Should we discuss what happens if BL3 is Epic Store exclusive?

Same goes for other side. Developers and publishers should be well aware of what reaction from customers they’ll get by publishing game one Epic Store as exclusive. They know that there will be those kinds of criticisms, but this doesn’t require any special knowledge to figure out.

Elitism probably is core reason for this disconnect. It isn’t that devs don’t understand us customers, it’s that they don’t care and consider themselves entitled. They choose to make money over making a product for customers.


Oh sure. But that’s not the world we live in. The gaming industry is now on par with other entertainment media. They’re going to have to start looking at models like Disney or they might end up getting swallowed by Disney.

How’s that for cynical.


You can’t just say “same goes for the other side” when you’re replying to me about possibly not knowing the full extent of what goes on on one side.

Publishers do expect reactions, a lot of the time. This kind of thing is why publishers exist, in addition to developers! If you thought they were unaware of any blowback, especially given the ongoing critical coverage of Epic right now, then I don’t know what to say.

As for your comment about elitism, I don’t know what to say. You’re still conflating developers and publishers as one single entity. I’m wasting words, sorry :stuck_out_tongue:

I do not need to know what happens on other side. My main point is that I want BL3 on steam. My second point is that I don’t want to use Epic Store due to low quality of this platform. Those are really simple and transparent points, that publishers should be aware of, and as you said, they probably are well aware of. *That’s exactly the reason why them choosing to do otherwise is clear sign that they do not care about my desires as customer. They look at me at just another disposable consumer that’ll throw money at them, for they’re big cooproation and I’m just a single individual. That’s just the honest feeling I’m getting, before I quantify that as something that applies on lot of more people than just me.

*edit: I think I just got carried away by flavor of point I was making, because after taking another look at what I wrote I don’t think it’s entirely right. I think I quantify my point and apply it on larger group of people and then look at it as cooporation not caring about us, not me. I’m trying to avoid generalizing stuff and try to think for me only and not represent others, but this example shows that I’ve still not learned to handle this tendency.


I think PC games are a prime target for enhanced marketing techniques.
So, brand identity is a method to get money from the consumer, but this gives them satisfaction, and satisfaction means contentment, which translates to less sales. And so in the industry, brands take turns being the good or bad guys, so that industry as a whole reaps greater profit - since, as a matter of perception they offer as least as possible, while making it seem new, and better - but it is more of the same and can not be anything else, lest it give satisfaction. This ‘leave them wanting more’ assures future sales.

And so, they divert attention away from this practice by creating controversies that limit the scope so that the larger scheme is undetected.

And so PC gamers get the treatment since they spend so much more on hardware than console users. And this is the reason behind the brand A vs. brand B battle. It is marketing that channels consumers into their slot, but it doesn’t matter what they do as consumers (buy, boycott, critque) It just gives them a way to blow steam as they are continually being played by a game of industrial scope.


What’s the example of satisfaction leading to less sales? This might make sense if there was single publisher/platform selling all games, but for individual developer I don’t see how it makes sense.

Satisfaction with a certain brand - like Borderlands - it is a great game you can play for a long time… this means you are unlikely to buy another game as long as you are playing Borderlands. So a great game hurts everyone else in the industry - pocketbook-wise.

So, if games were ‘all-that’ a large part of the gaming populace would be content to play what games they already have. Success is gamings own bane. And so as more brands get into industry, they have to preserve themselves by uniting under a singular purpose - to make profit, and cooperate in playing the consumers. So brands take turns putting out great/bad games just to get as much profit in a organized way that ensures more sales.

1 Like

That’s really not the case. We seem to be well into conspiracy theory here.

Do you imagine the cabal of studio heads gathering in some shadowed hall deciding whose turn it is to make a bad game?
Conspiracies do exist, of course, but mostly bad games are the result of ■■■■-ups, not intention.


I think Borderlands is everything against this according to its game design. BL games are designed in way that feeds and maximizes replayability. I think it could be worth investigating whenever BL is the single player game franchise with highest replay value in world.

As for idea of 2K doing this intentionally and making BL3 into bad guys, then it’d carry high risk to ruin their relationship with Gearbox.

1 Like

This franchise is a prefect example of brand loyalty. The worst thing it can be accused of is limiting sales of other IPs. I know of more than one person who only play the BL games. This loyalty is exactly what caused so much hype, buildup and excitement about a new addition. People frothing at the mouth ready to throw hundreds of dollars at the new game.

Same as when the new iPhones came out (not really anymore of course).


Imagine all the news outlets putting out the same topics, same articles - word for word… does that sound too far fetched? I say it is likely.

1 Like

I disagree.

I’ve had a little contact with some devs and they wholeheartedly devote themselves to making the best game they can, every time.
And even then, they make mistakes. Bad games are a result of human error. No-one deliberately plans on releasing a poor product.


That is an inappropriate parallel. Not even remotely close to what we’re talking about.

One is dissemination of information. The other is a product.

I know people who make games love what they are doing, but the profit component at the top has the decision to decide when a game is good or not.

So people who make the games can be as in the dark as anyone else save for the people at the top.

1 Like

I’m out.


I’ll end with this… in any situation, you can narrow the scope of subject matter until the broader picture is out of frame. And what is talked about is entirely different from the original subject.

So if I wavered too far from the core of the subject I’m sorry. And if you made the subject to narrow, that’s fine.

The subject is public perception of a brand or service and their willingness to give them money for that brand or service.

Manipulation may happen in any enterprise - and may or may not be worth discussing elsewhere - but it’s not relevant to this discussion.


I guess that what resonated for you and that led you to making your own point is issue of cooporations as “evil entity” and your way to approach this complex nest of problems.

Gorbles is right on point that there are lot of things that goes on that side of camp that we don’t know. However the problem is that there is just no handling that- it’s either to discard this issue in conversation, or come up with wild claims/theories/strawmans on how this unknown side operates. Of course those claims can vary wildly from general safe assumptions, to completely wild conspiration theories. I guess that this theme that have been reoccuring through this topic.

In the end the issue is caused by missing communication between devs and customers. It’d be far easier if devs just did their work to not give reason for such issues to arise.

Well, it’s a balancing act. But if people are aware, or come to the conclusion that it is too bad, sales will go down. And then industry will have to give us something to generate sales.

And so, this is where PR comes in - where the internet is blanketed with political wars, brand wars, sex identity wars…

And this is the foundation upon which industry rests. And in this blanket, the desire to consume is at its best. And under any guise and for what ever reason, consumerism is superconducted.

And that too will get old.

I mean… for as hated as EA is for all of its practices and tactics, I highly doubt their developers intentionally throw quality of their product. It’s also literally hard to accomplish without it being viewed as blatant too.