The Epic exclusive bullshit always stinks. Glad they are at least offering an option to get it from their website, even though the best solution is to release it everywhere.
this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2024
181 points (94.6% liked)
PC Gaming
8529 readers
1409 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Better than the android version of the original being a Netflix exclusive.
World of Goo - A Netflix Live Action adaptation
When will PC gaming heal and move on from Epic exclusives god damn it, didnt enough of us boycott this practice? Fuck Epic.
World of Goo 2 would not exist if Epic had not helped us fund the game!
I feel people are overlooking this.
I understand disliking Epic, but directly funding a game that needs it is much different than grabbing an already finished game and giving them money to turn it into a exclusive like they done before.
Two different practices.
I think it sucks but I don't have an issue with it. If Epic is the publisher and they choose to publish only on their own store then that's their decision. It's what every publisher, including Valve, does. To me this usually means it's a game I won't play and that's not a problem because I have so many games to play, I won't miss a handful of games.
However I will buy World of Goo 2 if for no other reason than the fact that I pirated the first game when I was poor.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Ah nice, missed that it released. Shame about the epic store limitation but nice of them to allow you to buy it from them directly. Would prefer to buy it on Steam so i can play it on my deck though
Should be very easy to install it on the Steam Deck from the website, especially as it even has a native Linux version.
That'd be neat, I'll Google to see if someone has tried it. Otherwise I'll just wait till it comes to steam, which I hope it will eventually
Just install it and add it as a non-Steam game. It's not Deck-specific, that's just how Steam works.
Its still stupid and anticompetitive that Epic is allowed to dictate where the game is sold, but at least they're letting the developer sell it on their own page now, without all of Epic's shit.
people in this thread have lost their damn minds. you can buy the game without DRM. that's better than epic or steam
Buying the game without DRM is great. But the fact that people don't have the option to buy it in any store they want is annoying, and we can thank Epic for that. Epic is poison and they earned the hate they get.
The problem isn't even that we can't buy in any store we want. Thats normal. The problem is that they're paying to prevent it from being added to other stores, because they know other stores would out-compete them. Imagine how absurd and anti-consumer it would be if Pizza Pizza could pay a peperoni producer to not sell to other pizza chains, for example.
That said, Epic did effectively fund the game from scratch, which makes this more grey area in terms of overall results, but considering Epic's history, I can see easily why people are viewing this pessimistically.
I can't think of any time in history that the public has had that ability for anything. Imagine being upset because a Ford dealership won't sell you a Toyota, or that Kohl's won't sell you some designer brand.
Not if you own a Steam Deck, or want cloud saving, or have hundreds of games and don’t want to hope you remember your login and password for this one game 10 years from now and that the website still exists, or worry about keeping a local backup of the game if you want to play it in the future.
DRM-free direct downloads are a great option, but better than Steam? That’s subjective. For me, I want all of those things I listed so a non-Steam PC game for me is a last resort, pretty much only reserved for games that I really want to play.
I don’t know why people find this so difficult to understand, I have to assume they’re being wilfully obtuse. Would you download a separate app and create an account for every song you wanted to listen to or every movie you wanted to watch? Of course not. So why would games be any different?
it's not really subjective, having a drm free download is like owning the thing, having it on steam is like borrowing it from someone fairly trustworthy, and having it on epic is like borrowing it from an asshole
you're on a decentralised, federated social media website. why are you arguing that more centralisation is a good thing? the comparison you're making is nonsense. you don't need to download an app or sign up for an account to listen to music drm free or to play drm free copies of games. you download the thing at the point of purchase and then you own it and you can do whatever you want with it. and that includes launching it from steam, which I do with a lot of my drm free games
you're on a decentralised, federated social media website. why are you arguing that more centralisation is a good thing?
The same reason people gave up piracy for Netflix a decade back; it offered a better service.
Note: I know what Netflix is like now. But my point still stands.
It’s subjective or we wouldn’t be arguing about it would we? Maintaining my own backup of downloaded DRM free games not offered through a service is not a benefit to me, it’s an inconvenience. I already explained why, and what the benefits are.
You don’t need an account to listen to DRM free music or movies, true. But if you delete them either on purpose or because of data loss, you have to go get them again should you want them. Which means digging through emails or accounts or backup drives to get your copies again. That’s not worth it to me, I prefer being able to set up Steam and just go, delete games and redownload them as needed in a click.
