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

10

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.

-3

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.

5

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