Metro dev says next game won't be on PC if players boycott. EDIT: Official Statement made

[Chazore]

eva01beserk said:

Then you should read more carefully. But Im sure that wont matter to you. I saw the evidence and I even agreed to most points. But Im sure you just missed that. CGI pointed out to me that the main issue is the game being pulled 2 weeks before release, and like I said in the previous post, I believe it to be so minuscule that I dint even think people had an issue with that. And that one issue alone yea I will say is not important at all.

I will say that it does sound like im calling people entitled. Im really trying to not sound like that. I really dont like people accusing others like that. Specially since non gamers tend to label all gamers like that when any little complain happens. 

My very first post should tell you why Im commenting even if not not a pc gamer. Because of peoples reaction is to hurt the devs, review bombs and boycott's. I even said it that I dont believe they are to blame, and this boycott is mainly hurting them and not the real culprits who are epic and "Deep silver"? Its deep something, I cant say I remember the name. This misplaced outrage will hurt all gamers as they dont only make pc games.

No, I read the last parts, it just took you numerous posts to come to a slight agreement to one of them, but largely you've remained unchanged from what was presented to you, and it taking this long and this many people to explain it to you, doesn't exactly count as remaining "objective" to the issue at hand. 

Yeah, it's not important to you, but it is important to others, myself included. The same thing could be thrown back at you when you face an issue you believe is big, and others finding it a non issue to them, then you'll understand where the current side facing issues at this moment are coming from. 

It's not so much as using the entitlement card, but understanding it's actual use. People these days end up misusing the world entitlement, and end up applying it to a situation or a person improperly. In this case, with what's been going on between the publisher and Epic games, in regards to consumer options, trust and generally sticking to what was advertised, I wouldn't even pen it down as entitlement. I wouldn't specifically say you're using that card all the way through with your discussion, but it has contained a few hints of it. It's not exactly on the same level as what Hynad was going with though.

You see, I know you want to have good intentions, but the way you're already approaching the start of this thread, has you instantly siding with the devs, who aren't exactly the kind of people you should always look out for, right off the bat. The consumers are what even allow for games to exist, since it is our money that fund these games, so surely you would have and share some sort of empathy and compassion for the same base you hail from. I know I stand primarily for consumer rights and pro consumer practices, because we are the lifeblood of any industry out there. The devs I would stand for second, but only if they are who they are, and not simply pretending to be something they are not. When a dev threatens it's userbase, then I cannot side with them, because you should never bite the hand that feeds you, even if a portion of that base can come off as toxic, you must always keep your composure as a dev and never stoop low. 

believe it or not, but writing one angry email letter does absolutely nothing when you've got the likes of big publishers like EA, Ubisoft, Activision, Deep Silver etc at the helm. Emails don't voice anything and hardly do much these days. Tweets can possibly do something, but again they can also be washed away, blocked or simply ignored by the ones running the show. Review bombing however cannot be ignored, and instead it brings further attention towards both the devs and those seeking to buy said game for the first time. it actually alerts newcomers to what the devs might have dev/publisher has done wrong. Review bombing is usually painted in bad faith, rather than actually studying as to why those games were bombed in the first place (like when China gamers bombed some games because they were ignored when they had already asked plenty of times for said games to have their native tongue patched in).

See, without user reviews, we've really got no voice. Forums don't really bring much attention towards devs, let alone the public eye, and neither do youtube vids, which again don't work well unless you're someone like Yong/Quarterly, and don't get copyright claimed by the opposing dev/publisher (because that does happen). User reviews are up front and center when you're wanting to buy a game on Steam. They come straight from users who have bought and played the games. You can even see how long they've played said games for and vote up their reviews or downvote them to tell others if said reviews were helpful/non-helpful. We don't have anything like that on any other client storefront and it's why we argue heavily for that feature, because it lets us have a voice, which like it or not is very important for consumers. To want that taken away means to take away the voice of the consumer, which isn't something a consumer should ever want. 

The only ones it will hurt in the end will be DS, as they've already paid 4A games for their work and they were the ones who willingly made the deal with EGS. EGS is already trying to cover their hides with "exclusives are fair competition on PC storefronts", when in reality, that's not what some of us users want.