• mihnt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Not even that. They lost their good face they used to have in the gaming community. Early 2000s Epic was peak Epic. Now all I see them doing is picking fights with everyone. I have no wish to spend money with a company that treats the gaming community with such disdain.

    • normanwall@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      42
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      They made Borderlands 3 exclusive on Epic store for a period

      I loved the series but never bought it out of spite

      • SYLOH@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        8 months ago

        I’m fine with a company making their own games exclusive to their own software platform.
        I don’t like it, but I accept it.

        I absolutely hate a company inducing other companies to release only on their software platform. Seems like monopolistic practices rather than competing on services.

        • Chailles@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          8 months ago

          It wasn’t even to release on their software platform, it was more explicitly a “non-Steam” release as games were available on PC via both Epic and Microsoft’s Store.

        • Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          8 months ago

          Seems like monopolistic practices rather than competing on services.

          It literally is? They’re literally not competing on services, they’re competing via artificial scarcity.

          • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            Well, it entirely depends on how you look at things. Sometimes it’s monopolistic, other times it’s actual competition.

            With Sony and Xbox, I dislike what Sony does with PS5 exclusives because I don’t think that it convinces people to switch to the PS5. What does do that is the PSVR2 and controller features. The actual features, not exclusives. Games are better on that system, so people can decide to swap.

            With PC platforms, I care far far less. In fact, I’d say it’s nearly impossible to compete with the monopoly that is Steam without exclusives. I like steam, but imagine if they change course. PC gaming would be screwed. There is no valid competition.

            Epic mostly does timed exclusives (the right thing), they just aren’t giving features which is frustrating. The conversation changes a lot if the platform doesn’t suck. If I like the platform that also has free games and also has new releases for a time, that’s competition and it’s cool with me. But since I like steam and they take games away from the steam monopoly, we call them a monopoly and dislike them.

        • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          I absolutely hate a company inducing other companies to release only on their software platform.

          On one level I get this, but on another level…the companies themselves agreed to it. Like, everybody gets pissed at Epic for making the offer. Nobody gets pissed at the company that takes it. So weird. It’s almost like your favorite game developer only exists to make money and they got offered more money than what they thought they’d make releasing on Steam.

          • Tak@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            I see lots of people complaining towards the company that takes the deal with Epic. It’s just way easier to whine about Epic instead of a specific list of game companies that took the offer for various reasons. Like for indy studios I can totally see why they would take the money instead of risking it while for Ubisoft it’s completely down to more profit.

            Let’s also not conflate “developers” with “companies” Epic will talk about paying developers a better cut but often times it is the publisher not the developer that gets paid. My favorite developers don’t get paid by Epic, they get paid whatever they can scrape together from their boss.

            • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              Let’s also not conflate “developers” with “companies”

              Development companies, like 4A Games are what people are complaining about when they complain about “Developers.” This is different from the programmers or individual game developers who work on the game as people. The words might be conflated, but the company is what’s being complained about.

              Also, it depends on the game. Metro Exodus was subject to what their publisher wanted to do. The developers behind Phoenix Point, however, received additional funding from Epic to finish their game in exchange for a year of exclusivity. It just depends. Regardless, it kinda just…doesn’t matter, right? I mean, it’s video games. There are people in the United States who can’t afford insulin. A video game being exclusively published for a year via the EGS is, like…the least of our societal problems. And I meant that literally.

              • Tak@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                I think it does matter as I will always encourage a developer to take the money, they gotta get by and I get that but a publisher isn’t going to share that Epic money with the workers.

                  • Tak@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    I’ve heard only good things about how Valve treats their employees. Meanwhile Ubisoft who was one of the biggest to go for Epic’s store just had 120 something layoffs.

      • mihnt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I was pissed when EA did this shit with Mass Effect 1 & 2 being on steam and 3 not being on steam until much later. Like, yes, it’s their IP. It was a trilogy though. Drove me nuts.

      • Cossty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        I don’t like epic like any other guy but point your finger at right people. Gearbox made borderlands 3 exclusive to epic.

        • normanwall@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          8 months ago

          Gearbox and Epic made an agreement together not to have it on Steam at release, and I didn’t buy it, even once it showed up on Steam.

          I voted with my wallet and blame Gearbox and Epic, as without both parties this arrangement wouldn’t have happened.

    • jet@hackertalks.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Oh yeah they have bad actor vibes all over. The fact that they’re pushing exclusive titles… That demonstrates that they’re willing to make the gaming landscape worse for people to increase their own profits.

      They can compete on revenue share, they don’t have to compete on exclusivity. That’s console level bullshit.