So there I was, happily offline and gobbling up video and AAR's of Imperator before release tomorrow, and I notice I have unread chat messages. "That's weird, I haven't been on chat recently," I said to myself. "Yeah, it really is," myself said back to me.
And that's when I realized @Karoz sniped me. ME! Without merit, without reason, without provocation. Karoz locked s-foils in attack position and swept the leg like a Cobra Kai with Jedi Academy. But of course, what Karoz doesn't realize is that I have the high ground now, and they seem a little short for a stormtrooper.
I'm going to completely rock out with the double-bladed lightsaber this weekend on a total nostalgia fest. Thanks!
+12
Dr. ChaosPost nuclear nuisanceRegistered Userregular
edited April 2019
If anyone likes games like Stardew Valley but feels like they don't have enough murder, well, here ya go:
It's more sweet shinobi action as you shadow step your way around the warriors of light. I imagine even better with a buddy as you synchronize killing, but enough map awareness and you can blip around the map and get no-kill runs as well.
Thanks for letting me get my stealth on once more @vamen
I also think it has a great picture of Pixie taking a contract on my life
Sorry if this is the wrong place for it, or if it's already been mentioned. But while I'm not sold on the platform. Epic store currently has Transistor for free. And that game is far to good not to play if you haven't already.
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
I like one of the suggestions in the comments. Valve could call their bluff, offer a 12% cut for a basic level of service (since that's all Epic offers). Higher cuts for opting in to things like Cloud saves, Workshop support, etc. Then see if Epic are full of shit or not.
I like one of the suggestions in the comments. Valve could call their bluff, offer a 12% cut for a basic level of service (since that's all Epic offers). Higher cuts for opting in to things like Cloud saves, Workshop support, etc. Then see if Epic are full of shit or not.
Higher cut if your game does not include loot boxes or extra monetization methods
I like one of the suggestions in the comments. Valve could call their bluff, offer a 12% cut for a basic level of service (since that's all Epic offers). Higher cuts for opting in to things like Cloud saves, Workshop support, etc. Then see if Epic are full of shit or not.
I can see that ending up badly for Valve - publishers would take that offer, then customers would be mad at Valve for getting worse service than what they are used to all the while Valve would be getting less money. Lose-Lose for Valve.
I like one of the suggestions in the comments. Valve could call their bluff, offer a 12% cut for a basic level of service (since that's all Epic offers). Higher cuts for opting in to things like Cloud saves, Workshop support, etc. Then see if Epic are full of shit or not.
I can see that ending up badly for Valve - publishers would take that offer, then customers would be mad at Valve for getting worse service than what they are used to all the while Valve would be getting less money. Lose-Lose for Valve.
Customers are already getting that worse service from Epic for the same money.
I like one of the suggestions in the comments. Valve could call their bluff, offer a 12% cut for a basic level of service (since that's all Epic offers). Higher cuts for opting in to things like Cloud saves, Workshop support, etc. Then see if Epic are full of shit or not.
I can see that ending up badly for Valve - publishers would take that offer, then customers would be mad at Valve for getting worse service than what they are used to all the while Valve would be getting less money. Lose-Lose for Valve.
Customers are already getting that worse service from Epic for the same money.
Yes, but at least those customers aren't getting mad at Valve. Not to mention getting worse service elsewhere tends to be more palatable than getting worse service in a place where you are used to getting better service.
I like one of the suggestions in the comments. Valve could call their bluff, offer a 12% cut for a basic level of service (since that's all Epic offers). Higher cuts for opting in to things like Cloud saves, Workshop support, etc. Then see if Epic are full of shit or not.
I can see that ending up badly for Valve - publishers would take that offer, then customers would be mad at Valve for getting worse service than what they are used to all the while Valve would be getting less money. Lose-Lose for Valve.
Customers are already getting that worse service from Epic for the same money.
Yes, but at least those customers aren't getting mad at Valve. Not to mention getting worse service elsewhere tends to be more palatable than getting worse service in a place where you are used to getting better service.
