onien11235

5 ms·

1.
by onien11235 7y ago
I asked for a viable alternative strategy that didn't also involve paying for exclusives to initially attract customers. Apparently Epic doesn't agree with you about this being viable by itself.
2.
by onien11235 7y ago
Website design won't drive customers to a new store instead of Steam. Epic is curating their store so that should already cover quality and discoverability. Apparently they think that isn't enough. > Price in this case would be
3.
by onien11235 7y ago
I don't have time to look it up right now but I'm pretty sure GOG had layoffs a few months ago. DRM free doesn't seem to be a winning strategy.
4.
by onien11235 7y ago
> competing on quality, price, customer service, etc, etc, etc. What metric are you using to define quality and how would it make people use this store over Steam? How much cheaper would you need to sell games to get people to go to the
5.
by onien11235 7y ago
What Valve did on L4D2 isn't relevant. My point was that Valve did the same thing with L4D as Epic is doing with Rocket League. Talking about L4D2 does not show that this point was wrong.
6.
by onien11235 7y ago
Turtle Rock made L4D. Valve bought Turtle Rock. If paying for exclusives is bad what viable alternative strategy should Epic be using to get users to their store?
7.
by onien11235 7y ago
From the update at the very top of the article the GP linked: > Epic has offered an update on the confusingly worded statement issued to press earlier today regarding Rocket League's future status on Steam, now insisting that it has
8.
by onien11235 7y ago
The link you provided doesn't say what you claim it says. The parent post is discussing giving away free games, not acquisitions. What is unhealthy about the way Epic is trying to attract users? I know they've received some negati