Phoenix Point Catch-All

The idea that "this isn't competition" is ass backwards.

This is EXACTLY what competition looks like. This is Epic competing for market share, competing for your dollars, and competing for developer buy-in.

Agree to disagree, Jonman.

I very much appreciate the points you, Sorbicol, and Certis made. They actually did make me reconsider where some of my anger was stemming from and also who deserves the actual ire.

In my opinon, though, this is NOT competing, this is paying someone off so they won't have any competition.

I know the business side of it makes sense, but I really want to believe that there is more to this business than money. Stupid and idealistic? Yep, that's me!

The community surrounding this game is irrevocably borked, though. The poisoned well comment is so true.

Seems to me that the community did the poisoning, however.

Demeaner wrote:

In my opinon, though, this is NOT competing, this is paying someone off so they won't have any competition.

IMAGE(https://ih0.redbubble.net/image.193307344.3142/st%2Csmall%2C215x235-pad%2C210x230%2Cf8f8f8.lite-1u2.jpg)

SallyNasty wrote:

Seems to me that the community did the poisoning, however.

I respectfully disagree. I'd say it was their decision to change their promise that did.

Considering their game was already past the projected release window and cruising into 6 months later, considering they used the extra money from the FIG thing to hire more people it seems like perhaps this was the best way for them to finish the game and make it the way they want without firing people, compromising on their vision of the game, or releasing it in an unfinished state. If you truly cared about this game existing in the first place then shouldn't you be happy that is still being achievable? You get the game you supported and 1 year of DLC for free on top of that. All to use another launcher besides steam. Is it really worth getting that worked up over? IF SO, get your refund, move on, never crowdfund something again.

Jonman wrote:

The idea that "this isn't competition" is ass backwards.

This is EXACTLY what competition looks like. This is Epic competing for market share, competing for your dollars, and competing for developer buy-in.

That is competition to developers. It is not competition to customers. That is a fact no matter how many stupid pictures you post.

Granath wrote:

That is competition to developers. It is not competition to customers. That is a fact no matter how many stupid pictures you post.

Kellogg’s don’t make breakfast cereal for anybody else. If want Cereal made by Kellogg’s you have to buy it from box made and sold by Kellogg’s.

They even use that as a selling point for their brand. Sometimes, exclusivity is exactly what competition for customers looks like.

If you don’t like it, don’t install Epic and wait a year to get the game on a different platform.

So how is the game itself?

whispa wrote:

So how is the game itself?

Not out yet?

People have been playing backer builds, but I'm waiting for launch.

Sorbicol wrote:
Granath wrote:

That is competition to developers. It is not competition to customers. That is a fact no matter how many stupid pictures you post.

Kellogg’s don’t make breakfast cereal for anybody else. If want Cereal made by Kellogg’s you have to buy it from box made and sold by Kellogg’s.

They even use that as a selling point for their brand. Sometimes, exclusivity is exactly what competition for customers looks like.

If you don’t like it, don’t install Epic and wait a year to get the game on a different platform.

1. Epic did not make this game.
2. I can buy Kellogg's cereal at many retailers.
3. Exclusivity, when dealing with a sales channel, is a term that is mutually exclusive from competition. If there is only one Subaru dealer in the country, they have exclusivity. I cannot buy a Subaru from any other dealer. There is no competition. There may market competition from Ford or Toyota but there is no competition in the sale of Subarus. That is what the lack of competition looks like for a consumer.

We do agree on something. If you don’t like it, don’t install Epic. But sadly I suspect that we will see a significant rise in piracy on such titles for those who do not want to wait.

Granath wrote:

That is competition to developers. It is not competition to customers. That is a fact no matter how many stupid pictures you post.

No, it's competing FOR customers. You know, like what businesses do? Epic just won 100% of the customers who want to play Metro Exodus in the next year.

I mean I guess if you're a shareholder you could call it a win.

Us lowly peasant customers sure lost out on the deal though.

Language - Certis

Edit - Fair moderation here, I was perhaps a bit TOO frustrated by the whole thing and it also removed the ableist term I used so I appreciate that.

The frustration still stands though and the melodrama over all of this is still baffling so I'll leave it at that.

It is indeed a bit wild how hot the debate gets over these topics. Discussions and Debates is nothing compared to this :O
Personally I think crowdfunding is what it claims to be, and not just a glorified preorder. As such you are not entitled to get what was promised.
But you obviously have reason to be disappointed, and not wanting to have anything to do with the developer again.

Shadout wrote:

It is indeed a bit wild how hot the debate gets over these topics. Discussions and Debates is nothing compared to this :O

It is kinda funny how charged EGS topics are. Complete with snipes at each other and all the other shenanigans you'd expect to see in D&D.

Guess everyone feels pretty strongly about it one way or the other, lol.

Shenanigans. Snipes. *checks sub-form*

I've always viewed crowd funding as somewhere between charity and gambling. There is no binding guarantee. It will benefit the receiving end. It is chance odds to return on the providing end. It could return nothing at all. Thus I tend not to partake. (Unlike Patreon where upon receiving something you can then choose to offer support for continued mutual benefit.)

Epic Store? It is another Steam, GoG, Beamdog, Blizzard, Origin. I got on board with Steam because Portal 2 on PS3 had a free Steam key included. My library then grew with ludicrous sales. Beamdog won my favour because of timed exclusively with Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition, and as developers of the Enhancing I thought it a fair shake. GoG put in the effort to keep older titles available and runnable, with no DRM. That was their ticket. A niche in the market. Epic have nothing I want to consider another store with my details, and access to my devices. Strong arming registration through exclusivity, or freebies, is effective, and potentially a necessity. It's what put most everyone else on the map.

