Well Chris Avellone says that this sort of behaviour is exactly what he would have expected from Obs. CEO. Obviously, there is some bad blood here, but he says the devs are the last to know, and that the upper management would have most likely been part of this decision, so it probably wasn't a publisher surprise.

 

https://twitter.com/ChrisAvellone/status/1108967939451940866

Except he backtracked immediately. Just scroll ONE tweet down.

 

 

Well, I wouldn't say he completely backtracked, but agreed that the actual devs (not the management) shouldn't be blamed. 

This is epicly anti-consumer.

I don't understand why I should give Obsidian's upper management the benefit of the doubt. Yes there's no evidence they supported this; but equally there's no evidence they didn't. So it's a matter of how each of us subjectively chooses to see things, isn't it?

 

I love the Obsidian devs. But I do harbor concerns about Obsidian's upper management (and no, it isn't because of Avellone's crazy and silly rants).

The exclusive deal sucks, but, I already have Unreal Engine installed whiich forces the Epic launcher. So, don't care as much as I probably should.   The only metric that really matters is how good the game is, after all. 

I don't play many first person games and I don't mind waiting for bug fixing or dlcs to play a game for the first time, so this isn't really a big problem for me. I can wait for Steam or (preferably) GOG, but that will mean that unless the game is really good, it will be ok to wait a little more and buy it with a good discount.

Imagine leaving Pillars 2 in a state of disarray and then making this announcement lol

I don't understand why I should give Obsidian's upper management the benefit of the doubt. Yes there's no evidence they supported this; but equally there's no evidence they didn't.

 

Because they would not be making the decision. All PD games are EGS 'exclusives' (iirc the rest are proper exclusives too, with no WinStore, so TOW is already a special case). If you blame Obs management you also have to blame Desilets and the rest of the PD game makers effected equally, and the fact that PD have gone EGS on all titles says it's their decision- or that all the devs involve don't like steam, in which case you'd have to ask what steam is doing wrong as well.

 

In order for the wishes of Obs execs to be relevant they have to be, well, relevant and able to influence PD/ 2k's decision making, in order for Obs management to think it's a good idea  Obs also has to benefit from a decision which leaves the largest marketplace. The way that EGS and publishing works the benefit will be PD's. Obs management are not going to throw their game under the bus by screaming publicly at their publisher though.

 

 

Well Chris Avellone says that this sort of behaviour is exactly what he would have expected from Obs. CEO. Obviously, there is some bad blood here, but he says the devs are the last to know, and that the upper management would have most likely been part of this decision, so it probably wasn't a publisher surprise. 

 

https://twitter.com/ChrisAvellone/status/1108967939451940866

 

Yes, Avellone is totally legit and beliavable source when it comes to Obsidian and the partners. Oh, wait. He isn't.

Avellone uses every opportunity to strike at Feargus & co. Doesn't have to be true, if someone believes him he has achieved what he was looking for.

 

 

This is also the perfect situation for Chris- who, lest we forget, was singing the praises of PD when he was trying to get them to give TOW the chop. Whatever happens he can and will blame management. If management fights back against decisions they don't like it's Feargus yelling and ruining another publisher relationship while patting himself on the back!, if they say nothing it's typical low energy Feargus, bet he didn't even tell anyone [which is likely prohibited by contract, but hey] about it, SAD!

Edited March 23, 20196 yr by Zoraptor

definitely not buying this game. i dont like Steam that much, i dont like other clients/stores/bloatware except GOG Galaxy, but i hate Epic for doing this ****. i backed Phoenix Point and after that stupid annoucement i asked for refund. this case with Obsidian is not so evil, but it is stupid the same. 12 months exclusivity on Epic and Windows stores? PS4/XOne release date unchanged? this is a spit in the face to most customers on PC even Obsidian are not publishers.

 

whats next? what if they do some Fig/Kickstarter game funding, because Microsoft will not be interested in the idea? should we back it or not? because then, they could annouce some similar **** as Snapshot did. no backing/pre-ordering anything from Obsidian in the future and will just wait and see where is what heading.

Look at it this way, worst case scenario we have to wait a bit longer to enjoy a fully patched game which will probably be less expensive once it hits Steam and Gog. 

 

I've preordered the Obsidian Edition of Deadfire, it's almost been a year and I'm still waiting for the game to be fully patched before getting into the DLC and the turn based mode. 

 

One year is not such a big deal. Especially when you have a backlog and if waiting ultimately means that you get to play a better and fully patched version of the game. 

Obs is now on the list of devs that can't be trusted, along with newly included Bioware. They are slaves to their corporate masters.

Edited March 24, 20196 yr by Verde

Thank God I hadn't gotten super-hyped about this game yet. Now I'll be getting it bug-free, feature complete and at a discount a year later, on a platform that doesn't violate my privacy on behalf of their Chinese overlords.

Thank God I hadn't gotten super-hyped about this game yet. Now I'll be getting it bug-free, feature complete and at a discount a year later, on a platform that doesn't violate my privacy on behalf of their Chinese overlords.

You know you REALLY messed up when even the folks from the Norse peninsula aren't tolerating with your crap.

