Until it eventually does come to steam. Please don't listen to these fuckers. They will say whatever they can for profit. It wouldn't be the first time these people have lied about this exact thing only for the game to come to steam a year later.
You already got an answer more or less, but to specify, Fitgirl is one specific repacker of games that a lot of people trust. She (or he, or they or it, nobody really knows) specializes in compression to make the releases quick to download on slow Internet connections. Of course if you're sitting on gigabit download speeds or something, the decompression will take way longer than what you save from the download.
Thank you for the details, much appreciated. I extrapolated from the other response - more or less, as you said - but you provided plenty I couldn't have guessed.
Epic profittability is on Fortnite; there will be lot of skin based on Alan Wake franchise and, also, Fortnite ads everytime you launch AW2 form their launcher etc.
...as for Alan Wake franchise itself, well it goes in the epic games store marketing black hole
Cool. I guess I won't be buying it then and will simply sail the seas when I finally feel like playing it after all the games I bought on steam and gog.
Yup, any “never” decision under modern capitalism should be treated at “within this quarter.” All that matters is quarterly growth, and all company decisions will change every quarter
In other words: Sweeney still can't get people to use his inferior service. I can't wait to see him cry about Valve's alleged anti-competitive behaviour yet again.
Wish I could just wire money straight to Remedy. Best I could do was buy Control again on GOG and consider my seafaring soul free of sin.
Games not developed or published by Epic only become exclusive when the publishers and/or devs take their money. Why is no one mad at them? And of course Valve doesn't have to do much of anything, they have had like a 10+ year headstart on cornering the PC marketplace. GOG has been completely awesome and more ethical than Valve and yet they're barely scraping by. Gamers/consumers just love to fanboy the hell out of corporations these days. When Gabe is gone and Valve inevitably goes public and enshitifies, you'll be glad there's still some competition left. But it'll suck because 90% of PC gamers have probably damn near 100% of their library locked into one platform. Remember, Steam is a huge reason why PC games went fully digital almost two decades ago.
People are mad at them. However, Epic is the one enabling this shitty behavior so they are the ones getting most of the hate.
they have had like a 10+ year headstart on cornering the PC marketplace
So Epic had like 10 years of learning from steam and doing it better, offering a competitive platform and experience. However, they didn't do that because that actually takes time, money and effort so they just artificially tried to limit the amount of titles for sale on steam, which is basically trying to strongarm consumers into using their platform. Which is quite the same practice you see from any big players in any industry, from apple to john deere - and all are getting hate for it.
you’ll be glad there’s still some competition left
Competition like the EGS? No, I'm definitely not happy about that.
Steam is a huge reason why PC games went fully digital almost two decades ago
Not really. Games would've gone digital either way, it was the obvious path to go. Steam might've sped up that process by a few years, but pretending that without steam, digitalization of the games industry would've never happened is naive at best and dishonest at worst.
Not really. Games would've gone digital either way, it was the obvious path to go. Steam might've sped up that process by a few years, but pretending that without steam, digitalization of the games industry would've never happened is naive at best and dishonest at worst.
And yet consoles still have physical game copies available all these years later. Why is PC so much different?
And I'm not saying to be happy that Epic is competition, I'm saying that if GOG dies, you'll only really have Steam and Epic. That sucks ass, but it's still better than only having ONE option. And like I said, once Gabe is gone, I 100% believe Valve will go full on enshitification mode. I wouldn't have to worry as much if I could still buy physical fucking copies of modern PC games.
As for Epic competing by creating better platform, I completely agree. Their launcher has made improvements, but it is still very bare bones and not great. I try to remember that tons of common sense software features we take for granted get patented. Hell, that's why so many streaming services felt so much shittier than Netflix for so long. It's not as straightforward as just emulating what Steam does but slightly better. That's still no excuse though, and they still fall very short of offering the mostly comfortable user experience we've grown accustomed to. Steam didn't start off where they're at now, they've had 20 years with an entire company dedicated to developing it.
My main point is, we all love Steam and Valve because they've been a mostly ethical corporation so far as well as mostly improving the experience of PC gaming, especially with Linux (minus expediting and enabling 100% digitization so they could attain better profit margins on Half-Life 2 sales). But nothing lasts forever, and pure monopolies are bad. Fuck Epic for buying exclusive rights for third party games, but in this specific context, it is their game, so it is what it is.
And yet consoles still have physical game copies available all these years later. Why is PC so much different?
It isn't. You can still buy physical copies of PC games, mostly AAA tho, but nobody does it anymore. Also, there are consoles that are delivered without a cd drive, so they are digital only.
And I’m not saying to be happy that Epic is competition, I’m saying that if GOG dies, you’ll only really have Steam and Epic
To be fair, steam is my platform of choice now anyways because of their awesome linux support.
I 100% believe Valve will go full on enshitification mode. I wouldn’t have to worry as much if I could still buy physical fucking copies of modern PC games
Certainly a worry, however, in case they do become shitty, I'll just download a bunch of cracks for my games and leave the platform.
Steam didn’t start off where they’re at now, they’ve had 20 years with an entire company dedicated to developing it.
I don't care tho?
Seriously, this is the worst argument to me. Why should I as a consumer care about that? If someone sells a flip phone now, you're not going to say: "Oh man samsung had such a big headstart obviously their phones are better". If a company enters a new space, they have to compete on the same level, not on the level of 20 years ago.
Fuck Epic for buying exclusive rights for third party games, but in this specific context, it is their game, so it is what it is
Ye agree, it is their game rn so they can do that. But a majority of games weren't.
I was about to say it isn't the same before googling and realising that they are the publisher for Alan Wake 2.
