oxidizedWhat matters is having fun, no matter how i do it, who i pay, and what i use, just fun.

What is the point of gaming then if not for having fun?

I don't understand. You trying to make gaming like it is some kind of Templar Knight tradition that has been handed down for generations and if you haven't been initiated then you aren't 'in'. Or a 'gamer'.

moproblems99What is the point of gaming then if not for having fun?

I don't understand. You trying to make gaming like it is some kind of Templar Knight tradition that has been handed down for generations and if you haven't been initiated then you aren't 'in'. Or a 'gamer'.

Oh come on guys, i mean i don't have the best english but it guess it's quite understandable what i write. I don't mean you don't have to have fun, i'm saying it's not the only thing that matters.

64KYes and no. Competition is being created but calling it a textbook example is a bit unusual. Maybe overall in a business sense it is but none of the other online game stores did what Epic is doing.

If we check Merriam Webster it seems pretty much spot on:

the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms

Yes, Epic is competing using different tactics, but it's still competition, and it is still the consumer that stands to gain in the long term.

64KNone of them built up their store by paying other Publishers to make their games exclusive on their store. This is what people are "huffing and puffing" about.

And how is a game being exclusive to one store prevent anyone from playing it and enjoying it? There are no hardware requirements; access to the Epic Game Store is completely free.
The only actual exclusivity is in peoples' heads when they impose ridiculous restrictions on themselves.

Sure, Epic's client is missing features. I get it. I agree that more features need to be added. But to suggest that a person needs those features to play and enjoy a game is ridiculous.
When I've played pirated games years ago I had at my disposal none of the features Steam offers now. Did I enjoy my games? Hell yes I did!
When I play a game I've purchased from GOG and install it using the offline installer I also get none of the features Steam has. Do I enjoy said game? Damn straight!

If a few missing extra features is enough to ruin your enjoyment of a game, then you need to ask yourself if you are actually in it for the game(s) or something else.

Jeez, sometimes it seems to me that some people use games to "play" their platform (Steam), instead of using the platform to play games.

oxidizedAgain with insults, where do you see insults? Lesser gamer? You're just a casual gamer, there's nothing wrong being that, it's not like you have some deficiency, it means you're not too serious with them, nothing more nothing less.

If it’s not an insult, stop theowing it around like one. What makes you thoroughly “out there” is you are the only one here who would even think that is something associated with me. You keep saying I am a casual gamer and still have not givien any evidence as to why. Because I enjoy the hell out of my gaming time? Yeah, I learned to immerse myself into the games completely because raising two kids meant my time was limited for many years. So if enjoying my gaming time makes me “casual” then I feel sorry for you, because obviously you claim to be the opposite, which means not enjoying yourself.

oxidizedA true gamer plays a wide spectrum of games, but always maintaining a high standard, and using that standard (crafted with years of experience of playing videogames) to judge and analyze a videogame and its contents, and not lowering his standard in order to appreciate what's currently on the market and what's launching on it just because "i want to have fun" or just because "anything else is worse" because if you only seek fun and amusement time into a videogame that's exactly when you can be labelled as casual gamer,

“Crafted”, :laugh: By the time I got there I realized you are one of the most extreme cases I have ever seen of someone being full of themselves. I included more so people could get the full effect and have themselves a good laugh as well.

oxidizedunless i need it, besides i don't need to know you in person to understand your point of view on videogames, it's enough reading your position regarding this matter here, which gives me a pretty significant hint, and your previous avatar also gives me another hint

My position here, that I dont care who sells it, because that doesn’t impact my enjoyment IN THE GAME. You DO need to have a much better idea of who I am by being a part of the gaming forum because then you would know that the only pretender in this whole gaming discussion is you. We only know that you SAY you are a gamer. Most of the people here you are also arguing with already know that, because they don’t only hang out in the news section.

What in the HELL does my previous avatar have to do with anything? It’s the second time you’ve bashed it, like you are some superior being. What are you, the avatar police? It doesnt say anything except for about 5 months I used it because I really enjoyed a game I played. It says nothing about who I am, and certainly is not a comment on my “true gamer” status. You are so wrapped up in appearances. I change my avatar every 5 to 6 months. They mean nothing as far as ANYone’s gamer status or status on ANYthing. People use them because they like them.

oxidized"That aside, the idea that somehow a real gamer should be more concerned about how the game is launched than actually playing the game sounds really, really uppity to me"
Not more, he should be equally concerned. What is it people, it works when the subjects of the discussion are intel, AMD and nvidia, and not when it's video game PC platforms/stores? Come on!

