Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 

So here's a new thing. Ubisoft's Anno 1800 has just gone Epic-exclusive, but in an interesting twist, they'e continuing to sell the game on Steam as a pre-order until its release date: https://store.steampowered.com/app/916440/Anno_1800/

 

My first thought is, wow, how greedy. Juicing up pre-orders from Epic-hating players desperate to have the game on Steam.

 

But my second thought is...hey, that's not a bad compromise actually.

 

That's the smart way to do it. You don't piss off the superfans of your game and you actually get them to buy the game when it's released. Rest of the crown will most likely gladly wait a year or two for sales anyways.

 

Weird though, that even Ubisoft is turning to Epic Store, since they have their own store. Epic must be paying a lot to get someone like Ubisoft to ditch thier own store.

Sorry but I don't see how this is any sort of compromise. You still don't get the game for a year. What meaningful difference does having it as a preorder make?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Sorry but I don't see how this is any sort of compromise. You still don't get the game for a year. What meaningful difference does having it as a preorder make?

 

No, people who pre-order Anno 1800 on Steam are getting it on release day. It's actually a better deal than what I suggested earlier (which was giving people Steam keys that don't activate until a year after release).

 

The Outer Worlds was in the top 3 most wishlisted games on Steam. Private Division could totally have demanded something like this from Epic and gotten it.

Edited by Infinitron
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Sorry but I don't see how this is any sort of compromise. You still don't get the game for a year. What meaningful difference does having it as a preorder make?

 

No, people who pre-order Anno 1800 on Steam are getting it on release day. It's actually a better deal than what I suggested earlier (which was giving people Steam keys that don't activate until a year after release).

 

The Outer Worlds was in the top 3 most wishlisted games on Steam. Private Division could totally have demanded something like this from Epic and gotten it.

 

 

It's some kind of compromise, but I'm not sure it's a great one from a customer standpoint. It's offshoring the developer's risk at the expense of the customer. In return for the game being available in a timely manner on their preferred platform, they assume all financial risk that the game sucks.

 

It works GREAT for the developer. They get those sweet, sweet Epic store bribes without looking quite as ****y to the people who aren't a big fan of Epic AND they likely juice preorders all in exchange for the low, low price of making their customers buy something before the reviews are out unless they want to read the reviews first and then either buy on an inferior platform or wait a year.

 

It gives you two lousy choices.

Edited by nocoolnamejim
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Sorry but I don't see how this is any sort of compromise. You still don't get the game for a year. What meaningful difference does having it as a preorder make?

 

No, people who pre-order Anno 1800 on Steam are getting it on release day. It's actually a better deal than what I suggested earlier (which was giving people Steam keys that don't activate until a year after release).

 

The Outer Worlds was in the top 3 most wishlisted games on Steam. Private Division could totally have demanded something like this from Epic and gotten it.

 

 

It's some kind of compromise, but I'm not sure it's a great one from a customer standpoint. It's offshoring the developer's risk at the expense of the customer. In return for the game being available in a timely manner on their preferred platform, they assume all financial risk that the game sucks.

 

It works GREAT for the developer. They get those sweet, sweet Epic store bribes without looking quite as ****y to the people who aren't a big fan of Epic AND they likely juice preorders all in exchange for the low, low price of making their customers buy something before the reviews are out unless they want to read the reviews first and then either buy on an inferior platform or wait a year.

 

It gives you two lousy choices.

 

AND they're going to have to outsource those reviews, because it's not like Epic lets you post reviews.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just chipping in.

I find it extremely disturbing, this late trend of PC game exclusivity. We are getting one thing (increased competition in the PC Store platforms), and transforming it into a limiting factor to consumers.

We all know Steam needs to do better. The market has changed, and it needs to offer more for game developers. But, looking from the consumer PoV, Steam does a decent job in offering a good experience when buying games, and offering relevant services and amenities. Epic Store does not. I know it is a new marketplace, but that doesn't justify any exclusivity. This is a dumb way to strong-arm people into using you platform because they NEED to, not because they WANT to.