I guess there might still be the nuance of develop vs publish, does Valve publish any games that it didn't develop/weren't mods of their titles? (Genuinely don't know)
Either way, I'm still buttmad about the rocket league situation
How does it hurt you? Look, I get that people dislike using multiple launchers, but it's not like you have to buy a console to play the god damn game. The melodrama is crazy, all you have to do to play it besides buying the game is download epic's launcher. If you're in Linux, it's a bit more of a pain, but hardly.
By using their service and giving them money, you're validating their shitty practices and propagating this garbage across multiple platforms when other companies see it's profitable.
If you want gaming to get better, stop giving bad companies your money and attention.
When you're required to use their "store" to play the games too, then it's a platform. And an isolated one, at that. Imagine you could only buy a game AND PLAY IT at Walmart.
Platform exclusivity is part of Epic Games' problem. Not the sole issue, but a big one.
Exclusivity has been a thing since the advent of videogames, this isn't anything new. Epic is just a shitty company, so they're an easy target to criticize. They funded the development and published the game, it's their right to do with it as they please. They're losing money by not bringing it to Steam, so their loss, really. But it's not even close to the equivalent of console exclusives, as the barrier here is spending 5 minutes to just download their shitty launcher. It sucks, but this really isn't that big of a deal, in my opinion.
Apart from the inconvenience (which is a huge reason I dont use Epic) for the same price I get less service.
If you only want to play games thats nothing, no melodrama, just install the game and play it.
...but as soon as you want to interact with your friends in-game, download some mods, look up help with the game, stream stuff from my computer to my living room TV, share my account with family or just play on Linux the Epic store transforms from "just another launcher" to a useless peace of extra software on my PC actively standing in the way of my fun.
Steam's voice chat/partying functionality is garbage. Discord is widely used for a reason. Remote Play is hit or miss, but I've largely resorted to using Moonlight instead on my Steam Deck because it's more reliable and stable. The guides on Steam vary wildly from game to game, just depends on the community support for it. It is nice when there's good stuff available, as it is somewhat convenient (though I wished it saved my spot on the page, I constantly have to scroll to where I left off on guides whenever I do use them). Lutris and NonSteamLauncher makes running Epic on Linux a non-issue.
I get it, Epic is a lackluster launcher. No one's arguing otherwise. But it's hardly a huge barrier to playing games.
My steam profile is 18 years old. I am using all the above features for many years and they are perfectly functional.
Your solution is to use different third party apps for everything is the opposite of convenience in my opinion. If you prefer the better software for these features, why not the better launcher/storefront for games?
Epic gives no added value to the user experience (IMO) and does not inspire competition to do better, other that the free games extravaganza to try to expand its userbase, while steam does not have to prove anything anymore, yet still investing more money in new features, technologies.
The steam users are used to a certain level of service and have a perfectly valid reason to dislike less functional competitors.
If you are just here to grab the weekly free game, download and play then go for it, Epic will 100% serve its purpose , just don't put it on the same level when talking about everything else.
Epic actually financed Remedy's development of the game, as opposed to swooping in at the last minute to offer a timed-exclusivity deal. In that case I was fine buying the game on their platform if it meant the game got to exist at all. After all I do not expect Valve to sell their games on another platform than their own.
Don't get me wrong: I'd rather the game was sold on Steam, or even better, DRM-less on GOG. I did wait for a number of those timed exclusives to find their way on Steam or other stores (Borderlands 3, Kena, Journey, Control, Hades, etc). It's a shame that so many people will not get to experience AW2 because of its delivery platform, because it's a damn unique game.
As much as I hate Epic, I actually bought AW2 based on that logic but ended up refunding it because, and I can not stress this enough, FUCK ALWAYS ONLINE REQUIREMENTS ON PURELY OFFLINE GAMES. I refuse to pay for an offline game that locks me out when my internet isn't working...doubly so when the pirated version works perfectly fine without internet.
P.S. I also refuse to pay for single player games with arbitrary online "features" made to force a DRM check, or games published by cunts that do layoffs and shutter studios while posting record profits but that's a different conversation.
Damn shame the decision Remedy made to get the funding from Epic looks like it has backfired (since as I understand it AW2 still hasn't turned a profit). I truly hope this doesn't affect their upcoming games as Alan Wake 2 is one of the best gaming experiences I've ever had and I want for nothing more than Remedy to keep doing what they're doing.
It's unfortunate, but if you're developing a game and are in dire need of cash, Epic is your best bet.
Way before the whole store debacle, Epic also had a lot of grants and stuff, but those didn't require you to give up publishing rights IIRC. Honestly, the EGS greed aside, they've been excellent for the gaming industry.
Yeah, a big reason why Remedy took Epic's money was that barely anyone wants to invest in an honest to god sell it once traditional single player game these days. Almost every investor with enough money to finance something like AW2 wanted mtx bullshit and/or live service and epic was one of maybe a handful that had both the ability and willingness to fund the damn thing so credit where credit is due.
For that reason, I don't mind buying it on Epic. The always online requirement though, that's a deal breaker.
The good news is that the live service bubble burst so hard and spectacularly that we may see a return to actual good games getting funding after investors are done licking their wounds.
The good news is that the live service bubble burst so hard and spectacularly that we may see a return to actual good games getting funding after investors are done licking their wounds.
Did it?
I honestly have no idea what's going on in that space anymore. I'm still playing Baldur's Gate 3 because I've been extremely busy since about August 2023. Got into Act 2 yesterday! When I'm finished with that, I can get back to the game I was playing before BG3, which I STILL haven't finished, which is Elden Ring. I got stuck there and bought BG3 lol
The only good thing about not having time to play video games is that you can fill the entirety of your video game time with awesome single player games.
