540°

Gearbox boss: 'Bitch and moan' if you want, but the Epic Store is best for Borderlands 3

Randy Pitchford explained in a long tweetstorm why he believes the future does not belong to Steam.

PapaBop1870d ago

"blah blah blah.. oh $$$$$$$ blah blah blah umm ahhh, umm CROSSPLATFORM"

Totally sold, who needs consumer choice, the future is great, magical and EPIC /s

Avernus1870d ago

I don't really care too much about this issue personally, but it's funny you bring up consumer choice as an argument against it when Steam basically had a monopoly.

MrBitch1870d ago

Steam didn't have a monopoly, steam games were available to any platform that was willing to compete, steam didn't buy games rights to publish. Just because no one wanted to compete doesn't make them a monopoly.

sinspirit1870d ago

You clearly don't know what a monopoly is. Steam made no efforts to control the market and prevent competition. It's just a great service without any catch. Customers gave it all the success it deserves.

Epic has a boring, featureless, and compromising client which has had many security breaches and continues to fail customers. The client is not right for customers. If developers want more money then they should just release the game standalone like back in the day and get all of the cut instead of launch on a bad client

Hungryalpaca1870d ago

You don’t know what a monopoly is. Steam wasn’t the only place selling the games. The developers had numerous storefronts to choose from and steam never barred anyone from other stores. Steam was and still is the best option for everyone.

PapaBop1870d ago

Steam had it's rocky beginnings for it's own reasons too but it's an apples and oranges argument, any perceived monopoly Steam had was due to Valve being one of the first gaming companies to offer a digital store.

WombBat1870d ago

Steam is the greedy one, they take 30%...

Jaypi031870d ago

Steam isn't a monopoly though, it's the most popular platform but it's not a monopoly, that's not even how monopolies work, just because you say it's "basically" a monopoly doesn't mean it is. There's still competition for Steam, sure not as popular as Steam, but still competition, Humble Bundle, GOG, U-Play, Origin, and even piracy.

McDonalds is the biggest fast food place in the world, but it's still not a monopoly.

sinspirit1870d ago

@WombBat

Okay. Take this for example. The whole industry takes 30%. Even retail takes a cut on top of console manufacturers getting 30% for releasing on their console. You are a free service that gives users and developers tons of tools and capabilities that no one else does. These developers also bypass fees that retailers would have taken by using Steam. Steam is great for developers and consumers.

Now, imagine a company releases a featureless security flawed service that can't keep themselves afloat and stay consistently updated and serviced at a 12% developer fee, while throwing cash at them for timed exclusivity, and is basically a flex to shoehorn into being a known marketplace by blending money because their super rich partner told them to try. Would you actually cut your fee on a consistently great service that makes the effort to do right for developers(given the fee) and consumers alike? Who really decides who wins? The consumer will. And, Steam will stay the main choice for us. Developers should just release their games standalone again jnstead of using a crappy launcher and make more money per unit.

1869d ago
Kryptix1869d ago (Edited 1869d ago )

Guy, I don't think you know what a monopoly is including those who agreed with you.

Valve never forced any market that sells keys to only sell Steam keys. for example.

Your anger is misdirected. It should be aimed at the anti-consumerism of purchasing exclusivity rights to games that were announced on one platform and then switched in the last second which in effect also took marketing space.

Not only that, but making people in the last second switch to a platform/launcher that lacks security and basic features which are considered pro-consumer.

I only played Fortnite once and till this day I still get "denied access" emails of someone obviously using an automatic password generator/cracker.

I'm good.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 1869d ago
darthv721870d ago

If the game wasnt coming to PS and XB store then you may have a point but as it is there will still be consumer choice. You can play on pc, xbox and ps4. How you obtain your copy is dependent on which platform you want to use.