What has taken place with Phoenix Point is understandable from different viewpoints. Keeping the lights on and food on the table. Keeping payroll moving. They're the important ones. If they were teetering on the edge. Even if not this is business and profit is the name of the game. A sizeable timed exclusivity sum. An 88/12 profit margin. You'd be crazy to turn that down. That could be what clinches security for the foreseeable future. It was not handled well, though. I do believe it is in bad taste to withhold activation keys, for the backers who made it possible to even get to the Epic deal, for their preferred storefront. Wait a year. Or get on board with Epic. Or take a refund. That wasn't what was proposed. It's probably not possible, but granting release access to those who backed, where they so desire, should have happened. Everyone else, non-backers, get the timed exclusively barrier, obviously. I highly doubt Epic would have entertained that idea, though, also obviously.

RnRClown wrote:

Shenanigans. Snipes. *checks sub-form*

I've always viewed crowd funding as somewhere between charity and gambling. There is no binding guarantee. It will benefit the receiving end. It is chance odds to return on the providing end. It could return nothing at all. Thus I tend not to partake. (Unlike Patreon where upon receiving something you can then choose to offer support for continued mutual benefit.)

Epic Store? It is another Steam, GoG, Beamdog, Blizzard, Origin. I got on board with Steam because Portal 2 on PS3 had a free Steam key included. My library then grew with ludicrous sales. Beamdog won my favour because of timed exclusively with Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition, and as developers of the Enhancing I thought it a fair shake. GoG put in the effort to keep older titles available and runnable, with no DRM. That was their ticket. A niche in the market. Epic have nothing I want to consider another store with my details, and access to my devices. Strong arming registration through exclusivity, or freebies, is effective, and potentially a necessity. It's what put most everyone else on the map.

What has taken place with Phoenix Point is understandable from different viewpoints. Keeping the lights on and food on the table. Keeping payroll moving. They're the important ones. If they were teetering on the edge. Even if not this is business and profit is the name of the game. A sizeable timed exclusivity sum. An 88/12 profit margin. You'd be crazy to turn that down. That could be what clinches security for the foreseeable future. It was not handled well, though. I do believe it is in bad taste to withhold activation keys, for the backers who made it possible to even get to the Epic deal, for their preferred storefront. Wait a year. Or get on board with Epic. Or take a refund. That wasn't what was proposed. It's probably not possible, but granting release access to those who backed, where they so desire, should have happened. Everyone else, non-backers, get the timed exclusively barrier, obviously. I highly doubt Epic would have entertained that idea, though, also obviously.

Whelp. Time to get a new forum avatar.

Holy crap! I thought that was you!

Vector wrote:

Holy crap! I thought that was you!

So did I.

Certis wrote:

If your view is "I don't care, this is unfriendly to consumers who trusted them to deliver what they promised," I can't really argue the point. It is.

Pretty much, for some people this project was built on trust. They didn't just back Phoenix Point to get a discount on the price of the game, they backed it because Julian Gollop is back in town and wants to fulfil his dream of making a successor to X-Com. They put money on the table sight unseen just to give him the *chance* to make that a reality knowing full well that it might not happen. Not just out of nostalgia but also because people have been trying (with varying degrees of success) to make a new X-Com for decades, and if anyone can do it it's him. And it worked, but right at the finish line he decided to break that trust because his next paycheck meant more to him than the promise he made to his fans. For some people it's not about the money, it's not even about the Epic exclusivity (though that obviously doesn't help), it's the fact that they can no longer trust Julian Gollop that hurts the most about all this.

If his post announcement AMA is true the company was financially solvent at the time they approached Epic. I think they simply wanted to distribute on Epic and Epic countered with a deal they couldn't resist. I sure hope that deal was a good one because it came at the cost of their reputation. You just snubbed your biggest fans and released your very niche game on a platform that deliberately omits social features, so no one is going to be keeping the hype going and getting people interested (quite the opposite I bet). Said platform doesn't support easy modding either so the longevity of the game is going to suffer. And on top of everything else they are releasing the game without DRM so the pirates will have a field day with it.

Reaper81 wrote:

Whelp. Time to get a new forum avatar.

Oops. My bad!

I was avatar hopping and this became a temporary place holder upon failing to choose a winner. I totally blanked on my thievery.

Jonman just reminded me that the time is nigh! It seems like forever since we backed this.

Localgod54 wrote:

Jonman just reminded me that the time is nigh! It seems like forever since we backed this.

Out on Tuesday.

Sorbicol wrote:
Localgod54 wrote:

Jonman just reminded me that the time is nigh! It seems like forever since we backed this.

Out on Tuesday.

That was the fastest reply I've ever seen! It's like you've been poised since the last post in April... hah!

Seriously, I'm ready to get excited, though.

I'm very interested but have a feeling it's going to be buggy and a bit of a technical mess for a bit.

I suspect I'm going to enjoy it very much, while at the same time it's probably not going to live up to my expectations.

I'm much more interested in XCOM 3, which if you read between the lines and various reports that have come out recently, is in active development. Fingers crossed for an announcement early next year

Sorbicol wrote:

I'm much more interested in XCOM 3, which if you read between the lines and various reports that have come out recently, is in active development. Fingers crossed for an announcement early next year

Made me check Jake Solomon's twitter account. He hasn't posted since Halloween but his bio is

Designer of XCOM, XCOM 2, and...

So sure sounds like it's in development.

Very clever Mr Solomon.

So I am really hyped about this one. It looks great from what I have seen and read but really trying to minimize researching this further.