Why should I be equally concerned about the launcher as the game if I am a “true gamer?” Because you said so? Who are you besides some guy hanging out in the news section dictatong who are real gamers and casual gamers? I have news for you. I xan’t play the launcher. I can play the game that comes from the launcher, and that’s what I’m going to go do. You stay here and keep being full of yourself.

NRANMIf we check Merriam Webster it seems pretty much spot on:


Yes, Epic is competing using different tactics, but it's still competition, and it is still the consumer that stands to gain in the long term.


And how is a game being exclusive to one store prevent anyone from playing it and enjoying it? There are no hardware requirements; access to the Epic Game Store is completely free.
The only actual exclusivity is in peoples' heads when they impose ridiculous restrictions.

Sure, Epic's client is missing features. I get it. I agree that more features need to be added. But to suggest that a person needs those features to play and enjoy a game is ridiculous.
When I've played pirated games years ago I had at my disposal none of the features Steam offers now. Did I enjoy my games? Hell yes I did!
When I play a game I've purchased from GOG and install it using the offline installer I also get none of the features Steam has. Do I enjoy said game? Damn straight!

If a few missing extra features is enough to ruin your enjoyment of a game, then you need to ask yourself if you are actually in it for the game(s) or something else?

Jeez, sometimes it seems to me that some people use games to "play" their platform (Steam), instead of using the platform to play games.

There's just more to it than you are seeing. From my perspective I only have one issue with Epic but I am probably in the minority. I want to see Epic give a damn about their store beyond taking a short-cut to build it up. The reason for that is because I look at buying games in the long run. I go back and replay games all the way back to the late 90's that I really enjoyed. If Epic is making a half-assed attempt at their store right now what kind of shape will it be in 20 years from now?

Epic needs to prove themselves to me. I waited a while to get a Steam account after they launched. I waited a while to get an account on GOG, Origin, Uplay, Rockstar and just lately got an account on the MS store. I will wait a while for EGS as well.

DimiSo what about the Steam keys that Valve provides for free to devs/pubs to sell on other stores like GMG, Humble Bundle, Amazon... Keys they have 0% cut on. They practically lose money on those keys.

They don't lose money. No company will just lose money like that, everything has a purpose.

64KEpic needs to prove themselves to me. I waited a while to get a Steam account after they launched. I waited a while to get an account on GOG, Origin, Uplay, Rockstar and just lately an account on MS store. I will wait a while for EGS as well.

We’ve known each other a long time and that is a perfectly valid stance. You’ve applied it equally to each of them, because they all started out with just a basic store and launcher. Bravo, because you are not one of the fanatics mad that there is competition or that it didnt start out with the same level of features that Steam has.

rtwjunkieIf it’s not an insult, stop theowing it around like one. What makes you thoroughly “out there” is you are the only one here who would even think that is something associated with me. You keep saying I am a casual gamer and still have not givien any evidence as to why. Because I enjoy the hell out of my gaming time? Yeah, I learned to immerse myself into the games completely because raising two kids meant my time was limited for many years. So if enjoying my gaming tome makes me “casual” then I feel sorry for you, because obviously you claim to be the opposite, which means not enjoying yourself.


“Crafted”, :laugh: By the time I got there I realized you are one of the most extreme cases I have ever seen of someone being full of themselves. I included more so people could get the full effect and have themselves a good laugh as well.

My position here, that I dont care who sells it, because that doesn’t impact my enjoyment IN THE GAME. You DO need to have a much better idea of who I am by being a part of the gaming forum because then you would know that the only pretender in this whole gaming discussion is you. We only know that you SAY you are a gamer. Most of the people here you are also arguing with already know that, because they don’t only hang out in the news section.

What in the HELL does my previous avatar have to do with anything? It’s the second time you’ve bashed it, like you are some superior being. What are you, the avatar police? It doesnt say anything except for about 5 months I used it because I really enjoyed a game I played. It says nothing about who I am, and certainly is not a comment on my “true gamer” status. You are so wrapped up in appearances. I change my avatar every 5 to 6 months. They mean nothing as far as ANYone’s gamer status or status on ANYthing. People use them because they like them.

