Quantcast
The Epic Store won't accept 'crappy games,' says Tim Sweeney

Forums - PC Discussion - The Epic Store won't accept 'crappy games,' says Tim Sweeney

Azzanation said:

thismeintiel said:

Just some of my thoughts in bold.

Lets not turn this into a endless debate. The point has gotten over a lot of people's heads here. Let me make it clear, there is nothing wrong with offering bad games or games you are not interested in. In fact every platform has bad games or games that people aren't interested in, that's not the problem here. The problem here is that while Epic store snatches games from Steam, all Steam is doing is offering nothing worth playing in return. 

You know what is worse than a bad game? Is a broken, Unfinished game and offensive games. Sure Offensive games might be excluded to some people that's okay, but what about the majority of mess that gets allowed in, hoping to snatch some poor fellows money on a game that you cannot even finish, leaving bad tastes in peoples mouths. Why do we want broken unfinished games on Steam selling at high prices? I certainty don't. Epic is cleaning up there act while buying exclusivity and Steam is doing what exactly?

In other words, while Epic game customers get to play Outer Worlds on release, Steam owners get to play some unfinished Green Light game. That's my problem with the system atm. There is nothing wrong with quality control, even just a little.

A player having the ability to make their own choices always trumps a company trying to moneyhat their way into the industry.  MS learned that lesson this gen, too.



Around the Network

Curation is a good thing. Multiple different stores curating by their own separate set of standards should give more games a chance in the spotlight. As he said, there are other ways to get a game than on their store. Not every store needs to offer everything for everyone.



Trunkin said:
Curation is a good thing. Multiple different stores curating by their own separate set of standards should give more games a chance in the spotlight. As he said, there are other ways to get a game than on their store. Not every store needs to offer everything for everyone.

But then we'll get a brand new issue, where one game's curation is light enough, that we get another Undertale style hit, and what's then to stop Epic from simply buying them out and locking them to their store, after seeing the one hit wonder on another store (there really isn't anything to stop that from happening).

I don't think curation is good in general. Stopping complete non games from entering is good, because well, they are designed to just generate cards, cheevos or bot coin mining, which should all be done away with regardless, but I prefer Steam's way, where we get the tools and simply block what genres we don't like, devs and pubs games we don't want to see. 



                                       

thismeintiel said:
Azzanation said:

Lets not turn this into a endless debate. The point has gotten over a lot of people's heads here. Let me make it clear, there is nothing wrong with offering bad games or games you are not interested in. In fact every platform has bad games or games that people aren't interested in, that's not the problem here. The problem here is that while Epic store snatches games from Steam, all Steam is doing is offering nothing worth playing in return. 

You know what is worse than a bad game? Is a broken, Unfinished game and offensive games. Sure Offensive games might be excluded to some people that's okay, but what about the majority of mess that gets allowed in, hoping to snatch some poor fellows money on a game that you cannot even finish, leaving bad tastes in peoples mouths. Why do we want broken unfinished games on Steam selling at high prices? I certainty don't. Epic is cleaning up there act while buying exclusivity and Steam is doing what exactly?

In other words, while Epic game customers get to play Outer Worlds on release, Steam owners get to play some unfinished Green Light game. That's my problem with the system atm. There is nothing wrong with quality control, even just a little.

A player having the ability to make their own choices always trumps a company trying to moneyhat their way into the industry.  MS learned that lesson this gen, too.

Exactly. Sweeney was cocky to assume that anything and everything is decided by devs, and not the consumers, the very lifeblood, the very people that buy said games and make said choices, that directly fuel what goes where and what.

Not sure why he's included Greenlight, considering that it's been dead for some time now. If he means early access, then he has to look no further than Epic games, who also allow for buggy unfinished games. 



                                       

BraLoD said:
S.Peelman said:
This is vague, because what exactly is “crap”. Where’s the line? Is there going to be someone who arbitrarily decides if something is crap or not? It’d be one big mess. A lot of things are crap to me.

Yup that's a problem.

It's going to become "what I think YOU should play" and that's not really a good approach.

They are not obligated to have products they don't want in their store, tho, they sell what they want to sell, but they should not have given this "what's good for you" reasoning, tho.