People are on Lemmy for lots of different reasons, you shouldn’t assume that the primary reason anyone is here is because they deeply care about free software or decentralization. I’m here because Reddit banned 3rd party clients and I hate their app, same reason I’m on Mastodon.
Can you not add non-Steam games to a steam deck? It's DRM free so the idea for most of concerns you have is to back it up yourself since you can.
You can. I have some emulators of various origins on mine. They all launch from the steam application also.
You can, but it requires going through the desktop interface to install them, if they use another launcher you have to set up that, frequently some trial and error, and then adding them into the Steam interface so they can launch easily with proper input support.
Do all that and set them up correctly, and they’ll run, but without one of the primary Steam Deck benefits which is that Valve does pre-compilation of shaders. That only works for native Steam titles, and it can be the difference between a game being playable and a stuttery mess, especially for more graphically intense titles.
For some games, there are also hardcoded patches in Proton that look for the SteamID of the game to apply them. Those also won’t have those fixes applied when adding them as non-Steam games.
requires going through the desktop interface to install them, if they use another launcher you have to set up that, frequently some trial and error
Valve does pre-compilation of shaders. That only works for native Steam titles, and it can be the difference between a game being playable and a stuttery mess, especially for more graphically intense titles
there are also hardcoded patches in Proton that look for the SteamID of the game to apply them. Those also won’t have those fixes applied when adding them as non-Steam games.
How is any of this the fault of the World of Goo devs? How come Valve shouldn't be expected to implement features to make these things simpler/work?
Because they have a very simple solution: offer their game through their storefront. Why is it Valve’s problem that the World of Goo developers want to forgo their popular storefront because they partnered with a company that forbids it as a requirement of funding?
The real answer of course is that nobody is obligated to help the other with their product. The issue comes down to consumers and what they want to support. I think Valve is being perfectly fair here and Epic is not. The Steam Deck is an open system, if Epic wanted to build a storefront for it, they could. They choose not to, because they don’t want to promote Steam Deck sales.
Isn’t it funny that the “run your own marketplace and keep all revenue” option that Epic took Apple to court over is already available on the Steam Deck from Day 1 and Epic chooses not to take advantage of it. It’s almost like company using a pile of cash to artificially tip the scales in their favour is perfectly fine as long as its them.
Everyone made their business choices here, and they have to live with the consequences.
load more comments
(2 replies)
But I want to play it on my heavy computer that's strapped to my face and sprays pixels into my eyeballs.
Does the dev not like VR?
The dev has quite the history of being... How do I say it... Butthurt.
They made a claim that 90% of the game was pirated. Something they just pulled out of their ass. The initial FAQ was very aggressive too.
I liked WoG, but this dev is yet another example of someone who should just shut the fuck up and quit damaging the company and hard work done by the team.
Took the Epic money, loose my sale. World of Goo 1 was awesome. Much disappointment.
While I do agree that it's disappointing that the game is available on Epic and not Steam (and Tim Sweeney is an assface for shitting on Linux), I'm of the opinion that this situation isn't one that should warrant boycotting. I think being able to buy directly from the developers and have a maximum percentage of the revenue go straight to the studio is the best case.
It's an inconvenience to have to manually add the game to the launcher/platform of choice, but it's such a minor inconvenience to deal with given the outcome.
I understand and sympathize with the principle your expressing. However, I think it's important to be open-minded and ultimately in support of the devs themselves over the platforms that distribute their game.
You can buy from website and Tim Sweeny don't get a single ¢. If giving money to Valve is your other issue, you can also try ask for Gaben's bank account and put there an additional fee as cutshare for your purchase.
Epic fuckers don't get my money
Many great games has failed just because they took the Epic's Exclusive money upfront. When will they learn?
I don't even care if it's free on Epic. Exclusive should not be existed in gaming no matter shapes or forms.
This would bother me if I couldn't just shove the inside sake purchase in my steam. I sure AF ain't buying through Epic.
My favorite part of the original was the music. Kyle Gabler killed it. I still have three songs on my playlist.
My favorite part was the shitty cash grab mobile port.
It seems to me that the real reason people are upset is that they don't want to accept that the devs of games they like willingly accepted the money. As if Epic forced them.
First game was very addictive and I spent many days trying to figure out how to solve some maps.
This is a given buy for me.
Torn between supporting devs not using launchers and supporting devs using Epic
load more comments
(2 replies)
view more: next ›