Epic Games is now a third-party multi-plat publisher, secures three big studios

erek

erek

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
10,875
Opinion? Anything good to come of this?

"Three notable studios have already signed on, and Epic says that each studio will launch its "next" game through its EGP partnership. Remedy Entertainment first rose to popularity with 2001's Max Payne, and its latest game, Control, won Ars Technica's 2019 Game of the Year honors (and marked its first game as an independent developer after a 12-year deal with Microsoft). Playdead launched both of its previous games, the indie darlings Limbo and Inside, with timed exclusivity deals on Xbox consoles. And genDESIGN is led by Fumito Ueda, the director responsible for PlayStation-exclusive classics Ico and Shadow of the Colossus."


https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2020...lti-plat-publisher-secures-three-big-studios/
 
Remedy is a pretty big name in gaming. I don't think this is a bad thing, necessarily, if that means they get good funding AND retain control of their IP.
 
Having more competitors is a positive thing, provided they can do it without store exclusives.

Personally aim just done with all the services trying to install clients on my machine and steal my data.

My policy for the last 2 years has been that I absolutely under no circumstance no matter what will create any new accounts for anything, or install any new "clients".

If a game requires me to sign up for a new account or install a special client I just won't play it. I tried to buy Far Cry 3 a while back on Steam but it tried to force me to sign up for Uplay, so I requested a refund.

I also won't buy hardware that requires a software client to be installed to control it, like CorsairsiCue or Logitech Ghub or anything like that.

Simply not happening.

If any product requires an account of any kind that I don't already have, I'm out.
 
I assumed something like this was happening. This is how Epic continues to make money, and follows their philosophy in general. Put the tools out there to allow developers to thrive and make some money off of it in the process. If the article is correct and I was a developer, I'd be tripping over myself to get Epic to be my publisher. Footing the cost while keeping your IP? Practically unheard of these days. Would be a great way for a small but talented/ambitious studio to make the jump to AAA games with a hands off approach and the ability to retain their IP. Sounds like they can come and go as they please once they deliver their Epic funded game. Hopefully Epic signs on some games that never would've gotten made and gives them a AAA budget.

Only thing that will suck is, Epic will probably require you to use EGS. But maybe after you've broken even you can put it on a different PC client. Doubt it though, as Epic is funding the game. EA seems to be the only one who has reversed course on this so far.
 
A) EGS free game offers = good

B) EGS funding exclusive game development = cringe, exclusives are lame, but still okay since they're bearing risk.

C) EGS creeping Top50 wishlisted on Steam, waiting until a high profile game has enjoyed months or years of free advertising on Steam, and then at the very last minute before release and all the heavy lifting has already been done and all the risk taken by others, trying to bribe the dev/publisher to delete the game from Steam and only sell it on EGS = this is what angers people and gives EGS their shitstain reputation, that eclipses any goodwill from A or B.

If they could stick to just A and B going forward, and god forbid add a new feature to the client some day, then eventually people might even take them seriously without bribes and gimmicks.
 
I see no downsides to this, I don’t get to play many games often hell Im only catching up on my 2013 list. But I don’t like Steam, hell I like Origin more than Steam. I welcome a change to the game software industry programmers tend to get the very short end of the stick and Epic’s approach to this could very well change things for the better for both Developers and Programmers.
 
From being owned by microsoft and being xbox exlusive or ms store exclusive to being published by epic and being epic store exclusive.
Replacing one evil with another is not a step forward.

Remedy gained fame with max payne, and they still live off the good faith gained then.
With me they lost all their credibility when they stabbed the PC gaming community in the back by signing a deal for Alan Wake to become an xbox exclusive for microsoft. Which meant the game was highly downgraded from the original concept that was demoed on PC.

Otherwise they didn't do anything outstanding since Max Payne 2.
 
odditory said:
A) EGS free game offers = good

B) EGS funding exclusive game development = cringe, exclusives are lame, but still okay since they're bearing risk.

C) EGS creeping Top50 wishlisted on Steam, waiting until a high profile game has enjoyed months or years of free advertising on Steam, and then at the very last minute before release and all the heavy lifting has already been done and all the risk taken by others, trying to bribe the dev/publisher to delete the game from Steam and only sell it on EGS = this is what angers people and gives EGS their shitstain reputation, that eclipses any goodwill from A or B.

If they could stick to just A and B going forward, and god forbid add a new feature to the client some day, then eventually people might even take them seriously without bribes and gimmicks.
Click to expand...
I think A is an empty gesture that only affects hoarders. If I wanted to play any of the games they are giving away I'd already have purchased them. I'm not going to play games that I'm not interested in just because they are free.
As for B, it's exactly what Sony and MS does for their consoles. Doing it on PC on a digital storefront is unjustifiable. But the bigger issue is not that you need a new launcher, it's that you can't even buy most exclusives outside of the epic store. Even EA and Ubisoft allows 3rd party selling of games that you can unlock on uplay or origin. Not Epic. I still to this date haven't seen a deal for Control outside of EGS.