No, they're not getting mad at Valve, true. (Except for the subset who already were mad at Valve, because reasons.) But apparently they've already decided that some combination of exclusive titles, supporting a different store, sticking it to Valve, or who knows what else, is absolutely worth having a significantly worse service on many levels and massive security holes, for the same money on their end.
I like one of the suggestions in the comments. Valve could call their bluff, offer a 12% cut for a basic level of service (since that's all Epic offers). Higher cuts for opting in to things like Cloud saves, Workshop support, etc. Then see if Epic are full of shit or not.
I can see that ending up badly for Valve - publishers would take that offer, then customers would be mad at Valve for getting worse service than what they are used to all the while Valve would be getting less money. Lose-Lose for Valve.
Why would people be getting worse service than they were used to because of Valve giving more money to developers?
I like one of the suggestions in the comments. Valve could call their bluff, offer a 12% cut for a basic level of service (since that's all Epic offers). Higher cuts for opting in to things like Cloud saves, Workshop support, etc. Then see if Epic are full of shit or not.
I can see that ending up badly for Valve - publishers would take that offer, then customers would be mad at Valve for getting worse service than what they are used to all the while Valve would be getting less money. Lose-Lose for Valve.
Why would people be getting worse service than they were used to because of Valve giving more money to developers?
I think Merkel is implying Valve will not tolerate a hit to their bottom line and will cut something to compensate for it.
I like one of the suggestions in the comments. Valve could call their bluff, offer a 12% cut for a basic level of service (since that's all Epic offers). Higher cuts for opting in to things like Cloud saves, Workshop support, etc. Then see if Epic are full of shit or not.
I can see that ending up badly for Valve - publishers would take that offer, then customers would be mad at Valve for getting worse service than what they are used to all the while Valve would be getting less money. Lose-Lose for Valve.
Why would people be getting worse service than they were used to because of Valve giving more money to developers?
Read Loki's quote again. Unless I'm the one misunderstanding him, he says that the 12% cut would give you same crappy levels of service Epic store has and then it would scale all the way to 30% for all the services Steam has. I can't see any way that would work out well for Steam.
I like one of the suggestions in the comments. Valve could call their bluff, offer a 12% cut for a basic level of service (since that's all Epic offers). Higher cuts for opting in to things like Cloud saves, Workshop support, etc. Then see if Epic are full of shit or not.
I can see that ending up badly for Valve - publishers would take that offer, then customers would be mad at Valve for getting worse service than what they are used to all the while Valve would be getting less money. Lose-Lose for Valve.
Why would people be getting worse service than they were used to because of Valve giving more money to developers?
The suggestion was to give developers a bigger cut but not the full valve feature platform for their game. Which I don't think would work to divide up that way. But that's why some games would have a worse experience on steam than previously.
There's a pretty good argument to be made that Steam could counter with a cut in fees on their end, but I doubt they'd go so far as to match Epic since they're already way ahead on feature/support set and install base. Will be interesting to see if they budge at all. Their initial counter was pretty anemic. Just to make things a tiny bit better for the games that sell a ton already.But that was before Epic started going hard on the exclusive deals. It may just be a waiting game to see how all that pans out or see how long Epic is willing to keep it up. Have to put those staff psychologists to work on customer store loyalty analysis instead of how best to upsell micro-transactions and move trading cards.
I went back and watched a bunch of mk X to learn why eveything is the way it is in XI damn if the final act didnt come off as an insanely violent girl power teenage romp through a burning hellscape
Yeah, I haven't done one of these in a while. So why not, right?
I should start with the bait, huh? Bait is good. Like blood. Blood is good. Oh, speaking of blood... Yes, you're vying for a copy of this:
Who wouldn't want this? I mean, you'd have to be crazier than a Malkavian not to want this, amirite?
Ok so you're gonna need to have at least a rudimentary knowledge of Vampire: The Masquerade...
See, starting in May, I'll be running a Vampire (5th Edition) campaign for my gaming group. Should be lots of fun! There'll be cosplay. There'll be goblets of blood passed around! Wait, no. Forget I said that part. That's a secret.
