Epic Games Announces More Exclusives and Features

MavericK

Zero Cool
Joined
Sep 2, 2004
Messages
29,822
It could not be more obvious by some of the replies in here who the industry shills are. Sad.
 

MavericK

Zero Cool
Joined
Sep 2, 2004
Messages
29,822
"Someone disagrees with me! This must be a scam!" :arghh::dead:
If you believe that a lack of choice really represents a consumer-positive message, I don't know what to tell you.

Why defend an industry that doesn't give a crap about you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: M76
like this

odditory

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
6,435
It could not be more obvious by some of the replies in here who the industry shills are. Sad.
Not industry shills, just contrarians - otherwise-intelligent posters that find it more interesting or entertaining to argue the counterpoint and lock themselves into that position and wear everyone's patience real thin with a broken-record act, even if the argument defies common sense. I get that, because I've done it - its one of the traps you fall into if you hang around on forums too long. Its completely stupid though.

And then there are some people that aren't being obtuse but are just completely missing the forest of why EGS in its current form is cancerous and anti-consumer.

Nobody rational thinks EGS doesn't have a right to exist or create an excellent store. What's on trial is simply how badly and shadily they're going about it in attempt to take shortcuts. The biggest thing that bonehead Tim Sweeney seems to be missing is that building user trust takes time. And those shortcuts are backfiring, they're being polarizing and creating insane headwind for themselves, and squandering a lot of built-up goodwill that existed for their company.
 
Last edited:

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
11,187
My evidence is both Quantic Dream and thatgamecompany haven't had PC titles since 2005. Epic is bringing the whole catalog of both companies to PC at the same time. That's quite the coincidence. That's what's known as supporting evidence. It doesn't prove it beyond a doubt, but it does support the claim as the timing is highly improbably otherwise.

You said without Epic they would be sold in a number of places. Where's YOUR evidence for that claim? They've never been available on PC until now, nor have any of these games been announced they would be coming to PC since they entered an exlcusive contract with Sony. How do you know Epic didn't have a hand in helping them break away from Sony? Again, it's Quantic dreams AND thatgamecompany both at the same time that just so happens to be ideal for Epic. At least I have supporting evidence for my claim. You haven't listed ANY evidence for your claim.
You're doubling down when clearly you made an erroneous assumption. They aren't bringing the games to PC because of epic, they would've anyway, since they broke ties with Sony recently and that ended their exclusivity deal with them.

You are making the claim, that epic made this happen, back it up. Re-iterating your theory is not proof.

You want me to prove that a game without an exclusivity deal would sell at multiple places? LOL, stop being ridiculous.
 
Last edited:

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
11,187
That is not what they said. What you're claiming is outright wrong assuming this article is correct:



Massive difference. They didn't get paid anything. What they do have is a guarantee. If their sales flop Epic will cover them by X amount. If the game goes on to be successful they won't get a payout.
They only say that it didn't come in the form of a single paycheck. That doesn't mean they did not get a paycheck too. They did have this to say:

It was also revealed on the Phoenix Point Discord that Snapshot Games was aware of the backlash they would face for their decision, but even if every single person who had initially backed the project requested a refund, they would still be “in the black.”
If they refunded every backer that would mean roughly 2 million. It does not seem to me that that is just based on the guaranteed sales.

Either way it's still a payoff. Even if it is conditional on the sales figures.
 

tetris42

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
4,518
You're doubling down when clearly you made an erroneous assumption. They aren't bringing the games to PC because of epic, they would've anyway, since they broke ties with Sony recently and that ended their exclusivity deal with them.

You are making the claim, that epic made this happen, back it up. Re-iterating your theory is not proof.

You want me to prove that a game without an exclusivity deal would sell at multiple places? LOL, stop being ridiculous.
Still waiting for your evidence Epic had nothing to do with both companies exclusivity deals ending at the same time, especially since thatgamecompany wanted to go multiplatform back in 2012, but already had an agreement that Sony owned their first 3 games. Journey itself bankrupted the studio. So, by all accounts, Sony had the rights to those games, the studio had no money, and yet, those came out to PC so conveniently the same time Epic is buying up exclusives. Gee, I wonder where the money came from to buy the rights back to bring it over to PC just in time to appear on Epic store?

The problem is you're assuming that these games would have come to PC anyway, instead of remaining in Sony's possession forever. Some games that happens to, most consoles exclusives that does NOT, especially from studios with no money. Think what you want, I've provided evidence. You've provided no evidence and just keep repeating that I have none. If you want to provide EVIDENCE, I'll listen to what you have to say.
 
Last edited:

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
11,187
Wrong, it and free or cheap start menu replacements both work a treat.
Sure, I'll install a 3rd party unverified app to do something I don't really need since steam does it better already.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
11,187
Still waiting for your evidence Epic had nothing to do with both companies exclusivity deals ending at the same time, especially since thatgamecompany wanted to go multiplatform back in 2012, but already had an agreement that Sony owned their first 3 games. Journey itself bankrupted the studio. So, by all accounts, Sony had the rights to those games, the studio had no money, and yet, those came out to PC so conveniently the same time Epic is buying up exclusives. Gee, I wonder where the money came from to buy the rights back to bring it over to PC just in time to appear on Epic store?