Why should I be equally concerned about the launcher as the game if I am a “true gamer?” Because you said so? Who are you besides some guy hanging out in the news section dictatong who are real gamers and casual gamers? I have news for you. I xan’t play the launcher. I can play the game that comes from the launcher, and that’s what I’m going to go do. You stay here and keep being full of yourself.

I'm not throwing around anything, i'm just naming stuff with the appropriate word, if you felt that, i'm sorry but it wasn't meant as i already said. I've already explained why you're a casual gamer, not high quality standard, not interested in who sells you the game and how, not interested in their practices good or bad, you're only interested in the final product and not anymore, and that's what makes you a casual gamer, you said it yourself multiple times, and even in this post here "My position here, that I dont care who sells it, because that doesn’t impact my enjoyment IN THE GAME" and that's exactly why i said that fun isn't the only important thing, because you're not going to have much fun in all games, but it doesn't mean that they're not good products basically. For example take cuphead, it's not an insanely fun game, i mean it's ok, but it's not only that, it's the rest that makes the game great, the artwork, the OST, the gameplay style and most of its bosses/enemies.

"Crafted" keep in mind i'm not a native english speaker, and i used that word because that what came to my mind at that point.

The thing is very simple, Assassin's creed is a low quality game, and it has been for years now, and they're mostly enjoyed by casual gamers (because they find it fun), and young people. That one reason i've been saying your tastes are those of a casual gamer, of course you're free to like it, i'm not here to deny any of that to anyone, anyone should be free to have fun with whatever they fit best, but talking about objective quality in general is another thing.

You do whatever you want of course, i'm saying you have to do what i say, sorry if it looked that way but again, not meant. But accept being a casual, there's nothing wrong with that.

rtwjunkieSo if enjoying my gaming tome makes me “casual” then I feel sorry for you, because obviously you claim to be the opposite, which means not enjoying yourself.

It's entirely possible he/she wasn't alive during the time that gaming was just for kids and nerds. I can totally understand the viewpoint if you consider gaming has only been truly mainstream for less than 2 decades. One it hits mainstream, everybody and everything needs to be labeled and grouped so one can feel part of something or be able to look down upon others.

oxidizedtalking about objective quality in general is another thing.

Here's the problem, there is no objective quality in video games. Quality is purely subjective in video games. How do you define beautiful? It's akin to asking what purple taste like.

moproblems99It's entirely possible he/she wasn't alive during the time that gaming was just for kids and nerds. I can totally understand the viewpoint if you consider gaming has only been truly mainstream for less than 2 decades. One it hits mainstream, everybody and everything needs to be labeled and grouped so one can feel part of something or be able to look down upon others.

Oh i was alive, and one of the best part was exactly the beginning of those decades you mention.

"everybody and everything needs to be labeled and grouped so one can feel part of something"

Exactly this.

moproblems99Here's the problem, there is no objective quality in video games. Quality is purely subjective in video games. How do you define beautiful? It's akin to asking what purple taste like.

Almost nothing is purely subjective, and videogames are one of the most distant things from subjective. Like movies, and music too. Your experience about them increase the more you play or watch or listen to, and your standard changes the more you do.

oxidizedOh i was alive, and one of the best part was exactly the beginning of those decades you mention.

"everybody and everything needs to be labeled and grouped so one can feel part of something"

Exactly this.



Almost nothing is purely subjective, and videogames are one of the most distant things from subjective. Like movies, and music too. Your experience about them increase the more you play or watch or listen to, and your standard changes the more you do.

Game enjoyment is mostly a subjective thing. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you are saying about games being one of the most distant things from subjective.

64KGame enjoyment is mostly a subjective thing. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you are saying about games being one of the most distant things from subjective.

That's why i talk about quality, and not enjoyment.
Well actually, even enjoyment is something that has standards and can be built up with the years of experience. There's more possibility that a person who has a short history of videogaming (both in quantity and in quality) finds enjoyable a game another person with a longer history in it. Seems pretty logical.

64KGame enjoyment is mostly a subjective thing. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you are saying about games being one of the most distant things from subjective.

You’re right. It’s totally subjective. Just as whether a game is “low quality” or not is subjective. I feel sorry for him because apparently he has no idea how to immerse himself and have fun in nearly any game, whether people label it bad or not. It must be tough for him deciding what a true gamer is (because there is only his definition, not an accepted one), and what is a low quality game or high quality. With his knowledge level he should be head of one singular Game Quality Rating Agency.

oxidizedAlmost nothing is purely subjective, and videogames are one of the most distant things from subjective.