So this campaign will be set in Boston. Camarilla territory. With all kinds of fun places to set scenes. And not too far from werewolves, for added fun.
Yeah, I hear the Nossie over there in the shadows asking for the bottom line. Whaddaya gotta do? Fine. I need more NPC vampires to populate the city. Sooooo... Create a vampire! Tell me as much as you want/can about them. Make them interesting as possible. My favorite, chosen arbitrarily based on what tickles my fancy, will get worked into my campaign somehow and YOU will own VTMB2! We both win!
So, there ya go. Get your vampire on. I'll leave this open for an undetermined amount of time - basically until I've gotten enough entries and/or it seems like interest has flagged.
EDIT: Clarification - don't bother with stats. I don't need stats and not everyone has played Vampire V5. I just need vamps with personality and style.
Okay, when the sun goes down tonight on my little part of the world (7:32 Eastern US time), I will stop accepting vampire recruits.
I will then read over all the submissions by the light of the moon and sometime tomorrow pick a winner.
Speaking of vampires, I found this paragraph just now in the 5th edition Vampire rulebook:
"Vampire: The Masquerade is not a fascist-friendly game. If you are a neo-Nazi, "alt-righter", or whatever you’re calling yourself nowadays, we urge you to put this book down and call someone who you trust to talk about where you went so wrong in your life."
So it's Steam's fault? That's... certainly a take.
Reads a bit like, "baby, why you got to make me hit you?"
Y'know... given how notorious his company is for treating his employees like utter shit(see: 70-hour crunch weeks), acting like he's doing this all because he's just some big ol' champion of the little people is an impressively rickety artificial high ground.
I like one of the suggestions in the comments. Valve could call their bluff, offer a 12% cut for a basic level of service (since that's all Epic offers). Higher cuts for opting in to things like Cloud saves, Workshop support, etc. Then see if Epic are full of shit or not.
I can see that ending up badly for Valve - publishers would take that offer, then customers would be mad at Valve for getting worse service than what they are used to all the while Valve would be getting less money. Lose-Lose for Valve.
Why would people be getting worse service than they were used to because of Valve giving more money to developers?
Read Loki's quote again. Unless I'm the one misunderstanding him, he says that the 12% cut would give you same crappy levels of service Epic store has and then it would scale all the way to 30% for all the services Steam has. I can't see any way that would work out well for Steam.
I don't think Steam should actually do it (I do actually agree with the theory of if the publisher chooses reduced services it would in fact reflect badly on Steam; I wouldn't like to see that, as a Steam customer), but I do think there is a certain level of dialogue that subject could open up. "Sure, Epic may only take 12%, but we also provide you with x number of services, and should you have a multiplayer component, Steamworks infrastructure alone can be weighed against the costs of running your own servers etc etc".
I dunno. I'm not a publisher or developer so honestly I have no idea how the numbers juggle between 12% plus moneyhats minus infrastructure costs etc etc versus 30% plus Steam's suite of services and potential userbase (pretty sure Steam's still far bigger especially if you discount the massive number of Epic users who literally only play Fortnite) and thus potential sales numbers and so on and so forth.
Borderlands 3 could be an interesting case study, ultimately. It's a proper third-party AAA exclusive that isn't also on Uplay, unlike, say, The Division 2; and it has predecessors that were well hooked into Steam, even if they're old now. We'll obviously never have concrete sales numbers to compare, but hopefully we'll see things like online populations.
I feel like BL3 will do absolutely fine on the Epic store, and then get the added bonus of a late-run boost to sales six months later when it's on Steam.
Oh it'll do perfectly fine. The number of people (like me) who are actually actively avoiding the Epic store are, I'd wager, a tiny (if not insignificant) percentage of game buyers.
It'll just have to do fine without me, though. :razz:
Oh it'll do perfectly fine. The number of people (like me) who are actually actively avoiding the Epic store are, I'd wager, a tiny (if not insignificant) percentage of game buyers.