I was interested in Control, but I can't even buy it on my preferred storefronts. let alone run it on my preferred launcher. With being published by epic this only gets worse for remedy games.
 
M76 said:
From being owned by microsoft and being xbox exlusive or ms store exclusive to being published by epic and being epic store exclusive.
Replacing one evil with another is not a step forward.

Remedy gained fame with max payne, and they still live off the good faith gained then.
With me they lost all their credibility when they stabbed the PC gaming community in the back by signing a deal for Alan Wake to become an xbox exclusive for microsoft. Which meant the game was highly downgraded from the original concept that was demoed on PC.

Otherwise they didn't do anything outstanding since Max Payne 2.
Click to expand...

They did practically beg Alan Wake to come to PC, and the port was perfect. Control was better than most games I've played in the last few years. Quantum Break was actually okay, I thought it was decent and more interesting than most 3rd person action adventure type shooters as well. But I admit, I sometimes forget about this game. Suffice to say, I am really looking forward to Remedy's next project.

Being 100% independent is best, but probably isn't a solution for most companies. Being able to keep IP with a proper, no strings attached type of publisher is the next best thing. This is how publishing should be. Developer shops around for someone to help fund the game, picks one, puts out their project. If they can stay afloat after that on their own they should be able to take their IP and continue on alone.

As for the exclusive client, it sucks, but I suppose that is the norm if your publisher has a client program. I don't see people complaining about L4D, Portal or any of EA Originals titles. All of those were published or acquired partway through development by Valve and EA and are forced to use Steam and Origin respectively.
 
M76 said:
Otherwise they didn't do anything outstanding since Max Payne 2.
Click to expand...
You're entitled to your opinion, but I'd have to disagree.

Quantum Break was awesome, and Control is simply amazing and one of the best games ever IMO. Both in the original story and the gameplay.

Still have to go back for Alan Wake (which did eventually come to PC), that is next on my list. But the super powers they added in Quantum Break and Control and so much fun and a step beyond Max Payne.
 
While I prefer Steam over EGS, I personally don't see how its evil for Epic to pay for a game to be made then want to sell it on their own store. Development costs can be in the 10s to 100s of millions. Splitting 30% of the earnings with Valve to use steam would mean less generous terms which from what I see seem pretty fair to the devs.

What's evil paying a bribe on the order of a few millions to take away games previously announced for other platforms and developed with other funding sources.
 
cybereality said:
You're entitled to your opinion, but I'd have to disagree.

Quantum Break was awesome, and Control is simply amazing and one of the best games ever IMO. Both in the original story and the gameplay.

Still have to go back for Alan Wake (which did eventually come to PC), that is next on my list. But the super powers they added in Quantum Break and Control and so much fun and a step beyond Max Payne.
Click to expand...
You're entitled to your opinion too, but it's just one opinion I don't have an opinion of either Quantum Break or Control, but both got mixed user reviews, that's what I was going by.

Alan Wake is a decent enough game, but I can't help but think about what it could've been had they realized their original vision.
 
M76 said:
You're entitled to your opinion too, but it's just one opinion I don't have an opinion of either Quantum Break or Control, but both got mixed user reviews, that's what I was going by.

Alan Wake is a decent enough game, but I can't help but think about what it could've been had they realized their original vision.
Click to expand...

I recommend both. I'm not going to say they were absolutely ground breaking on the gameplay front, but they're solid games. Quantum Break tried an interesting approach blending in a mini series but I don't think it was executed very well.
 
Quantum Break got some heat at first because it was Windows Store exclusive, and also had some performance issues at launch in DX12.

It's now available on Steam, and they patched the game I believe it runs decent now (plus new cards are out). It is a pretty intensive game but the graphics were some of the best for the time.
 
I feel vehemently that pretty much every decision made by Epic since the advent of the Epic Store has been not just lacking benefit, but actively harmful to gaming, especially PC gaming and those who support an open ethos. Every decision has been about throwing around money, much of it ill gotten through varying modalities, in order to attempt to control an industry without having to give anything of real benefit or truly compete on features. Worse, the fact that they attempt to proclaim themselves as heroes while actively downing those who have done WAY more for gaming (ie the farcical concept that Steam was some kind of evil overlord etc... its sheer projection!)

