How ironic it is that Notch is thriving like a king in XBLA and he still doesn't want to release his game in Steam, while certain other indie developers still complain about how shitty Microsoft treats them.
Those (like me) who want to play Minecraft on the PC but cant because their credit card wont work on the Minecraft site (still cant figure out why.)DVS BSTrD said:Real answer: All the PC gamers already have it so what would be the point?
Why should he share profit with steam he doesn't need it and he has been successful without it.Carnagath said:Balls, balls, balls. Notch doesn't want to share some of his profit with Steam, because he does not need to, he has no need for further exposure, the Minecraft fanboys did that for free for many years so he could fill bathtubs with their money and swim in them while delivering possibly the most horribly incomplete videogame of the last 20 years. Fuck. Right. Off.Perhaps there's something we could do to help out there? I don't know. If nothing else, we might work as an inspiration for people to self-publish
To me it is not biased at all. EA pulled there games form a competing digital distribution service to create their own competing service to increase profits. The reason they were badmouthed was for how they went about creating there service, and how they forced users to use there service. If they just left existing games on Steam, provided a better service, and were upfront with why they were creating Origin, I think people would have been less irritated. I understand that they aren't trying to be the "nice guys" but if they could have probably wooed many people over without all of the lies and drama that they created.Zefar said:When EA did this they where greedy as hell. When Notch does he's praised.
Seems a little bias to me.
But I'm ok if he want to earn more money from it.
I agree with this. People have no problem calling EA on being greedy but if notch is greedy its justified. Essentially it just comes down to notch wanting more money and doesn't want anyone to get a cut out of it.Zefar said:When EA did this they where greedy as hell. When Notch does he's praised.
Seems a little bias to me.
But I'm ok if he want to earn more money from it.
I don't see a lot of praise directed at Notch, just a lot of nods and "Yeah, that's probably the smarter move for him." EA earned the ire of gamers because they decided to start offering games only on their service, and their service is terrible. Notch just isn't adding another way to buy the game. The game still costs what it did before and didn't gain any sort of DRM or buggy launch platform. EA removed a way to buy games, and then changed to force all purchases to use a piece of software that very few consumers actually like using.Zefar said:When EA did this they where greedy as hell. When Notch does he's praised.
Seems a little bias to me.
But I'm ok if he want to earn more money from it.
Re-purchase power. A lot of gamers have games either in physical form or on some other digital platform and as soon as it hits Steam they jump all over that shit and buy it again. Just check out the Steam forums when an older game gets released. You will see people going, "I have this on x or I have it retail and just bought it again because it's on Steam. I have done this maybe once, and that was with Borderlands because I got tired of having to actually find the disc everytime I wanted to install it.DVS BSTrD said:Real answer: All the PC gamers already have it so what would be the point?
Popular misconception #1: EA removed their games from Steam.Zefar said:When EA did this they where greedy as hell. When Notch does he's praised.
Seems a little bias to me.
But I'm ok if he want to earn more money from it.
Mixed in with the antifanboys or fanhaters or what-have-you. Seem to be a lot of those out today too.Mr Cwtchy said:Ooh, this should be interesting. Notch fanboys versus Valve fanboys.