/exclusive-supply-or-purchase-agreements https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/gui... As long as storefronts have to compete for games, this is what that looks like. There's not really any way to get rid of exclusives without hurting competition. Would you want a law passed for games to be required to be put on certain storefronts? For storefronts to be required to accept all games submitted to it? Either one would hurt competition by giving too much power to either the game publisher or the storefront.

rstat1 3y ago
No I think what I want is pretty obvious. No exclusives. I don't honestly care what shitty storefront something is on, as long as its not limited to one. That's literally my only gripe. Besides publishers are already free to decide where the games they publish go or don't, so I'm not sure where the "too much power to publishers" thing is coming from.
- ThatPlayer 3y ago
  >I don't honestly care what shitty storefront something is on, as long as its not limited to one. But that's not unique to paid exclusives. That's not even unique to Epic, Valve's own games are exclusive to a single storefront. You should boycott them for the same reason. There is a cost to releasing games on multiple storefronts, forcing games to release on multiple stores only hurts smaller developers. Some smaller developers also skip storefronts altogether. Minecraft and Factorio were initially sold without any storefront. Is that still considered limited to one and therefore an exclusive? >Besides publishers are already free to decide where the games they publish go or don't, so I'm not sure where the "too much power to publishers" thing is coming from. I'm talking about cases where the storefront doesn't want to sell the game. Say the game has adult content, or the game has is just unfinished and not good. If storefronts are required to carry games. Otherwise games that only get accepted to a single store will continue to be exclusive to that single store. Same thing with smaller developers, are they expected to cater to the whim of multiple storefronts to be able to release a game? One of my favorites, Zachtronic's Opus Magnum was rejected from GoG initially.

thaumasiotes 3y ago

A lot of games are exclusive to Steam. People are currently pretty angry about Sea of Stars, which explicitly committed to a GOG release, and then decided not to have one. Return to Monkey Island also released as a Steam exclusive.