Thank God I hadn't gotten super-hyped about this game yet. Now I'll be getting it bug-free, feature complete and at a discount a year later, on a platform that doesn't violate my privacy on behalf of their Chinese overlords.

Lmao @ bug free

How much say does Obsidian have over exclusivity deals when they own the IP rights to the game? 

 

Wouldn't owning the rights give you more control in the matter? 

Phew... going through that entire topic was... something.
So, my 2 cents:

I'm personally torn apart - on one hand, I kinda knew that TOW will not get a day one release on GOG and as such I was willing to get it on Steam instead, provided it gets some sort of physical, CE edition release on PC. With Epic Store exclusivity I won't be getting any of that, so I might just as well wait until proper GOG release...
Which brings me to "on the other hand". 
The Outer Worlds is a project I waited for longer, than I remember. A game helmed by a duo I owe much of my gaming (rpg specifically) tastes. A duo, that for more over a decade I thought to be impossible again (with Mr. Boyarski career in Blizzard and all). You can imagine how hard (to use internet lingo) I came, when I've learned about their secret project somewhere around 2017. Now I think about it, I feel like comparison to ones first love would not be out of place here. After all, it may not be the strongest, or the ever lasting one, but it is always the one, that leaves a lasting mark, a reference if you will, by which one looks at any future relationships he or she has. The one, that teaches. And that is exactly what oryginal Fallout did to me.
You have to agree, that it was a very high note to start with and it left me spoiled for years (I vividly remember how disappointed I was by Baldur's Gate lack of INT/CHA influence over my char dialogue choices)

Sigh...
Having written the above, it seems like I already made my decision and I'm now just trying to find a justification for my own complacency with yet another big corporate entity telling me where and how to buy (sorry, rent) things I really, really wan't. Between my small and insignificant part in the ongoing games as service war and the rest of the world already playing and discussing TOW, I will have to cowardly abandon the case.
But jokes aside - I can't turn my back on Mr. Cain and Mr. Boyarski. I can only imagine how they feel, when what they call their dream project, is being tossed around by publishers like that. I don't much care about brand loyalty, but I most definitely owe at least something to those two amazing gents, for all the stories they've spun and shared as I'm one of those, who believes story telling is one of the most fundamentally humane activities, on par or maybe even bigger than science or religion.
Even with funds from sales being secured (if I understand how EGS works, that is), any means of boycotting the game will in the end, hurt them more, than it would hurt Epic or even Obsidian itself. I can't have that.

And on the closing note - how the hell I am expected to avoid all the potentially deal breaking spoilers, in case of this particular story driven game for well over a year (again, not so sure it will even see GOG release in 2020)? Like internet is going to give any efs, that I'm on some personal crusade against this or that digital retailer... Being a GOG customer, I've already had my share of games spoiled to me, because of "how didn't you play that YET?!".

Pretty sure this business decision is a big money loser. Here's hoping this great studio survives - but it won't be thanks to me. I just can't abide this nonsense. If they don't, I suppose the talent can always reassemble somewhere else.

How much say does Obsidian have over exclusivity deals when they own the IP rights to the game? 

 

Wouldn't owning the rights give you more control in the matter? 

 

The leverage they have is that they can threaten to take the IP elsewhere for sequels. In this case that has already happened though, since MS bought Obsidian in the interim the IP has already gone elsewhere. If PD handling sequels was written into the contract even that leverage would not be there. Walking out of the contract would also be an option, but not a practical one.

 

Except in a very few cases the publisher has effectively total freedom in determining how the game is published because they are providing the funding and ultimately taking most of the risk. A situation like PoE/ Deadfire would likely be one of those different situations as there were obligations to honour KS/ Fig pledges like being on GOG/ Steam and the bulk of the funding was provided by crowdfunding and Obsidian itself- but minus IP ownership TOW seems to be a classic work for hire situation. Phoenix Point shows that even crowdfunding obligations can be... delayed, with enough inducement.

 

As for the devs, they should say something. Top of my head, what would probably get the community off of their backs would be an admission, hey... publisher sprung this on us and we hate it too. Second, if they really wanted to come out as the good guys, state that all sales of the game from the MS store can be transfered to steam at the end of the 12 month waiting period....

Non Disclosure Agreement. They can't say **** publicly about this until the NDA runs out.

 

Would Microsoft ever agree on such transfer of games? I seriously doubt that.

Aside from just plain NDA considerations, it's bad business to publicly disparage your business partners.  That's a quick way to turn needless drama into needless drama with a lawsuit attached.

 

And as far as Microsoft goes, it does look like they already did throw their weight around.  If they didn't intervene, TOW would likely be a true Epic exclusive, and not have a simultaneous PC release on the Microsoft Store.

 

How much say does Obsidian have over exclusivity deals when they own the IP rights to the game? 

 

Wouldn't owning the rights give you more control in the matter? 

 

The leverage they have is that they can threaten to take the IP elsewhere for sequels. In this case that has already happened though, since MS bought Obsidian in the interim the IP has already gone elsewhere. If PD handling sequels was written into the contract even that leverage would not be there. Walking out of the contract would also be an option, but not a practical one.