I could spend an entire article breaking down the various issues with Epic Gaming bit by bit, but suffice it to say on the current topic that I object to exclusivity by contract as a concept and I damn Epic from attempting to normalize it within the PC gaming. Prior to them coming along, the idea that there were PC exclusives - especially 3rd party exclusives - was simply not a significant part of the medium. Despite the cloaked vitriol spit at Valve, even when there were fewer players in the digital distribution market entirely - fewer keysellers, much less actual separate platforms/launchers - they did not use their dominance to either entice or threaten others not to release their games via GOG or Itch etc, or to foist money if they ensured Steam would get exclusive access. This is to say nothing for all the other benefits and openness that Valve and Steam conferred on players and developers alike, which would take quite a bit of time to delve into in any depth.

We're seeing gaming on PC go the wrong direction, with more and more people trying to carve out their own little proprietary, incompatible fiefdoms. Exclusivity by contract of all sorts (3rd the most egregious, but I also object to Origin like attempts to take your toys and go to your own store/platform exclusively) is harmful on many levels. Epic has been the vanguard of the most extreme, worst parts of the exploitative and controlling aspects of gaming and I personally will not purchase any title on the platform in protest . I don't want to see this nonsense spread because we should know very well that the beancounters of the gaming industry , especially AAA publishers, look for anything they can justify as "Well, this is what the market's doing.. so we HAVE to do it to keep up", ushering it into the new normal ; each more exploitative and restrictive for the players and in many cases the developers too.

The only way we avoid a future where this becomes the norm is to make the idea rightly toxic; I want developers to think about taking the Faustian bargain of up front cash for exclusivity as a threat to their company's future and standing among the playerbase; an enemy of value and openness. We must show there is a cost, but also a better way - that releasing on all platforms and (among other things) embracing the most open future for PC gaming will be supported both financially and otherwise. What used to be a standard feature of PC gaming, we now have to fight to keep it from slipping away, funded by Fortnite profits and Tencent investment.
 
Last edited:
RanceJustice said:
I feel vehemently that pretty much every decision made by Epic since the advent of the Epic Store has been not just lacking benefit, but actively harmful to gaming, especially PC gaming and those who support an open ethos. Every decision has been about throwing around money, much of it ill gotten through varying modalities, in order to attempt to control an industry without having to give anything of real benefit or truly compete on features. Worse, the fact that they attempt to proclaim themselves as heroes while actively downing those who have done WAY more for gaming (ie the farcical concept that Steam was some kind of evil overlord etc... its sheer projection!)

I could spend an entire article breaking down the various issues with Epic Gaming bit by bit, but suffice it to say on the current topic that I object to exclusivity by contract as a concept and I damn Epic from attempting to normalize it within the PC gaming. Prior to them coming along, the idea that there were PC exclusives - especially 3rd party exclusives - was simply not a significant part of the medium. Despite the cloaked vitriol spit at Valve, even when there were fewer players in the digital distribution market entirely - fewer keysellers, much less actual separate platforms/launchers - they did not use their dominance to either entice or threaten others not to release their games via GOG or Itch etc, or to foist money if they ensured Steam would get exclusive access. This is to say nothing for all the other benefits and openness that Valve and Steam conferred on players and developers alike, which would take quite a bit of time to delve into in any depth.

We're seeing gaming on PC go the wrong direction, with more and more people trying to carve out their own little proprietary, incompatible fiefdoms. Exclusivity by contract of all sorts (3rd the most egregious, but I also object to Origin like attempts to take your toys and go to your own store/platform exclusively) is harmful on many levels. Epic has been the vanguard of the most extreme, worst parts of the exploitative and controlling aspects of gaming and I personally will not purchase any title on the platform in protest . I don't want to see this nonsense spread because we should know very well that the beancounters of the gaming industry , especially AAA publishers, look for anything they can justify as "Well, this is what the market's doing.. so we HAVE to do it to keep up", ushering it into the new normal ; each more exploitative and restrictive for the players and in many cases the developers too.

The only way we avoid a future where this becomes the norm is to make the idea rightly toxic; I want developers to think about taking the Faustian bargain of up front cash for exclusivity as a threat to their company's standing among the playerbase; an enemy of value and openness. We must show there is a cost, but also a better way - that releasing on all platforms and (among other things) embracing the most open future for PC gaming will be supported both financially and otherwise. What used to be a standard feature of PC gaming, we now have to fight to keep it from slipping away, funded by Fortnite profits and Tencent investment.
Click to expand...

I think you're letting your emotions get the better of you.
All of this "bad stuff" started long before the Epic store. The Epic store is making things better for both gamers and developers. I'm not going to write a 10 page essay refuting every point you made again for your cognitive bias to dismiss it with ridiculous reasons.
 
sharknice said:
I think you're letting your emotions get the better of you.
All of this "bad stuff" started long before the Epic store. The Epic store is making things better for both gamers and developers. I'm not going to write a 10 page essay refuting every point you made again for your cognitive bias to dismiss it with ridiculous reasons.
Click to expand...