BG3 and the Cyberpunk dlc sold really well, proving you can turn a good profit from old school single player games still. Simultaneously, live service games like Concord, Suicide Squad, and Dragon Age sold terribly, the current copium is the massive losses from live service will push developers and publishers back towards single player games they can get a nice profit from compared to possible huge losses.
The truth is, the only way good games will be made again is when the publicly traded aaa companies die out and privately owned indie companies rule the scene.
This kind of thing happened with "American Nightmare" and "Quantum Break". While I'm not aware of any formal policy that Remedy has, I suspect this happens because they're a smaller shop trying to leverage whatever they can.
It's a good game and it wouldn't have been made if it werent for epic games fronting the cost. Step beyond the silly platform tribalism and just enjoy the game that was made with love and vision while supporting the devs and the choices they made. Or dont, w/e, I'm personally glad I got it there since the devs got a bigger cut than they'd get on steam anyway.
[...] the devs got a bigger cut than they'd get on steam
Inconsequential, considering the game is still not profitable, even after a year. The devs lost money on this game. If it came to Steam, they'd be swimming in cash right now. The cut they get from the store doesn't matter if the game releases on a single store that most people refuse to use.
If Epic Games would be an actual competitor to Steam instead of trying to lock their content behind a paywall and force users to use them over the competition, then people might consider using their service. But as long as they continue to use shitty practices, most people are going to avoid them and use their competition's service.
If Epic Games would be an actual competitor to Steam instead of trying to lock their content behind a paywall and force users to use them over the competition, then people might consider using their service.
Exactly, that's why it worked out so well for GOG.
If you want them to recoup the costs then buy the game instead of taking a pointless moral stance over supporting a monopoly.
What hurts GOG is its stance on DRM, since companies don't want games to be DRM free. It leads to late releases if it does come out leading to missing out on a lot of the purchases associated with hype. Leads to less games being sold at full price which happens most at launch with games having to rely on discounts older they get.
Why do people love Steam's DRM on everything, online only gameplay? Why do people love Steams totalitarian control and extortion deals?
If people could built their own Steam client, it wouldn't be so bad. I use Heroic on Windows for both Epic and GOG and get new games through Heroic so there can't be telemetry or data gathering. Why won't Valve allow a libre/free software Steam client to play games and let go of what people choose to install on their computer. I'm nit asking for DRM-free games, I'm asking ti stop dictator how I am allowed to play games.
Because Steam's DRM is entirely unobtrusive, it doesn't require online-only gameplay and the customer experience is excellent.
When Epic tries to compete with Steam they don't look to make a better user experience, instead they bribe developers for exclusivity deals to force people on their platform if they want to play a game on release.
I left steam. Only interested in offline installers from GOG.. When WWIII hits and players are still reliant on Steam's Online DRM Leased versions of your games, like come on already!.. No Internet,no games.. I'm burning all these games onto M-Disc media.. I can sell games for bullets and food in the apocalypse!! Woo!
I mean that doesn't really factor in.. Electricity isn't going to just vanish from existence. Just need to find ways to generate like hydro, battery, Solar.
You are stating stricty your own opinion when you say "customer experience is excellent". Read the documents of the legal case against Valve, the documents show Valve to be an extortionist.
Valve made it super convinient for their customers and they also took steps to encourage content creation with SFM, Source Engine, sharing their own assets. They created working cloud saving and mod sharing solutions, greenlighting a bunch of indies based on votes and being on the side of the customer in disputes over refunds with 2hr rule becomingthe new norm. For years, they provided and improved their service, so it's rare to see anyone complaining about that.
Ah, and Epic killed UT4 in beta when they found their initial zombie game mode that became Fortnite gave them that much cash they could start their own marketplace with regular giveaways and exclusives going on for years. I'm fucking pissed at them for that even now. It is irrational and personal, but Valve didn't kill my favorite game series, it's the opposite, since they kept slowly releasing and constantly updating Dota, CS, create Alyx, keep TF2 alive, and I'm only sad Alien Swarm would never see new content. In game studios and game marketplaces, Valve are golden.
But coming back to your initial displeasment with them, the funny thing is a lot of Steam games don't need Steam to launch. Unless devs implement some hooks and DRMs themselves, you can just launch their EXE file. Nobody really checks that, but that's the truth, and I've seen some lists of games that don't do that. On top of that, 99% offline games can be launched without internet with Steam only, you can even backup and then install some game on your PC offline if your client knows you own it. And don't forget family sharing - although they promised to rework it, I, my partner and our friends used it a lot, and although you can't use a game from a shared library when you are offline, if the owner plays it offline you can play it too at the same time without messing with each others' gameplay. This lazy implementation of DRM with many workarounds and general respect to even the sleakiest, cheating customer is why I still buy games there.
Valve has not been on the side of the customer when I've tried to return games. I've had multiple instances now of them refusing returns. I've been using Steam from the beginning and only started trying to return games within the past few years, but out of the handful I've tried to return at least half have been rejected. The last game was only $5 and was literally broken and unplayable, I had 2 minutes of playtime total and they still rejected the return. I had been really happy with Valve and Steam until this started happening. It's weird because my partner returns games with no problem. Even the same game that we tried together and discovered it has feral children screaming into microphones and then returned it, mine got rejected.
I was like that until a few years ago when I bought a broken and unplayable game that had been abandoned by the dev. I spend a lot of money on Steam and have a huge library at this point so its not like I'm trying to abuse the system. I think I've tried to return 5 or 6 games total with 2 or 3 rejected since they implemented the return policy.
