Quantcast
This guy tells it like it is reguarding the Borderlands 3 exclusivity with epic games store.

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - This guy tells it like it is reguarding the Borderlands 3 exclusivity with epic games store.

Nautilus said:

How so?Losing customers(money) will make them more likely to keep doing nothing?Or rather, just offering more and more services, when Epic has been gaining grounds clearly due to games?(their own or otherwise)

Not saying that this will definely make them go back to developing games, but it sure increase the chances.

Except they have been losing money due to making games, specifically Artifact - a game they have been pouring money into for the past 2-3 years.

Even if they do make games like Left 4 Dead 3, Half-Life 3, Portal 3, etc and release them on Steam, its not gonna change anything.

I'd rather them improve the service (QoL like what they been doing such as with Steam big picture, controller configuration, Social features, etc)  than make games to be honest. The worst that can happen is if they themselves moneyhat like Epic is doing which will be hilarious how people will complain about that when and if it occurs.

As for overall customer base, I dont think they've lost any to be honest - both EGS and Steam can be interchangeable just like Uplay, Origin, GOG, itchio, etc.

There's no way anyone can moneyhat every single dev/publisher - same as what happened last gen between PS3 and Xbox360.

Services within the store/client have been improving and will keep on improving and its likely EGS will copy some of Steam's features in the coming months to years just like how GOG, Origin and Uplay when they were barebones included a lot of stuff that Steam introduced first to the PC marketplace.

Hopefully sooner than later.

Last edited by BasilZero - on 14 April 2019

    

Basil's YouTube Channel


                    

Around the Network
BasilZero said:
Nautilus said:

How so?Losing customers(money) will make them more likely to keep doing nothing?Or rather, just offering more and more services, when Epic has been gaining grounds clearly due to games?(their own or otherwise)

Not saying that this will definely make them go back to developing games, but it sure increase the chances.

Except they have been losing money due to making games, specifically Artifact - a game they have been pouring money into for the past 2-3 years.

Even if they do make games like Left 4 Dead 3, Half-Life 3, Portal 3, etc and release them on Steam, its not gonna change anything.

I'd rather them improve the service (QoL like what they been doing such as with Steam big picture, controller configuration, Social features, etc)  than make games to be honest. The worst that can happen is if they themselves moneyhat like Epic is doing which will be hilarious how people will complain about that when and if it occurs.

As for overall customer base, I dont think they've lost any to be honest - both EGS and Steam can be interchangeable just like Uplay, Origin, GOG, itchio, etc.

There's no way anyone can moneyhat every single dev/publisher - same as what happened last gen between PS3 and Xbox360.

Services within the store/client have been improving and will keep on improving and its likely EGS will copy some of Steam's features in the coming months to years just like how GOG, Origin and Uplay when they were barebones included a lot of stuff that Steam introduced first to the PC marketplace.

Hopefully sooner than later.

Lets be honest: They lost money on Artifact because of its shitty monetization.I mean, its worse than EA microtransactions.Even if it wasnt the best card game, it could have survived just fine without it.

And yes, I do care about its games.Portal 1 and 2 are simply masterpieces, and I would love for Valve to develop sequels or games like them.Same for its other franchises.And Im sure Im not alone.Making those game exclusive to Valve, on PC at least, would make people adopt and keep buying games on Valve, because it would better Valve image of a game developer and thus bring attention to them.I know they are famous enough, but with the current condition of its curation and thus game finding, they could use the help.

And I really do want a new Portal.

And Valve wouldnt need to moneyhat developers.Not to the extent of what Epic is doing anyway.Valve already has the marketshare.They only need to improve their other aspects, such as service, game development, curation, etc.

And while you are right that people that play on PC will buy on whatever service that the game is cheaper(or more convenient), its still a sale lost for valve, since they held like 95% of the market.



What does Valve do?



Nautilus said:
I agree completely.Epic plan seems to be working and honestly, its the first competitor to actually stand a chance against Valve.Epic will hopefully make Valve stop sitting in its ass and improve their services.Or to be more specific, go back to developing great games.

Why would they?

At best, I can expect Valve to improve steam. But their days of making games seem to be far in the past. I don't even know if they even have anybody left who worked on Half-life 2.



Bait and Switch tactics I am against. Hence my disdain for the Epic store.

Competition however is a good thing... I personally refuse to have a dozen store fronts running on my PC though, but props to others who don't care.

The other issue is fragmentation of the PC market... We have already witnessed multiplayer populations fragmented because store fronts wish to run with their own technology. (I.E. Windows Store vs Steam.) That kind of thing shouldn't happen on a single platform, it would be like Xbox online populations being cut off if you were to run a game from Gamepass rather than from the Store front. It shouldn't happen.

