The Outer Worlds won't launch on Steam

[Wormerine]

Complaining aside. Wow, Epic you offer good games. And the next free givaway is The Witness. That is 3rd game on my list "to play" which I didn't own by now, while others were either I already owned and were great, or games I heard a lot of good about, but are not my thing. 

[DaveLister]

This is disappointing. I geuss I will not be playing this for a year then. I have not heard good things about Epic and I have a Steam account, I do not need more accounts. It was bad enough that I had to open an account just to play Fallout 76 (and yes I am weird, I enjoy it).

[Dodo00d]

The developer rarely decides where his games are being sold, so I doubt Obsidian has anything to do with this decision.

Still, if the game is good I will buy it at release though I would have preordered it on Steam.

[MDMAisGOOD]

nothing that much"news" but.... funny things and such :/

 

https://indiannoob.in/obsidian-entertainment-was-adding-steam-achievements-to-the-outer-worlds-hours-prior-to-making-the-move-to-epic/

[Infinitron]

nothing that much"news" but.... funny things and such :/

 

https://indiannoob.in/obsidian-entertainment-was-adding-steam-achievements-to-the-outer-worlds-hours-prior-to-making-the-move-to-epic/

 

They're actually still adding achievements to Steam even now.

Edited March 22, 2019 by Infinitron

[Zoraptor]

 

With Steam having a monopsony, mostly being the sole provider, on PC games Epic is trying to gain a foothold through exclusivity. They already have a better product in that you actually own the games you purchase, no DRM, and offering free games; they just lack the user base.

Steam forces DRM and you are basically "renting" every single game you've bought, and Steam also has exclusives (Total War, previously Bethesda, the Civilization series, etc).

 

If the end result changes any of Steams anti-consumer policy then this is great, if it doesn't then hopefully EGS will take over.

 

You don't know what you are talking about:

 

1) Steam has DRM-free games: https://steam.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_DRM-free_games

 

2) It is publishers who push the DRM crap, and they do it on EGS as well Metro Exodus for example uses Denuvo: https://www.epicgames.com/store/de/product/metro-exodus/home

There is only one store that is arguably better in regards to DRM and that's GOG[1]. This is also why so few AAA titles are available there. Go figure.

 

3) You don't own EGS-Games, you are merely granted a license. Like you said, basically "renting": https://www.epicgames.com/store/en-US/eula

 

4) Total War, Bethesda Games titles Civ etc. are not bought exclusives. They aren't games Valve snatched away from other platforms at the eleventh hour. Those games were published on Steam because that's where the players are.

 

[1] Even GOG has games with DRM'd multiplayer: https://www.gog.com/forum/star_wars_battlefront_ii/i_have_had_enough_of_gogs_pushing_of_their_drm_platform/page1

 

 

1) If there are DRM free games on Steam, there are also DRM free games on EGS. In reality neither is DRM free (and no, a fan wiki does not count for anything) as both require a proprietary app for download and install; and you can't just decide to ignore that form of DRM because you like Steam. And no Galaxy ain't DRM since it's optional and all you need for GOG is a browser and an account.

 

2) GOG is inarguably better than steam, even if you go by the incorrect definition of DRM free only about 1 in 20 Steam games don't require steam running- 99.95% of GOG games don't require Galaxy (with the one exception being always online by its nature). Centralised MP makes drm irrelevant, as you have to be online and connected to the company's servers, that's just how it works- ie you cannot be offline to play centralised MP. DRM on LAN or direct connection etc would be a valid complaint though.

 

3) You own games on EGS exactly as much as you own them on Steam, ie you don't. It's the same everywhere, hence End User License Agreement rather than End User Ownership Agreement. In some cases the licensing cannot be enforced- physical media, GOG installer downloads, local law saying something is a good not a service- but you only own them practically, not legally.

 

4) They are induced exclusives, they're just bought in kind rather than as a guaranteed minimum sale figure. All those 'free' features steam offers are inducements to exclusivity every bit as much as a lump sum, they're just a different approach to it.

[midnightvulpine]

When it comes right down to it, the only ones who can change this are we the consumers. Until we stop buying, they won't stop doing their utmost to squeeze as much money from us as possible and manipulate us into getting what they want. We should have our choice of what platform we want to play on, rather than letting them choose for us and going along with it.

 

The only reason this exclusivity isn't as bad as the console wars(one reason I'm deeply displeased to see this sort of BS growing on PC now) is that they don't know yet if they can still profit while doing it. The more we allow a substandard storefront to dictate terms, the more likely this will get worse. I'm avoiding games now that are gated off, even if it's just to one exclusive launcher.

 

The same will apply to Steam, despite my using their launcher. If they try to do this exclusivity bull, I'll do the same for them. We need to realize that, no matter how nice the game looks, every game ends up old and forgotten. There is always something new on the horizon. The more you feel bound to a sense of loyalty or loss when it comes to a game, the more they have you.

