oxidizedYou "showed me"? You showed nothing, because even if the game sold more than Last Light, it's pretty far from "Huge success". I could ask you the same, show me some credibile and actual source for what you're saying, because using metascore's 2788 reviews is as good as me saying it wasn't even close to a huge success.

Metro 2033 and LL got another sequel because the franchise is shit, gotcha.

Let's drop it there. When you can add 1+1 come back.

Alternatively you can check out other big shooter releases of the past years and compare the review counts. Metro is pretty high up there, consistently with every part. For giggles, put those numbers next to Call of Duty BLOPS 4, with a measly 300 reviews. Or are you going to tell me now that doesn't say anything either?

BasardIf we all love steam so much, an extra five bucks for a sixty dollar game is not too much to ask.

Aaaaaaaand this is why we have $1500 GPUs that used to cost $649.

Vayra86Metro 2033 and LL got another sequel because the franchise is shit, gotcha.

Let's drop it there. When you can add 1+1 come back.

So in your eyes only "huge success" franchises have sequels? There's plenty of game that sold even worse than Metro, and still made at least one sequel. Making or not making sequels of a game, depends almost solely to Software house's goals, deep silver is not a big SH, and even games selling just ok, will do for them, besides it's probably one of their most important franchises, if not THE most important one - As i already said, this might have sold more than Last light and 2033, but it's not even close to a "Huge success", and if it launched on steam too, it would've only been better for everyone, software house included.

Vayra86Alternatively you can check out other big shooter releases of the past years and compare the review counts. Metro is pretty high up there, consistently with every part.

This is one of those games that without real, solid numbers no one knows. You have people purposely going out and giving negative reviews because their panties are in a twist while simultaneously having people leave overly positive reviews to correct it.

Edit: I bought it last night and so far I really like it. I have not played the other two so I can't compare in that regard.

oxidizedSo in your eyes only "huge success" franchises have sequels? There's plenty of game that sold even worse than Metro, and still made at least one sequel. Making or not making sequels of a game, depends almost solely to Software house's goals, deep silver is not a big SH, and even games selling just ok, will do for them, besides it's probably one of their most important franchises, if not THE most important one - As i already said, this might have sold more than Last light and 2033, but it's not even close to a "Huge success", and if it launched on steam too, it would've only been better for everyone, software house included.

A success is when you get enough sales to keep going, because it means your bottom line is positive and you can keep your team employed. In that sense, going on review counts alone, Metro Exodus is potentially a bigger seller than its prequels because it already has the same review count just over a month post-release. Define 'Huge'... 10 million? 20? 100? Stop circling the hot pile and just admit you have no idea and you have not provided ANY sources that prove otherwise, all you have is your clouded gut feeling versus actual numbers and news reports.

Another writing on the wall is the scope of the game itself. It has become a LOT bigger than its predecessors and will likely receive further DLC treatment down the road.


And... yes. Successful franchises get sequels. Do I really need to give you a list of examples, is the plank really that thick?

Vayra86EDIT: (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.

Yes they do. Hulu was free, Youtube didn't have a paid model, most movies and TV shows were on Netflix, now most Channels have their own paid access.

Incorporating VR is far and away different than adding a monthly fee onto something already in place. We are already seeing the trend into this with Origin Premiere Access getting games weeks in advance.

WarlenYes they do. Hulu was free, Youtube didn't have a paid model, most movies and TV shows were on Netflix, now most Channels have their own paid access.

Incorporating VR is far and away different than adding a monthly fee onto something already in place. We are already seeing the trend into this with Origin Premiere Access getting games weeks in advance.

You're right about that. I'm just not convinced it will stick, time will tell...

Vayra86A success is when you get enough sales to keep going, because it means your bottom line is positive. In that sense, going on review counts alone, Metro Exodus is potentially a bigger seller than its prequels because it already has the same review count just over a month post-release. Define 'Huge'... 10 million? 20? 100? Stop circling the hot pile and just admit you have no idea and you have not provided ANY sources that prove otherwise, all you have is your clouded gut feeling versus actual numbers and news reports.

I don't know, huge is something else, huge is something only battle royale games recently reached, and having more reviews on metascore means nothing as i already said, it's not a reliable source, never was. It's you having no idea what you're talking about like most of the time you write on this forum regarding anything really. I have myself as source, which is surely more valuable than what you're using as "source", just stop it with this aggressive ignorant posting of yours you're by far one of the lamest users in this forum.

oxidizedI don't know, huge is something else, huge is something only battle royale games recently reached, and having more reviews on metascore means nothing as i already said, it's not a reliable source, never was. It's you having no idea what you're talking about like most of the time you write on this forum regarding anything really. I have myself as source, which is surely more valuable than what you're using as "source", just stop it with this aggressive ignorant posting of yours you're by far one of the lamest users in this forum.

