During E3 2019, it had been quietly revealed that Shenmue III would be headed to the Epic Games Store for PC, as an exclusive. This contrasted with what had been initially promised to Kickstarter backers--a Steam key--which resulted in controversy and confusion as to how things would play out for those who paid for the game and requested a digital PC copy. When it was announced that backers would be unable to request a refund, things became even more contentious. Aiming to calm the masses, a message from the Shenmue III development team noted that the Ys Net and Deep Silver would be looking into how best to work the situation out. Now, after a few weeks, it appears that the team has come up with a solution.

Those who backed the game get one of four options:

• a. PC Physical: Package (Disc) ＋ EGS Key
• b. PC Digital: EGS Key
• c. PS4 Physical: Package (Disc)
• d. PS4 Digital: PSN Voucher Code

For those that choose the PC option, you'll get a copy of the game on the Epic Game Store, but you'll also receive a Steam key as well, which will arrive exactly one year post-launch. Backers can also switch their platform to PS4, if they no longer wish to have the game on PC.

Most importantly, refunds will now be allowed, if none of the above choices suit you.

Source

 

[Pluupy]

Just pirate it, honestly. Not worth wrestling with bureaucracy for your refund.

 

[Armadillo]

It is perfectly logical to enjoy what Steam provides. Whether that logic extends to having a little hissy fit because a game is not coming out on that service and demanding a refund is a different matter entirely.

Asking for what you were promised isn't a hissy fit.

While nobody said directly I have to then there are plenty that wonder at my actions in tolerating them, and if people are going to have a nice little hate train I want to know why -- going as far as having said hate train is a fairly radical step.

Do they wonder. I mean plenty of people have come in with the "only a launcher" & yet no one else had really been dragged on a long conversion. Only reason you have is because you directly asked why multiple times. You also know why, you just refuse to accept it because it's not up to whatever bar you set to ok the outrage.

I am using the lack of resale as a stick to beat anybody that does not offer it, Valve are just one of the targets. Just because none of the big boys have a resale option does not mean it does not exist within legal framework (the ability to resell software has been by many courts all over the world at this point, some are inclined to deem it something other than a simple sale that can be resold, others not so much) or is some kind of insurmountable technical challenge (the gifting thing they already have would function just fine as a basic thing here) means very little here, to say nothing of them having fought it every step of the way despite not having to.

So you claim. It's a stick to beat everybody, yet so far it's only Valve you have had a problem with. You brought it up against valve originally, made it something against valve. You didn't start out with you don't like digital distribution in general because of no resales, you specifically blamed valve for it. Only now do you pivot to "everyone who doesn't offer it"

Are we nit picking with the term monopoly again? What percentage of PC game sales do they do? Has getting on there not been something of a make or break thing for game devs for some years now (might be falling a tiny bit out of favour).

Nah we aren't nitpicking. We just aren't twisting it to fit your narrative against valve.

A huge amount of games on the pc platform aren't available only on Steam. I would say the fact that some of the most succesful games on pc, are outside the Steam ecosystem, would mean no, no it's not neccesarily make or break to be on steam either.

The fact that valve commands such a share, despite plenty of games being available elsewhere and a lot of games being offered on Steam + X, and yet still the majority chooses steam, is not a monopoly. It's valve providing a service that people clearly value.

 

[Deleted member 492222]

Developers obviously prefer EGS

 

[Xzi]

So if they assure offline support and have a reasonable controller API then things are good?

No, not after Steam keys were promised to backers. As I said, the issue is still clearly bait and switch, I was just giving examples of what affects the user experience to contradict your statement that 'gameplay is unaffected.' Hell, EGS doesn't even function in many of the regions/countries that Steam does. In those regions, offering EGS keys is the same as offering a flaming bag of dog shit.

Competition is bad now?

Competition is great. Ensuring that customers have fewer purchasing options is the opposite of a competitive business practice, however.

People keep saying industry-standard cut as if that means anything too -- I thought the whole point of tech was to disrupt things and drive prices down.

But that isn't Epic's intention, as they only ever complain about Steam, while ignoring the fact that the Win10 Xbox store and console storefronts continue to take the same 30% cut they always have. They aren't trying to change the whole industry, they're trying to get Steam in particular to adopt an unsustainable cut so that Valve's PC gaming market share will start to drop. Though he thinks himself clever, Tim Sweeney has been very transparent about this goal.

Time will tell then. Maybe it is Valve being able to take the not be concerned with the actions of ants thing. Maybe Valve will be caught napping.

