Features Hate for the Epic Store is out of proportion

It's not just pure engine cross-talk, it's the convenience aspect where economies of scale and Metcalfe's law come in to play. That's why I suggest making all platforms compatible using some sort of protocol. That's the way to do it, drafting up overt exclusivity contracts is not; It's about as appealing as a girl who mentions marriage on the first date.

 

This article smells a bit like clickbait - and well, it worked on me..got my frustrated enough to register on these forums (and I may stay, seems a friendly place )
The problem is, the article is completely missing the point and the reason that most people are angry at Epic's approach and tactics.....and that problem is that Epic are actually not offering any competition whatsoever for consumers, they are not helping the market, they are not competing with Steam, and they are not offering better prices.

Their model simply doesn't work to help the market, and purely lines their own pocket whilst hurting gamers, reducing choice of where to buy products and keeping prices artificially high...and yes, there are others playing a similar trick - Origin, Uplay and Bethesda are all playing the same game, but crucially only with their own franchises and games, and not by "poaching" games from other platforms. They are all guilty of a similar problem, but the way they have gone about it isn't quite so sickening and anti competitive as Epic.

I really, really want Epic to succeed and build a storefront & platform to compete with Steam, but their current attitude means I won't help them out with this and will refuse to purchase any game that has become a paid exlusive for them.

If they had decided to actually compete - be that on price (should be doable given their lower royalty rates), features (They have hundreds of developers they could have targeted to build a feature rich storefront) or simply on credability (they had a lot of that which they have now thrown away!) then you know what, I would have happily bought games on their platform...I don't care about having everything in one place, but I do care about getting the best value for money and return on my investment.

Steam offers me this, heck even Origin does to a degree depending on the title - but Epic offers me, as a gamer, absolutely nothing.

They can't compete on price, as when you are the only person selling something...then by definitiont here is no competition, no alternative price to judge against, there is only your price...They are not cheaper, they are not "better", they don't offer more choice...so why would anyone want to use their store?

I really don't get how anyone can defend them and their practice - it seems so simple and black and white to me.....if they only would bother to try and compete, they woudl get the support of many of us. As it is, they will get zero and we as gamers should not stand for this - it will only lead to higher prices and less competition overall.

edit: and just because "steam did it" or some games are only sold on steam is no excuse for Epic to do the same. True competition only happens when you can buy a game from multiple outlets/storefronts/etc, and exclusives actively work against that. Shame on Epic for taking this approach.

 

We've caught ourselves another one lads, bolt the doors!

Welcome @Spud1 make yourself at home

 

Line on the left, one cross each

Welcome aboard.

 

Except Epic can't compete on price.
Because just like Steam Epic allows developers / publishers to dictate prices, so if a developer decides to pass on zero percent of the savings / bribes to us filthy gamers (or to their employees) there is literally nothing Epic can do about it.

And that is a very crucial difference between game stores and real stores, if Asda wants to sell milk for a penny less than Tesco then Asda negotiates a lower price with the supplier, but with game stores the suppliers have total control (And unlike with milk you can't go to a different supplier if the first one refuses, after all each game only ever has one supplier).

 

The ideal solution would be to split up functions that are currently crammed together into one store:
- Purchasing a game
- Distributing the installer
- Distributing updates (probably most practical to keep this combined with initial isntaller distribution)
- Game 'communities' (forums etc)
- Voice chat
- Serves & matchmaking

Having these separate but cross-compatible (for example, pick your voice client but able to talk to other clients because they use the same underlying protocol) relieves the lock-in effect. Using standard protocols also alleviates some of the problems we have today, like a matchmaking service being sunset (e.g. the shudown of Gamespy) leaving otherwise functional games unable to connect to each other.

However it does come with some new pitfalls. For example: Pay a developer directly to purchase a game, developer pays $Distributed_Distribution_Service to host and distribute the installer and updates. Developer subsequently goes under, and is no longer paying $Distributed_Distribution_Service. Are you still able to download the game or updates? (though the same can happen today, if a dev goes under and nobody picks up the license to their catalogue, then Steam et al would need to remove the game from their service).

 

i dont have my vr headset anymore but my first epic store purcase woulda been tetriss effect. couple of my friends were wondering why it wasnt running till they read this https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/...ct-exclusive-requires-steamvr-to-run#comments you woulda thought it woulda told users to either install or run steam vr

 

That's another problem: SteamVR - or other Steamworks runtimes - cannot be distributed with game installers, the only method of getting the installed is to install Steam itself first.
Though in this case, if they're using a Rift rather than a Vive they could use OpenComposite, and bypass SteamVR entirely (and gain some performance back too).

 

thats the problem both say there was no mention of needing to install steamvr. either both are playing the game now

 

I’ve got Epic Store Installed but never bought anything and probably never will. Just like I’ve got a few other stores installed and will never buy from them either.

Because they’re not Steam. I want all my games in one place.

However, I booted up Epic Store the other day ... can’t even remember why ... and I loved how simple it looked with no Japanese art porn games and no indie rogue-like games. Just AAA games. Simple. Beautiful. I really miss how Steam used to look.

But I won’t be convinced to split my games and friends across multiple clients. I’m not short of cash so I don’t need to chase a bargain. I missed the free Fortnite train and might never find the time to board it.

 

I got a few bits from Epic and many other stores and really don't give two hoots about what I have to click to open it. The extra calories used on extra clicks is all good.

 

Aye, nothing worse that fat fingers

 

1) They're already all in one place: on your PC. Games are not magic, they are programs like any other program.
2) You can add games installed through anywhere to the Steam launcher, if you really want to launch Steam before launching another pgoram.

 

Does anyone remember the hate Steam got when it was first released. The WON Wars and so on. Valve suceeded by forcing us onto Steam with HL2, I, like many, many others had avoided making the change over prior to that point.

Exactly the same thing is happening with the hate for the Epic store. It is normal irrational human behaviour. Fear of change, rose tinted glasses for the old times, etc.

 

Is it just irrational?
I’m not saying I hate any other store but I won’t use them. I get why other people will use them, for timed bargains and exclusives.

My reason is I want all my games connected through one library, with the same friends’ list attached, using all the features Steam offers like leaderboards and cloud saves. Among other reasons.

It’s not irrational.

——————————

I will you give you one thing though, as time creeps on and more clients turn up and Steam receives less and less attention, then yeah, I might be forced to change my POV. But for the moment I’m content just buying through them. And I can wait for Metro to get released back to steam.

 

TBH it does sound irrational. I liken it to Stockholm Syndrome. IE - that's exactly how Valve want you to feel.

I was annoyed at first when EA decided to go Origin only. After that I really couldn't care. Then came Battlenet and Uplay store etc. Like I said, once I realized Origin was here to stay I got over it. I just have a folder on my desktop called Games and in there I have shortcuts to each store. I've stopped any loading at boot too, so I only have the one running at once.

 

Me wanting my games delivered via one client, with one friends list, is not irrational.

I am perfectly happy the way I do things right now. Yes it’s grating when another client turns up. But we’re getting used to it. Either Valve ups their game or it’ll just keep getting worse.

What could be irrational is how you perceive my contentment. You do your thing, I’ll do mine.

 

This may be a solution, i'd not heard of GOG Galaxy 2.0 - sounds like it's in closed beta but allows you to access all your games across steam/gog/epic/origin and so on.