World of Goo 2 would not exist if Epic had not helped us fund the game! We were able to hire artists and engineers for multiple years to help us build the biggest game we've ever made. We're grateful for this! You've likely seen similar arrangements with other games, and I imagine ours is comparable.
If you don't use Epic, that's ok. You can always get World of Goo 2 right here on this page, DRM-free, for Win / Mac / Linux. Just scroll up there. And if you have a Nintendo Switch, you can get it on the eShop directly on your device.
But I want to play it on my heavy computer that's strapped to my face and sprays pixels into my eyeballs.
Someone in Chapter 4 wants to have a conversation with you.
How did you fit so much goo into this game?
Computers have come a long way in the last 16 years!
I used to play the original World of Goo when I was a kid. Will this make me feel like a kid again?
You might be able to visit for a while.
I missed you, World of Goo!
We hope you will love it as much as we've loved building and discovering this new world! You can read our first interview about the game here.
The Epic exclusive bullshit always stinks. Glad they are at least offering an option to get it from their website, even though the best solution is to release it everywhere.
World of Goo 2 would not exist if Epic had not helped us fund the game!
I feel people are overlooking this.
I understand disliking Epic, but directly funding a game that needs it is much different than grabbing an already finished game and giving them money to turn it into a exclusive like they done before.
Two different practices.
I think it sucks but I don't have an issue with it. If Epic is the publisher and they choose to publish only on their own store then that's their decision. It's what every publisher, including Valve, does. To me this usually means it's a game I won't play and that's not a problem because I have so many games to play, I won't miss a handful of games.
However I will buy World of Goo 2 if for no other reason than the fact that I pirated the first game when I was poor.
Its not Epic exclusive. Its available on Epic, or on their own website for the better version without all of Epic's bloat or the risk of them taking the game away from you.
Why do people around here so insistent on locking down Steam's monopoly status? More stores is a good thing, and if Epic wants to fund a game in return for an exclusive period the devs have every right to take the deal.
I don't see people shitting on Valve for not letting Epic and Ubisoft sell Half-life and Portal.
Ah nice, missed that it released. Shame about the epic store limitation but nice of them to allow you to buy it from them directly.
Would prefer to buy it on Steam so i can play it on my deck though
Not if you own a Steam Deck, or want cloud saving, or have hundreds of games and don’t want to hope you remember your login and password for this one game 10 years from now and that the website still exists, or worry about keeping a local backup of the game if you want to play it in the future.
DRM-free direct downloads are a great option, but better than Steam? That’s subjective. For me, I want all of those things I listed so a non-Steam PC game for me is a last resort, pretty much only reserved for games that I really want to play.
I don’t know why people find this so difficult to understand, I have to assume they’re being wilfully obtuse. Would you download a separate app and create an account for every song you wanted to listen to or every movie you wanted to watch? Of course not. So why would games be any different?
it's not really subjective, having a drm free download is like owning the thing, having it on steam is like borrowing it from someone fairly trustworthy, and having it on epic is like borrowing it from an asshole
you're on a decentralised, federated social media website. why are you arguing that more centralisation is a good thing? the comparison you're making is nonsense. you don't need to download an app or sign up for an account to listen to music drm free or to play drm free copies of games. you download the thing at the point of purchase and then you own it and you can do whatever you want with it. and that includes launching it from steam, which I do with a lot of my drm free games
Buying the game without DRM is great. But the fact that people don't have the option to buy it in any store they want is annoying, and we can thank Epic for that. Epic is poison and they earned the hate they get.
The problem isn't even that we can't buy in any store we want. Thats normal. The problem is that they're paying to prevent it from being added to other stores, because they know other stores would out-compete them. Imagine how absurd and anti-consumer it would be if Pizza Pizza could pay a peperoni producer to not sell to other pizza chains, for example.
That said, Epic did effectively fund the game from scratch, which makes this more grey area in terms of overall results, but considering Epic's history, I can see easily why people are viewing this pessimistically.