Skipping over the game debate, wbere did this "my partnet" fad trend get started, instead of good married people talking about husband or wife, or single people talking about boyfriend or girlfriend? It's because linguistically it's not a natural or normal way of speaking, the phrasing sounds like it's from indocrination, saying "my partner", unless it.s part of a firm.
There are a lot of reasons for this, and it's been normal in some places for a very long time. If it's new to you, it's probably just a regional difference that you haven't heard it more. The way you worded your question makes me feel like you are trying to start a fight, so I think I'll push down my instinct to link you to resources.
The main reason for me is the implication of a certain legal status when you say husband/wife/spouse and that of a short term relationship when you say [boy/girl]friend. The only word I know of that says long term relationship but without the legal status is "partner" or "significant other".
For something long term like a "partner" of 5 years, is a joke of a relationship because there if there is no interest in marriage and a wedding after 5 years, it proves that at least one of the people is only wanting a good time for awhile and wants the freedom to dump the other person any day they feel like with no consequences or repercussions and move on to someone else any day they feel like it to be free and clear to cut out the other person from their life.
Howrar's being nice about it but here's the way I see it (sightly less nice):
What someone wants to call their partner/significant other/husband/wife/girlfriend/boyfriend/whatever is up to them and nobody else. Whether or not it's clear is irrelevant. They should share exactly as much or as little information about their lives as they want and use whatever word they wanna use because, simply put, we're randos on the internet and it's none of our business.
Whether or not these people get married, are married, or even want to get married is a private matter and who they share and/or discuss this with is up to them and nobody else. Furthermore, we are not allowed to have opinions on how their relationship or marriage works. Whether they want to get married after a week, or they wanna casually hang out for 5/10/50/whatever years without getting married, it's their life and as randos on the internet, we don't get and honestly shouldn't even want a say in it. Live and let live, mate :)
Your views on relationships and marriage seem very traditional to me, and that's fine. Asking why people use words like "partner" or "significant other" instead of wife/husband/girlfriend/boyfriend is also fine. But just a heads up, you come off kinda shitty when you say "a joke relationship" and "proves at least one of the people is only wanting a good time" in response to something that's a little different from what you think a relationship should be.
its the best platform I use to organize my games that only gets better and doesn't actively try to screw me with bullshit at every turn. once someone outdoes steam, I'll reward that company with my money.
There is a weird cult around steam, they literally can't do wrong, and even if they do, well it was deserved. Dunno how that happened but it really does hurt me when games on gog aren't updated for months for no reason but steam.
you're just going to interpret this is as proving you right and me as a cultist but the thing about no updates on gog is nothing to do with steam that's the publisher steam doesn't make them do that there's no reason it's the publisher/developers I don't think valve can do no wrong but I would say steams never done anything bad to me valve includes gambling in all their multiplayer games that are full of children they were one of the earliest companies to make loot boxes their business model though arguably even worse as they gave all the tools for an external economy for those skins and gave the crates out abundantly to encourage you to buy the keys because you already have the crate but the steam division in valve has provided me with a consistently great experience in every way games on there own launcher almost always just work on linux refunds are trivial family sharing is great for making it even cheaper I don't like drm and I'd use gog more if they didn't kinda suck from a user perspective but even with heroic playing games on gog is a little jank on linux in a way it just isn't with steam and gog has literally no family sharing I don't play games from the shared library much but I like having it when I do and my siblings actually do play some games from my library a fair bit steam/valve is a company like any others that ultimately cares about profit not me or any other customer but unlike other companies they understand the value of long term thinking and good customer relationships they don't care about me but they know I'm more likely to keep coming back and buying loads of games if they don't keep trying to screw me over and add lots of good features that save me money and make my experience better
There were a few games that explained slow updates with "just download them on steam" when asked, ofc it's not on steam that publishers are lazy. Publishers are lazy because steam has such an overwhelming majority that they can ignore customers on other platforms. I do prefer gog because they are drm free and offline, so in the inevitable crash of global internet i will have my oldie games, lol.
that's still the publisher not steam and honestly a bit gog that they let them get away with that you can't blame steam and customers largely using the better platform for awful publishers scamming people on a different platform
Its because the industry is full of companies that are so much worse than Valve. Gamers are used to companies like EA, Valve are saints in comparison to the other major players.
Until it eventually does come to steam. Please don't listen to these fuckers. They will say whatever they can for profit. It wouldn't be the first time these people have lied about this exact thing only for the game to come to steam a year later.
Maybe, but its on fitgirl now if they don't want your money
I'm afraid to ask what that is.
Yar har
Ah, I think I understand. Thank you.
You already got an answer more or less, but to specify, Fitgirl is one specific repacker of games that a lot of people trust. She (or he, or they or it, nobody really knows) specializes in compression to make the releases quick to download on slow Internet connections. Of course if you're sitting on gigabit download speeds or something, the decompression will take way longer than what you save from the download.
Thank you for the details, much appreciated. I extrapolated from the other response - more or less, as you said - but you provided plenty I couldn't have guessed.
Lol I just checked there after seeing this news
I confirm that I'm never going to buy it then.
I'll buy it when it comes to GOG then.
The game wasn't even profitable after a year as a result of not being on Steam, according to the article. Pretty interesting
I guess they don't want it to be profitable then. Maybe over the next 10 years it will break even on Epic.
Epic profittability is on Fortnite; there will be lot of skin based on Alan Wake franchise and, also, Fortnite ads everytime you launch AW2 form their launcher etc.