 

Sounds melodramatic, but it's true. I've already bypassed Metro: Exodus until it goes off exclusive(and will likely be discounted). I'll do the same for Outer Worlds and Control. All three were going to be day one buys for me. But I'm not allowing the publishers to dictate terms. Nor Epic. I think you all should consider doing the same. Otherwise you're condoning the latest batch of anti-consumer tactics and doing yourself no favors.

[DekarServerbot]

I had my doubts about pre-ordering when it was announced as first person only. My doubts are now into boycotting. I am not buying this game on sissy epic games store whose only good point is that's better than u-play. Go **** yourselves

[IndiraLightfoot]

I haven't delved into the Epic Store, but now seiing stuff like this, it seems I've been living under a rock when it comes to that Fortnite luancher. Welp!

 

[Flouride]

I like how Obsidian is just hiding from the beep-storm this decision stirred up amongst its fans.

 

/sarcasm

 

What should they do? Break their NDA and tell everyone that this is Private Division's decision 100%? They cannot and will not say anything about this issue until the future of the franchise is secure and under Microsoft's wings. Currently Private Division owns the publishing rights to the series and it would really stupid of them to agonize Private Division at this point.

[Flouride]

 

No one forced Obsidian to partner with Private Divison.  That was a business decision on their part and as a result they are culpable (at least in part) for the consequences of that partnership.  Rhetorically speaking, you don't just get to wash your hands of something because you hired someone else to do it for you.

 

 

Indeed, they should have just not made the game at all. That will show them and the internet!

 

[Flouride]

 

I assume that there is a revenue split between developer and publisher.

 

It is not unreasonable to assume that Obsidian is getting a portion of the revenue from the deal that Private Division made. I could be wrong.

But if I am, then that right there would be a great thing for Obsidian to say. "We are not receiving any additional revenue from the decision our publisher made to be a timed exclusive and were not involved in the decision making process towards granting the exclusivity deal."

 

Transparency goes a long way. I don't know, and you don't know, how much or even IF Obsidian profits from this decision or was involved in the decision.

 

 

It's definately not a split of revenue, when Private Division is funding the project. Obsidian is lucky to get to keep the IP rights.

As to speaking about the issue out loud, there are usually very strict NDA's in place to prevent that from happening. Publishers don't want the developers to say anything that might shine negativity towards the publisher.

 

[M4xw0lf]

I haven't delved into the Epic Store, but now seiing stuff like this, it seems I've been living under a rock when it comes to that Fortnite luancher. Welp!

 

To be fair, that's about all the features I need.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Wot! Chi com spying and paid exclusives?

[M4xw0lf]

Wot! Chi com spying and paid exclusives?

In fact more features than I need.

[daven]

What is wrong with you people????? Its a frigging game. Why are you getting so angry? If their previous games are anything to go by it wont even be finished until a year after release anyway!

[Zoraptor]

 

 

I assume that there is a revenue split between developer and publisher.

 

It is not unreasonable to assume that Obsidian is getting a portion of the revenue from the deal that Private Division made. I could be wrong.

But if I am, then that right there would be a great thing for Obsidian to say. "We are not receiving any additional revenue from the decision our publisher made to be a timed exclusive and were not involved in the decision making process towards granting the exclusivity deal."

 

Transparency goes a long way. I don't know, and you don't know, how much or even IF Obsidian profits from this decision or was involved in the decision.

 

 

It's definately not a split of revenue, when Private Division is funding the project.

 

 

It would be very unlikely to be a revenue split until such time as PD's initial investment is recouped at least, after that some sort of revenue split (or bonus) is more likely.

 

Wot! Chi com spying and paid exclusives?

 

There's still as much evidence of that as there is of Huawei spying- ie none.

 

Frankly I'm starting to suspect there's more than a whiff of Yellow Peril racism in both accusations, since both accusations are made sans any evidence. in the Huawei case the problem is far more likely to be a lack of NSA spying built in rather than CCP spying being present.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

 

Wot! Chi com spying and paid exclusives?

 

There's still as much evidence of that as there is of Huawei spying- ie none.

 

Frankly I'm starting to suspect there's more than a whiff of Yellow Peril racism in both accusations, since both accusations are made sans any evidence. in the Huawei case the problem is far more likely to be a lack of NSA spying built in rather than CCP spying being present.

 

On this point I will have to factually agree with you.

[daven]

 

 

 

I assume that there is a revenue split between developer and publisher.

 

It is not unreasonable to assume that Obsidian is getting a portion of the revenue from the deal that Private Division made. I could be wrong.

But if I am, then that right there would be a great thing for Obsidian to say. "We are not receiving any additional revenue from the decision our publisher made to be a timed exclusive and were not involved in the decision making process towards granting the exclusivity deal."

 

Transparency goes a long way. I don't know, and you don't know, how much or even IF Obsidian profits from this decision or was involved in the decision.

 

 

It's definately not a split of revenue, when Private Division is funding the project.

 

 

It would be very unlikely to be a revenue split until such time as PD's initial investment is recouped at least, after that some sort of revenue split (or bonus) is more likely.

