We won't be silenced by fascists like you.fucking nerds, steam just needs to disable user reviews at this point.
Probably Epic provides the crossplay software they are using.Steam games getting review bombed is like clockwork at this point, but why does this require an EGS account in the first place?
Kinda weird for the account to be needed and weird to review bomb for it.
I bet most of the folks already have epic accounts for the free games.
Ftfy.fucking devs/publishers, steam just needs to "disable" the need for another launcher.
I wish we could disable retarded opinions like this...fucking nerds, steam just needs to disable user reviews at this point.
I have to assume they are contractually obligated to use it.It will be curious to see if D3/Sandlot submit to the pressure. The saving grace might be the previous versions not requiring this so they at least have the know-how.
The last Sandlot game did not have crossplay, it also was not available on EGS. Rectifying this might actually be too much work for them.It will be curious to see if D3/Sandlot submit to the pressure. The saving grace might be the previous versions not requiring this so they at least have the know-how.
The bullshit part here is the Bait & Switch. They knew very well there would be negative reaction and kept the EGS account requirement secret until release.
Valve should enact a policy to combat such bait and switch methods, remove the game, refund pre-orders and ban the developer. Nip this sort of behaviour in the bud before we see more of it.
I have to assume they are contractually obligated to use it.
The last Sandlot game did not have crossplay, it also was not available on EGS. Rectifying this might actually be too much work for them.
Exactly. Requiring a 3rd party account, while kinda lame, isn’t something I feel so strongly about. But keeping that a secret was very lame.The bullshit part here is the Bait & Switch. They knew very well there would be negative reaction and kept the EGS account requirement secret until release.
Valve should enact a policy to combat such bait and switch methods, remove the game, refund pre-orders and ban the developer. Nip this sort of behaviour in the bud before we see more of it.
It protects the customer and their reputation.Does Valve really need to enact a policy? If it happens you can easily refund as soon as the game boots up and makes you create\sign in to epic.
Using Epic’s online service for their game isn’t an issue. Like you said, Epic has the infrastructure in place for that, whereas a tiny company like Sandlot absolutely does not. It’s requiring users to create an account and all that jazz. PC gamers don’t want to give Epic their data to play fucking EDF with their bros.Just did some reading and Steam users will probably need to bite the bullet on this one. The games entire online infrastructure kind of depends on Epic Online Services to currently function. Compatibility with PS4 & PS5 cross-matching would break if they remove it. For a company like Sandlot and a niche IP like EDF, not sure if they deserve getting review bombed for this. Helldivers 2 was an entirely different situation if I recall correctly.
Was this feature/requirement known before launch? It’s an incredibly dumb thing to do if they tried to hide it.Just did some reading and Steam users will probably need to bite the bullet on this one. The games entire online infrastructure kind of depends on Epic Online Services to currently function. Compatibility with PS4 & PS5 cross-matching would break if they remove it. For a company like Sandlot and a niche IP like EDF, not sure if they deserve getting review bombed for this. Helldivers 2 was an entirely different situation if I recall correctly.
The use of epic online services themselves does not require the users that will be using them to make an epic account as far as i am aware.Just did some reading and Steam users will probably need to bite the bullet on this one. The games entire online infrastructure kind of depends on Epic Online Services to currently function. Compatibility with PS4 & PS5 cross-matching would break if they remove it. For a company like Sandlot and a niche IP like EDF, not sure if they deserve getting review bombed for this. Helldivers 2 was an entirely different situation if I recall correctly.
That is a good point. There should be some kind of requirement for them to maintain games to some degree.This will break steam deck support and eventually the game itself like many MS games and Ubisoft games that never got patched and require old ass versions of Uplay or G4WL.
It’s not just whining for nothing.
What people are complaining about can be fixed without removing EOS. Your implementation of EOS is flawed.
See here:
https://dev.epicgames.com/en-US/news/player-authentication-with-epic-account-services-eas
Specifically:
Connect Interface
The Connect Interface handles authentication to Epic Game Services. It is provider-agnostic, and can thus be used with a number of Identity Providers (such as Epic Games, Steam, Xbox Live, etc.).
The Connect Interface does not rely on Epic Accounts but instead uses a Product User ID (PUID) that is unique to a particular product in your organization.
The easiest way to think about these two Interfaces is that the Auth Interface deals with Epic Accounts and the related social graph APIs and the Connect Interface deals with the unique user IDs that are created on behalf of your game and must be linked to an external identity. Because the IDs used by the Connect Interface are not a social graph, they can be used for cross-play and cross-progression connected to multiple identities and can be used without the Auth Interface entirely.