I have accounts on many services. Steam, GOG, Ubi, Origin, even Windows Store (yeah...). I also have an account in Epic Store. But only Steam and GOG are in my tray when my PC starts, because I LIKE these services, and what they offer me. Nothing so far enticed me to really purchase anything over there, and price is just one more factor in this calculation.

So, Obsidian, I am afraid The Outer Worlds has officially entered my Longtail Backlog. When and if it gets into a service that I approve, that's when I'm getting this game. I was really excited about the premise, but I won't be forced to behave in a specific way because someone else is getting money, if I can help it.

Talk to Steam. Rally other devs and pressure it into giving you a better cut. But don't weaponize your products. There's a part of your community that won't like it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just chipping in.

 

I find it extremely disturbing, this late trend of PC game exclusivity. We are getting one thing (increased competition in the PC Store platforms), and transforming it into a limiting factor to consumers.

 

We all know Steam needs to do better. The market has changed, and it needs to offer more for game developers. But, looking from the consumer PoV, Steam does a decent job in offering a good experience when buying games, and offering relevant services and amenities. Epic Store does not. I know it is a new marketplace, but that doesn't justify any exclusivity. This is a dumb way to strong-arm people into using you platform because they NEED to, not because they WANT to.

 

I have accounts on many services. Steam, GOG, Ubi, Origin, even Windows Store (yeah...). I also have an account in Epic Store. But only Steam and GOG are in my tray when my PC starts, because I LIKE these services, and what they offer me. Nothing so far enticed me to really purchase anything over there, and price is just one more factor in this calculation.

 

So, Obsidian, I am afraid The Outer Worlds has officially entered my Longtail Backlog. When and if it gets into a service that I approve, that's when I'm getting this game. I was really excited about the premise, but I won't be forced to behave in a specific way because someone else is getting money, if I can help it.

 

Talk to Steam. Rally other devs and pressure it into giving you a better cut. But don't weaponize your products. There's a part of your community that won't like it.

 

Ok, this idea that the exclusives are due to a "better cut" needs to die, and I'm going to stab it now. The exclusives aren't due to a better cut. They're due to Epic either throwing a big bag of money at publishers right off the bat and/or promising a minimum number of sales after a certain time (or, possibly, both).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not every game on EGS will get 'paid' to be there though, the lower cut is to encourage those that won't be being paid to offer their game there as an option. Stores need a differentiation from steam; GOG has a rather different market including a lot of people who won't use steam (and now, a lower cut than steam too), EGS offers a lower cut and theoretically a lot of customers. Steam's strategy involves making itself the default and in many cases it costs money (initially) to go onto a competitor as you have to unpick whatever steam exclusive features you may have integrated, so if you want to compete with steam you have to offer an improved financial return to defray the costs of not going steam exclusive.

 

EGS has three strategies- 'exclusives' via guaranteed minimum sales and offering a lower cut per sale unit to attract publishers, and free games to attract new customers. They cannot just pay everyone to be 'exclusive' in the longer term as it plain isn't practical, they'll do that only for games they think will make them money long term and attract demographics that they think they are lacking. For every other game the customer base and lower cut will be the attractive part.

Edited by Zoraptor
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just chipping in.

 

I find it extremely disturbing, this late trend of PC game exclusivity. We are getting one thing (increased competition in the PC Store platforms), and transforming it into a limiting factor to consumers.

 

We all know Steam needs to do better. The market has changed, and it needs to offer more for game developers. But, looking from the consumer PoV, Steam does a decent job in offering a good experience when buying games, and offering relevant services and amenities. Epic Store does not. I know it is a new marketplace, but that doesn't justify any exclusivity. This is a dumb way to strong-arm people into using you platform because they NEED to, not because they WANT to.

 

I have accounts on many services. Steam, GOG, Ubi, Origin, even Windows Store (yeah...). I also have an account in Epic Store. But only Steam and GOG are in my tray when my PC starts, because I LIKE these services, and what they offer me. Nothing so far enticed me to really purchase anything over there, and price is just one more factor in this calculation.