So asking for a source is now aggressive and ignorant, while ignoring any and all sources provided is good form.

Thanks for the update.

Vayra86So asking for a source is now aggressive and ignorant, while ignoring any and all sources provided is good form.

Thanks for the update.

No, writing like you do with your choice of word is.
Stop asking for a source, there's no reliable source for these things, especially this close to the launch of a game, what you claim to be a source just isn't, no matter you keep pushing that at all costs, it isn't, because reviews say nothing, and mean nothing, you have no idea where those reviews come from what they say. No problems for the update.

As long as it is still on UPlay, I do not mind (because I have ordered it on UPlay).

I don't see what the fuss is, aside from the fact that the game was listed on pre-order for Steam and it's now getting pulled after the fact (that's pretty shitty).

Ubisoft publishes the game (series) Anno. I'm kind of surprised they haven't started pulling more games from Steam to be strictly sold on their Uplay store. Look at EA. When was the last time EA released a game on Steam? According to search by Publisher on Steam, and sorting by Release date:


YEAH! Sims 3! (what a garbage game, if you ask me)

EA shifted from Steam, but left a lot of older games they already offered on Steam to be available through Steam (though they probably require Origin to be used to actually play the games), so they didn't truly cut ties with Steam, they just stopped offering newer games.

Steam needs a kick in the ass to correct how it does thing. More and more companies are coming around with their digital stores. Steam will soon feel the pinch once they start to lose enough of their slice of the pie. They'll have to adjust how much they cut off the top for their take. They may even realize that companies with big, triple A games (Tom Clancy games on Uplay, BattleField games on Origin and so on) are keeping the sales and more money for themselves by skirting Steam and using their own digital store or other launchers (such as EPIC) that takes a much smaller cut.....maybe Steam will stop f'ing around and get back into game development....?

Valve needs to stop milking developers. Their "steam tax" is way too high. Sure, as a gamer and a consumer I want all of my games to be in one convenient place, but if that means that less money has to be spent by stusios on developing quality games because they have to take "steam tax" into account, then I will have to support other services.

neatfeatguyI don't see what the fuss is, aside from the fact that the game was listed on pre-order for Steam and it's now getting pulled after the fact (that's pretty shitty).

If that's not illegal, it is at least immoral. You take advantage of the platform to rake in money when you have no product and when you do, you take your business elsewhere. Definitely not cool.

Penev91Valve needs to stop milking developers. Their "steam tax" is way too high. Sure, as a gamer and a consumer I want all of my games to be in one convenient place, but if that means that less money has to be spent by stusios on developing quality games because they have to take "steam tax" into account, then I will have to support other services.

Valve is free to charge whatever they want for their service. The trouble is, till now it was their service or bust because outside of publisher run stores, there was only GOG. That has changed.

Penev91Valve needs to stop milking developers. Their "steam tax" is way too high. Sure, as a gamer and a consumer I want all of my games to be in one convenient place, but if that means that less money has to be spent by stusios on developing quality games because they have to take "steam tax" into account, then I will have to support other services.

Valve offers much much more (not bribing though) to real developers compared to anyone else, their 20 to 30% cut is justified most of the times.

oxidizedValve offers much much more (not bribing though) to real developers compared to anyone else, their 20 to 30% cut is justified most of the times.

I hate to be an asshole but again... source? We have no idea what deals have been struck with Epic and we have no idea whether or not Steam's cut is justifiable either... All we know is they generate some free keys and offer a discount on large revenues...

Vayra86Check this out - reviews, overall score and number of it.
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...

That only tells how popular the Metro series got, not purchase numbers, (steam does but not everyone will review it, hard to know the real numbers) and that popularity is to expect since they invested most of their budget on marketing to reach as much people as possible. You could see advertisements in so many gaming sites and youtube. It was a spam fest for a few months.

bugIf that's not illegal, it is at least immoral. You take advantage of the platform to rake in money when you have no product and when you do, you take your business elsewhere. Definitely not cool.

Not arguing. I even said it was a pretty shitty move.

Now, unless Steam has something in their "sell your game on our platform" contract that says you can't pull your game and they make it illegal, a publisher can do whatever they want with their game even after they offered it up on Steam.