PapaBop1870d ago

By that logic, Gamestop for example could obtain the exclusive rights to sell the Xbox copy but that wouldn't be impacting consumer choice because consumers could pick it up on a different platform instead. You are right though, I'll be getting it on PS4.

jeki1869d ago

You have several choices: buy the game when it's released at the Epic Store, wait for it to release at Valve Corporation's Steam store, or don't buy it at all.

rainslacker1869d ago

Developers and publishers have choice to. While I often don't side with the dev or pub at the expense of consumer choice, in this case, about the only thing the consumer is losing is the ability to choose which store to buy it from. The price is going to remain the same for the customer, and the customer won't be excluded from playing it on their PC platform, so the situation isn't completely anti-consumer. It's about akin to some companies only selling their products at certain retailers, often with regional non-compete agreements so that company has an advantage. In those cases, the prices are usually fixed by the manufacturer to, so the customer doesn't gain much benefit outside of where they may prefer to shop.

jojo3191869d ago

It's actually more of an oligopoly than a true monopoly.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1869d ago
PapaBop1870d ago

Well he isn't nicknamed Randy Bitchford for nothing.

rainslacker1869d ago

He's also pretty shady in general.

VTKC1870d ago

Bitch and moan? We will see who be bitching and moaning when your product doesnt sell as well as it should. A certain company already been down that road.

1870d ago Replies(6)
1869d ago Replies(1)
1870d ago Replies(1)
Father__Merrin1870d ago

in another few years epic is likely to trunce steam. EGS will be a world wide phenomena and is likely the goto place for pc gaming

Hungryalpaca1870d ago

Why you support shitty business is beyond me.

PapaBop1870d ago

Perhaps they should have released it in a few years when it was good and ready then instead of throwing around their Fortnite money on trying to force gamers into using it.

1869d ago Replies(1)
opc1869d ago

Epic Games Store is just a store though.

Steam is Platform supported by hardware and features that has a store inside of it.

If Epic is only interested in being a store, they should probably start selling Steam keys like Humble, GMG, Amazon... because people love those stores.

rainslacker1869d ago

I dunno about trounce them, but I think they'll improve their store over time, and with enough time, people will hate them like they hate steam now. Hate, but still use. Eventually, the stores will just be two options with relatively equal features, and it may even help each store be more innovative and offer benefits for the customers.

the biggest thing I can't take seriously with all the hate towards epic's store now is that it was hate before they really did anything that was worth hating on. I do think Epic should have fleshed out the store a bit more before going all in.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1869d ago
Show all comments (115)
150°

Days Gone Director Says Bend's Project Costs Over $250M; Says PS Co-CEO Doesn't Want 2 Zombies Games

Days Gone director claims Sony has already poured in at least a $250M in Bend's project; says Days Gone sold more than Death Stranding.

shinoff218315h ago

Well that sucks. Seems they want more online trash. I'd rather of had the sequel if it was single player

MrNinosan1h ago

What online trash games did PS Studios release last 10 years?

-Foxtrot15h ago

It would be a shame if it was true that Hermen never gave the franchise a chance simply because he didn't like it and they already had a "Zombie" game with TLOU.

NaughtyDog are most likely moving onto a new IP next so it would have been the perfect time to do it.

ThinkThink7h ago

Here's where xbox steps in and releases state of decay 3 day and date on ps5.

Grilla51m ago

Days gone 2 was canceled before Herman was in charge. That happened like 4 years ago.

vfl52315m ago

4 years ago he was head of Playstation Studios. He would've probably had a hand in the cancelation.

excaliburps1h ago

Yep. Kind of weird since it wasn't a sales flop, no?

I know we have to take what Ross says with a grain of salt since we're hearing just one side of the story, but even so, the game wasn't bad at all. Heck, it's my brother's favorite last-gen game from what I recall.

The amount of zombies on screen, imagine that with the PS5 and SSD? That would be insanely fun!

Grilla48m ago

Most copies were sold on sale. Not enough ppl bought it at full price. I paid 20$ for it 6 -7 months after release.

P_Bomb1h ago

Well I don’t want 10 live service games, but they have no problem doing that lol. Ugh.

CrimsonWing6951m ago(Edited 50m ago)

Oh great so we only get what the big wigs want… y’know, the people that really have their fingers on the pulse of what their consumers want. Faaaaantastic!

200°

Former Activision studio Toys for Bob partners with Xbox to publish its first game as an indie

Former Activision studio Toys for Bob partners with Xbox to publish its first game as an indie. This is something of a homecoming, as Microsoft owns Activision.

Read Full Story >>
engadget.com
Obscure_Observer14h ago

Very very early in development. Still, fantastic news!

