Fallout 76 - Won't Launch on Steam

Originally Posted by joxer
Thank god I won't be seeing this mmo pos among "steam suggests because you play RPGs".

Speaking of suggestions…. Thanks to one freaking suggestion you made joxer, i downloaded a demo of a jrpg in steam and since then it recommends every freaking visual novel/jrpg/rpgmaker abomination out there.

Steam really is clued when it comes to recommending.

Well that reduces the odds I'll play it. But at this point they weren't high anyway.

I don't see how on earth they'll attract the number of people they'll need to sustain this garbage considering how many have already bailed. And those that haven't departed quickly will once they see it, I imagine.

I'm not excited about yet another client to install, but at the end of the day it's not that big of a deal to me.

This will have to get amazing reviews for me to consider it, now.

Do what I do.

Buy the game and download a crack copy.of it so no one tracks you

Refusing to play a game cause it's on Origin or Uplay or Bethesda.net, instead of Steam, is the modern day equivalent of refusing to play a game because it's only carried at Babbage's and not at Electronics Boutique. Fairly amusing.

Not interested in this turd either way, though.

I don't want to deal with thirty or so different platforms, similar to how I don't care to deal with so many services to get telly shows. If they are too high and mighty for the likes of great old games, or steam, then I'll simply do without. And I thank them in advance for saving me the cabbage.

Originally Posted by Carnifex
I don't want to deal with thirty or so different platforms, similar to how I don't care to deal with so many services to get telly shows. If they are too high and mighty for the likes of great old games, or steam, then I'll simply do without. And I thank them in advance for saving me the cabbage.

Right on my fellow gamer.
When you become a cord cutter it was supposed to save you money but now everybody, and their mom wants to create a movie/tv service that ends up gating content.

At the end of the day I wind up paying more then I ever did with cable. Anyway were talking about games and trends point toward a similar scenario in the future.

This goes beyond being simply another service ala` Origin, Uplay, & Steam. It's far easier to monetize modding if you control the entire infrastructure.

Again, Fallout '76 will serve as a test bed for their future products. Comparatively speaking, it was made on a shoestring budget w/ recycled assets. If it fails, Bethesda will be limiting their losses; but I'm sure they're banking on it not failing, and subsequent titles relying on an increasingly more self-contained architecture until every facet of the game is garnering them profit.

That'll be $20 for a new pack of ever-so-interesting Radiant Quests please.

Yeah, I'm sure it took a shoestring budget and nothing but recycled assets to create a game four times the size of Fallout 4 in a completely different setting, with elaborate multiplayer features - paying a full development team for years.

That sounds convincing

Again, once you're irrationally invested against something - your judgment turns to shit.

As for this being about mods - who can tell. I'm sure it's a part of it.

Personally, I think it's more a part of a larger online infrastructure in place to circumvent Steam and other, similar, platforms that's ultimately a bad deal if you can distribute your own games on your own terms.

Maybe it's inconvenient for Steam users - but anyone who's genuinely interested in a multiplayer Fallout game would already understand that a separate client would be required - regardless of where the game is launched from.

The tiny I-hate-online-everything crowd would already have taken a pass on this.

If there's more than 2% of people who WERE genuinely interested and excited about FO76 who will now never touch it because it launches from a different place, I'd be surprised.

Then again, I'm stuck in the real world.

Well, when EA moved to their own platform I moved with them purchasing DA:O. Thing is, I haven't purchased a single game from them since then. Not because I can't stand a different platform, but because I simply forget about those games. I would gladly play ME3 and probably DA:I too, but when I'm not exposed to those games on Steam I need a much bigger incentive than "they might be fun".

I do believe competition is healthy for a market, and Steam being so big while taking such a large cut might be problematic in the long run. It's damn convenient though.

I'm not interested in FO76, but I'm pretty sure I'll buy the next TES game although Skyrim isn't a favourite of mine, and the little I know about Starfield makes me interested in that as well. If I have to use a different platform than Steam I will, and I'm guessing most Beth fans feel the same way. But the exposure to new players will be a lot lower without Steam.

Originally Posted by TomRon
Well, when EA moved to their own platform I moved with them purchasing DA:O. Thing is, I haven't purchased a single game from them since then. Not because I can't stand a different platform, but because I simply forget about those games. I would gladly play ME3 and probably DA:I too, but when I'm not exposed to those games on Steam I need a much bigger incentive than "they might be fun".

I do believe competition is healthy for a market, and Steam being so big while taking such a large cut might be problematic in the long run. It's damn convenient though.

I'm not interested in FO76, but I'm pretty sure I'll buy the next TES game although Skyrim isn't a favourite of mine, and the little I know about Starfield makes me interested in that as well. If I have to use a different platform than Steam I will, and I'm guessing most Beth fans feel the same way. But the exposure to new players will be a lot lower without Steam.

You're vastly overestimating the power Steam exposure has for huge AAA titles.

Steam exposure is vital for indie games - or games that don't have much in the way of marketing.

Publishers like EA or Bethesda (ZeniMax) make most of their money on consoles, first of all. Secondly, they have nearly infinite marketing budgets.

EA is a business - nothing more, nothing less. In that way, I give you my personal guarentee that if the suits found themselves losing money by not being on Steam - they would move back to Steam.

Very, very few people in this world are only exposed to Steam and nothing else. Most people go on Facebook, Youtube - or whatever. The VAST majority.

There's no exclusive little bubble called "Steam marketing".

So, if the game is marketed on those sites - it doesn't have to be marketed on Steam for people to be aware of it.