He made an effort, you didn't.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Having more competitors is a positive thing, provided they can do it without store exclusives.

Personally aim just done with all the services trying to install clients on my machine and steal my data.

My policy for the last 2 years has been that I absolutely under no circumstance no matter what will create any new accounts for anything, or install any new "clients".

If a game requires me to sign up for a new account or install a special client I just won't play it. I tried to buy Far Cry 3 a while back on Steam but it tried to force me to sign up for Uplay, so I requested a refund.

I also won't buy hardware that requires a software client to be installed to control it, like CorsairsiCue or Logitech Ghub or anything like that.

Simply not happening.

If any product requires an account of any kind that I don't already have, I'm out.
Click to expand...

Seems you're too hung up on "oh noes my data!". Make a junk gmail account for these services and have fun. So what if they collect what type of hardware you run? It's not like you're safeguarding national secrets.
 
RanceJustice said:
Exclusivity by contract of all sorts (3rd the most egregious, but I also object to Origin like attempts to take your toys and go to your own store/platform exclusively)...
Click to expand...

So you mean like Valve and Half Life Alyx right? Or how they bought out the L4D developers and mandated the game be sold on Steam?

On a more serious note, this has been going on for a while with Blizzard and the like. Valve just made it much more common. The main difference is Valve is more gamer oriented whereas Epic is more developer oriented. This is why Valve has always lagged behind on many developer centric things. They let Source wither away to practically nothing, allowed Steam to become bloated and allowing good games to be lost among the rubbish. On the other hand they've done a lot of things gamers like. Epic is pretty much on the opposite end. They've offered better support than Valve ever did for their engines and pushed for lower selling fees. On the other hand, you can see how barren EGS is. Each company has different focuses and are primarily gaming technology companies rather than being purely game developers. Yes, both have put out some truly iconic games but their focus has always been on the tech side. They just focus on different ends of the spectrum.
 
No more clients for me either. I deleted my Steam account (yay GDPR forcing Valve to provide that option finally) and am sticking to GOG/PS4.
I am consistently disappointed in "modern" games anyways with their artificially over-engineered dopamine loops and excessively monetized "economies".
<shrug>
 
Valve has exclusives too. For example, you can't buy Portal 2 on GoG can you?

There are also lots of 3rd party games that are only on Steam, like NieR Automata.

They aren't considered "exclusive" because there probably wasn't a "deal" but they are only available on Steam nevertheless. A de facto exclusive.
 
I like how I can play many of my steam games on Linux, can EPIC do that? Does EPIC have a full library of VR games? I really don't see how EPIC is benefitting me, as a user one bit. Now I have too many game launchers just to play a given game. Steam giving me as a user the best support of them all. Steam as a platform does have some solid bases for developers, community, multiple platforms, ingame options, many servers etc. If I was a developer I would be also look at who gives my users the best service and really would want multiple options for those who will be willing to buy our game. Steam may charge more for the developer but they look like they give a hell a lot with it.
 
sharknice said:
There are plenty of other threads on this forum that I as well as other level headed people have explained it. You want me to copy and paste spam that all of over the forums?
Click to expand...
Then link to that topic and suggest continuing the discussion there.
 
Last edited:
Flogger23m said:
I recommend both. I'm not going to say they were absolutely ground breaking on the gameplay front, but they're solid games. Quantum Break tried an interesting approach blending in a mini series but I don't think it was executed very well.
Click to expand...
That's what I'm saying. solid game != outstanding. I don't think much value is lost on me by not playing Quantum break or Control. It's not like skipping HL2, Mass Effect, or Max Payne for that matter.
 
sharknice said:
I think you're letting your emotions get the better of you.
All of this "bad stuff" started long before the Epic store. The Epic store is making things better for both gamers and developers. I'm not going to write a 10 page essay refuting every point you made again for your cognitive bias to dismiss it with ridiculous reasons.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how I as a gamer benefit from Epic's exclusives in the short term, maybe in the medium to long term. I did benefit for Borderlands3, 6 months later it was 50%+ off for the super version with season pass on Steam. Other games I haven't played because I wanted drm free versions via gog. One of those has released on gog in the past month after a year on epic. That same game was also out on Xbox and PS4 a year ago with the epic exclusive on PC.

Complain all you want about Steam's monopoly of access, at least they have price competition most of the time. Epic does not.
 
Seems like less big names exclusive s this year vs last year? I could be wrong but at least games I'm interested in there are none
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top