The problem is you're assuming that these games would have come to PC anyway, instead of remaining in Sony's possession forever. Think what you want, I've provided evidence. You've provided no evidence and just keep repeating that I have none. If you want to provide EVIDENCE, I'll listen to what you have to say.
Is it "proving a negative" or "burden of proof" that you don't get? Do you have evidence of epic providing funds for developing these ports, or not? Your conjecture is not evidence. You can't just go around asserting things without evidence and expect others to disprove them for you.

They started working on these last year, the epic store didn't start firing shots until this year. Don't you find that odd that they would've paid for it quietly? Do you not think it would be a great advertising tool that they couldn't stop talking about if they did? This is your last chance to see reason, be wise.
 

tetris42

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
4,518
Is it "proving a negative" or "burden of proof" that you don't get? Do you have evidence of epic providing funds for developing these ports, or not? Your conjecture is not evidence. You can't just go around asserting things without evidence and expect others to disprove them for you.

They started working on these last year, the epic store didn't start firing shots until this year. Don't you find that odd that they would've paid for it quietly? Do you not think it would be a great advertising tool that they couldn't stop talking about if they did? This is your last chance to see reason, be wise.
Still waiting on your proof.

As for reason, how about Occam's Razor? Here are the facts:

1. Sony owns exclusive rights to 3 games from thatgamecompany.
2. That studio went bankrupt on Journey and expressed interest in bringing games to PC since 2012, yet hasn't brought any since then.
3. Epic has large coffers and has been paying companies left and right for exclusives.
4. Suddenly, Epic announces these games on their platform.

That sure looks like Epic paid to get the rights to the game to me. But fine, let's say I'm wrong. Answer this simple question:

If not Epic, where did thatgamecompany get the money to buy their rights back from Sony?

There's such a thing as preponderance of evidence. As for not making that more public, probably the main reason is they're likely paying developers different rates for different exclusives and don't want that information public, otherwise developers will demand more than if it's kept secret. Most people will just see that now it's on PC and that's enough.
 
Last edited:

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,008
I have not spent a single penny on a Steam game in years. Why should I, since there are better games and deals elsewhere? Having multiple store fronts and exclusive deals in not anti competitive, unless you think Steam having a monopoly is a good thing.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,008
Still waiting on your proof.

As for reason, how about Occam's Razor? Here are the facts:

1. Sony owns exclusive rights to 3 games from thatgamecompany.
2. That studio went bankrupt on Journey and expressed interest in bringing games to PC since 2012, yet hasn't brought any since then.
3. Epic has large coffers and has been paying companies left and right for exclusives.
4. Suddenly, Epic announces these games on their platform.

That sure looks like Epic paid to get the rights to the game to me. But fine, let's say I'm wrong. Answer this simple question:

If not Epic, where did thatgamecompany get the money to buy their rights back from Sony?

There's such a thing as preponderance of evidence. As for not making that more public, probably the main reason is they're likely paying developers different rates for different exclusives and don't want that information public, otherwise developers will demand more than if it's kept secret. Most people will just see that now it's on PC and that's enough.
So? Just so long as the games are now coming to the PC, what does it matter? Not like Steam is doing anything for the gamer anymore.
 

tetris42

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
4,518
So? Just so long as the games are now coming to the PC, what does it matter? Not like Steam is doing anything for the gamer anymore.
That's my attitude about it also. He was insisting that Epic is doing NOTHING for the gamer, yet, we're getting free games and they've brought some Playstation exclusives over to PC, works for me.

ManofGod said:
Yakuza 0 came to PC. Catherine and Vanquish came to PC also, but those weren't Playstation exclusives, just console exclusives. Those are the only ones I can think of.
 
Last edited:

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,008
That's my attitude about it also. He was insisting that Epic is doing NOTHING for the gamer, yet, we're getting free games and they've brought some Playstation exclusives over to PC, works for me.

Yakuza 0 came to PC. Catherine and Vanquish came to PC also, but those weren't Playstation exclusives, just console exclusives.
OH, oops. :D
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
11,187
Still waiting on your proof.

As for reason, how about Occam's Razor? Here are the facts:

1. Sony owns exclusive rights to 3 games from thatgamecompany.
2. That studio went bankrupt on Journey and expressed interest in bringing games to PC since 2012, yet hasn't brought any since then.
3. Epic has large coffers and has been paying companies left and right for exclusives.
4. Suddenly, Epic announces these games on their platform.

That sure looks like Epic paid to get the rights to the game to me. But fine, let's say I'm wrong. Answer this simple question:

If not Epic, where did thatgamecompany get the money to buy their rights back from Sony?