It'll just have to do fine without me, though. :razz:
I'm agreeing to concerned folks being a tiny sliver. I still have to decide if I'm going to get BL3 at launch.
The fact that I have to think about whether to immediately order Borderlands 3 SHOULD CONCERN GEARBOX THAT THIS MOVE MIGHT NOT BE WITHOUT SOME DEGREE OF DOWNSIDE.
Oh it'll do perfectly fine. The number of people (like me) who are actually actively avoiding the Epic store are, I'd wager, a tiny (if not insignificant) percentage of game buyers.
It'll just have to do fine without me, though. :razz:
Yeah, basically this. I completely removed it from my system after the privacy stuff came out. Hadn't used it before, but wanted to see what it was all about. Won't put it back on. But then, I'm one of those wierdos who picks their Internet browser on whether or not I like/trust the company who owns it. I know me not being on Epic won't impact them, but there are lots of games out there, God knows I have a huge backlog as it is, they don't need (and won't get) my money. It's not a crusade thing, just a personal decision.
My super shitty math says they could potentially lose over 20% of sales and still come out ahead of what they would have made on Steam.
EDIT: Take 2 that is. Obviously Gearbox would see less of that benefit, if they even see any of it at all.
Is that using the 20% for the higher revenue games?
Also, my main concern is if the egs and steam versions will be about to play together. I kinda doubt they're going to be rolling with steamworks for the egs version ..
My super shitty math says they could potentially lose over 20% of sales and still come out ahead of what they would have made on Steam.
EDIT: Take 2 that is. Obviously Gearbox would see less of that benefit, if they even see any of it at all.
Is that using the 20% for the higher revenue games?
Basically if they sell X games on Steam, they could sell .8X games on the Epic store and make roughly the same amount of money. Basically.
.7 of 60 is 42, .88 of 60 is 52.8. You'd have to sell 23.8 copies to make $1000 on steam, while you could make roughly the same amount with 18.94 copies on EGS, which roughly comes out to 80%.
Like I said, shitty math, so I probably made a major error somewhere.
Oh it'll do perfectly fine. The number of people (like me) who are actually actively avoiding the Epic store are, I'd wager, a tiny (if not insignificant) percentage of game buyers.
It'll just have to do fine without me, though. :razz:
I'm agreeing to concerned folks being a tiny sliver. I still have to decide if I'm going to get BL3 at launch.
The fact that I have to think about whether to immediately order Borderlands 3 SHOULD CONCERN GEARBOX THAT THIS MOVE MIGHT NOT BE WITHOUT SOME DEGREE OF DOWNSIDE.
From what I hear, these exclusivity deals also come with compensation if the move to the EGS causes lower than projected sales or somesuch, so there's kinda not a downside.
Oh it'll do perfectly fine. The number of people (like me) who are actually actively avoiding the Epic store are, I'd wager, a tiny (if not insignificant) percentage of game buyers.
It'll just have to do fine without me, though. :razz:
I'm agreeing to concerned folks being a tiny sliver. I still have to decide if I'm going to get BL3 at launch.
The fact that I have to think about whether to immediately order Borderlands 3 SHOULD CONCERN GEARBOX THAT THIS MOVE MIGHT NOT BE WITHOUT SOME DEGREE OF DOWNSIDE.
From what I hear, these exclusivity deals also come with compensation if the move to the EGS causes lower than projected sales or somesuch, so there's kinda not a downside.
MY NOT PREORDERING THE GAME IS THE DOWNSIDE IN THIS SCENARIO.
Oh it'll do perfectly fine. The number of people (like me) who are actually actively avoiding the Epic store are, I'd wager, a tiny (if not insignificant) percentage of game buyers.
It'll just have to do fine without me, though. :razz:
I'm agreeing to concerned folks being a tiny sliver. I still have to decide if I'm going to get BL3 at launch.