...as for Alan Wake franchise itself, well it goes in the
epic games store marketing black holeCool. I guess I won't be buying it then and will simply sail the seas when I finally feel like playing it after all the games I bought on steam and gog.
Yup, any “never” decision under modern capitalism should be treated at “within this quarter.” All that matters is quarterly growth, and all company decisions will change every quarter
Epic Games? The place with all the free games? Why would I buy something from the free store?
In other words: Sweeney still can't get people to use his inferior service. I can't wait to see him cry about Valve's alleged anti-competitive behaviour yet again.
Wish I could just wire money straight to Remedy. Best I could do was buy Control again on GOG and consider my seafaring soul free of sin.
That's okay, since I am never coming to Epic Games. Seems only fair.
Shame, I'm never buying a game from the Epic Store.
Oh well.
Sucks for Remedy then, since they won't be getting my money.
This is the bullshit that makes me hate Epic games. I want Fortnite to die already so Tim Sweeney can eff right off.
A exclusive war only one person is waging...
I dislike Epic as much as the next guy, but he's not the only one waging it, lol. Try to find any of Valve's games on the Epic marketplace.
Not really comparable IMO. Epic has paid devs/publishers in the past for not releasing on steam. Gearbox, Ubisoft etc
Nobody is mad that fortnite isn't on steam.
Games not developed or published by Epic only become exclusive when the publishers and/or devs take their money. Why is no one mad at them? And of course Valve doesn't have to do much of anything, they have had like a 10+ year headstart on cornering the PC marketplace. GOG has been completely awesome and more ethical than Valve and yet they're barely scraping by. Gamers/consumers just love to fanboy the hell out of corporations these days. When Gabe is gone and Valve inevitably goes public and enshitifies, you'll be glad there's still some competition left. But it'll suck because 90% of PC gamers have probably damn near 100% of their library locked into one platform. Remember, Steam is a huge reason why PC games went fully digital almost two decades ago.
People are mad at them. However, Epic is the one enabling this shitty behavior so they are the ones getting most of the hate.
So Epic had like 10 years of learning from steam and doing it better, offering a competitive platform and experience. However, they didn't do that because that actually takes time, money and effort so they just artificially tried to limit the amount of titles for sale on steam, which is basically trying to strongarm consumers into using their platform. Which is quite the same practice you see from any big players in any industry, from apple to john deere - and all are getting hate for it.
Competition like the EGS? No, I'm definitely not happy about that.
Not really. Games would've gone digital either way, it was the obvious path to go. Steam might've sped up that process by a few years, but pretending that without steam, digitalization of the games industry would've never happened is naive at best and dishonest at worst.
And yet consoles still have physical game copies available all these years later. Why is PC so much different?
And I'm not saying to be happy that Epic is competition, I'm saying that if GOG dies, you'll only really have Steam and Epic. That sucks ass, but it's still better than only having ONE option. And like I said, once Gabe is gone, I 100% believe Valve will go full on enshitification mode. I wouldn't have to worry as much if I could still buy physical fucking copies of modern PC games.
As for Epic competing by creating better platform, I completely agree. Their launcher has made improvements, but it is still very bare bones and not great. I try to remember that tons of common sense software features we take for granted get patented. Hell, that's why so many streaming services felt so much shittier than Netflix for so long. It's not as straightforward as just emulating what Steam does but slightly better. That's still no excuse though, and they still fall very short of offering the mostly comfortable user experience we've grown accustomed to. Steam didn't start off where they're at now, they've had 20 years with an entire company dedicated to developing it.
My main point is, we all love Steam and Valve because they've been a mostly ethical corporation so far as well as mostly improving the experience of PC gaming, especially with Linux (minus expediting and enabling 100% digitization so they could attain better profit margins on Half-Life 2 sales). But nothing lasts forever, and pure monopolies are bad. Fuck Epic for buying exclusive rights for third party games, but in this specific context, it is their game, so it is what it is.
It isn't. You can still buy physical copies of PC games, mostly AAA tho, but nobody does it anymore. Also, there are consoles that are delivered without a cd drive, so they are digital only.
To be fair, steam is my platform of choice now anyways because of their awesome linux support.
Certainly a worry, however, in case they do become shitty, I'll just download a bunch of cracks for my games and leave the platform.
I don't care tho?
Seriously, this is the worst argument to me. Why should I as a consumer care about that? If someone sells a flip phone now, you're not going to say: "Oh man samsung had such a big headstart obviously their phones are better". If a company enters a new space, they have to compete on the same level, not on the level of 20 years ago.
Ye agree, it is their game rn so they can do that. But a majority of games weren't.
I was about to say it isn't the same before googling and realising that they are the publisher for Alan Wake 2. I guess there might still be the nuance of develop vs publish, does Valve publish any games that it didn't develop/weren't mods of their titles? (Genuinely don't know)
Either way, I'm still buttmad about the rocket league situation
Rocket League was my turning point as well.
That's fine, I will never purchase Alan Wake 2 then
It'll eventually be included in a giveaway anyways like Control was. So if I haven't bought it by now I'm fine waiting for the giveaway.
What a shame, it's in my top 3 games I've ever played, but I pirated it because Epic app sucks ass. Was going to buy it once it was on Steam.
This only hurts us, gamers. Stop this exclusivity BS and be competitive with better features, customer service and convenience.
How does it hurt you? Look, I get that people dislike using multiple launchers, but it's not like you have to buy a console to play the god damn game. The melodrama is crazy, all you have to do to play it besides buying the game is download epic's launcher. If you're in Linux, it's a bit more of a pain, but hardly.
