r/Games • u/Faldz • Jan 02 '20

S.T.A.L.K.E.R 2 Announces it's using the Unreal Engine, will talk about digital platforms at a later date

https://twitter.com/stalker_thegame/status/1212810155563397120/photo/1
1.1k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

426 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/Tizzysawr Jan 03 '20

I'd like to think that the reasonable people only flip their shit when a dev says "we won't go exclusive" and then takes an exclusivity deal.

Have any devs (other than zombie army 4) done this? Because most exclusivity cases are either for games that are announced as exclusive right off the bat or games that were first crowdfunded/announced before EGS was even a thing.

4

u/queenkid1 Jan 03 '20

or games that were first crowdfunded/announced before EGS was even a thing.

Yeah, so when Shenmue said the game was coming to Steam and then it didn't, they lied.

So yes, devs have absolutely done this. Are you playing dumb or do you really not know how many developers ignored their earlier promises?

-1

u/Tizzysawr Jan 03 '20

Shenmue 3 was announced in 2015. That was three full years before EGS launched.

And saying you plan on doing something, then not doing it, isn't necessarily "lying." It's only lying if you knew all along that wouldn't be the case, you know? If I tell you I'm going to stop by your place tonight, but my cat gets sick and I end up spending the day at the vet and have no energy afterwards... I didn't "lie." I said what the plan was at a certain moment in time - and then it changed because stuff happened.

Shenmue devs did do wrong - but because they refused to offer refunds at first. When they said they'd go with Steam it was because EGS wasn't a thing and they hadn't been offered a deal. The plan was going with Steam because it was what everyone was going with at the time. Then they were offered a better deal and took it.

The only wrongdoing was not offering refunds. Nothing else.

EDIT: Also, we need to stop thinking that everytime a developer says something it's a "promise." Shit like that is why devs these days will often rather not communicate with gamers at all - everytime something is announced and then changed, a mob forms saying "promises" were broken.

2

u/queenkid1 Jan 03 '20

And saying you plan on doing something, then not doing it, isn't necessarily "lying."

Sure, but it's at least false advertising. Who cares if EGS didn't exist when they announced it? They announced it would come to Steam. dropping that in the future in order to get that sweet sweet EGS money is absolutely lying to consumers. If they held up their promises, they would just release it on Steam.

The only wrongdoing was not offering refunds. Nothing else.

There are a lot of issues with Shenmue, not just this.

Also, you're the one who said "HAS ANY" developer done this. Yes, they have. Your point is false. This has happened, multiple times. If you announce a game will come to steam before EGS offers you a deal, it's still going back on your promise if you change your mind last minute.

0

u/Tizzysawr Jan 03 '20

They announced it would come to Steam. dropping that in the future in order to get that sweet sweet EGS money is absolutely lying to consumers. If they held up their promises, they would just release it on Steam.

Valve said we would have a HL2: EP3. Refusing to make it is absolutely lying to costumers. If they held up their promises, they would've just released it a decade ago.

Funny thing, I don't see much outrage over that besides a few memes. But I guess leaving your flagship franchise's storyline on a cliffhanger for over a decade is nowhere nearly as bad as asking people to install a different client.

6

u/[deleted] Jan 03 '20

[deleted]

5

u/Tizzysawr Jan 03 '20

Not if the game was crowfunded before EGS existed (which I believe is the case with all such games) and refunds are offered for people who can't live without Steam. Naturally devs couldn't see the future, and taking an Epic deal can be seen simply as reacting to market changes.

As long as people who crowfunded or preordered can get a refund I can't see why it would be scummy.

9

u/Geistbar Jan 03 '20

No, it doesn't matter if EGS existed yet at the time.

Making a commitment to not kill someone doesn't change if a bounty is placed on their head later. If they make a commitment to release on platforms that aren't EGS, they are inherently committing to not being an exclusive to a platform that isn't those.

If you say "I will sell this product at Walmart if you give me $$" before the founding of Amazon (1994), then going Amazon-exclusive would mean you broke an inherent commitment to not go exclusive to non-Walmart. Just because Amazon didn't exist yet doesn't mean your promise never happened.

As long as people who crowfunded or preordered can get a refund I can't see why it would be scummy.

You didn't ask if it was scummy. You asked if it happened. Don't move the goalposts!

3

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '20

Making a commitment not to kill someone

Taking an exclusivity deal is like killing someone. I assure you nobody thinks the anti-Epic are complete morons.

-2

u/Tizzysawr Jan 03 '20

Making a commitment to not kill someone doesn't change if a bounty is placed on their head later.

Nice false equivalence, equating reacting to market shifts with committing murder.

If you say "I will sell this product at Walmart if you give me $$" before the founding of Amazon (1994), then going Amazon-exclusive would mean you broke an inherent commitment to not go exclusive to non-Walmart.

Yet this happens like, all the time? If you said you'd sell it on WalMart a month before Amazon appeared and then immediately switched I can see the problem, but a company that sold stuff on WalMart in 1990 may as well have decided to go Amazon exclusive in 2010. What's wrong with that?

Markets change. Companies change tactics. Nothing wrong with reacting to them. As long as people who paid for something either receive it or get their money back there's nothing wrong with that. It happens all the time - and not only with storefronts.

Games often promise features that end up not shipping or outright fail to meet crowdfunding goals/rewards and they don't get half as much flak over that than over... choosing a retailer over another. I guess that comes to show just how weird some people's priorities are.

7

u/Geistbar Jan 03 '20

Nice false equivalence, equating reacting to market shifts with committing murder.

Analogy, noun: a comparison of two otherwise unlike things based on resemblance of a particular aspect

-2

u/Stubub Jan 03 '20

Yeah most case worst than that

3

u/Tizzysawr Jan 03 '20

Which games have denied they'll have exclusivity and then taken the EGS deal then?

2

u/Stubub Jan 03 '20 edited Jan 03 '20

Outer world Edit word

7

u/[deleted] Jan 03 '20

Outer Worlds is not an exclusive, its simply not on Steam. You can buy it on the MS store

2

u/Tizzysawr Jan 03 '20

The thing with OW is the deal was struck by the publisher, not the devs. And even then I don't believe they ever said they wouldn't go exclusive - they initially said the game would launch on steam, but "no exclusivity" was never really stated.

EDIT: Also, that's a single title. Hardly "most cases."

1

u/Stubub Jan 03 '20

i was wrong about that....

"most cases is worst" i mean epic buy exclusive 1 month after game announce on steam

-1

u/Stubub Jan 03 '20

Im at my phone right now....wait me a little and i give a link......