Fender178:

Epic is scum. end of story because of this exclusivity bs that they are doing. It is anti consumer which caused Steam to remove a game they had already to go for sale but had to pull out at the last second because of a deal that Epic made with the developer. It seems like Epic is greedy right now with the exclusivity bs they are doing.

Really getting tired of this attitude. So YOU develop and create a game. Epic turn up at YOUR door with a massive wad of cash and ask YOU to release YOUR game on their platform and the only factor is that YOU agree to allow them to sell YOUR game on their service exclusively for a period of time so who's fault is it if YOU make the decision and agree. I'll give you a small hint by highlighting the person YOU should be blaming. What is anti consumer though is the BS that these companies then give to justify their decision. If the game was actually cheaper on the store than it would have been on Steam then yeah great fine talk all the PR justifying bollocks you want about the decision, hell I would even accept we opted for Epic and opted to sell at established prices because we will make more cash and they gave us a huge sum of money, purely because they at least are being honest. I am honestly confused about this entire scenario, we have seen in the past that these game / GPU brand team ups can and have lead to games that end up performing worse when played on a PC using a rivals GPUs. Yet no one here really seems to care about the fact that money will have changed hands to get this potential massive issue for Nvidia owners to happen, that this deal could potentially result in a worse gaming experience for at least 50% of PC gamers. But agreeing to sell the game on a store that isn't Steam, a deal that when push comes to shove will have no f*cking effect on the game's performance what so ever. A deal that at worst can be classed as a minor inconvenience and folk are ready to storm 2Ks fort with their pitch forks and flaming torches. Seriously what the hell is wrong with this so called master race of gamers?

The Laughing Ma:

Really getting tired of this attitude. So YOU develop and create a game. Epic turn up at YOUR door with a massive wad of cash and ask YOU to release YOUR game on their platform and the only factor is that YOU agree to allow them to sell YOUR game on their service exclusively for a period of time so who's fault is it if YOU make the decision and agree. I'll give you a small hint by highlighting the person YOU should be blaming. What is anti consumer though is the BS that these companies then give to justify their decision. If the game was actually cheaper on the store than it would have been on Steam then yeah great fine talk all the PR justifying bollocks you want about the decision, hell I would even accept we opted for Epic and opted to sell at established prices because we will make more cash and they gave us a huge sum of money, purely because they at least are being honest. I am honestly confused about this entire scenario, we have seen in the past that these game / GPU brand team ups can and have lead to games that end up performing worse when played on a PC using a rivals GPUs. Yet no one here really seems to care about the fact that money will have changed hands to get this potential massive issue for Nvidia owners to happen, that this deal could potentially result in a worse gaming experience for at least 50% of PC gamers. But agreeing to sell the game on a store that isn't Steam, a deal that when push comes to shove will have no f*cking effect on the game's performance what so ever. A deal that at worst can be classed as a minor inconvenience and folk are ready to storm 2Ks fort with their pitch forks and flaming torches. Seriously what the hell is wrong with this so called master race of gamers?

First off there is no reason to be a jerk about it. I was just saying exclusive games are anti consumer. Yeah I know it is on the publisher/developer if the developer is the same company as the publisher as it was proven with that one game that was removed from Steam after a short selling of units to have exclusive rights with Epic. To me that should have been taken to court for some kind of contract breaching since money changed hands even though Steam refunded the money of the game.

I am not saying Gearbox is in the wrong here or AMD ... just EPIC ... for me epic has no security measure for my account . as I have said ... IT does not induce trust on my end. I see epic store as a childish little scholar trying to take on the bully . But it;s doing so by bulling him even worst . I understand that steam is greedy and they should do something about it ,, but this is not the way to stump them into submission. Metro was pirated, from my point of view because it was release on epic store. I am not saying that if it was on steam we would have seen otherwise , but MAYBE .... MAYBE on a lower scale.

IchimA:

Metro was pirated, from my point of view because it was release on epic store. I am not saying that if it was on steam we would have seen otherwise , but MAYBE .... MAYBE on a lower scale.