The fact that I have to think about whether to immediately order Borderlands 3 SHOULD CONCERN GEARBOX THAT THIS MOVE MIGHT NOT BE WITHOUT SOME DEGREE OF DOWNSIDE.
From what I hear, these exclusivity deals also come with compensation if the move to the EGS causes lower than projected sales or somesuch, so there's kinda not a downside.
MY NOT PREORDERING THE GAME IS THE DOWNSIDE IN THIS SCENARIO.
Oh it'll do perfectly fine. The number of people (like me) who are actually actively avoiding the Epic store are, I'd wager, a tiny (if not insignificant) percentage of game buyers.
It'll just have to do fine without me, though. :razz:
I'm agreeing to concerned folks being a tiny sliver. I still have to decide if I'm going to get BL3 at launch.
The fact that I have to think about whether to immediately order Borderlands 3 SHOULD CONCERN GEARBOX THAT THIS MOVE MIGHT NOT BE WITHOUT SOME DEGREE OF DOWNSIDE.
From what I hear, these exclusivity deals also come with compensation if the move to the EGS causes lower than projected sales or somesuch, so there's kinda not a downside.
MY NOT PREORDERING THE GAME IS THE DOWNSIDE IN THIS SCENARIO.
Posts
I was wrong.
Thank you for the Anima Gate of Memories key!
Behold now the terrible vengeance of the forsaken
You also respawn as a zombie with limited zombie skills and have to kill living players to get back into the game
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
And that's when I realized @Karoz sniped me. ME! Without merit, without reason, without provocation. Karoz locked s-foils in attack position and swept the leg like a Cobra Kai with Jedi Academy. But of course, what Karoz doesn't realize is that I have the high ground now, and they seem a little short for a stormtrooper.
I'm going to completely rock out with the double-bladed lightsaber this weekend on a total nostalgia fest. Thanks!
Gonna be a weird fucking game.
It's more sweet shinobi action as you shadow step your way around the warriors of light. I imagine even better with a buddy as you synchronize killing, but enough map awareness and you can blip around the map and get no-kill runs as well.
Thanks for letting me get my stealth on once more @vamen
I also think it has a great picture of Pixie taking a contract on my life
Reads a bit like, "baby, why you got to make me hit you?"
Steam | XBL
Higher cut if your game does not include loot boxes or extra monetization methods
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
I can see that ending up badly for Valve - publishers would take that offer, then customers would be mad at Valve for getting worse service than what they are used to all the while Valve would be getting less money. Lose-Lose for Valve.
Customers are already getting that worse service from Epic for the same money.
Steam | XBL
Yes, but at least those customers aren't getting mad at Valve. Not to mention getting worse service elsewhere tends to be more palatable than getting worse service in a place where you are used to getting better service.
No, they're not getting mad at Valve, true. (Except for the subset who already were mad at Valve, because reasons.) But apparently they've already decided that some combination of exclusive titles, supporting a different store, sticking it to Valve, or who knows what else, is absolutely worth having a significantly worse service on many levels and massive security holes, for the same money on their end.
Steam | XBL
Why would people be getting worse service than they were used to because of Valve giving more money to developers?
Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I think Merkel is implying Valve will not tolerate a hit to their bottom line and will cut something to compensate for it.
Read Loki's quote again. Unless I'm the one misunderstanding him, he says that the 12% cut would give you same crappy levels of service Epic store has and then it would scale all the way to 30% for all the services Steam has. I can't see any way that would work out well for Steam.
The suggestion was to give developers a bigger cut but not the full valve feature platform for their game. Which I don't think would work to divide up that way. But that's why some games would have a worse experience on steam than previously.
There's a pretty good argument to be made that Steam could counter with a cut in fees on their end, but I doubt they'd go so far as to match Epic since they're already way ahead on feature/support set and install base. Will be interesting to see if they budge at all. Their initial counter was pretty anemic. Just to make things a tiny bit better for the games that sell a ton already.But that was before Epic started going hard on the exclusive deals. It may just be a waiting game to see how all that pans out or see how long Epic is willing to keep it up. Have to put those staff psychologists to work on customer store loyalty analysis instead of how best to upsell micro-transactions and move trading cards.