Please tell me how you can repeatably measure quality in a video game? With numbers.

rtwjunkieYou’re right. It’s totally subjective. Just as whether a game is “low quality” or not is subjective. I feel sorry for him because apparently he has no idea how to immerse himself and have fun in nearly any game, whether people label it bad or not. It must be tough for him deciding what a true gamer is (because there is only his definition, not an accepted one), and what is a low quality game or high quality. With his knowledge level he should be head of one singular Game Quality Rating Agency.

I don't need any more proof from you honestly, you confirmed my thoughts were right 100%

moproblems99Please tell me how you can repeatably measure quality in a video game? With numbers.

No numbers for that, i'm sorry.


It's pretty easy to excuse everything we do only with Taste isn't it?

@oxidized You are now reaching the level of trolling this guy. rtwjunkie isn't a casual. You just don't know his history with gaming and discussion about games from him.

oxidizedI don't need any more proof from you honestly, you confirmed my thoughts were right 100%

It’s sad that you are so uptight you are unable to just enjoy yourself and that you feel the need to label people. I’m very secure in myself from my education, work accomplishments, raising 2 boys, and reaching all my life goals early enough that early retirement is in the cards. And through it all I have games for over two decades.

So you go on continuing to be insecure and labeling people (because that is what insecurity breeds) and missing out on some very fun games just because a “true gamer” spends half their time apparently being analytical about what store/launcher they come from.

I’m done here because there is more to life than letting someone troll me because I enjoy gaming.

64K@oxidized You are now reaching the level of trolling this guy. rtwjunkie isn't a casual. You just don't know his history with gaming and discussion about games from him.

It would be even easier if i was.

rtwjunkieIt’s sad that you are so uptight you are unable to just enjoy yourself and that you feel the need to label people. I’m very secure in myself from my education, work accomplishments, raising 2 boys, and reaching all my life goals early enough that early retirement is in the cards. And through it all I have games for over two decades.

And what has this got to do with the argument? Have i ever questioned this?

I'm not insecure, if i was i wouldn't be talking like this. Yes he does if he truly cares, i let the "having fun only" casual to you, i've had my share of it in the beginning, now i've moved up.

Oh, the guy who plays EA titles and claims to not support the company that way.

Vayra86What dó they have? We know about the featureset difference, but other than that?

Ergo, they offer more, nice of you to actually say what I said and reffered to. Probably should skip all the rest of what you wrote afterwards as it is already irrelevant after your first 2 sentences, since afterall you just said that Steam offers more tahn EGS... But what the hell.

The games on offer are not at all representative of the entire marketplace like it used to be at some point a few years ago. They're missing a large part of the market. Blizzard/Activision, Ubisoft and EA most notably are best not accessed through Steam. Its double DRM and it has historically been plagued by problems. Its 'OK' these days, but preferable for sure it is not. Not in the least because these publishers also don't use the additional features like Workshop etc.

Another thing Steam dóes have is a large percentage of the products on offer being complete and utter junk. Not even budget bin material, but rather some middle school project of some random dude practicing with level editors. Then, one level higher than that you have the countless indie devs ripping off assets left and right to assemble something capable of tricking gullible young people into a purchase. They call that early access, and Greenlight. How did that work out again? ;) Even today you need serious experience and a very good bullshit sensor to avoid the early access titles that are not going to go anywhere anytime soon. Steam/Valve doesn't curate much, even when it was too late their response was questionable at best, there are many examples of it.

So you disagree with the fact that Steam has the widest offering of games on the market? You realize you are trying to disagree with facts, right?

So Steam provides a platform for potential new developers to show up on the market while EGS offers... what exactly in that regard? Seems like its another case of "Steam has that feature and EGS doesnt, steam bad".
Just because alot of people create garbage, does not mean there are no gems to be found. You can say the same about mobile market aswell. Ton of garbage apps out there and yet there are plenty of good ones aswell and plenty of developers got to earn money/jump start their carreers thanks to it. Steam workshop is another one of such features... Unknown artists from earning nothing went to work for valve and have 200 000$+ per year thanks to it.

Also you are reffering to other companies with their own launchers for THEIR OWN GAMES. Do you even read a post before replying, or do you instantly decide to disagree and then just bable whatever comes to your mind?
I specifically wrote that if epic wanted to keep their games on their platform that is fine, problem is, they dont do that, they bribe independent developers to get their games on their garbo soft and hurt the market in the process. Who loses out cause of it? oh right, us...