As steam has proven in i.e. Russia, piracy is nothing more than an issue of service. Offer better service than the warez and customers will come.

BlackZero:

Last time you walked in a store, purchased an item to find it wasn't what you were expecting, and asked for a refund, did the store keeper threaten you with court? I mean, when it comes to dealing with companies, why do people stop treating others with commonly accepted norms. In any case, It's a tender until the goods have been supplied and accepted.

I have never had that happen. All I was saying it was very underhanded what Epic and that Video game publisher did after the game was ready to be sold on Steam. That's all. I can understand why they did it. The got a last second good deal from Epic. I get that.

PhysX was amazing with BL2 and PS, i hope it can be retained in some level. What special effects AMD will bring? probably some Vega optimization.

BlackZero:

Once up on a time, games were pirated because people wanted to test or didn't have the money, and the game companies knew they had to produce good games for them to get some money back. Now, it seems, no one cares about the games, just the store features and social media reputation.

Na, games were always pirated because people could play them for free so why spend money.

Dribble:

Na, games were always pirated because people could play them for free so why spend money.

It's both reasons although some people on both sides of the argument seem to pretend like it's not. I have a friend that makes 150K+ a year that refuses to pay for movies/music/games, he pirates everything. When I was younger I used to pirate because I had no money and my parents refused to pay for anything - now that I have a job I sub to services like spotify/netflix/amazon prime - buy my games through digital stores, etc. I can't be bothered pirating anymore -- to much work.

Denial:

It's both reasons although some people on both sides of the argument seem pretend like it's not. I have a friend that makes 150K+ a year that refuses to pay for movies/music/games, he pirates everything. When I was younger I used to pirate because I had no money and my parents refused to pay for anything - now that I have a job I sub to services like spotify/netflix/amazon prime - buy my games through digital stores, etc. I can't be bothered pirating anymore -- to much work.

Well that's because they've put together a service that's effectively made it worth paying - it's easier, it works better, it's linked in with everything else, there's no threat of getting sued. If the pirating worked just as well and there were no ramifications for using it then most would still pirate. I suppose the difference between now and 20 years ago is pirating made the industry innovate - instead of trying to prevent pirating by making the item you bought very difficult to use (having to use the physical disk ever time, unavoidable copyright messages, installing low level nasties on your pc) - they've made something that just works better then the pirated version (spotify, netfix, steam).

moab600:

PhysX was amazing with BL2 and PS, i hope it can be retained in some level. What special effects AMD will bring? probably some Vega optimization.

it was never good with pre sequel, becaues it inheritted the same screwed up performance regression from pirate booty dlc of BL2.

At first I was pissed again, but then realized that all this Epic exclusives bullshit is actually saving me a quite a bit of money. Metro, Outer Worlds, this, I'd have bought all these at release, were they on steam. I won't pirate out of principle, but I sure won't hold it against the people who do. What Epic started is an absolute cancer to the the PC gaming community and I can't wrap my head how people can defend them. This is not competition, it's anti-consumerism at its worst. They do not want to compete with steam, they want TO BE steam ASAP. And since they can't offer a proper platform to attract their customers they just bribe the developers/publishers (yes, in some cases it's both). But no, I don't blame Epic alone, every developer/publisher that accept this, are consciously shitting on their fans, and they should be ashamed. As for AMD teaming up, good for them. I really liked nvidia's PhysX in BL1 & 2, and I even remember running a dedicated PhysX GPU at some point for these games alone, and it actually made a difference. If they can keep the same effects within the engine this time around, cool.

Fender178:

I have never had that happen. All I was saying it was very underhanded what Epic and that Video game publisher did after the game was ready to be sold on Steam. That's all. I can understand why they did it. The got a last second good deal from Epic. I get that.

You are right their is no need to be a jerk about it but here's the thing, that statement above shows that you still don't get it. Epic isn't the one at fault they walked up to the guys behind Metero offered them a vast sum of cash to have their game on Epic's store front exclusively and they accepted, I seriously doubt they did any funny deals or strong arm tactics that left them with no other option, they just made them an offer that was better than what anyone else could make. They could have opted not to go with Epic, they chose otherwise, so why exactly is it Epics fault? On the flip side here's a better question what has Valve done? They aren't some cash strapped mom and pop small business, they could very easily match or counter offer or do something, anything to pull developers back to them. Then again Valve has always been happy to sit back do a little as it can possibly get away with and let the community do it's job for them.