 

So, Obsidian, I am afraid The Outer Worlds has officially entered my Longtail Backlog. When and if it gets into a service that I approve, that's when I'm getting this game. I was really excited about the premise, but I won't be forced to behave in a specific way because someone else is getting money, if I can help it.

 

Talk to Steam. Rally other devs and pressure it into giving you a better cut. But don't weaponize your products. There's a part of your community that won't like it.

 

Ok, this idea that the exclusives are due to a "better cut" needs to die, and I'm going to stab it now. The exclusives aren't due to a better cut. They're due to Epic either throwing a big bag of money at publishers right off the bat and/or promising a minimum number of sales after a certain time (or, possibly, both).

 

 

Immediately, yes. But the reality is a bit more complicated than that. Epic Store is throwing a ton of money on top of these games, the longer plan is attracting more devs into the service and retaining them through better rev shares. To do that, they need more users. This is the short-term plan.

 

Having worked in a major game store platform, I can say with certainty that they won't deal in minimum game sales. It's a lump sum kind of deal. They have the leverage to do that, and they will buy their way into relevance. Not with my money, though, at least until they keep on with the exclusivity bullcrap.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Just chipping in.

 

I find it extremely disturbing, this late trend of PC game exclusivity. We are getting one thing (increased competition in the PC Store platforms), and transforming it into a limiting factor to consumers.

 

We all know Steam needs to do better. The market has changed, and it needs to offer more for game developers. But, looking from the consumer PoV, Steam does a decent job in offering a good experience when buying games, and offering relevant services and amenities. Epic Store does not. I know it is a new marketplace, but that doesn't justify any exclusivity. This is a dumb way to strong-arm people into using you platform because they NEED to, not because they WANT to.

 

I have accounts on many services. Steam, GOG, Ubi, Origin, even Windows Store (yeah...). I also have an account in Epic Store. But only Steam and GOG are in my tray when my PC starts, because I LIKE these services, and what they offer me. Nothing so far enticed me to really purchase anything over there, and price is just one more factor in this calculation.

 

So, Obsidian, I am afraid The Outer Worlds has officially entered my Longtail Backlog. When and if it gets into a service that I approve, that's when I'm getting this game. I was really excited about the premise, but I won't be forced to behave in a specific way because someone else is getting money, if I can help it.

 

Talk to Steam. Rally other devs and pressure it into giving you a better cut. But don't weaponize your products. There's a part of your community that won't like it.

 

Ok, this idea that the exclusives are due to a "better cut" needs to die, and I'm going to stab it now. The exclusives aren't due to a better cut. They're due to Epic either throwing a big bag of money at publishers right off the bat and/or promising a minimum number of sales after a certain time (or, possibly, both).

 

 

Immediately, yes. But the reality is a bit more complicated than that. Epic Store is throwing a ton of money on top of these games, the longer plan is attracting more devs into the service and retaining them through better rev shares. To do that, they need more users. This is the short-term plan.

 

Having worked in a major game store platform, I can say with certainty that they won't deal in minimum game sales. It's a lump sum kind of deal. They have the leverage to do that, and they will buy their way into relevance. Not with my money, though, at least until they keep on with the exclusivity bullcrap.

 

Are you saying Epic isn't doing deals for minimum game sales, or am I misreading? Because if that's what you're saying, then you're categorically wrong, as Snapshot Games flat out said that was the deal, and that they got no lump sum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, that's what I'm saying, and I stand by it. Companies say a lot of things. Internally, though, things move in weirder angles.The recent announcement of Borderlands 3 exclusivity also seems to point in this direction.

I could be wrong, of course, but I don't think so.

Edited by Strigoi
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, that's what I'm saying, and I stand by it. Companies say a lot of things. Internally, though, things move in weirder angles.The recent announcement of Borderlands 3 exclusivity also seems to point in this direction.

 

I could be wrong, of course, but I don't think so.

According to Snapshot Games, you're wrong. Their representative said they did a deal for minimum guaranteed sales (WITHOUT a lump sum, to boot).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now Borderlands 3 is an Epic-exclusive, but only for six months instead of a full year. That would have been nice to have for The Outer Worlds too, PD.