I can't think of any time in history that the public has had that ability for anything. Imagine being upset because a Ford dealership won't sell you a Toyota, or that Kohl's won't sell you some designer brand.
So say the game dev shuts down and my install is lost or I never kept it. That "DRM free" is now lost. What is more likely, steam shuttin g down or studio who was unable to fund themselves?
DRM free offers no tangible benefit to 99% of people.
Its still stupid and anticompetitive that Epic is allowed to dictate where the game is sold, but at least they're letting the developer sell it on their own page now, without all of Epic's shit.
While I do agree that it's disappointing that the game is available on Epic and not Steam (and Tim Sweeney is an assface for shitting on Linux), I'm of the opinion that this situation isn't one that should warrant boycotting. I think being able to buy directly from the developers and have a maximum percentage of the revenue go straight to the studio is the best case.
It's an inconvenience to have to manually add the game to the launcher/platform of choice, but it's such a minor inconvenience to deal with given the outcome.
I understand and sympathize with the principle your expressing. However, I think it's important to be open-minded and ultimately in support of the devs themselves over the platforms that distribute their game.
You can buy from website and Tim Sweeny don't get a single ¢.
If giving money to Valve is your other issue, you can also try ask for Gaben's bank account and put there an additional fee as cutshare for your purchase.
The dev has quite the history of being... How do I say it... Butthurt.
They made a claim that 90% of the game was pirated. Something they just pulled out of their ass. The initial FAQ was very aggressive too.
I liked WoG, but this dev is yet another example of someone who should just shut the fuck up and quit damaging the company and hard work done by the team.
It seems to me that the real reason people are upset is that they don't want to accept that the devs of games they like willingly accepted the money. As if Epic forced them.
The epic hate is tiresome. It sounds like they functioned as a publisher here, providing long term funding of development prior to release. The game isn't exclusive and has no DRM, I see no downside to this. Stop hopping on bandwagons of hate and enjoy your games people.
Yeah, with a launcher- and DRM-free version, I think the hate is quite misplaced here. It's especially extreme on reddit. There is an irony of people who are supposedly against exclusivity writing things like "No steam no purchase.". I guarantee those people never complain about a Steam-exclusive game not being on GoG or EGS.
Its stupid that they're able to effectively pay the developer to not work with their competition, but thats relatively minor seeing as the developer is still independent and still able to self-publish. I get why people are mad about it though, seeing as it is still kinda anticompetitive and Epic has a long track record of doing much worse.
Why shouldn’t he be downvoted? A downvote isn’t rude, and it’s not an indicator of how sane the opinion is. It indicates that the comment misses the point. They assume it’s about DRM, or that Epic didn’t to enough to deserve exclusivity, or that it’s not a true exclusive because you can pay the developer directly.
It’s not. It’s just about not wanting another launcher that doesn’t bring anything to the table. GOG is for old games, Itch is for small indies, and Steam is for everything else.
Epic is just Steam but worse, doesn’t work well on Steam Deck, with some exclusives that will hit Steam in a year. Doesn’t offer anything new or improved, just makes things worse by splitting a market by paying off developers, and because it doesn’t offer anything compelling, will probably die of when Epic eventually wastes all its Fortnite money and falls on hard times.
I wouldn’t give them a penny, they’re actively working to make PC gaming a worse experience when Steam arguably brought it back from the brink of death. Before Steam, PCs were about to become MMO and RTS machines. It’s hard to overstate how big their impact was.
people once again prove that the hate for epic exclusives is more about not having more than one icon to click rather than any actual consistent principle. people who defend console exclusives will still cry about this even though there is a direct purchase option.
...as you can see, if you buy from dev's website you get to buy the advertised Linux's version.
A Dev that publish exclusively on Epic store is de facto forced to trash away any additional Linux support they may have put into.
Basically, if a Dev support Linux, the time they go exclusively on Epic became essentially windows-only.