Let´s GO!!!

Lightning7712h ago

I guess.

How come they didnt either let them go or sell Tango and others to another publisher? Not saying Ubisoft, EA would be any better. (Capcome would of treated them right )

At least it wouldn't be MS of all ppl destroying them.

MS really should let go Tango go like they did TFB here.

darthv7211h ago(Edited 11h ago)

one was under Bethesda (Tango) the other under Activision (TFB). Clearly each one handled the separations of their subordinates differently.

Obscure_Observer11h ago(Edited 11h ago)

"How come they didnt either let them go or sell Tango and others to another publisher? Not saying Ubisoft, EA would be any better. (Capcome would of treated them right )"

Perhaps because Zenimax and ABK handles such matters differently based on their own internal policies as "independent" publishers.

Whoever, chances are it´s simply because MS didn´t wanted Tango or Austin to be acquired by competitors and develop new bangers for them, giving MS a bad rep in a possible future. Which could also be the reason why they ensured an exclusive partnership with TFB and its new game, before anyone else.

Sad and disgusting. But it is what it is.

Lightning777h ago(Edited 7h ago)

"Whoever, chances are it´s simply because MS didn´t wanted Tango or Austin to be acquired by competitors and develop new bangers for them, giving MS a bad rep in a possible future."

MS has a bad rep now because those studios are no more. I rather them sell the studio continue to make multiplatform releases, while MS continues to focus on whatever they're doing. If they didn't want Tango around they should separated from them or sell them to, like they did TFB.

It's inexcusable, they have options on how to handle studios they don't want anymore with killing jobs. Not just MS but the rest of the industry also.

Sad and disgusting sure how many will get shut down next year or this year even?

I don't trust MS decisions and motivations at this point. You have to admit they make one dumb move after another.

Obscure_Observer15m ago(Edited 15m ago)

"MS has a bad rep now because those studios are no more. I rather them sell the studio continue to make multiplatform releases, while MS continues to focus on whatever they're doing. If they didn't want Tango around they should separated from them or sell them to, like they did TFB."

Imo, MS separated from TFB because they didn´t had a game associated with Xbox yet, unlike Tango.

"I don't trust MS decisions and motivations at this point. You have to admit they make one dumb move after another."

Fair enough. It was indeed an epic dumb move from them to close Tango.

Still, all to be forgotten, like always have. This is not the first time a big publisher shuts down a beloved and/or successful studio out of nowhere and certainly won´t be the last. Do you remember Lionhead? Do you remember Evolution Studios? Yeah... both were beloved studios and yet, those companies kill those studios in q blink of an eye and got away with it.

-Foxtrot13h ago

Manages to buy their freedom especially after all the shit Microsoft has been doing with its studios lately

...

Goes right back to them as partners.

Okaaaaaay...

darthv7211h ago

Id venture a guess that TFB working directly with MS was a better outcome than working through Activision to get to MS.

VersusDMC9h ago

From the article...

"Toys for Bob spun out as an indie back in February after Microsoft instituted sweeping layoffs that impacted 86 employees, which was more than half of the staff"

I doubt those 86 employees enjoyed the Microsoft experience over Activisions.

Inverno9h ago

MS shuts down studios because of lack of resources and then helps these guys by giving em resources. Also MS is what forced them to buy their freedom in the first place? What kind of logic 😂

Chevalier6h ago

The best thing is that the company that is worth $3 trillion and owns the company instead of Xbox lacks resources. How the hell does a company worth $3 trillion making a measly $70 billion purchase they 'can't' support. Lol

Sciurus_vulgaris11h ago(Edited 11h ago)

Xbox’s gaming division seems to still function as 3 semi-autonomous sub-divisions, Xbox Studios, Bethesda and ABK. The three main sub-divisions can seemingly shut down or build studios and set up partnerships independently. This would explain why Bethesda can recently shutdown studios, while ABK spins off one studio, while building a new one. Plus, Toys for Bob could be spun off by ABK, only to immediately re-partner with Microsoft.

Chevalier6h ago

That's absolutely 💯 BS. Any sane 'autonomous' company would NOT put their games on Gamepass day 1 like COD will lose probably billions.

Also they're all under Xbox game studios so any autonomy is an illusion.