Time is entirely on Valve's side. As exclusivity contracts start to expire, it will be become more and more obvious EGS cannot compete on its own merits. Not to mention Epic is mismanaging their cash cow, Fortnite, and driving away ever-increasing numbers of players.

 

[xdarkx]

For those that still think this is okay, defending Epic, or think people are overreacting, this whole thing wouldn't be a thing in the first place if Epic didn't buy out this game as exclusivity couple of months before the game will be out.

The dev/publisher did say this game was going to be on Steam just about everywhere other than on the Kickstarter page. That is until the last minute decision made by the publisher to go Epic exclusive.

Backers that selected Steam as their platform as choice before this change are angry because the dev/publisher broke their trust. Course there are those that do not like EGS in general.

I did not backed this game, but if this were to happen to any games I help backed, I would be pissed as well for breaking my trust.

 

[TheMrIron2]

People who paid money to see this game happen are totally within reason to get their money back for a breach of trust. In fact, I'd say it's quite fair to boycott Epic and avoid the EGS on moral grounds - or, as my friend put it, "based solely on the honor system".

Also, is nobody going to point out the irony that Xbox was heavily inspired by the Dreamcast and close work was done with the Xbox after the Dreamcast was finished, and yet this game is only coming to PS4/PC?

 

[Bladexdsl]

and the whole internet just got a refund

 

[Foxi4]

Complaining about which digital storefront your game is delivered by is the single most "first-world" problem on the planet, I do not understand why people are desperate to crown Steam as the people's spaghetti factory on PC. Valve's effective monopoly needed to be broken one way or the other and if deals with Epic are lucrative, developers should take the money and make more games with it, that's what I care about.

 

[Lazlo52]

Complaining about which digital storefront your game is delivered by is the single most "first-world" problem on the planet, I do not understand why people are desperate to crown Steam as the people's spaghetti factory on PC. Valve's effective monopoly needed to be broken one way or the other and if deals with Epic are lucrative, developers should take the money and make more games with it, that's what I care about.

I technically have no reason to dislike Epic for stuff like this. Not a single game that's suddenly gone exclusive are games l'd ever buy. What really burns me up, though, is how often it's done only months before the release. And then there's how much they hypocritically bad mouth Valve. Sure, maybe Valve needs to lose some of its monopoly, but why be such dicks all around about it? Don't answer that, though, I've already seen plenty of counter-arguments. I just can't stand how crappy Epic looks throughout all this.

Also, do you really know if developers get the extra money over the publishers? I mean, I haven't seen anyone post a source either way. If it's the developers, then that'd be one more thing I can relax over.

 

[Foxi4]

I technically have no reason to dislike Epic for these reasons. Not a single game that's suddenly gone exclusive are games l'd ever buy. What really burns me up, though, is how often it's done only months before the release. And then there's how much they hypocritically bad mouth Valve. Sure, maybe Valve needs to lose some of its monopoly, but why be such dicks about it? Don't answer that, though, I've already seen plenty of counter-arguments. I just can't stand how crappy Epic looks throughout all this.

Also, do you really know if developers get the extra money over the publishers? I mean, I haven't seen anyone post a source either way. If it's the developers, then that'd be one more thing I can relax over.

It's certainly an additional revenue stream that takes some pressure off the developers, regardless of whether they get to see a single penny from it or not. Ultimately video games are commercial products intended to make money - there's always a magical "X" value that's the desired ROI. If Epic can cover some of that return on the initial investment, more power to them.

Is their behaviour shitty? Probably. Does their launcher suck? Probably. Do I care? Not in particular, I consider launchers to be bloatware, and I've dropped off the PC gaming master race once running Steam in the background effectively became a requirement, and that was only after years of going through hoops to disable it or somehow go around it. As far as I'm concerned, digital storefronts have one job and one job only - sell games at prices that are appealing to the consumers. As long as Epic can do that, they're doing their job.

Now, I myself am in two minds about this as I absolutely hate games that are "exclusive", it alienates large swathes of gamers from enjoying them, but on the PC landscape it's a little bit different than on console - installing a different launcher is not an additional investment. That, and the exclusivity is timed, so it's less of a problem, at least to me.

All in all this is an argument over which of the two evils is better for you. From where I'm sitting, the two evils should be in a constant state of competition as that's what ultimately benefits consumers. People who don't like Epic's strategy should just vote with their wallets, which is simple enough.

 

[KingVamp]

I'm all in for the option to sell your game, but doesn't PC get a bunch of discounts anyway?