Epic Games Store now open!

[CaptainRAVE]

Somehow this seems worse than a new game launching exclusively on Epic. It adds risk to the idea of just waiting for a game to go on sale, because you may lose out on the chance to buy it on Steam without warning. Also a game that gets pulled and you then losing access to any future DLC. Epic has gone even further down in my estimation.

 

[sinwave]

There hasn't been a free game worth installing the client for me. I already owned subnautica.

I can see that. Subnautica is the one that made it interesting for me. The rest is a pile of meh and dupes.

Maybe axiom verge is another I'll bother with.

The rocket league situation is disturbing. Will Steam customers and Epic store customers be able to play together?

 

[wnb]

Lol over 1500 negative reviews on steam Since Epic released news of buying Psyonix.

 

[Tombstone]

Lol over 1500 negative reviews on steam Since Epic released news of buying Psyonix.

Which simply serves to show to me how pointless the review system on Steam is and why I don't miss it on other launchers. You should review the game, whether the game is any good, what the games graphics/audio/longevity/plot is like, that's a review of the game. Criticisms of company A or company B or decisions they make should not, imo, affect the review of the quality of a game. A review of the company yes...an article on the companies practices and decisions yes...a youtube video about it yes. On a review of the quality of the game, no. A good review imo is one without bias, where you are reviewing the standard of the item in question, nothing more.

Subnautica for instance is an utterly superb game, even if it was an Epic exclusive the game of Subnautica would still be utterly superb.

I may dislike an actor or actress for their beliefs or life decisions, but that does not detract from whether the film they are in is any good. Case in point being Tom Cruise, who I think it an absolute tool in RL and has done many things I dislike but that doesn't affect my thoughts on his movies.

 

[ic1male]

Which simply serves to show to me how pointless the review system on Steam is and why I don't miss it on other launchers.

It's not the system that's pointless, it's the idiots who abuse it. Steam has a new option which blocks review bombing and doesn't include them in the overall rating.

 

[sinwave]

I may dislike an actor or actress for their beliefs or life decisions, but that does not detract from whether the film they are in is any good. Case in point being Tom Cruise, who I think it an absolute tool in RL and has done many things I dislike but that doesn't affect my thoughts on his movies.

true, however i don't think having the information is a bad thing. had I not heard of the epic games situation by other means and was browsing steam looking to buy rocket league, those review bombs could make two differences to my decision making. 1. I might bring forward my purchase on steam to deprive epic of their bigger cut, or 2. I might decide that their business practices set a bad precedent that i don't want to support financially at all, to the loss of potential gaming enjoyment.

similarly if I was particularly offended by kevin spacey I might refuse to to (pay to) watch his brilliant performances.

the problem is that without looking at the comments the review system loses its meaning. the feature ic1male mentions mitigates that.

 

[HungryHippos]

I think people are just review bombing it because it's the only way they can have their voices heard.

 

[Tombstone]

I think people are just review bombing it because it's the only way they can have their voices heard.

There is always the discussion forums on steam for each title. Don't need to be immature about it and spam reviews.

 

[iv-tecman]

Just read Epic have stated they haven't even decided on the fate of the Steam version of Rocket League. Could be game doesn't get removed, I know Tim Sweeney said if Steam matched the 12% cut they'd stop all this, and even maybe release their own games on Steam

I doubt that'll happen, but bold claim nonetheless.

 

[Tombstone]

true, however i don't think having the information is a bad thing. had I not heard of the epic games situation by other means and was browsing steam looking to buy rocket league, those review bombs could make two differences to my decision making. 1. I might bring forward my purchase on steam to deprive epic of their bigger cut, or 2. I might decide that their business practices set a bad precedent that i don't want to support financially at all, to the loss of potential gaming enjoyment.

similarly if I was particularly offended by kevin spacey I might refuse to to (pay to) watch his brilliant performances.

the problem is that without looking at the comments the review system loses its meaning. the feature ic1male mentions mitigates that.

The information is fine and I agree, its quite useful to have reviews of a company as much as it is to have a review of a game, however this could easily be provided by having 2 review sections on a game on Steam, a review for the game and a separate review section for the game companies. Use the same sort of system of comments etc but link it on the company rather than the game. That way verdicts on whether or not a game is actually any good can be kept clean and anyone who is looking at scores can then make a personal choice as to whether they want to overlook a companys actions on the grounds that the game has scored well as a game or whether or not despite it being a high scoring game the actions of the company makes them not purchase. Would make it easier to judge the quality of a game without having to siphon out non-game related spam.

 

[chrcoluk]

Which simply serves to show to me how pointless the review system on Steam is and why I don't miss it on other launchers. You should review the game, whether the game is any good, what the games graphics/audio/longevity/plot is like, that's a review of the game. Criticisms of company A or company B or decisions they make should not, imo, affect the review of the quality of a game. A review of the company yes...an article on the companies practices and decisions yes...a youtube video about it yes. On a review of the quality of the game, no. A good review imo is one without bias, where you are reviewing the standard of the item in question, nothing more.

Subnautica for instance is an utterly superb game, even if it was an Epic exclusive the game of Subnautica would still be utterly superb.