Solfaur:

What Epic started is an absolute cancer to the the PC gaming community and I can't wrap my head how people can defend them. This is not competition, it's anti-consumerism at its worst. They do not want to compete with steam, they want TO BE steam ASAP. And since they can't offer a proper platform to attract their customers they just bribe the developers/publishers (yes, in some cases it's both). But no, I don't blame Epic alone, every developer/publisher that accept this, are consciously shitting on their fans, and they should be ashamed.

Even if they developed a "proper" platform, most people would still use Steam. The idea that gamers pick stores / launchers on based on features is an illusion - most gamers use Steam simply because that's where most of their games are. This is the crux of the issue, and it explains the rationale for Epic's strategy - by offering gamers a large library of AAA games that's only available on their store, they can shift the balance and make the EGS the default store for gamers. They want to make it so that most of our games are under the EGS from now on.

We as consumers are gambling when buying into anything pre-purchase related. The store is selling something they do not have. They are assuming they will have it based on past outcomes. That is why they have no choice but to offer refunds if the item does not show up. All they are offering is a promise to fulfill the order provided the item actually materializes. There is nothing anti-consumer about exclusives. Exclusives serve the purpose to entice consumers to walk through the doors. It is designed to generate foot traffic. The fact one refuses to provide their patronage to a particular store does not make that particular store anti-consumer. The consumer is being anti-"insert store name". Consumers still have the free choice to purchase the item or not to purchase it. Just because one refuses to buy something from a particular store is not what makes a store anti-consumer. Poor performance, lack luster service, lack of services does not make a store anti-consumer. It makes it a lousy store. Just because one can get a better deal, more bang for their buck elsewhere, does not make the other places anti-consumer. Anti-consumer is furthering the well being of the business at the expense of the consumer; meaning the consumer is ultimately harming themselves by being a patron of the place.

Absolutely loved the first 2 games. Will be getting this one for sure. 2019 is looking like being the best year for gaming for quite some time.

D3M1G0D:

Even if they developed a "proper" platform, most people would still use Steam. The idea that gamers pick stores / launchers on based on features is an illusion - most gamers use Steam simply because that's where most of their games are. This is the crux of the issue, and it explains the rationale for Epic's strategy - by offering gamers a large library of AAA games that's only available on their store, they can shift the balance and make the EGS the default store for gamers. They want to make it so that most of our games are under the EGS from now on.

They would entice me more effectively if they charged less for the games then competitors and giving more to the developers/publishers. Exclusives just make me wait till its no longer exclusive, cheaper prices make me buy elsewhere.

Astyanax:

it was never good with pre sequel, becaues it inheritted the same screwed up performance regression from pirate booty dlc of BL2.

You right, this is the one thing i hate about the PhysX performance, it might get fixed in the new game if they use the new SDK properly, but they teaming with AMD...

moab600:

You right, this is the one thing i hate about the PhysX performance, it might get fixed in the new game if they use the new SDK properly, but they teaming with AMD...

I dont think physx is big of a deal like before. Maybe it will run on the CPU like in Metro Exodus with no performance cost on AMD gpus.

Aura89:

They would entice me more effectively if they charged less for the games then competitors and giving more to the developers/publishers. Exclusives just make me wait till its no longer exclusive, cheaper prices make me buy elsewhere.

That's all well and good, but I think most would prefer to wait for a Steam sale (it's when I buy most of my games). Many are also choosing to wait out the timed exclusivity period and buy it on Steam later. Like I said, most Steam users want all their games under one store - I know I do.

I just hope the next round of AMD graphic cards can complete with nvidia in the price range I look at, generally high end. I would happily buy a game from any store, as long as I could choose the game launcher of my choice to install and run the game from. I have plenty of other options to wait out 6 months for a game to be released on other retail platforms.