There's such a thing as preponderance of evidence. As for not making that more public, probably the main reason is they're likely paying developers different rates for different exclusives and don't want that information public, otherwise developers will demand more than if it's kept secret. Most people will just see that now it's on PC and that's enough.
You'd like to believe something and so you act as if it's true. But it doesn't make it so.
Quantic Dream, as I've said numerous times which you keep ignoring ended their exclusivity deal with Sony effective 01/01/19.
That's why their games are coming to PC NOW and not earlier. As for where the money is coming from: Netease.
The other company I don't care about enough to even look into it.

PS you still don't understand what burden of proof is. If you assert something you need to back that up with evidence.
Otherwise I can say it is funded by john travolta and the sceintology club, prove it's not true!
 

tetris42

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
4,518
You'd like to believe something and so you act as if it's true. But it doesn't make it so.
Quantic Dream, as I've said numerous times which you keep ignoring ended their exclusivity deal with Sony effective 01/01/19.
That's why their games are coming to PC NOW and not earlier. As for where the money is coming from: Netease.
The other company I don't care about enough to even look into it.

PS you still don't understand what burden of proof is. If you assert something you need to back that up with evidence.
Otherwise I can say it is funded by john travolta and the sceintology club, prove it's not true!
My entire previous post was about thatgamecompany, so you ignore it, fine. The Netease funding makes the case Quantic Dream would have brought it to PC anyway. See, that's EVIDENCE to back up your assertion. If you started with that, it would have saved us both time. That still doesn't explain thatgamecompany. You come up with evidence they received funding from elsewhere, I'll concede my point.

And yes, I of course understand burden of proof, which is why I kept pressing you to back up YOUR assertion. Here, I'll quote you again since you seem to have forgotten:

M76 said:
No, without epic they would be sold on a number of places, but no, they snatched exclusivity rights
Now if that was ONLY in reference to Quantic Dream, you at least have some evidence to back that up now. With thatgamecompany, you still have no evidence of that claim. Again, post #171 lays it out. But here, I'll try and explain as clearly as I can what "circumstantial evidence" means:

Say you've lived in a region that hasn't had recorded earthquakes in its history. A fracking company moves in and starts operating. The next year, three earthquakes are registered. Does that definitively proved they caused the earthquakes? No, it's not conclusive enough for that, it could be coincidence. If they DID cause the earthquakes, does the timing of events support that theory? Absolutely. That's how circumstantial evidence works. Saying games like Journey would have come to PC without Epic is the equivalent of saying, no, these earthquakes were going to happen and have nothing to do with the fracking company and not providing any explanation why they happened. I don't have enough evidence to definitively prove the fracking company is at fault, but you have even LESS evidence to prove it WASN'T them. Do you understand how that works?

Thatgamecompany's games have all been playstation exclusives, going on 13 years now if you count flOw. There was no reason to think that was ever going to change. Epic starts buying exclusives, then shortly after Journey is on PC and you're insisting that's unrelated. Based on what? YOU made the claim they would have come to PC anyway!
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
11,187
My entire previous post was about thatgamecompany, so you ignore it, fine. The Netease funding makes the case Quantic Dream would have brought it to PC anyway. See, that's EVIDENCE to back up your assertion. If you started with that, it would have saved us both time. That still doesn't explain thatgamecompany. You come up with evidence they received funding from elsewhere, I'll concede my point.

And yes, I of course understand burden of proof, which is why I kept pressing you to back up YOUR assertion. Here, I'll quote you again since you seem to have forgotten:

Now if that was ONLY in reference to Quantic Dream, you at least have some evidence to back that up now. With thatgamecompany, you still have no evidence of that claim. Again, post #171 lays it out. But here, I'll try and explain as clearly as I can what "circumstantial evidence" means:

Say you've lived in a region that hasn't had recorded earthquakes in its history. A fracking company moves in and starts operating. The next year, three earthquakes are registered. Does that definitively proved they caused the earthquakes? No, it's not conclusive enough for that, it could be coincidence. If they DID cause the earthquakes, does the timing of events support that theory? Absolutely. That's how circumstantial evidence works. Saying games like Journey would have come to PC without Epic is the equivalent of saying, no, these earthquakes were going to happen and have nothing to do with the fracking company and not providing any explanation why they happened. I don't have enough evidence to definitively prove the fracking company is at fault, but you have even LESS evidence to prove it WASN'T them. Do you understand how that works?

Thatgamecompany's games have all been playstation exclusives, going on 13 years now if you count flOw. There was no reason to think that was ever going to change. Epic starts buying exclusives, then shortly after Journey is on PC and you're insisting that's unrelated. Based on what? YOU made the claim they would have come to PC anyway!
i'm done talking to a wall
 

tetris42

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
4,518
i'm done talking to a wall
If you read what I said, you'd realize I gave you credit for backing up one of your points and admitting you have evidence to support it, just not the other one.
 

Ranulfo

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
2,072
I have not spent a single penny on a Steam game in years. Why should I, since there are better games and deals elsewhere? Having multiple store fronts and exclusive deals in not anti competitive, unless you think Steam having a monopoly is a good thing.
If a game is sold only on Epic store, it won't have price competition. Maybe later in the year we'll see some price fluctuations since Epic made a deal with Humble to sell their games but that is still only one other storefront selling Epic store game keys.
 
Top