I may dislike an actor or actress for their beliefs or life decisions, but that does not detract from whether the film they are in is any good. Case in point being Tom Cruise, who I think it an absolute tool in RL and has done many things I dislike but that doesn't affect my thoughts on his movies.

Before EPIC it was certainly a very good system. Its certainly better than having no review system as well.

If you going through reviews (which you should do instead of just counting the totals) then just ignore review bomb reviews.

Even with review bombing tho its a fair way for people to vent their displeasure so I have no issue with it.

 

[chrcoluk]

Just read Epic have stated they haven't even decided on the fate of the Steam version of Rocket League. Could be game doesn't get removed, I know Tim Sweeney said if Steam matched the 12% cut they'd stop all this, and even maybe release their own games on Steam

I doubt that'll happen, but bold claim nonetheless.

He said it knowing steam wont do it as 12% is not financially viable.

 

[sinwave]

The information is fine and I agree, its quite useful to have reviews of a company as much as it is to have a review of a game, however this could easily be provided by having 2 review sections on a game on Steam, a review for the game and a separate review section for the game companies. Use the same sort of system of comments etc but link it on the company rather than the game. That way verdicts on whether or not a game is actually any good can be kept clean and anyone who is looking at scores can then make a personal choice as to whether they want to overlook a companys actions on the grounds that the game has scored well as a game or whether or not despite it being a high scoring game the actions of the company makes them not purchase. Would make it easier to judge the quality of a game without having to siphon out non-game related spam.

Agreed, it would be nice to have a pristine is the product good as a product field. the chances of having other categories of review criteria approved and implemented seem negligible.
failing that situation a filter if it works is a better solution than heavy moderation/deletion.

 

[Tombstone]

Agreed, it would be nice to have a pristine is the product good as a product field. the chances of having other categories of review criteria approved and implemented seem negligible.
failing that situation a filter if it works is a better solution than heavy moderation/deletion.

Indeed.

Of course in an ideal world people wouldn't be such chumps and would understand the concept of what a review is and such things would be a non-issue, but you know how people are in general, I think someone famous once said that the average person in the street is thick as ****

 

[HungryHippos]

Just read Epic have stated they haven't even decided on the fate of the Steam version of Rocket League. Could be game doesn't get removed, I know Tim Sweeney said if Steam matched the 12% cut they'd stop all this, and even maybe release their own games on Steam

I doubt that'll happen, but bold claim nonetheless.

I think the way that Epic worded the statement was misleading, and could be read to assume they are in fact removing it at some point. Additionally they have stated they would not stop going after exclusives, even for games already on Steam, so people quite rightly assumed they probably would do something like this.

Steam is just ignoring them though and is staying quiet, maybe they just don't care enough and think that if Epic keep on banging the same drum without any response they'll get tired of trying.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

 

[SS-89]

So Epic buys a developer and they might make it exclusive to their platform going forward, not sure how that is any different to EA/Ubisoft (aside from being far later in the release cycle) etc. They are well within their rights to do that as owner and have already said this won't affect existing steam customers. Honestly the rabbid bandwagon jumping and review bombing is just sad.

People honestly think they are buying up developers of mature games where most sales are already done for exclusivity need their heads checked. There is clearly more to this move than simply wanting rocket league on the Epic platform. Regardless, doesn't bother me was never into rocket league.

 

[StriderX]

So Epic buys a developer and they might make it exclusive to their platform going forward, not sure how that is any different to EA/Ubisoft (aside from being far later in the release cycle) etc. They are well within their rights to do that as owner and have already said this won't affect existing steam customers. Honestly the rabbid bandwagon jumping and review bombing is just sad.

People honestly think they are buying up developers of mature games where most sales are already done for exclusivity need their heads checked. There is clearly more to this move than simply wanting rocket league on the Epic platform. Regardless, doesn't bother me was never into rocket league.

It’s obviously a constant stream of cash flow,
Which considering this purchase and recent statements, they’ve probably started running out of their bribes and realised they needed some stable money coming in.

Plus it flows well with the fortnite crowd, so it’s epics environment I guess, same sort of aesthetic, same monetisation, same lame future.

 

[mark43]

So Epic buys a developer and they might make it exclusive to their platform going forward, not sure how that is any different to EA/Ubisoft (aside from being far later in the release cycle) etc. They are well within their rights to do that as owner and have already said this won't affect existing steam customers. Honestly the rabbid bandwagon jumping and review bombing is just sad.

People honestly think they are buying up developers of mature games where most sales are already done for exclusivity need their heads checked. There is clearly more to this move than simply wanting rocket league on the Epic platform. Regardless, doesn't bother me was never into rocket league.

Rocket League has probably exhausted most of its sales potential sure, but they can always make it free and then monetise it in other ways.

 

[uncle_rufus]

It sets kind of a bad precedent... I don't like it but if they're not lying about honouring existing purchases of the game then it's not the complete end of the world, as most people who want Rocket League likely already own it... However that changes significantly depending on what they intend to do about patches... If a game breaking bug or exploit comes out will it be forever un-patched on Steam? (and as we know in a competitive game a bug/glitch that gives an unfair advantage almost always ends up ruining the game until fixed)