Tuesday, April 2nd 2019
Steam AAA Bleed Continues: Anno 1800 to be UPlay and Epic Games Store Exclusive
Ubisoft has pulled the upcoming entry to its smash-hit RTS franchise, "Anno 1800" from Steam. For the PC platform, the game will be available only through Ubisoft's own UPlay, and the Epic Games Store, which continues to vacuum AAA titles from Steam on the promise of higher revenue share for the game developers. Ubisoft is giving Steam fans a chance to put their money where their mouths are, though.
You will be able to pre-order "Anno 1800" on Steam until April 16. The pre-ordered game will remain in your Steam library, and you will receive updates for the game through Steam. Also, people who purchased the game on Steam will be able to play multiplayer with those who bought their copies through UPlay or Epic Games Store. This presents Steam fans with a unique opportunity to tell a big studio like Ubisoft what they want.
Source:
Ubisoft
You will be able to pre-order "Anno 1800" on Steam until April 16. The pre-ordered game will remain in your Steam library, and you will receive updates for the game through Steam. Also, people who purchased the game on Steam will be able to play multiplayer with those who bought their copies through UPlay or Epic Games Store. This presents Steam fans with a unique opportunity to tell a big studio like Ubisoft what they want.
180 Comments on Steam AAA Bleed Continues: Anno 1800 to be UPlay and Epic Games Store Exclusive
Exclusives can suck a dick. Make it available on all platforms and let the user decide.
See Metro Exodus, huge success in the Epic Store, despite all the hate on the internet!
If we all love steam so much, an extra five bucks for a sixty dollar game is not too much to ask.
So much for that then...
But this is one hell of a weird mix, though. Now we can pre-order to buy a product in our preferred store, as if that is even a perk... That is exactly what exclusives force the user to do. And it is exactly why they work and why Epic uses them. Commerce 101, you need to have something the competitor doesn't.
An example. Consider the actual sale price of games. Games get more expensive to produce over time, we have inflation, and also, on the plus side, the target audience is larger. But, there are also far more games to choose from. This makes a game's success a high risk factor and any investment doubly so. At the same time, we as consumers will not accept super high game prices, historically we gamers have shown to be pretty crafty at avoiding high pricing and a large audience simply hasn't got the funds, mostly (very) young gamers - this explains why we get free content that explodes like PUBG. There is a group of fans that buys at launch and the rest will wait for budget bin. That on its own, is already the market at work. That budget bin wouldn't even exist if we didn't ask for it.
How do we ask for such things, simply by not buying at full price. Why do you think we get lured with pre-orders? Publishers want us to buy at launch, at full price, because they know it will drop like a stone shortly after, with promotions, key selling and reselling etc etc.
But the average sale price of a high profile game, is STILL, even today, at best 60 EUR/$. I remember that being the same norm 10-15 years ago. That is quite something and it completely contradicts the sentiment that we as customers are 'powerless'. We have power, we exercise it, and most of the time barely even realize that. Actually it got even better, because you can also buy tons of smaller / indie games at any price between $5 and $40,- and some of those offer 10x the value of a triple A release.
Epic Store = No No
Yes + No No = No.
See, there's a real simple thing going on here, I can only spend as much as I can every month, and there are far more important things to spend money on. I also prefer ownership over on-demand in a basic sense, but for entertainment, especially film/video which is 'fully consumed' if you've seen it once, I think on-demand is a perfect vehicle. So I consider it worthwhile. For gaming, I don't see that at all. The always online component is already a huge red flag, but no control is another I simply cannot get around. And then we have the ever-present latency, quality problems. It won't fly. Going deeper, there is also the problem of mod support, persistence, (fixable but not as such in the current offering of services) and in the long run a cost aspect, because if you do any more than casual gaming, this will run a higher cost - its like you say, its easy to stack a dozen subs on top of each other. But I only have limited time, so what's the point.
EDIT: (response to yours above) They all do it? A few years back everyone did VR, look where that is at today. They all TRY it and they fail left and right as quickly as new services get fired up. Its a novelty on the marketplace, and everyone wants to get their share of the pie. In the long run, a few large players will dominate, even if only because of the problems I pointed out above. You can't feasibly have dozens of services and make good use of them all.
store.steampowered.com/app/412020/Metro_Exodus/
Doesn't look like a boycot to me.
And how about this then, for numbers
2883 ratings (over a much longer period of time)
versus... 2788 in a month post launch.
Reality check...
Also i don't really care what the majority of people does anyway, in these things especially is where they're wrong pretty much all the time.
I also don't think this was ever about whether you cared or not, you disputed the news article about 'more sales' and are convinced it didn't sell, I'm just showing you sources that support the opposite. Grow up a bit... Or provide some source YOU think it credible that supports your statement - maybe we'll learn something beyond this temper tantrum.
Second, I like how people listed their pros and cons of having yet another game manager, yet the publisher's choice seems to be based (again, not surprising) on revenue cut only.