Furthermore, FO76 has already been marketed and hyped - and most people potentially interested ALREADY know about it. They don't need Steam to tell them it exists.

It's incredibly simple.

As for Bethesda.net - it's too soon to say anything for sure.

FO76 is a new thing for them. Some people seem to think they're exclusively targeting fans of singleplayer games. Obviously, they're going for an entirely new audience ON TOP of their established fanbase.

One thing is for sure, with 20+ million copies sold of their more popular games - there will be enough potential customers to make it sustainable. But whether it's a "hit" or a big smash is anyone's guess.

Since it's their first outing in this genre - which I suppose is something of a hybrid Fallout/MMO-lite looter shooter - I'm sceptical they really know what they're doing.

As such, I would be careful expecting big numbers - and I don't know if they are.

I think, for them, it's more a way of testing the waters - before they bet on MP in a bigger way.

But it's not a small project by any means. If you watch the making of documentaries - it's clear that this is as big a thing as anything they put out.

Originally Posted by TomRon
Well, when EA moved to their own platform I moved with them purchasing DA:O. Thing is, I haven't purchased a single game from them since then. Not because I can't stand a different platform, but because I simply forget about those games. I would gladly play ME3 and probably DA:I too, but when I'm not exposed to those games on Steam I need a much bigger incentive than "they might be fun".

I do believe competition is healthy for a market, and Steam being so big while taking such a large cut might be problematic in the long run. It's damn convenient though.

I'm not interested in FO76, but I'm pretty sure I'll buy the next TES game although Skyrim isn't a favourite of mine, and the little I know about Starfield makes me interested in that as well. If I have to use a different platform than Steam I will, and I'm guessing most Beth fans feel the same way. But the exposure to new players will be a lot lower without Steam.

I think you’re either overestimating steam or underestimating “ new players”.

New players will typically be teens or even pre-teens as in my sons case. They are sponges and will soak up everything they see. They are not just stuck to steam.

For example I’ve been gaming on computers for about 30 years, I regularly browse the web for game news and even still get a gaming magazine. I regularly check online retailers like steam, origin, uplay, gog, GMG, etc and I have a decent size network of friends that game and we talk.

Even with all that exposure it’s not uncommon for my son and his friends to be playing an obscure indie game I haven’t heard of or show me some mod I haven’t seen or a chat client, etc.

This kids are tenacious, have a never ending ability to soak up information and the ability to spread this information at light speed. If it’s out there and they want it, they will find it.

Furthermore, they’re not old and jaded like many of us. A new client to them is nothing more than 30 seconds to make a new account and another icon on thier desktop. Thier not fear mongers of the end of gaming as we know it. They embrace the new, adopt it and master it way faster than us.

Bethesda won’t lose new players by doing this they’ll lose the old jaded players and since old jaded player will die first ( sorry harsh but true) this is a trade they have no problem making.

Bethesda will absolutely lose some new players. It's naive to think otherwise. Whether or not it's actually a significant amount is another matter. I don't think it will be.

Well, technically, you kinda can't lose something you don't have in the first place

Obviously, every single platform of exposure will have some amount of players that - for one reason or another - have decided to be blind to all other forms of exposure.

I think it goes without saying that, with proper marketing, these people will essentially have to be married to Steam to not be aware of Fallout 76 come release.

I will be bold and say that less than 1% of total Steam users will exclusively be using Steam as a window to the gaming world.

Anyone telling himself or herself that ZeniMax is going to fund a MP Fallout without making damned sure that everyone knows about it - should go join Scientology and donate some funds for improved mental health

Originally Posted by JDR13
Bethesda will absolutely lose some new players. It's naive to think otherwise. Whether or not it's actually a significant amount is another matter. I don't think it will be.

Obviously, I forgot how literal the internet can take things.

Considering some could be 1, you’re absolutely right.

I'm pretty sure TomRon wasn't just talking about people being aware of the game's existence. I believe he's referring to the added exposure of seeing it on a daily basis on the platform you log into the most, which would be Steam for most people.

It's not rocket science. Steam is, by far, the most used platform for PC gamers, and a lot of people are either too stubborn or too lazy to use additional platforms.

There's absolutely no doubt that there would be more people playing if it were on Steam.

It's not going to make much of a difference in the long run.

Originally Posted by sakichop
Obviously, I forgot how literal the internet can take things.

Considering some could be 1, you’re absolutely right.

Yeah, because that's quite realistic.

Originally Posted by JDR13
I'm pretty sure TomRon wasn't just talking about people being aware of the game's existence. I believe he's referring to the added exposure of seeing it on a daily basis on the platform you log into the most, which would be Steam for most people.

It's not rocket science. Steam is, by far, the most used platform for PC gamers, and a lot of people are either too stuborn or too lazy to use additional platforms.

There's absolutely no doubt that there would be more people playing if it were on Steam.

It's not going to make much of a difference in the long run.

I don't know which Steam you're using - the one I'm using is only showing a tiny, tiny selection of games - depending on when it's released and how well it's doing.

One of the biggest problems for a lot of games that ARE on Steam, is that people don't see them. On some days, more games are released than are actually shown on the front page.

I don't know why you're repeating yourself, though.

Saki and I already agree. Yes, more people will be playing when Steam is added to the mix.

The point is that it's almost certainly not going to be a significant amount of people - which means the ENTIRE point of bringing it up as relevant is nullified.

But I guess some people just enjoy being literal to have something to say.

Note that I'm not talking about TomRon here.