Vitalis

Ah, pit spells. A casters way of asserting their dominance over their party members for choosing inferior clqsses.

Decision made by the publisher. Clearly Obsidians fault. I love this logic. The thing is that it doesnt matter who made the decision. In this purpose the developer and publisher are one and the same. It may suck for the developer but they are inseparable in guilt because either they are not able to separate or they do not separate and for us, the consumer, the end result is the same. Everything else is just shooting ourselves in the foot and making excuses for greed. This is logic. Your arguments is logic cut in a third and presented as the full result. It is faulty and it is misleading, it is borderline lying. Yes, because Obsidian lacks the funds to self publish, wants to give the consumers the best product they can, and decides that crowdfunding will impair the quality; they are the ones that are at fault for any decision that is made by the publisher. Obsidian should really just decrease the quality of the product, separate from the publisher, and go back to crowdfunding. What could ever go wrong with that!

Decision made by the publisher. Clearly Obsidians fault. I love this logic.

That's not how competition works. EGS wasn't making their platforms better, they are just throwing money away to get market share, and they will get these money back when they get enought market share, from the consumers. It's not competition they want, it's monoploly. Sure, same as everyone. I'm pretty sure that's what competition is. No one is doing anything out of the goodness of their hearts. The problem is EGS are not using a better product to compete and gain market share, they are burning money to force their worse product on people. Consumers won't get a better result from this kind of strategy. It happened before, when they gain a big enough market share, they can push anything on consumers because we don't have a choices anymore. And the things they will do will be the exact opposite of consumer friendly. Steam has been top dog for years, but that's becasue they have actually become the best platform in the market, not because they use exclusive to force people using it. That's how they became top dog.

That's not how competition works. EGS wasn't making their platforms better, they are just throwing money away to get market share, and they will get these money back when they get enought market share, from the consumers. It's not competition they want, it's monoploly. Yes, because Epic is totally going to be a monopoly when Steam is the current top dog. It's not like Epic is using their own money to try to compete with the current monopoly in ways that GoG, Origin, a d UPlay are unable to do...

That's pretty cold, man. But admittedly, it's not EGS's fault that the Chinese government bans everything. But EGS' owned by the Chinese Government dontchaknow.

*Lucasfilm's Games.

Really? Is EGS not available in your country? In that case, I would understand your rage.It's banned in China. To which I say, don't live in China.

You misunderstand. People just don't want to be forced to use Epic platform. It should be available on all platforms so the gamer can choose. People didn't want to install Steam 15 years ago to play *insert series here* either.

So dramatic The over dramatic REEEE from the gaming commhbity about the proper ways to overcome a monopoly is real. I see this word monopoly thrown around quite often and I'm not sure a lot of the people using it know what that means. Please educate me as to how Steam is a monopoly when I can purchase Steam keys for any game I want from practically any digital storefront I choose which means finding the best deal FOR ME but can't seem to do the same with Epic Games Store exclusives. What is their direct competition? Origin, UPlay, and GoG arent even close to being competitive to Steam. If Steam wasn't so dominate in the market you wouldn't even have the CHOICE to buy games for Steam from other sellers. Steam is still making a profit from your purchase, which would not be possible unless they were a monopoly. Steam doesn't have to do anything to take your money if you're a PC gamer.

So dramatic The over dramatic REEEE from the gaming commhbity about the proper ways to overcome a monopoly is real.

Exclusives suck. They are anti-consumer. Steam doesn't do exclusives. Yeah but when a game company says their game is coming out for Steam and not GOG or elsewhere, no one will call jihad. Wait what? Isn't it an exclusive if it is exclusively sold on Steam? Of course not! Capitalism is great, except everytime something tries to compete in gaming people absolutely hate it.