I picked up that game a while ago on sale. If you play it, let me know how it is. I should probably try it at some point.
FFXIV: Tchel Fay
Nintendo ID: Tortalius
Steam: Tortalius
Stream: twitch.tv/tortalius
World of Warcraft? Nah mate that game will never take off.
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
Okay, when the sun goes down tonight on my little part of the world (7:32 Eastern US time), I will stop accepting vampire recruits.
I will then read over all the submissions by the light of the moon and sometime tomorrow pick a winner.
So, basically... last call for vampires!
"Vampire: The Masquerade is not a fascist-friendly game. If you are a neo-Nazi, "alt-righter", or whatever you’re calling yourself nowadays, we urge you to put this book down and call someone who you trust to talk about where you went so wrong in your life."
Y'know... given how notorious his company is for treating his employees like utter shit(see: 70-hour crunch weeks), acting like he's doing this all because he's just some big ol' champion of the little people is an impressively rickety artificial high ground.
I don't think Steam should actually do it (I do actually agree with the theory of if the publisher chooses reduced services it would in fact reflect badly on Steam; I wouldn't like to see that, as a Steam customer), but I do think there is a certain level of dialogue that subject could open up. "Sure, Epic may only take 12%, but we also provide you with x number of services, and should you have a multiplayer component, Steamworks infrastructure alone can be weighed against the costs of running your own servers etc etc".
I dunno. I'm not a publisher or developer so honestly I have no idea how the numbers juggle between 12% plus moneyhats minus infrastructure costs etc etc versus 30% plus Steam's suite of services and potential userbase (pretty sure Steam's still far bigger especially if you discount the massive number of Epic users who literally only play Fortnite) and thus potential sales numbers and so on and so forth.
Borderlands 3 could be an interesting case study, ultimately. It's a proper third-party AAA exclusive that isn't also on Uplay, unlike, say, The Division 2; and it has predecessors that were well hooked into Steam, even if they're old now. We'll obviously never have concrete sales numbers to compare, but hopefully we'll see things like online populations.
Steam | XBL
It'll just have to do fine without me, though. :razz:
I'm agreeing to concerned folks being a tiny sliver. I still have to decide if I'm going to get BL3 at launch.
The fact that I have to think about whether to immediately order Borderlands 3 SHOULD CONCERN GEARBOX THAT THIS MOVE MIGHT NOT BE WITHOUT SOME DEGREE OF DOWNSIDE.
Steam profile.
Getting started with BATTLETECH: Part 1 / Part 2
EDIT: Take 2 that is. Obviously Gearbox would see less of that benefit, if they even see any of it at all.
Yeah, basically this. I completely removed it from my system after the privacy stuff came out. Hadn't used it before, but wanted to see what it was all about. Won't put it back on. But then, I'm one of those wierdos who picks their Internet browser on whether or not I like/trust the company who owns it. I know me not being on Epic won't impact them, but there are lots of games out there, God knows I have a huge backlog as it is, they don't need (and won't get) my money. It's not a crusade thing, just a personal decision.
Is that using the 20% for the higher revenue games?
Also, my main concern is if the egs and steam versions will be about to play together. I kinda doubt they're going to be rolling with steamworks for the egs version ..
Basically if they sell X games on Steam, they could sell .8X games on the Epic store and make roughly the same amount of money. Basically.
.7 of 60 is 42, .88 of 60 is 52.8. You'd have to sell 23.8 copies to make $1000 on steam, while you could make roughly the same amount with 18.94 copies on EGS, which roughly comes out to 80%.
Like I said, shitty math, so I probably made a major error somewhere.
MY NOT PREORDERING THE GAME IS THE DOWNSIDE IN THIS SCENARIO.
Steam profile.
Getting started with BATTLETECH: Part 1 / Part 2
And the multiple copies left ungifted
Steam ID: Good Life
Kill a man, it doesn't matter who.
Does epic even support gifting?