Elda6h ago

Either a kiddie game or something uninteresting.

Obscure_Observer6m ago

Don´t worry. You won´t be playing it anyway since their next game will possible be a next gen Xbox console game.

Show all comments (17)
190°

Sony shares big new PS Plus stat, but not the one we want to see

PlayStation Plus has improved the split of PS4 and PS5 players on its priciest tiers, but Sony continues to hide total subscriber numbers.

Read Full Story >>
theloadout.com
mandf17h ago

lol acting like it’s equivalent to ms numbers

Mr Logic17h ago

Uh...They're definitely not equivalent.

"Microsoft’s Xbox Game Pass service now has 34 million subscribers."

"the total number of PS Plus subscribers across all tiers was 47.4 million"

darthv7216h ago(Edited 16h ago)

That PSN number seems like it should be much higher... especially when you consider that PS4 alone has a sell through of over 117m. To not even be at least half that is rather interesting.

To the XB side, having 34m to an install base of roughly 50m (XBO sell through) or even 85m (360 sell through) is a greater percentage of unit to member ratio than PSN.

bloop13h ago

That's not the "gotcha" you think it is Darth.

darthv7212h ago

^^it's not supposed to be bloop.... it's just an interesting observation.

Einhander197210h ago

darthv72

"That PSN number seems like it should be much higher... especially when you consider that PS4 alone has a sell through of over 117m. To not even be at least half that is rather interesting.

To the XB side, having 34m to an install base of roughly 50m (XBO sell through) or even 85m (360 sell through) is a greater percentage of unit to member ratio than PSN."

Have you ever heard of a PC before? I hear they are pretty popular.

fr0sty4h ago

MS started lumping gold subscribers in with those GP numbers... keep in mind.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4h ago
shinoff218315h ago(Edited 15h ago)

What. Definitely more os plus subscribers but that makes sense due to actual console sales

Darth the difference between the bases are huge your right but you gotta think. Ps players buy more games, where as the Xbox base relies on gamepass for their gaming. So it makes perfect sense

darthv7215h ago(Edited 15h ago)

What makes perfect sense though? You say PS players buy more games... so then logically there should be more PS+ subscribers given the increased number of online multiplayer games in the PS4 generation alone. The PS4 was the first time that + was required for online play much like Gold was for 360 users.

Keep in mind we are talking subscribers, not simply XB/PS users. I assume you meant to say offline single player games, which is most likely true as well. That gen also saw a significant increase in games with an online component comparted to the previous gen.

victorMaje15h ago

I for one will be going back to essential at the next renewal. When I feel a game is good & right up my alley, I’ll check trusted reviews & just buy it.

jznrpg13h ago(Edited 13h ago)

I have the top tier until 2028 as they gave me a massive discount for all the years I had left but I’ll most likely go to essential as well. I buy my games but my kids do use the service occasionally. They do prefer to own their games as well since any game can leave the rental service at some point and they don’t like that idea. They mostly use it to demo games then ask me to buy games if they really like it.

RedDevils9h ago

For me, I will cancel it all together but unfortunately I still have it till 2030 lol

meganick13h ago

I would like to see Sony add a fourth tier of PS Plus for people who just want to be able to play games online without any of the perks like monthly games, store discounts, or anything like that, and it should cost $20 annually, $30 maximum. There’s no way I’m paying $80 just to play games online. Even the original $60 fee was too much, and I would often wait for sales to re-up my subscription.

P_Bomb9h ago(Edited 9h ago)

Essential is too expensive, I agree. We’ve got one Essential and one Premium sub. Dropping the Premium when it expires.

gamerz6h ago

Just let my subscription lapse for the first time since 2010. Will sub again every now and then for a month or so to access my old ps+ games but for me it's the end of an era.

DivineHand1255h ago

Let those numbers continue to drop because it is now too expensive. $80 per year just to play online. I noticed they didn't offer any discounts on the subscription or controllers during this year's days of play for the first time in many years and they will feel it when people choose not to renew.

My subscription will lapse next month and it will stay that way until further notice.

KevtheDuff2h ago

There were savings on subs and controllers here in the UK? I bought a controller yesterday in the sale..
It would be weird if those deals were not in other territories too?