Exactly that is what's tricky about it. EGS has support just like Steam does, they are required by law. The refund policy is the same, even. And you're right - just because your personal experience with EGS was mostly negative, that does not mean it is bad in general. There is indeed nothing to discuss, so just don't. You have no knowledge on the quality of support on either platform apart from your N=1 experience.

Where did i wrote anything about MY experience with EGS support? I was replying to logic of "my personal experience with steam support was bad so its shit in general" by saying what my experience was with steam support and hence showing how irrelevant those type of statements are since they are personal experiences. Also support is quite general, does not necesarilly means Atmanand on a phone line 24/7.

Ah yes, and war was created by the gun manufacturers. Sound logic!

This analogy is supposed to be logical?
Firstly, wars predate guns, just in case you don't realize that (considering that "sound logic" of yours and extreme inability to interpret things you are actually reading, that very well might be the case). Secondly, weaponry (that also predates guns) was first created to hunt and protect yourself. In fact the first actual weapon created by humans was a spear. I don't need to say what type of weapon it is right? Or I better do, defensive, defensive weapon. A sharpened stick to keep dangerous things at bay or be able to kill dangerous animals for food without getting hurt...
Can you please tell me, how does that apply in any way, shape or form to shady company forcing you to use garbage software through exclusive titles while telling you its for your own good and that you should thank them. I really would like to know cause I personally see literally no conection between the two, but since you are the logical one here, enlighten me please.

Look at what GoG did. They had a goal of removing DRM from as many games as they can and bring as many old games to modern operating systems as they can. Sound goal. Do you see them trying to shove anything into anyone's mouth? No, they do good work and their project grows and grows.
Do you know who owns GoG? CdProjekt. They also own CDProjektRED. Was Witcher 3 some ultra exclusive title only to their own store? No, they could have made it so, hell, their profits from W3 would be even higher that way, but they did not. They left the choice to customers.
See the difference between good company practices where they actually want to impact the market in some sensible way and shit company who instantly shows they only want $$$ and try to disguise it as doing something for our own good?

Tell me now, what is not 'exclusive' about demanding content releases on Steam and Steam alone? Preferring that one store to the extent of excluding another is the exact same exclusivity. It is one you impose upon yourself as an individual. Store exclusivity is not an end-user exclusivity at all, unless you want it to be. Access to either storefront is free of charge.

Steam alone? I am sorry, where did I write anything like that? Please quote me, cause from what i recall i wrote in my first post in this news that if epic wants to compete with steam, they should offer good piece of software that would sway people to use it by choice instead of forcing them to use bad software cause of exlusives. Unless of course you are trying to make extreme argument, insinuating that i support it, ergo, put words into my mouth and claim they are mine. I've never said I want monopoly of any store on the market(In fact I've never seen anyone ever saying they want ie. Steam to be the only platform providing games), in fact I think I even wrote I am all for competition, cause from company competition only 1 group benefits, customers. However I DO NOT SUPPORT IN ANY WAY what Epic is doing with exclusivity bribes. I even compered it to console exclusivity to present who actually loses out on exclusivity. I suggest you read and most importantly, understand, my posts before replying.

By the way, did you notice that EGS also managed to get several console exclusives (real exclusives) to the PC platform? If you're all about gaming, that is something to applaud. That is a tangible, real reduction of exclusivity for a customer, however small.

No I did not, if they did, kudos to them, but if they continue on pushing exlusivity with their store, then all of it is for naught. So its already several - 3, so I hope several in this case is more like 10+ rather than 4.
Did they also made those console exlusives not be exclusive on other consoles? Somehow i doubt that, but I would love to be proven wrong as I sincerely would like to have every game be available on every platform.

If you take a step back and judge this at face value, can you seriously not see the irony of your statements? The very same applies on the other side of the fence, there is absolutely no difference whatsoever. Its just preference, and its easy to prefer Steam because of its quality of life features. Thát is what's going on here. Everything else is just trying to argue and hide that truth. People have to get out of their comfort zone to get a product they actually wanted to buy and that gets people all worked up. And guess what, if you like to wait a half year or a year and get your game on Steam, power to you. Thát is how the marketplace really works.