 

Except in a very few cases the publisher has effectively total freedom in determining how the game is published because they are providing the funding and ultimately taking most of the risk. A situation like PoE/ Deadfire would likely be one of those different situations as there were obligations to honour KS/ Fig pledges like being on GOG/ Steam and the bulk of the funding was provided by crowdfunding and Obsidian itself- but minus IP ownership TOW seems to be a classic work for hire situation. Phoenix Point shows that even crowdfunding obligations can be... delayed, with enough inducement.

 

 

Eh, PP mostly shows that crowdfunding obligations are worthless (or worth as much as the word of the developer, which I guess says a lot about the decision makers at SSG) in practice since pretty much no-one is going to take the steps to enforce them given the relatively small amounts of money involved. I'd love to be proven wrong though and I'd be very interested to see the outcome of any such case, especially in the EU (where Snapshot Games is based).

 

 

 

Except in a very few cases the publisher has effectively total freedom in determining how the game is published because they are providing the funding and ultimately taking most of the risk. A situation like PoE/ Deadfire would likely be one of those different situations as there were obligations to honour KS/ Fig pledges like being on GOG/ Steam and the bulk of the funding was provided by crowdfunding and Obsidian itself- but minus IP ownership TOW seems to be a classic work for hire situation. Phoenix Point shows that even crowdfunding obligations can be... delayed, with enough inducement.

 

True in general, but in this case, it gets a bit more complicated due to the M&A situation, probably. You'd certainly want to ensure no questions arise regarding due diligence research and a potential poisoned apple in the expectations for the future development of Obsidian's value. Especially not when the buying party in the M&A is Microsoft.

 

As for Phoenix Point, the decision is in my eyes awfully myopic. Even if they can refund backers now while remaining in the black, that says nothing about sales of this or future games, let alone future willingness of people to back crowdfunding by the studio. A cold, hard look at Bethesda's experience with Fallout 76 should teach some lessons as to what happens when you put short-term pleasing of investors over long-term customer relations. 

 

The problem a lot in the gaming industry seem to overlook is that if customers are happy and buying, revenue for investors will often come automatically. On the other hand, designing products alongside investor wants rather than customer needs makes finding customers willing to pay the price asked significantly more difficult. And if games such as Outer Worlds and Phoenix Point come to other platforms a year later, I'm pretty sure they will struggle to get a full price for a one-year-old game.  You only need to look at Fallout 76 having ended up in some places as a giveaway to understand how risky acting in deliberate disregard for the wants and needs of your core customers can be.  And revenue split aside, one should think twice before reducing Steam with its large user base to a bargain bin...

 

Aside from just plain NDA considerations, it's bad business to publicly disparage your business partners.  That's a quick way to turn needless drama into needless drama with a lawsuit attached.

 

And as far as Microsoft goes, it does look like they already did throw their weight around.  If they didn't intervene, TOW would likely be a true Epic exclusive, and not have a simultaneous PC release on the Microsoft Store.

 

 

That is very true. Not to mention it would create only more negativity around the game. Some fans would just pirate the game to spite PD, even though it would end up hurting Obsidian as well.

 

Yes, Microsoft definately threw it's weight around or were active in the deal making. Though it's more likely that they tried to salvage a horrible decision (from their point of view) by getting the game on their own store as well.

Does it really matter? 

 

I bet some of you have been up all weekend being angry at the world. 

 

Go for a walk or something.

Are you any better, commenting on every post that criticises the decision, even if it's constructive criticism?

 

You are fine with this decision - fine. Others are not - also fine. Let them express their concerns and take them seriously as long as they can explain (in a somewhat decent way) why they don't like it.

 

I personally are not fine with it because

1. I don't have access to the Epic Store nor the Microsoft Store
2. because I think it's the inferior platform
3. I don't want to spread my games all over the place

 

Sure I can wait for a year, but that's nothing that makes me go "hooray". I don't whine and cry - but I don't like it. I'm sure even people who don't agree can follow the reasoning.  

Edited March 25, 20196 yr by Boeroer

Are you any better, commenting on every post that criticises the decision, even if it's constructive criticism?

 

You are fine with this decision - fine. Others are not - also fine. Let them express their concerns and take them seriously as long as they can explain (in a somewhat decent way) why they don't like it.

 

I personally are not fine with it because

1. I don't have access to the Epic Store nor the Microsoft Store
2. because I think it's the inferior platform
3. I don't want to spread my games all over the place

 

Sure I can wait for a year, but that's nothing that makes me go "hooray". I don't whine and cry - but I don't like it. I'm sure even people who don't agree can follow the reasoning.  

 

Not to forget, the more stores you use, the higher the statistical likelihood that one of them will be breached and your data spread over the net. It's bad enough that so many now insist on having a launcher, but I can do without spreading my payment data across the net.

Let them express their concerns and take them seriously as long as they can explain (in a somewhat decent way) why they don't like it.

Eh, it's nothing new after a point. Amusing to hear you label it as 'constructive criticism', even if that is the usual fallback point for grousing. Also, your point 3 means you're just beholden to Steam ?