TLR
Properly implementing the connect interface means that the auth interface (The component that requires a linked account) can be optional.
This was avoidable, but it's not too late. Please fix your implementation of EOS.
SANDLOT/Publisher, please read :: EARTH DEFENSE FORCE 6 General Discussions
What people are complaining about can be fixed without removing EOS. Your implementation of EOS is flawed. See here: https://dev.epicgames.com/en-US/news/player-authentication-with-epic-account-services-eas Specifically: Connect Interface The Connect Interface handles authentication to Epic Game...steamcommunity.com
The use of epic online services themselves does not require the users that will be using them to make an epic account as far as i am aware.
SANDLOT/Publisher, please read :: EARTH DEFENSE FORCE 6 General Discussions
What people are complaining about can be fixed without removing EOS. Your implementation of EOS is flawed. See here: https://dev.epicgames.com/en-US/news/player-authentication-with-epic-account-services-eas Specifically: Connect Interface The Connect Interface handles authentication to Epic Game...steamcommunity.com
Some folks just really don't want to have multiple digital platforms. Especially ones that are for one, but still require another for some reason. A lot of PC users are primarily Steam users or Steam fans. So, in those instances they just want to use Steam. But there are a number of titles that have done things where they "release on Steam" but launching the game requires an external launcher, etc. People that play on Steam just want to play through Steam, etc.I'm not a PC nerd, someone explain to me why having an Epic Game Store account is some kind of huge dealbreaker.
I think it's because it's nothing to do with the quality of the game. When it's a ton of people negatively reviewing something for the same reason people essentially see that as review bombing.How is it reviewing bombing when they are all just giving their review of a game they actually purchased. Does giving a game universal praise equal review bombing?
For a pc game any extra layers you have to go through to get into the game is a major part of the user experience. Steam reviews aren’t for exclusively reviewing a single aspect of the purchase. They are for future customers to be aware of things that could affect their satisfaction with the product. At the very least it give a warning to future customers there is something that upset a lot of buyers. It’s up to them to find out what is was and if they care about it or not.Some folks just really don't want to have multiple digital platforms. Especially ones that are for one, but still require another for some reason. A lot of PC users are primarily Steam users or Steam fans. So, in those instances they just want to use Steam. But there are a number of titles that have done things where they "release on Steam" but launching the game requires an external launcher, etc. People that play on Steam just want to play through Steam, etc.
It's not a deal breaker for me, personally, but a lot of people are really not into that at all. I think it would've been helpful if they mentioned something on the store page in advance, but they didn't, so a lot of people are going to see that as a negative I'm sure.
I think it's because it's nothing to do with the quality of the game. When it's a ton of people negatively reviewing something for the same reason people essentially see that as review bombing.
Yep. At the end of the day they’re only costing themselves sales with a move like this.For a pc game any extra layers you have to go through to get into the game is a major part of the user experience. Steam reviews aren’t for exclusively reviewing a single aspect of the purchase. They are for future customers to be aware of things that could affect their satisfaction with the product. At the very least it give a warning to future customers there is something that upset a lot of buyers. It’s up to them to find out what is was and if they care about it or not.
Correct. This is just one of those situations that doesn't necessarily "affect everyone" for the most part. As some people don't care about having to connect to EGS, while some do. Whereas something like a game not launching correctly, absolutely poor performance, or something similar, would negatively affect every player that purchased the game. This at least brings attention to it, so it'll be more aware to those that care about it.For a pc game any extra layers you have to go through to get into the game is a major part of the user experience. Steam reviews aren’t for exclusively reviewing a single aspect of the purchase. They are for future customers to be aware of things that could affect their satisfaction with the product. At the very least it give a warning to future customers there is something that upset a lot of buyers. It’s up to them to find out what is was and if they care about it or not.
I could see a scenario where they at least ask devs to include that it "requires a 3rd party launcher for _______" somewhere on the game's store page. At least I'd like to see that, but I'm sure they won't do anything. I'm actually pretty surprised that we haven't seen something like that yet though, considering the requirement to do such a thing has never really been viewed in a positive light. Then again, the outcome falls on the game/devs/pub, not Steam. So they're probably like, "Hey, whatever, we're getting ours." lol.Steam should start having games that require 3rd party launchers or logins have a warning window popup before any payment is accepted for this these games. Game publishers know extra logins and multiple launchers are unpopular but they rather have unformed consumers buy their product and then cry that they a victim of “review bombing” when those consumers get upset.