By using their service and giving them money, you're validating their shitty practices and propagating this garbage across multiple platforms when other companies see it's profitable.
If you want gaming to get better, stop giving bad companies your money and attention.
It’s a store not a platform
If walmart doesn’t have a game, you would check gamestop
Don’t try to hijack the platform exclusive argument
When you're required to use their "store" to play the games too, then it's a platform. And an isolated one, at that. Imagine you could only buy a game AND PLAY IT at Walmart.
Platform exclusivity is part of Epic Games' problem. Not the sole issue, but a big one.
The platform is the OS
And you aren’t forced to use their launcher, that’s a Valve thing
Exclusivity has been a thing since the advent of videogames, this isn't anything new. Epic is just a shitty company, so they're an easy target to criticize. They funded the development and published the game, it's their right to do with it as they please. They're losing money by not bringing it to Steam, so their loss, really. But it's not even close to the equivalent of console exclusives, as the barrier here is spending 5 minutes to just download their shitty launcher. It sucks, but this really isn't that big of a deal, in my opinion.
Apart from the inconvenience (which is a huge reason I dont use Epic) for the same price I get less service.
If you only want to play games thats nothing, no melodrama, just install the game and play it.
...but as soon as you want to interact with your friends in-game, download some mods, look up help with the game, stream stuff from my computer to my living room TV, share my account with family or just play on Linux the Epic store transforms from "just another launcher" to a useless peace of extra software on my PC actively standing in the way of my fun.
Steam's voice chat/partying functionality is garbage. Discord is widely used for a reason. Remote Play is hit or miss, but I've largely resorted to using Moonlight instead on my Steam Deck because it's more reliable and stable. The guides on Steam vary wildly from game to game, just depends on the community support for it. It is nice when there's good stuff available, as it is somewhat convenient (though I wished it saved my spot on the page, I constantly have to scroll to where I left off on guides whenever I do use them). Lutris and NonSteamLauncher makes running Epic on Linux a non-issue.
I get it, Epic is a lackluster launcher. No one's arguing otherwise. But it's hardly a huge barrier to playing games.
My steam profile is 18 years old. I am using all the above features for many years and they are perfectly functional.
Your solution is to use different third party apps for everything is the opposite of convenience in my opinion. If you prefer the better software for these features, why not the better launcher/storefront for games?
Epic gives no added value to the user experience (IMO) and does not inspire competition to do better, other that the free games extravaganza to try to expand its userbase, while steam does not have to prove anything anymore, yet still investing more money in new features, technologies.
The steam users are used to a certain level of service and have a perfectly valid reason to dislike less functional competitors. If you are just here to grab the weekly free game, download and play then go for it, Epic will 100% serve its purpose , just don't put it on the same level when talking about everything else.
I was tired last night, toddler hasn't let me sleep much.
I think I poorly conveyed that I do prefer Steam, and do think Epic's launcher is lacking. My point is, getting into the gaming retail business has a crazy upfront cost, so if GOG closes shop (which isn't so crazy to speculate: https://cdaction-pl.translate.goog/publicystyka/wielkie-zwolnienia-w-gog-u-pracownicy-naswietlaja-wewnetrzne-problemy-firmy-tylko-u-nas?_x_tr_sl=pl&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp&_x_tr_hist=true the original article was in Polish, thus the google translate link), that leaves only Epic competing with Steam. If epic eventually concludes they can't pull enough marketshare to continue justifying the crazy money they've spent trying to attract users from Steam with all their sales, that'll leave zero competition to Steam. I for one don't condone monopolies.
Alternatively, studios could just start releasing physical media again, but we all know that'll never happen...
Epic actually financed Remedy's development of the game, as opposed to swooping in at the last minute to offer a timed-exclusivity deal. In that case I was fine buying the game on their platform if it meant the game got to exist at all. After all I do not expect Valve to sell their games on another platform than their own.
Don't get me wrong: I'd rather the game was sold on Steam, or even better, DRM-less on GOG. I did wait for a number of those timed exclusives to find their way on Steam or other stores (Borderlands 3, Kena, Journey, Control, Hades, etc). It's a shame that so many people will not get to experience AW2 because of its delivery platform, because it's a damn unique game.
As much as I hate Epic, I actually bought AW2 based on that logic but ended up refunding it because, and I can not stress this enough, FUCK ALWAYS ONLINE REQUIREMENTS ON PURELY OFFLINE GAMES. I refuse to pay for an offline game that locks me out when my internet isn't working...doubly so when the pirated version works perfectly fine without internet.
P.S. I also refuse to pay for single player games with arbitrary online "features" made to force a DRM check, or games published by cunts that do layoffs and shutter studios while posting record profits but that's a different conversation.
That’s what they said about red dead redemption too
Hopium take 1:
There's no reason they'd reveal their plans to bring it to steam early and cannibalize on the epic store sales
Hopium take 2:
Even if they don't have plans right now if they ever want some quick money to meet targets or something it's the prime candidate
Hopium take 3:
When or if remedy starts making money (like from control 2) they might buy the publishing rights back
Hopium take 4:
It'll run better anyways when Alan wake 2 remastered comes out in 10 years
Option #4 sounds most realistic.
Oh well, there are other games to buy.
Here's the thing about CEOs: they're beholden to a board of people who like money
Laughs in Heroic Launcher
Just starting on gaming, I got this yesterday. Why is it special?
Damn, and I was just about to break my "have never played Alan wake" streak...
NOOOOOOO!!!! What the hell am I supposed to do with this useless PC now?!
