I hate Epic Games, they are making PC gaming like console with exclusives, why do good companies do that to their awesome fan base?
I'm trying to figure out two things with this portion of this thread.
What targeted advertisements, I get none when I use Steam, or no advertisements at all when it is Epic?
Second, what Launcher on Epic?
I do get a Stardock launcher on Steam, and I get that Odin Cursed 2K launcher, which updates every twenty-one minutes sixteen seconds, on Steam also, but none on Epic.
Hard to imagine this was once a developer I had respect for and willingly supported with every release. Now they release buggy and unpolished games and complain about how toxic and ignorant their playerbase is for not giving them overwhelmingly positive reviews like so many other games on Steam have. The issue with trying to hide from your ratings on Epic is it makes people wait and look harder, like at the current metacritic scores, that's going to give anyone pause now isn't it. Maybe these critic reviews are just too toxic and prone to abuse though.
Early Access games are in fact buggy and unpolished games. They are offered for sale in early access as Alpha and Beta test phases to buyers who wish to become testers to and report bugs, flaws, games play mechanics issues offer suggestions and ideas to polish game and make the game better.
This is what's ongoing right now with GC4 on EPIC Games. Thousands of eyes pouring over testing new unreleased updates and new features to make sure they work as intended while also suggesting ways to make such features work better. You can follow development on GC4 discord channel or right here in the GalCiv4 official fourms. Epic Games has no review board so nothing is being hidden.
I'm afraid there are many user who leave reviews that do not know the difference between a buggy and unpolished early access game in the Alpha and Beta test phases and the more fully developed games. I can only suggest if you rather not be a game tester wait to buy it or sit on it and let it update until the game is out it's buggy and unpolished early access testing phase.
Negative Reviews for buggy and unpolished games in early access as mentioned above are unmerited because many users do not participate is the Early Access testing leave negative reviews on without understanding the game in still under testing and development. This Isn't because a game maker is afraid of the review process. It partially because some users are ignoring the fact that it is in fact a buggy and unpolished early access game still being developed and tested, leave unwarranted negative reviews completely disregarding that.
I hope this helps.
Are you seriously not aware the game left early access 2 months ago? The reviews are from the official release version. It's buggy and unpolished in a full release state.
If this is some off-topic tangent about Steam early access, if an early access game is buggy but playable and shows promise it gets positive ratings, RimWorld was in early access for like 5 years and is one of the highest rated games on Steam, similar deal with games like Subnautica, Satisfactory, Factorio, etc. If a developer abuses the Steam early access mechanic and treats paying customers as alpha testers for a product that isn't yet functional or fun, then they get a kick in the teeth as they should. Early access is not QA that pays you, it's people who want to play a functional game early and provide feedback. The system works fine and protects customers from shady developers.
Are you seriously not aware the game left early access 2 months ago? The reviews are from the official release version. It's buggy and unpolished in a full release state.If this is some off-topic tangent about Steam early access, if an early access game is buggy but playable and shows promise it gets positive ratings, RimWorld was in early access for like 5 years and is one of the highest rated games on Steam, similar deal with games like Subnautica, Satisfactory, Factorio, etc. If a developer abuses the Steam early access mechanic and treats paying customers as alpha testers for a product that isn't yet functional or fun, then they get a kick in the teeth as they should. Early access is not QA that pays you, it's people who want to play a functional game early and provide feedback. The system works fine and protects customers from shady developers.
I would like to remind you GC4 yet released is still under ongoing development and testing. I am fully aware of the release status. I'm sorry you feel GC4 isn't what you expected at release. The game is quite playable in it's current version and bug fixes and polish will be in each new update version. Again development and testing will be an ongoing process with each new update.
Almost every game still gets updates after release, that doesn't have anything to do with the situation. Critics don't change their reviews, if you scroll down on the Epic games store page GC4 will forever have "recommended by 50% of critics." 50%. I know Brad (in another thread) and you mentioned early access reviews being a problem, the irony is GC3 had the highest review score during early access with very few people not recommending the game at that point, anyone can look at the review chart on the store page to see this, it wasn't until that game was released into 1.0 in a buggy and unpolished state that a huge wave of negative reviews hit it. There are lessons to be learned that aren't being learned, and it has nothing to do with toxicity on steam or problems with the steam review system, it has everything to do with not polishing your games before slapping a 1.0 on them. The bigger issue though is the refusal to accept responsibility and to blame the problems on your players. It's not toxic steam players that prevented these games from getting the attention they deserved.
One thing, you do not elaborate on what it is you find buggy and unpolished. At this point on Epic Games GalCiv4 is enjoying a player ratings of 4.3 out of 4.5 which is pretty darn good. Over all critic scores are mixed at best which was expected since much was changed in game look and games play mechanics.
Looking at the reviews graph for GalCiv3 on Stream while it was in early access it received many negative reviews. On the day it was released it received 50% negative reviews. Which is not much different than the critic scores from from Gamer and PC magazine web critics.
I am of the opinion that Stardock didn't make this game to please the PC gamer's web magazine critics but made it give the GalCiv community what they asked for. I can't take your criticism seriously until you elaborate on what you see as buggy and unpolished.
Critics scores aside, you keep saying it's buggy and unpolished but you're not saying what's buggy and unpolished. Again as I said it's a work in progress and only gets better over time.
It is also worth noting that *ALL* turn based 4X games have many bugs at launch. It is why I typically wait a few patches before starting a new game.
No argument there.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