Valve does need to get off it's laurels and start making games again, Half Life, Left 4 Dead, Portal, Counter Strike, Team Fortress, Day of Defeat, Alien Swarm... They have a ton of great franchises at their disposal... And they are simply squandering the opportunity, that's how you build good-will and a customer base, with quality content.



Around the Network
Bofferbrauer2 said:
Nautilus said:
I agree completely.Epic plan seems to be working and honestly, its the first competitor to actually stand a chance against Valve.Epic will hopefully make Valve stop sitting in its ass and improve their services.Or to be more specific, go back to developing great games.

Why would they?

At best, I can expect Valve to improve steam. But their days of making games seem to be far in the past. I don't even know if they even have anybody left who worked on Half-life 2.

Thats why I said hopefully.



Basically people are upset because Steam has been good to them. They introduced the 80% discount after all. They opened up classic gaming and got devs to update a lot of these broken games for new PCs again. They opened up the indie market. People love steam and Valve. So they are kinda fine with letting them have a monopoly.

However, I think they are largely overlooking the fact that Valve has gotten lazy. They stopped releasing games from their main franchises. Their biggest accomplishment in the last couple years is updating their chat client to STILL NOT COMPETE WITH DISCORD... The few games they have released are a step above flash and Wii party games.

In short, their monopoly is unhealthy for steam. They've gotten lazy.



Valve focusing as a service provider and not as a game developer should not be considered "lazy". There is nothing wrong with being a service provider first and Valve hasn't been known for being a developer for the better part of 7 years. There is nothing wrong with wanting them to make games but it just seems odd to hold them up to the standard as a game developer when they've already made their position on that clear for the entire generation. It's a difference in goals, not "laziness". Unless people want to argue that Valve is lazy as a service provider - in which case I'd say that just isn't true, I feel as if a lot of people who don't use the service are under this impression but the amount of major changes that Steam has undergone in the last few years is extensive. 

For what it's worth Valve probably should start making games that appeal to the mainstream. You can't get upset at people for expecting it when at one time they were one of the most prolific developers out there. I just think that in a perfect world we wouldn't need to moneyhat third party games and pretend like that somehow is the antithesis of laziness  - it's pretty silly. It *should* be fine for a digital platform like Steam to compete with Epic Game Store whilst having the same games from a sales basis - it would be amazing if these games could release on all digital platforms, and the digital platform that simply tries the hardest to be a good service would win. That's simply not the case, though. 

Hopefully Epic Games starts investing in more first party like they seem to want to.

Last edited by AngryLittleAlchemist - on 14 April 2019

DarkD said:
Basically people are upset because Steam has been good to them. They introduced the 80% discount after all. They opened up classic gaming and got devs to update a lot of these broken games for new PCs again. They opened up the indie market. People love steam and Valve. So they are kinda fine with letting them have a monopoly.

However, I think they are largely overlooking the fact that Valve has gotten lazy. They stopped releasing games from their main franchises. Their biggest accomplishment in the last couple years is updating their chat client to STILL NOT COMPETE WITH DISCORD... The few games they have released are a step above flash and Wii party games.

In short, their monopoly is unhealthy for steam. They've gotten lazy.

I'm not upset because Steam has been "good to me", which it never did. Steam is trash right now. Problem is, EGS managed to be even worse. Much worse.

Why would I want to accept an even worse knockoff of an already shady product? Instead of making something better, they just moneyhatted themselves into the market, and selling out the consumer data to China via TenCent. And that's not even talking about the truckload of missing features.

Had Epic delivered a good store, I wouldn't have minded it. At. All. I actually probably would have supported it very much. Like I said in a previous post, I already have 8 game stores/launchers (even 9 if you would count the windows store, and 10 with the online indie store Crytivo), so adding yet another store to the list doesn't hurt anymore. But the way the store is is just short of catastrophic, and that's why I don't like it.

You can buy a game (and only one at a time since it's lacking even such basic features like a fucking shopping cart!) and start it, and that's it. Got any problems? You're out of luck. Want to know if the game is any good? No user reviews, to not talk about curators. Forums? Nope! Things like modding or a return policy? Are you on drugs?

What I fear is that the moneyhatting works too well and the competition starts doing the same stuff. Just imagine every developer having their own storefront. Instead of a supermarket for all your games at once, you get hundreds of little market stands and zero overview. No thanks!



Bristow9091 said:

I don't understand people being upset with something like this, it's not like they have to buy a whole new PC to play the game like console gamers do with console exclusive games... all they've got to do is download a FREE launcher to be able to buy and play their game. It's a complete non-issue for me, lol.

There is a massive lack of trust with the Epic launcher because their partly (nearly majority) owned by Tencent. Not a company to be trusted at all with my credit/debit card information. Let alone have their spyware on my computer, giving the Chinese government direct access to my entire life.