Damn shame the decision Remedy made to get the funding from Epic looks like it has backfired (since as I understand it AW2 still hasn't turned a profit). I truly hope this doesn't affect their upcoming games as Alan Wake 2 is one of the best gaming experiences I've ever had and I want for nothing more than Remedy to keep doing what they're doing.
It's unfortunate, but if you're developing a game and are in dire need of cash, Epic is your best bet.
Way before the whole store debacle, Epic also had a lot of grants and stuff, but those didn't require you to give up publishing rights IIRC. Honestly, the EGS greed aside, they've been excellent for the gaming industry.
Yeah, a big reason why Remedy took Epic's money was that barely anyone wants to invest in an honest to god sell it once traditional single player game these days. Almost every investor with enough money to finance something like AW2 wanted mtx bullshit and/or live service and epic was one of maybe a handful that had both the ability and willingness to fund the damn thing so credit where credit is due.
For that reason, I don't mind buying it on Epic. The always online requirement though, that's a deal breaker.
The good news is that the live service bubble burst so hard and spectacularly that we may see a return to actual good games getting funding after investors are done licking their wounds.
Did it?
I honestly have no idea what's going on in that space anymore. I'm still playing Baldur's Gate 3 because I've been extremely busy since about August 2023. Got into Act 2 yesterday! When I'm finished with that, I can get back to the game I was playing before BG3, which I STILL haven't finished, which is Elden Ring. I got stuck there and bought BG3 lol
The only good thing about not having time to play video games is that you can fill the entirety of your video game time with awesome single player games.
BG3 and the Cyberpunk dlc sold really well, proving you can turn a good profit from old school single player games still. Simultaneously, live service games like Concord, Suicide Squad, and Dragon Age sold terribly, the current copium is the massive losses from live service will push developers and publishers back towards single player games they can get a nice profit from compared to possible huge losses.
The truth is, the only way good games will be made again is when the publicly traded aaa companies die out and privately owned indie companies rule the scene.
Aye aye!
I hope someone Remedies this situation.
Yarrr!
This kind of thing happened with "American Nightmare" and "Quantum Break". While I'm not aware of any formal policy that Remedy has, I suspect this happens because they're a smaller shop trying to leverage whatever they can.
Guess I'll never get it then.
So, what’s the over-under on when it’ll show up on Gamepass?
It's a good game and it wouldn't have been made if it werent for epic games fronting the cost. Step beyond the silly platform tribalism and just enjoy the game that was made with love and vision while supporting the devs and the choices they made. Or dont, w/e, I'm personally glad I got it there since the devs got a bigger cut than they'd get on steam anyway.
Inconsequential, considering the game is still not profitable, even after a year. The devs lost money on this game. If it came to Steam, they'd be swimming in cash right now. The cut they get from the store doesn't matter if the game releases on a single store that most people refuse to use.
If Epic Games would be an actual competitor to Steam instead of trying to lock their content behind a paywall and force users to use them over the competition, then people might consider using their service. But as long as they continue to use shitty practices, most people are going to avoid them and use their competition's service.
Exactly, that's why it worked out so well for GOG.
If you want them to recoup the costs then buy the game instead of taking a pointless moral stance over supporting a monopoly.
What hurts GOG is its stance on DRM, since companies don't want games to be DRM free. It leads to late releases if it does come out leading to missing out on a lot of the purchases associated with hype. Leads to less games being sold at full price which happens most at launch with games having to rely on discounts older they get.
Why do people love Steam's DRM on everything, online only gameplay? Why do people love Steams totalitarian control and extortion deals?
If people could built their own Steam client, it wouldn't be so bad. I use Heroic on Windows for both Epic and GOG and get new games through Heroic so there can't be telemetry or data gathering. Why won't Valve allow a libre/free software Steam client to play games and let go of what people choose to install on their computer. I'm nit asking for DRM-free games, I'm asking ti stop dictator how I am allowed to play games.
Because Steam's DRM is entirely unobtrusive, it doesn't require online-only gameplay and the customer experience is excellent.
When Epic tries to compete with Steam they don't look to make a better user experience, instead they bribe developers for exclusivity deals to force people on their platform if they want to play a game on release.
I left steam. Only interested in offline installers from GOG.. When WWIII hits and players are still reliant on Steam's Online DRM Leased versions of your games, like come on already!.. No Internet,no games.. I'm burning all these games onto M-Disc media.. I can sell games for bullets and food in the apocalypse!! Woo!
...assuming electricity is still a thing
I mean that doesn't really factor in.. Electricity isn't going to just vanish from existence. Just need to find ways to generate like hydro, battery, Solar.
You're right. In my head, the grid is destroyed because of WWIII so no power. Completely forgot generators exist 🤦♂️
You are stating stricty your own opinion when you say "customer experience is excellent". Read the documents of the legal case against Valve, the documents show Valve to be an extortionist.
Valve made it super convinient for their customers and they also took steps to encourage content creation with SFM, Source Engine, sharing their own assets. They created working cloud saving and mod sharing solutions, greenlighting a bunch of indies based on votes and being on the side of the customer in disputes over refunds with 2hr rule becomingthe new norm. For years, they provided and improved their service, so it's rare to see anyone complaining about that.
Ah, and Epic killed UT4 in beta when they found their initial zombie game mode that became Fortnite gave them that much cash they could start their own marketplace with regular giveaways and exclusives going on for years. I'm fucking pissed at them for that even now. It is irrational and personal, but Valve didn't kill my favorite game series, it's the opposite, since they kept slowly releasing and constantly updating Dota, CS, create Alyx, keep TF2 alive, and I'm only sad Alien Swarm would never see new content. In game studios and game marketplaces, Valve are golden.
