I was with you right until you suggested that people spending their money should be “on-board” with Epic Games.

This is kind of a bummer to read. Splinter and the (former) Gizmodo wants to be all about consumer rights and protecting workers.

I said everything I needed or wanted to say about the entitlement that informs EGS rage (and no, I’m not an EGS fan—but come the fuck on) in the previous story on Ooblets.

The only thing I feel a need to add at this point is: if a person’s argument in defense of issuing death threats/sexist epithets/mocked-up photos…

Oh look. Another Kotaku article that lists all the things they see as wrong with Valve/Steam yet glosses over anything wrong with Epic or the EGS. No mention at all about how Epic treats their employees as far as “crunch” goes since Fortnite got popular even though Kotaku loves pointing out that issue with every other…

I dont want to pay money and give my information to an unproven unserviced 3rd party. Beyond that I dont want to support epic and pay money to epic. I should be free to choose where I want to buy something same way your free to choose where you shop for groceries it's a grossly simple concept.

Demonic presence in unsafe level
Rendered in unity

Chell wins!

That’s over simplifying things. Many would like to earn it in game, but also have the game respect the players time. Not everyone can spend multiple hours a day grinding RNG just hoping to get the item you want for a particular character.

People want to be able to play the game and unlock the tings they want, but want the amount of time to exist in some reasonable realm, the method for unlocking to be mostly deterministic, the ability to unlock not to be gated by some “event schedule”, want grinding to be contained on games built around grinding, and…

Essentially admitting that exclusivity deals are due to some pissing match between them and Valve rather than being anywhere near an attempt at being pro-consumer.

The “trickle down” argument is a flimsy excuse to rally behind EGS (or any other platform) when you specifically want to see Steam fail. Some people are deeply offended by Valve’s hands-off approach to moderation and curation and they want to see them punished for it. They view EGS as this punishment and even if it is…

I’d like to add my voice to those who have said that I’m comfortable waiting until titles like BL3 are on Steam.

Parasitic take? The 70% the publisher gets from Valve is comparable to what publishers get back on console sales. And Valve did lower their take on games that reach certain sales numbers.

Going to be speaking with my money (and it is the only thing 2K cares about) by not buying BL3 until 2020 (if at all).

As for Valve, all it has to do is lower its parasitic take.

Developers don’t get an extra %18. The publisher gets an additional 18%. Borderlands 3 is published by 2k games, that is one of the two subsidiary companies of it’s parent holding company, Take2 interactive. Guess what other games are under the Take2 umbrella. Most notably GTA, RDR, and the 2k sports franchises.

Why does nobody seem to understand it’s not always 18% more.  Steam has tiered rates too, if you sell enough copies Valve’s cut goes down. 

I mean, there’s a ton of stuff. Account security. More launchers. Existing friend networks. Feature set. Price competition from authorized key resellers.

Every argument I seem to see for EGS either a)says that since that person doesn’t care about those things, no one else does or can; b)has vague promises about…

Fighting with honour is about finding like minded competition and says more about yourself than it does about your competition (in a good way IMO though few will recognize it)

It’s stuff like this that prevents me from entering a competitive environment in any game.

I have, for many years, maintained the truism that fighting with honor creates only a moral obligation to lose. If you cannot sort a route around your opponent’s tactics, that’s on you.  So long as the play was within established…