We already have that from Tim in the lines of "The store wars will be decided by the devs, not the consumers". Tim already thinks we're not important, have zero power and suddenly do not matter. I know, because he doesn't really care about what he's even doing to the PC side of the industry right no> He's playing the biggest game of "Don't care if I piss everyone off, ya'll have to come to my store eventually and you'll like it, because you've got no choice", and honestly, that's a really shitty mindset/goal to have. 

Like, these two are so opposite it hurts:



                                       

Around the Network

That's very easy to say at this point. The question will be much more relevant in a few years when the store has grown.



thismeintiel said:
Azzanation said:

Lets not turn this into a endless debate. The point has gotten over a lot of people's heads here. Let me make it clear, there is nothing wrong with offering bad games or games you are not interested in. In fact every platform has bad games or games that people aren't interested in, that's not the problem here. The problem here is that while Epic store snatches games from Steam, all Steam is doing is offering nothing worth playing in return. 

You know what is worse than a bad game? Is a broken, Unfinished game and offensive games. Sure Offensive games might be excluded to some people that's okay, but what about the majority of mess that gets allowed in, hoping to snatch some poor fellows money on a game that you cannot even finish, leaving bad tastes in peoples mouths. Why do we want broken unfinished games on Steam selling at high prices? I certainty don't. Epic is cleaning up there act while buying exclusivity and Steam is doing what exactly?

In other words, while Epic game customers get to play Outer Worlds on release, Steam owners get to play some unfinished Green Light game. That's my problem with the system atm. There is nothing wrong with quality control, even just a little.

A player having the ability to make their own choices always trumps a company trying to moneyhat their way into the industry.  MS learned that lesson this gen, too.

A player? We aren't talking about professionals here. This is the gaming industry where games are offered to everyone, kids especially. You say its up to them to make the right choices? While Steam allows games that try there best to rip gamers off by offering unfinished messing broken games, no thanks. No one is perfect and the industry gains nothing from having those games.

Not sure why MS is brought up here but keep in mind that all companies learn there lessons with there mistakes not just MS, don't forget Sony recently just recovered from there mistakes last gen, the guy in your avatar pic will know all about it.



Chazore said:

Exactly. Sweeney was cocky to assume that anything and everything is decided by devs, and not the consumers, the very lifeblood, the very people that buy said games and make said choices, that directly fuel what goes where and what.

Not sure why he's included Greenlight, considering that it's been dead for some time now. If he means early access, then he has to look no further than Epic games, who also allow for buggy unfinished games. 

That's exactly how the video game industry crashed many years ago, was due to no quality control and relying on the people. Look how that turned out.

Green light was just an example. Where ever the shitty games come from it doesn't matter.



Azzanation said:
Chazore said:

Exactly. Sweeney was cocky to assume that anything and everything is decided by devs, and not the consumers, the very lifeblood, the very people that buy said games and make said choices, that directly fuel what goes where and what.

Not sure why he's included Greenlight, considering that it's been dead for some time now. If he means early access, then he has to look no further than Epic games, who also allow for buggy unfinished games. 

That's exactly how the video game industry crashed many years ago, was due to no quality control and relying on the people. Look how that turned out.

Green light was just an example. Where ever the shitty games come from it doesn't matter.

You've literally bolded the parts coming both from Epic and Greenlight, a cocky guy at a company, poised to try forming their own monopoly, and a system that's been abandoned by the company that made it.

The first bolded part has nothing to do with the original crash either, let alone the second part, which I'd already pointed out, was long since abandoned, in favor of the obvious and used "Early access" method, which both Epic and Valve adopt fully now.

It's obvious that if Steam's going to allow unfinished early access games, and that Epic doing the same, can only mean even more unfinished early access games in the future.

Where the shitty games come from does matter, because that's where the shitty games come from in the first place. Greenlight was trash because we reached a point where devs would ltierally bribe users into giving them free game keys if they voted for their games, or groups just simply upvoting bad games, just to dick around with the system itself (funnily enough, just like the Rapdeday dev has done recently with the "no holds bar" rules).

Greenlight was actual garbage, and I'm glad Valve did away with it, but it's now become obvious that the ea program is fast becoming a "me-too" glorified gaming version of Patreon, where you might get something good in return, rather than you will.