Edited by Infinitron
Link to post
Share on other sites

Now Borderlands 3 is an Epic-exclusive, but only for six months instead of a full year. That would have been nice to have for The Outer Worlds too, PD.

I would've found all of the "Epic exclusive" type deals a bit more palatable if they were all 6 months vs. a year. A little bit.

“Things are as they are. Looking out into the universe at night, we make no comparisons between right and wrong stars, nor between well and badly arranged constellations.” – Alan Watts
Link to post
Share on other sites

I registered just to post about this.  I've been trolling these forums for ages, especially for the sweet POE1 and Deadfire builds.  Shout out to Boeroer...I've always enjoyed your themed builds.  I'm pretty sure I own every single released Obsidian game to date, and it's quite likely that I'll end up getting Outer Worlds when it comes to Steam.  I'm extremely disappointed, a little at the publisher's choice here, but more at the rise of exclusivity in the PC market.  That we didn't have the manipulative marketing which seems so toxically pandemic in the console market was, in my mind, perhaps the best thing about the platform.

On the flip side, I've got hundreds of games in my Steam library that I've never touched.  If I spend every day trying out two new games from my existing library, I wouldn't clear out the unplayed games (some of them almost certainly amazing games [Kerbal Space Program, Grim Dawn, Papers Please, and so many more]) before The Outer Worlds is available on Steam.  This is, at the end of the day, why Epic will likely fail to seriously impact the market through its devious strategy of dividing the market.  If I have to choose between installing Epic Game Store or dumping another 100 hours into Europa Universalis 4 and/or installing Yakuza 0, it's an easy choice.

 

In the meantime, I hope that the community can unite in making clear that we don't want exclusivity in the PC gaming market.  I will personally do this by boycotting the Epic Game Store.  I would be sad to see a future for PC gaming in which the kind of marketing that kept The Last of Us out of my hands becomes the dominant paradigm.  Ultimately, it will be consumer behavior which determines if this becomes a successful gambit to be emulated and exacerbated or not.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Now Borderlands 3 is an Epic-exclusive, but only for six months instead of a full year. That would have been nice to have for The Outer Worlds too, PD.

I would've found all of the "Epic exclusive" type deals a bit more palatable if they were all 6 months vs. a year. A little bit.

 

Agreed. 6 months is sort of a "sweet spot" for me. These days I don't buy games at launch anyway and 6 months means most of the obvious bugs will have been ironed out through patches.

“He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, for me, a year may actually be a bit on the short side. But that has more to do with how Paradox does business which I learned the hard way with Pillars 1.

I bought it on release day and started playing immediately.

 

One thing was bugfixes and balancing patches, which meant that some of my key characters were nerfed hardcore halfway through my playthrough.

Another thing is that the White March packs were designed in such a way that, if you had proceeded too far into the main story, you couldn't play them.

Terrible decisions, in which you punish early adopters.

 

Then, of course, at the end of all of it - when all patches and expansion packs had been released, they made the definitive edition, which had everything in one pack and for a much lower price.

 

All of this has meant that, as much as I look forward to play Pillars 2, I still haven't purchased it. First because I wanted to wait until all expansions had been released, which in itself took quite a while after initial release (this time even more so, as there are 3 as opposed to 2). 

Now that they're all out and most bugs seems to have been fixed and all builds have been balanced (or at least won't be tampered with more), all that's left is to wait for the definitive edition on GOG so that I can be sure to buy everything in one go. With Pillars 2 being released early May of 2018, it will likely mean that it will have been over a full year at least from release to when I finally buy and play, because of patches, expansion and definitive edition. This is simply something Paradox has taught me. That it does not pay to buy early from them.

 

So yeah... A year, maybe a bit more, actually seems about right. They'll have fixed all bugs, released all DLCs/expansions, and maybe even made available some sort of definitive edition. It's all good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thing is that the White March packs were designed in such a way that, if you had proceeded too far into the main story, you couldn't play them.

 

Well, there's a fairly clearly broadcast point of no return, yes. Unless you choose not to read, you can't really miss it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well, there's a fairly clearly broadcast point of no return, yes. Unless you choose not to read, you can't really miss it.