I know it's becoming a bit of pattern where someone posts something negative about Epic and Fenixp jumps to their defense, so just to elaborate: I don't like exclusives. I never liked exclusives. Exclusives suck. The way Epic goes about getting their place on the market sucks and I wish they didn't do that, let alone a whole array of issues the store has (like, y'know, not complying with GDPR and tiny details like that.) Nonetheless, Mr. Sweeney is entirely correct. Historically, systems which made more sense to develop for (and now I'm not strictly talking about ease of use, throwing bags of money around certainly helps, see) eventually became dominant. I can pretty much guarantee that the people yelling about how Evil epic is and how they're not going to touch their store with a 10 ft pole, while very vocal, are also very much in a minority (see cancellation numbers of Phoenix Point). The explanation's pretty simple: Your average Joe doesn't care whether he installs Steam or Epic store, what he does care is what his friends have installed so that he can play Fortpex Legenite with them. As long as Epic makes sure that all sequels and variations on Fortpex Legenite is released on Epic store, customers will flood to it. For every unique and ambitious release like Phoenix Point, people will flood to it. For every high-profile release like The Division 2 or Metro Exodus, people will flood to it. And all that'll be then left exclusively using Steam will be the vocal minority, which shareholders/CEOs don't really give a toss about. Yep, Epic is currently behaving the way they are in order to upset the market which is dominated by Steam. Unlike GoG, Epic is being very aggressive in ensuring exclusive games, which in turn causes Steam to look bad; which really isn't all that hard since Steam has been sitting around as top dog for so long they became the perfect victim of Capitalism. Free markets my dudes. Some of us wre old enough to remember the dislike for Steam many had when it first reared up, as mentioned with Half Life 2. I encountered it with distaste when Empire Total War required it as I had been a fan of Total War games at the time. Eric's issues will either be worked out before the EU lawsuits, or they'll just fix them for EU and collapse due to the American market.

If they offer a curated games list, with limited to no shofelware games then it's an improvement for me. Steams game catalogue is not curated and is currently filled with thousands of games for $1 U.S. that are pure shovelware. I recall one of them was actually a bit coin generator for the creators which Steam only removed after it was proven to be one, or maybe Valve left it up because they don't care.

There's also an option for signing in with accounts from other places, but I guess most people don't realize what that does. The Epic Store is the first major competitor to Steam in years, which is a good thing as it will force Steam to get off their ass to start improving their stagnate platform. Free market!

Something something free markets.

Yeah, but what other turn-based tactical games are being released? Legit question. I suppose they could court Goldhawk, but Xenonauts' footprint isn't much bigger. The obvious alternative is Firaxis, but I'm guessing Epic would have to offer 2K more money than an exclusivity deal is worth to them. Poaching small and medium size developers is likely to get them the most bang for their buck, and megapublishers are notoriously risk-averse anyway. I would be surprised if they haven't contacted PDX regarding Rome. Just imagine... Paradox is just fine on their own, besides they also have their own launcher and store.

Last I heard they had an MMO in the works instead.

I buy it.

Ha. That is a surprisingly entertaining game every now and again, one of the few mobile games that is actually worth it.

ROFLMAO! I agree with this gif. The roleplaying went down hill after 1, but the shooting gameplay went up. They appealed more to the shooter crowd than the roleplaying, and let's not even get started on the Tali debacle that 2 gave us.

If BioWare can capture some of the Chinese market with Jade Empire reboot, they could make a fortune. The negative reaction to "white folks" making the first Jade Empire is what canned that franchise.

Those that grew up with black and white televisions tended to dream in black and white, I can't imagine what dreams will be like in fifty years. Humans also remember dreams only if they wake up in the middle of the dream. Silly humans.

I bought it and my life is filled with regret. Et tu, Hurlshot? No canvas bag for you! Meh, just kidding. I do enjoy some internet gaming. My current favourite is an MMO (Guild Wars 2) and when I need to bash something, Killing Floor 2 scratches the itch. Speaking of internet games, one of my worries at the moment is the lack of info about Borderlands 3. Makes you wonder what happened to it? Stuck in development hell? Its Gearbox, they're probably just trying to hype the fans before selling them a lackluster product while blaming the fans for the game failing. Five year olds and older.

What a surprise!