What irony? That I disagree with exclusivity as (again) customers lose out on it and only companies benefit from it? Where is irony in that? Unless ofc in your mind I want to have every game on Steam and Steam alone... If that was the case then yeah, I would see the irony... but then again, I never said I wanted singular store monopoly, so there is that...

Forgetting all the shady stuff around epic that kept popping up over the years. If Epic can create equally good piece of software to compete with any other store on the market, or well, Steam, since Steam is the market leader(even you agree about way richer featureset here) and then they show it to public and are like"Hey guys, look, we created this amazing thing, we would love for you to check it out" instead of "Hey guys, we created this garbage, it is crap compared to our competition, but we got exclusive deals, so if you want [insert game name] on release, you have to use this shit store, cool right? O also, it is for your own good, cause Steam is bad and is hurting the market" (market, that btw, Steam in big part built to begin with) then I would not say a word.
So again I am asking, do you decide to disagree before reading anything and then just follow through on your decision, or do you have problems understanding what you are reading?
Read the first post I've made in this news post, maybe it will enlighten you what I dislike about Epic. If you disagree with spyware part, that is fine, but I, for one, do not belive in coincidences and if one company hits the news multiple times for its "spying" I am never gonna trust that company.

Also, my store of choice is GoG, not Steam.
I do not care which store is the most popular and which one is not. I am gonna chose the best option for me. If i want to buy a game I want to buy it from a store I PICKED, not a store a company I distrust chose for me and told me it is for my own good.
If nVidia wanted to release a new gpu but would say "for the first 6 months you can only buy it at XYZ store and nowhere else", would you say that is alright? Or would you rather pick the store you want to buy the product from? I prefer the latter and so does every single person who is against exclusivity bribes of Epic. Can't say it any clearer for you to understand at this point...

oxidizedI'm not throwing around anything, i'm just naming stuff with the appropriate word, if you felt that, i'm sorry but it wasn't meant as i already said. I've already explained why you're a casual gamer, not high quality standard, not interested in who sells you the game and how, not interested in their practices good or bad, you're only interested in the final product and not anymore, and that's what makes you a casual gamer, you said it yourself multiple times, and even in this post here "My position here, that I dont care who sells it, because that doesn’t impact my enjoyment IN THE GAME" and that's exactly why i said that fun isn't the only important thing, because you're not going to have much fun in all games, but it doesn't mean that they're not good products basically. For example take cuphead, it's not an insanely fun game, i mean it's ok, but it's not only that, it's the rest that makes the game great, the artwork, the OST, the gameplay style and most of its bosses/enemies.

"Crafted" keep in mind i'm not a native english speaker, and i used that word because that what came to my mind at that point.

The thing is very simple, Assassin's creed is a low quality game, and it has been for years now, and they're mostly enjoyed by casual gamers (because they find it fun), and young people. That one reason i've been saying your tastes are those of a casual gamer, of course you're free to like it, i'm not here to deny any of that to anyone, anyone should be free to have fun with whatever they fit best, but talking about objective quality in general is another thing.

You do whatever you want of course, i'm saying you have to do what i say, sorry if it looked that way but again, not meant. But accept being a casual, there's nothing wrong with that.

Nah... this is not the right approach mate, sorry.

The idea that you can determine what a quality standard is supposed to be in a greater sense wrt games and its platform, is bonkers. And the reason it is so off is because of what you say and the way you say it. It only confirms you have no idea even of the definition of casual or experienced.

If you really know gaming you'd say that there is a wide variety of games with very specific qualities that may or may not work for a person at a specific point in time. It has nothing to do with 'casual or not' whether you can appreciate a good game. Almost everyone can appreciate a good game, as long as they understand the game. For most people when they meet a product of great quality, they recognize it.

On a deeper level, if you know gaming well, you have learned to recognize the very specific qualities of almost every little niche gaming has to offer. And let me enlighten you: that is exactly what @rtwjunkie is so damn good at. You should take a long look at his post history and the extremely wide variety of games he's played. I can only have respect for being so open minded. I know I can't play a lot of the stuff he does. Not because I can't - but because I simply lose interest.

Casual or not is about having gained an understanding of things or not. Its the same with music. True adepts in audio/musical performances can appreciate a very wide variety of styles, they can hear the difference between a skillful artist and an 'easy' one that copies every trick in the book.

Just as well, the platform 'quality' I think we all agree on is objectively lower on the EGS side. But this is simply a question of whether the bare necessities are met - for you personally as a customer. For me the necessities of a store are very simple: must have 2FA, must have several valid payment methods, must have a simple refund policy, and must be light and simple. The rest is bonus. For me, a purchase on EGS means nothing different from one on Steam. Is that casual? I think its sensible.