 

 

I didn't say the problem was lack of warning. My point is that design like that does really not make for great incentive to play the game until everything is out. Which is just one out of several reasons for why, in my experience with Obsidian/Paradox it is actually much better to wait.

 

While I haven't played it myself, it is my understanding that both the expansions for The Witcher 3 are designed in such a way that it does not matter how far along you are in the main game before you play them, so that something like White March doesn't happen. I could be wrong, but in any case, I think it's something to keep in mind when designing expansions like that, especially when they aren't due out for 6+ months after release. But at the end of the day, it is only one of several reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I registered just to post about this.  I've been trolling these forums for ages, especially for the sweet POE1 and Deadfire builds.  Shout out to Boeroer...I've always enjoyed your themed builds.  I'm pretty sure I own every single released Obsidian game to date, and it's quite likely that I'll end up getting Outer Worlds when it comes to Steam.  I'm extremely disappointed, a little at the publisher's choice here, but more at the rise of exclusivity in the PC market.  That we didn't have the manipulative marketing which seems so toxically pandemic in the console market was, in my mind, perhaps the best thing about the platform.

 

On the flip side, I've got hundreds of games in my Steam library that I've never touched.  If I spend every day trying out two new games from my existing library, I wouldn't clear out the unplayed games (some of them almost certainly amazing games [Kerbal Space Program, Grim Dawn, Papers Please, and so many more]) before The Outer Worlds is available on Steam.  This is, at the end of the day, why Epic will likely fail to seriously impact the market through its devious strategy of dividing the market.  If I have to choose between installing Epic Game Store or dumping another 100 hours into Europa Universalis 4 and/or installing Yakuza 0, it's an easy choice.

 

In the meantime, I hope that the community can unite in making clear that we don't want exclusivity in the PC gaming market.  I will personally do this by boycotting the Epic Game Store.  I would be sad to see a future for PC gaming in which the kind of marketing that kept The Last of Us out of my hands becomes the dominant paradigm.  Ultimately, it will be consumer behavior which determines if this becomes a successful gambit to be emulated and exacerbated or not.

PLAY GRIM DAWN!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say the problem was lack of warning. My point is that design like that does really not make for great incentive to play the game until everything is out.

You could just make a savegame before that point. There's barely any content after that point; it is the finale.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read this interview about Super Meat Boy Forever, and there is an interesting bit later on about Epic Store. Partially interesting, because it confirms what I posted about while ago: there is more appeal of Epic store to developers than just cash. (Yay me smart).

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2019/04/05/team-meat-on-the-return-of-super-meat-boy/

 

Excerpt:

[With Epic] actually going through and making sure they feel like this game is good enough, I feel, like, really honoured to be considered for the Epic Games Store. Everything that’s coming out and everything I know that’s coming out [there], I’m like, ‘Wow I’m in really good company’ and I can’t necessarily say that with Steam, because the company is everybody. I’m on the same platform as Borderlands 2 or whatever but I’m also on the same platform as that rape game, which is kinda like ehhhh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pffft. The vain indie hipsters are going to end up getting screwed either way. They think if they're on a fresh new platform it'll be just like Steam back in 2012 again. Fat chance.

Edited by Infinitron
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember back in the day... you didnt even need any of this junk to play pc games. Now steam has everyone by the balls, same as amazon and youtube and facebook.

  • Like 1

nowt

Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember back in the day... you didnt even need any of this junk to play pc games. Now steam has everyone by the balls, same as amazon and youtube and facebook.

That said curated steam was great for smaller studios, as long as you managed to get unto the platform. Whenever Epic will reproduce the appeal of younger steam appears to be seen, but I did notice myself eyeing other game on Epic, while I would completely ignore them on steam due to overexpose and complete lack of guaranteed quality.

 

Ideally for Epic they would become the elite platform - the place were the good games go, and if you are not on Epic you want to be there. 

 

One thing I must commed Epic is their choice of titles. From all the sea of average they tend to pick the few titles I am interested in. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...