I looked through (quickly, it is possible I missed something) the Documentation you go through for posting games on Steam and I didn't see anything mentioned about pulling a game off steam. Other then the fact that you'd be obligated by consumer rights to still offer the game to those that paid or issue a refund. You can go through the documentation here, if you're bored.....and I'm not that bored, nor do I have the time to read every single word while I'm at work.

oxidizedValve offers much much more (not bribing though) to real developers compared to anyone else, their 20 to 30% cut is justified most of the times.

Not to mention the work Valve did on getting games to run on Linux.

jmcostaThat only tells how popular the Metro series got, not purchase numbers, and that is to expect since they invested most of their budget on marketing to reach as much people as possible. You could see advertisements in so many gaming sites and youtube. It was a spam fest for a few months.

That's probably part of it, but then again, compare it to other well marketed games. Its not very likely for random people to place a review on metacritic when they don't own the game, and even if there are some, those also exist for every other game so you can easily cross them off against one another. The sample size is pretty decent here.

Here's another comparison: also released at around the same time, with a 50 million player peak... and free to play.

728x

I think you can safely cross off a lot of ifs and buts to the reliability but what remains is a pretty solid indication.

neatfeatguyNot arguing. I even said it was a pretty shitty move.

Now, unless Steam has something in their "sell your game on our platform" contract that says you can't pull your game and they make it illegal, a publisher can do whatever they want with their game even after they offered it up on Steam.

I looked through (quickly, it is possible I missed something) the Documentation you go through for posting games on Steam and I didn't see anything mentioned about pulling a game off steam. Other then the fact that you'd be obligated by consumer rights to still offer the game to those that paid or issue a refund. You can go through the documentation here, if you're bored.....and I'm not that bored, nor do I have the time to read every single word while I'm at work.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure the move was covered by their contracts. What I was hinting at is I wouldn't mind seeing these moves forbidden. You took advantage of pre-orders? Sell on that store for 6-12 months at least.
At the same time, I realize this was caused by Epic Store not being around when per-orders started. Maybe without this particular conjecture, we won't see dick moves like this again.

Steam needs to make it so if you advertise your game on Steam, by putting your game on Steams store, you agree to launch it there. Back out, pay the divorce fees.

Vayra86I hate to be an asshole but again... source? We have no idea what deals have been struck with Epic and we have no idea whether or not Steam's cut is justifiable either... All we know is they generate some free keys and offer a discount on large revenues...

Logic is your friend. Why you developer with a new game would you go and publish on the worst platform PC has right now? Why worst? Just compare the features of EGS with any other launcher or platform present on PC, you'll find EGS is the one with less features and has issues more frequently than any other platform. Oh and i forgot to mention that, not only those devs publish on the worst platform, but they make that game exclusive for a whole year on that platform only - If it's not money what is then? Revenge? Cmon...

oxidizedLogic is your friend. Why you developer with a new game would you go and publish on the worst platform PC has right now? Why worst? Just compare the features of EGS with any other launcher or platform present on PC, you'll find EGS is the one with less features and has issues more frequently than any other platform. Oh and i forgot to mention that, not only those devs publish on the worst platform, but they make that game exclusive for a whole year on that platform only - If it's not money what is then? Revenge? Cmon...

Worst platform is an opinion mostly pushed forward by flaming reddit posts with extensive lists of feature gaps. Not by developers. Metro has no real mod support, so workshop = irrelevant and I'd say that is one of the major perks Steam can offer a developer, a mod framework. It saves dev time and adds to game popularity, so that can be translated to actual profit.

But friends lists, and other community features, trading cards... all of that is largely irrelevant to a developer looking to release a game. These perks only matter to the end user and are unrelated to the game. Also, developers don't really choose. Publishers choose, and they look at the bottom line only.

I realize its all about money, but what Steam does is not all that unique or essential to a developer or publisher. What they care about is reach of a platform and in that, Steam has better reach but we also see a steady trend of people getting their content elsewhere. So, again, we have no clue whether Steam really does have such a great offer. Our consumer logic doesn't always apply on the business side... in fact it usually doesn't.

oxidizedValve offers much much more (not bribing though) to real developers compared to anyone else, their 20 to 30% cut is justified most of the times.

Like what?

Their main edge is userbase, nothing else.

Their engine is antiquated and while the documentation is ok, unreal and unity is as good for a much more advanced game engine.

They don't offer grants to Indies like epic, or as much free content or even the same level of interaction with Devs as you get from both unreal and unity.

Valve have needed a kick up the arse like this for years, I just hope they do react and don't think they can keep selling old rope like they have since origin, uplay and battlenet all took titles away from them.