 

Wot! Chi com spying and paid exclusives?

 

There's still as much evidence of that as there is of Huawei spying- ie none.

 

Frankly I'm starting to suspect there's more than a whiff of Yellow Peril racism in both accusations, since both accusations are made sans any evidence. in the Huawei case the problem is far more likely to be a lack of NSA spying built in rather than CCP spying being present.

 

Seems about as much nonsense as the whole anti MSG bollocks.

[M4xw0lf]

General comment on the EGS situation:

 

It is evident that Epic is taking bucketloads of money in hand at the moment to establish a foothold in the digital distribution market. Rumours of conditions not only include much smaller cuts of sales than common for other game platforms, but also guarantees for minimum revenue.

Epic will basically look at the projected money the publisher expects to make, and goes: yep, we give you that, no matter what; beyond that, we take 12%.

It's the proverbial offer that's too good to be refused, and the amount of even high-profile games making the switch to EGS (e.g. Metro Exodus virtually mere hours before release) is testament to that.

And I can't fault the Publishers for that, not to mention the Developers, who likely have little to no say on the matter. It's business. For Publishers/Devs, it's, right now, even great business.

[bonarbill]

I never buy games from the Microsoft store, but looks like I'll be buying this game from there.  No way are those money-hatting **** at Epic are getting my money.  I refuse to use their launcher if they are going to doing crap like this.

Edited March 22, 2019 by bonarbill

[Yonjuro]

Epic is a symptom. The problem is DRM. Suppose you buy the game on Steam or some other service that requires DRM.

 

Suppose that Epic's exclusivity gambit pays off big and they buy the service you bought your games from. Now you are Epic's customer. It doesn't matter whether you want to be Epic's customer. You don't have a choice (well, you could attempt to pirate all of the games you thought you owned, but that isn't a good choice). Your game library goes to whoever bought the service.

 

If they now have a monopoly (a common tendency in tech. - consolidation to the point of monopoly), they may decide to charge you a monthly fee to play the games you "own." They may decide to do other consumer unfriendly things. Who knows?

 

Or, you can refuse to buy anything with DRM. You then own your games. If your vendor gets bought by another vendor or just goes out of business (two very common occurrences in tech.), you still own them. You might need to start making your own backup copies if you were relying on your vendor for backups.

 

Anyhoo, it's been fun Obsidian. If The Outer Worlds makes it to GoG (and is still relevant when it gets there), I will certainly consider purchasing it.

 

[marelooke]

I just tested the Windows store and I didn't hate it. Nothing to download, sign up for, or configure.  

 

Just putting that out there for those that don't want Epic or to install an additional client

 

The nothing to sign up for bit is only true if you linked your Windows account to a Microsoft account, If you didn't then you still need to sign in (possibly even create an account), and be very careful so they don't intrude into your Windows experience outside of the store. (because anyone who didn't link their OS account did so on purpose, MS kinda "hid" that option on purpopse)

 

Just fair warning: do not pre-install (which is not the same as pre-loading) on the Windows store (or at least be aware of the caveats), if you install a game before its released it will download some placeholder data. It will then happily pull in the entire game on release. And fail to install it with a vague error. The only way to fix it is to uninstall and redownload. I've had this issue with all three Forza games, so I'm going to just assume it hasn't been fixed yet (and those aren't exactly small games, so I wasn't too please about having to redownload 40GB+ each time). Given how helpful the errors were it took me multiple hours (and multiple failed downloads) to figure out what was going on the first time.

 

If you get lucky and they either fixed it, or you manage to avoid it, go you, if not, now you know what to do

Edited March 22, 2019 by marelooke

[Triple - A Foxy Lad]

i only ever used steam under duress and most of its 'features' are of no interest to me. if gog or itchio aint options, everything else is second best. im already on both egs and windows store due to fortnite and sea of thieves so this aint something im gonna lose sleep over. tbh im still more annoyed at fact that i need a ps4 to play bloodborne lol, but whatevs.

[Voss]

I absolutely despise the fact that these exclusive-deals are brought over from consoles and simply will not support it.

 

 

I like how Obsidian is just hiding from the beep-storm this decision stirred up amongst its fans.

 

/sarcasm

Indeed, i relly appreciate that Obsidian is taking a stand.

/sarcasm

 

It is understandable that these are business decisions and that Obsidian most likely didn't have a say in this but that's what you got for selling out to Microsoft Studios. Well done guys, as of right now i guess i'm not going to spend any more money on you.

Nope. This has nothing to do with selling to MS. In fact, had they sold themselves to MS earlier, this wouldn't have happened (MS can rightfully sneer at Epic's exclusivity bribes).

 

This is Obsidian signing yet another bad publishing deal where they don't seem to have any grasp of what's in the contract, or set any real limits on the publisher. Its another live demonstration that Obsidian -needs- to be owned by another party, else they'll keep shooting themselves in the foot.

 

If we're really lucky the MS ownership will also mean less tolerance for shipping games as buggy messes.

Edited March 22, 2019 by Voss