But coming back to your initial displeasment with them, the funny thing is a lot of Steam games don't need Steam to launch. Unless devs implement some hooks and DRMs themselves, you can just launch their EXE file. Nobody really checks that, but that's the truth, and I've seen some lists of games that don't do that. On top of that, 99% offline games can be launched without internet with Steam only, you can even backup and then install some game on your PC offline if your client knows you own it. And don't forget family sharing - although they promised to rework it, I, my partner and our friends used it a lot, and although you can't use a game from a shared library when you are offline, if the owner plays it offline you can play it too at the same time without messing with each others' gameplay. This lazy implementation of DRM with many workarounds and general respect to even the sleakiest, cheating customer is why I still buy games there.
Valve has not been on the side of the customer when I've tried to return games. I've had multiple instances now of them refusing returns. I've been using Steam from the beginning and only started trying to return games within the past few years, but out of the handful I've tried to return at least half have been rejected. The last game was only $5 and was literally broken and unplayable, I had 2 minutes of playtime total and they still rejected the return. I had been really happy with Valve and Steam until this started happening. It's weird because my partner returns games with no problem. Even the same game that we tried together and discovered it has feral children screaming into microphones and then returned it, mine got rejected.
I'm sprry for your exeprience with Steam.
My own buying and playing routine doesn't even get to the point that I return games, multiple ones at that.
Sadly, I can't relate and can't understand your pov.
I was like that until a few years ago when I bought a broken and unplayable game that had been abandoned by the dev. I spend a lot of money on Steam and have a huge library at this point so its not like I'm trying to abuse the system. I think I've tried to return 5 or 6 games total with 2 or 3 rejected since they implemented the return policy.
Skipping over the game debate, wbere did this "my partnet" fad trend get started, instead of good married people talking about husband or wife, or single people talking about boyfriend or girlfriend? It's because linguistically it's not a natural or normal way of speaking, the phrasing sounds like it's from indocrination, saying "my partner", unless it.s part of a firm.
There are a lot of reasons for this, and it's been normal in some places for a very long time. If it's new to you, it's probably just a regional difference that you haven't heard it more. The way you worded your question makes me feel like you are trying to start a fight, so I think I'll push down my instinct to link you to resources.
I don't want to specify that, what's your problem?
The main reason for me is the implication of a certain legal status when you say husband/wife/spouse and that of a short term relationship when you say [boy/girl]friend. The only word I know of that says long term relationship but without the legal status is "partner" or "significant other".
For something long term like a "partner" of 5 years, is a joke of a relationship because there if there is no interest in marriage and a wedding after 5 years, it proves that at least one of the people is only wanting a good time for awhile and wants the freedom to dump the other person any day they feel like with no consequences or repercussions and move on to someone else any day they feel like it to be free and clear to cut out the other person from their life.
Howrar's being nice about it but here's the way I see it (sightly less nice):
Your views on relationships and marriage seem very traditional to me, and that's fine. Asking why people use words like "partner" or "significant other" instead of wife/husband/girlfriend/boyfriend is also fine. But just a heads up, you come off kinda shitty when you say "a joke relationship" and "proves at least one of the people is only wanting a good time" in response to something that's a little different from what you think a relationship should be.
I'm Canadian. Marriage doesn't have the same meaning here.
sweeney is that you?
its the best platform I use to organize my games that only gets better and doesn't actively try to screw me with bullshit at every turn. once someone outdoes steam, I'll reward that company with my money.
I do not buy games on Steam, only on 3rd party sites for a Steam key so Valve never gets money from me.
There is a weird cult around steam, they literally can't do wrong, and even if they do, well it was deserved. Dunno how that happened but it really does hurt me when games on gog aren't updated for months for no reason but steam.
you're just going to interpret this is as proving you right and me as a cultist but the thing about no updates on gog is nothing to do with steam that's the publisher steam doesn't make them do that there's no reason it's the publisher/developers I don't think valve can do no wrong but I would say steams never done anything bad to me valve includes gambling in all their multiplayer games that are full of children they were one of the earliest companies to make loot boxes their business model though arguably even worse as they gave all the tools for an external economy for those skins and gave the crates out abundantly to encourage you to buy the keys because you already have the crate but the steam division in valve has provided me with a consistently great experience in every way games on there own launcher almost always just work on linux refunds are trivial family sharing is great for making it even cheaper I don't like drm and I'd use gog more if they didn't kinda suck from a user perspective but even with heroic playing games on gog is a little jank on linux in a way it just isn't with steam and gog has literally no family sharing I don't play games from the shared library much but I like having it when I do and my siblings actually do play some games from my library a fair bit steam/valve is a company like any others that ultimately cares about profit not me or any other customer but unlike other companies they understand the value of long term thinking and good customer relationships they don't care about me but they know I'm more likely to keep coming back and buying loads of games if they don't keep trying to screw me over and add lots of good features that save me money and make my experience better
There were a few games that explained slow updates with "just download them on steam" when asked, ofc it's not on steam that publishers are lazy. Publishers are lazy because steam has such an overwhelming majority that they can ignore customers on other platforms. I do prefer gog because they are drm free and offline, so in the inevitable crash of global internet i will have my oldie games, lol.
that's still the publisher not steam and honestly a bit gog that they let them get away with that you can't blame steam and customers largely using the better platform for awful publishers scamming people on a different platform
A blind fanatical devotion to Steam/Valve.
As a sound, allow people to develop a libre/open source client to play games from that client, there would be a different perception.
Its because the industry is full of companies that are so much worse than Valve. Gamers are used to companies like EA, Valve are saints in comparison to the other major players.