DexiefyOh, the guy who plays EA titles and claims to not support the company that way.


Ergo, they offer more, nice of you to actually say what I said and reffered to. Probably should skip all the rest of what you wrote afterwards as it is already irrelevant after your first 2 sentences, since afterall you just said that Steam offers more tahn EGS... But what the hell.



So you disagree with the fact that Steam has the widest offering of games on the market? You realize you are trying to disagree with facts, right?

So Steam provides a platform for potential new developers to show up on the market while EGS offers... what exactly in that regard? Seems like its another case of "Steam has that feature and EGS doesnt, steam bad".
Just because alot of people create garbage, does not mean there are no gems to be found. You can say the same about mobile market aswell. Ton of garbage apps out there and yet there are plenty of good ones aswell and plenty of developers got to earn money/jump start their carreers thanks to it. Steam workshop is another one of such features... Unknown artists from earning nothing went to work for valve and have 200 000$+ per year thanks to it.

Also you are reffering to other companies with their own launchers for THEIR OWN GAMES. Do you even read a post before replying, or do you instantly decide to disagree and then just bable whatever comes to your mind?
I specifically wrote that if epic wanted to keep their games on their platform that is fine, problem is, they dont do that, they bribe independent developers to get their games on their garbo soft and hurt the market in the process. Who loses out cause of it? oh right, us...

Where did i wrote anything about MY experience with EGS support? I was replying to logic of "my personal experience with steam support was bad so its shit in general" by saying what my experience was with steam support and hence showing how irrelevant those type of statements are since they are personal experiences. Also support is quite general, does not necesarilly means Atmanand on a phone line 24/7.



This analogy is supposed to be logical?
Firstly, wars predate guns, just in case you don't realize that (considering that "sound logic" of yours and extreme inability to interpret things you are actually reading, that very well might be the case). Secondly, weaponry (that also predates guns) was first created to hunt and protect yourself. In fact the first actual weapon created by humans was a spear. I don't need to say what type of weapon it is right? Or I better do, defensive, defensive weapon. A sharpened stick to keep dangerous things at bay or be able to kill dangerous animals for food without getting hurt...
Can you please tell me, how does that apply in any way, shape or form to shady company forcing you to use garbage software through exclusive titles while telling you its for your own good and that you should thank them. I really would like to know cause I personally see literally no conection between the two, but since you are the logical one here, enlighten me please.

Look at what GoG did. They had a goal of removing DRM from as many games as they can and bring as many old games to modern operating systems as they can. Sound goal. Do you see them trying to shove anything into anyone's mouth? No, they do good work and their project grows and grows.
Do you know who owns GoG? CdProjekt. They also own CDProjektRED. Was Witcher 3 some ultra exclusive title only to their own store? No, they could have made it so, hell, their profits from W3 would be even higher that way, but they did not. They left the choice to customers.
See the difference between good company practices where they actually want to impact the market in some sensible way and shit company who instantly shows they only want $$$ and try to disguise it as doing something for our own good?



Steam alone? I am sorry, where did I write anything like that? Please quote me, cause from what i recall i wrote in my first post in this news that if epic wants to compete with steam, they should offer good piece of software that would sway people to use it by choice instead of forcing them to use bad software cause of exlusives. Unless of course you are trying to make extreme argument, insinuating that i support it, ergo, put words into my mouth and claim they are mine. I've never said I want monopoly of any store on the market(In fact I've never seen anyone ever saying they want ie. Steam to be the only platform providing games), in fact I think I even wrote I am all for competition, cause from company competition only 1 group benefits, customers. However I DO NOT SUPPORT IN ANY WAY what Epic is doing with exclusivity bribes. I even compered it to console exclusivity to present who actually loses out on exclusivity. I suggest you read and most importantly, understand, my posts before replying.

No I did not, if they did, kudos to them, but if they continue on pushing exlusivity with their store, then all of it is for naught. So its already several - 3, so I hope several in this case is more like 10+ rather than 4.
Did they also made those console exlusives not be exclusive on other consoles? Somehow i doubt that, but I would love to be proven wrong as I sincerely would like to have every game be available on every platform.


What irony? That I disagree with exclusivity as (again) customers lose out on it and only companies benefit from it? Where is irony in that? Unless ofc in your mind I want to have every game on Steam and Steam alone... If that was the case then yeah, I would see the irony... but then again, I never said I wanted singular store monopoly, so there is that...

Forgetting all the shady stuff around epic that kept popping up over the years. If Epic can create equally good piece of software to compete with any other store on the market, or well, Steam, since Steam is the market leader(even you agree about way richer featureset here) and then they show it to public and are like"Hey guys, look, we created this amazing thing, we would love for you to check it out" instead of "Hey guys, we created this garbage, it is crap compared to our competition, but we got exclusive deals, so if you want [insert game name] on release, you have to use this shit store, cool right? O also, it is for your own good, cause Steam is bad and is hurting the market" (market, that btw, Steam in big part built to begin with) then I would not say a word.
So again I am asking, do you decide to disagree before reading anything and then just follow through on your decision, or do you have problems understanding what you are reading?
Read the first post I've made in this news post, maybe it will enlighten you what I dislike about Epic. If you disagree with spyware part, that is fine, but I, for one, do not belive in coincidences and if one company hits the news multiple times for its "spying" I am never gonna trust that company.

Also, my store of choice is GoG, not Steam.
I do not care which store is the most popular and which one is not. I am gonna chose the best option for me. If i want to buy a game I want to buy it from a store I PICKED, not a store a company I distrust chose for me and told me it is for my own good.
If nVidia wanted to release a new gpu but would say "for the first 6 months you can only buy it at XYZ store and nowhere else", would you say that is alright? Or would you rather pick the store you want to buy the product from? I prefer the latter and so does every single person who is against exclusivity bribes of Epic. Can't say it any clearer for you to understand at this point...

Its simple - you make your choice as a customer and that is fine. The whole argumentation behind it though, is flawed in several ways. I hoped and tried to explain this so you could see that, but this nuance is lost on you, its too bad.

What do Steam,Uplay,Origin,GoG offer me in a platform over EGS? LOTS
What does Epics 12% revenue split offer me as a Consumer? NOTHING. Games not any cheaper.
What does Epic exclusivity offer me as consumer? Again, NOTHING except forcing me to use EGS and back to point 1.

INSTG8RWhat does Epics 12% revenue split offer me as a Consumer? NOTHING. Games not any cheaper.
What does Epic exclusivity offer me as consumer? Again, NOTHING except forcing me to use EGS and back to point 1.

Theoretically games should be more polished and/or have more content but that takes time to bare fruit.

FordGT90ConceptTheoretically games should be more polished and/or have more content but that takes time to bare fruit.

Sorry? You’re believing trickle down economics is gonna work for games now too? Publishers are taking the cut here, devs not so much...
We’re already in an age of huge Day 1 patches because publishers forcing Devs to out products ready or not to meet financial quarters and deadlines. This will not change because of some “discount” revenue split nor can Epic or any other platform offer that “discount” forever either.
Tim Sweeney is no White Knight here. He just wants more people on his Fortnite Launcher before the Fortnite money dries up.

INSTG8RSorry? You’re believing trickle down economics is gonna work for games now too? Publishers are taking the cut here, devs not so much...
We’re already in an age of huge Day 1 patches because publishers forcing Devs to out products ready or not to meet financial quarters and deadlines. This will not change because of some “discount” revenue split nor can Epic or any other platform offer that “discount” forever either.
Tim Sweeney is no White Knight here. He just wants more people on his Fortnite Launcher before the Fortnite money dries up.

I don't think everyone sees these deals Epic keeps making and the low 12% cut as temporary but even Sweeney has said they can't do the exclusives forever and I don't think he will keep the 12% cut for too much longer either. Some are saying that this is good for Developers but as you said it's the Publishers that make the money. Whether or not they put some of that money saved from the lower EGS cut towards developing better games or just pocket the money remains to be seen.

INSTG8RSorry? You’re believing trickle down economics is gonna work for games now too? Publishers are taking the cut here, devs not so much...
We’re already in an age of huge Day 1 patches because publishers forcing Devs to out products ready or not to meet financial quarters and deadlines. This will not change because of some “discount” revenue split nor can Epic or any other platform offer that “discount” forever either.
Tim Sweeney is no White Knight here. He just wants more people on his Fortnite Launcher before the Fortnite money dries up.

You're forgetting a lot of these games that signed exclusives are self-published like Rebel Galaxy Outlaw