Epic store brings competition. That's how things improve for everyone in a free market situation. Steam had an absolute MONOPOLY on game distribution to the point where you simply COULD NOT even get some games without a steam acct. Now Epic is challenging that. That's really a good thing. Unfortunately we live in an age of an "all or nothing" mentality so the fanbois on both side want to turn what should be a natural and good situation into some kind of street brawl. It's pretty sad. And pathetic.
Game can be sold outside of steam if they want too was on dev side of thing not on Valve. Monopoly is control can't be sold other then it's that store you have to go to with out any other option. Thats what mostly Epic is doing to other store then just steam. It is competitions but not in a good way even if people agree or not.
Epic store brings competition. That's how things improve for everyone in a free market situation. Steam had an absolute MONOPOLY on game distribution to the point where you simply COULD NOT even get some games without a steam acct. Now Epic is challenging that. That's really a good thing. Unfortunately we live in an age of an "all or nothing" mentality so the fanbois on both side want to turn what should be a natural and good situation into some kind of street brawl. It's pretty sad. And pathetic.
Game can be sold outside of steam if they want too was on dev side of thing not on Valve. Monopoly is control can't be sold other then it's that store you have to go to with out any other option. Thats what mostly Epic is doing to other store then just steam. It is competitions but not in a good way even if people agree or not.
So.. your opinion is correct if people agree or not? Logical.
Epic store brings competition. That's how things improve for everyone in a free market situation. Steam had an absolute MONOPOLY on game distribution to the point where you simply COULD NOT even get some games without a steam acct. Now Epic is challenging that. That's really a good thing. Unfortunately we live in an age of an "all or nothing" mentality so the fanbois on both side want to turn what should be a natural and good situation into some kind of street brawl. It's pretty sad. And pathetic.
Game can be sold outside of steam if they want too was on dev side of thing not on Valve. Monopoly is control can't be sold other then it's that store you have to go to with out any other option. Thats what mostly Epic is doing to other store then just steam. It is competitions but not in a good way even if people agree or not.
So.. your opinion is correct if people agree or not? Logical.
More on the competitons part as steam had to give back to dev more money due to epic little push. It's still do not help small time dev that are not greedy.
Epic store brings competition. That's how things improve for everyone in a free market situation. Steam had an absolute MONOPOLY on game distribution to the point where you simply COULD NOT even get some games without a steam acct. Now Epic is challenging that. That's really a good thing. Unfortunately we live in an age of an "all or nothing" mentality so the fanbois on both side want to turn what should be a natural and good situation into some kind of street brawl. It's pretty sad. And pathetic.
Game can be sold outside of steam if they want too was on dev side of thing not on Valve. Monopoly is control can't be sold other then it's that store you have to go to with out any other option. Thats what mostly Epic is doing to other store then just steam. It is competitions but not in a good way even if people agree or not.
So.. your opinion is correct if people agree or not? Logical.
More on the competitons part as steam had to give back to dev more money due to epic little push. It's still do not help small time dev that are not greedy.
Epic store brings competition. That's how things improve for everyone in a free market situation. Steam had an absolute MONOPOLY on game distribution to the point where you simply COULD NOT even get some games without a steam acct. Now Epic is challenging that. That's really a good thing. Unfortunately we live in an age of an "all or nothing" mentality so the fanbois on both side want to turn what should be a natural and good situation into some kind of street brawl. It's pretty sad. And pathetic.
Game can be sold outside of steam if they want too was on dev side of thing not on Valve. Monopoly is control can't be sold other then it's that store you have to go to with out any other option. Thats what mostly Epic is doing to other store then just steam. It is competitions but not in a good way even if people agree or not.
So.. your opinion is correct if people agree or not? Logical.
More on the competitons part as steam had to give back to dev more money due to epic little push. It's still do not help small time dev that are not greedy.
It's a competition, whether people like it or not? That sounds better.
I don't think the argument is that you can't sell a game outside of Steam, it's that Steam won't allow you to undercut their price. If I were to sell a game I would prefer to have it on both platforms but would lower the price on Epic's store to encourage more sales. I would get the same in the end, the consumer has a choice, and the stores can battle for consumer usage via price or products or whatever. The problem is I, as a developer, do not have that option.
Monopoly is controlling the major part of the something, not necessarily all of something. And steam certainly controlled the major part of online retail sales. Only the biggest developers could afford to use their own launchers, and steam even held the power over that by providing tools that discouraged buyers from using a developer's native launcher if it could be bought on steam, like the friends lists and mod file systems. Yes steam provided a service, but at a giant cost to both developers and consumers.
I'm not condoning Epics seeming "pirating" of games from steam or its draconian game feedback practices, but also can't condone steams use of it's financial might, online software connections and legions of frothing at the mouth fans to push back and try and harm its competition and keep up it's crazy tax on both consumers and developers. This is business tho, so all parties involved, developers, distributors, and consumers alike, are trying to get the best deal for themselves out of it. I'm simply saying that CHOICE benefits the production and end user alot more than not having a choice. I would love to see the fees both parties charge come closer together so that developers would be able to use both sites, and consumers could also purchase from either site. But with steams industry muscle and large pocketbooks, I don't really see this happening.
Ok, I'm beginning to see a trend here of certain individuals avoiding the obvious problems.
Epic Store versus Steam
#1 - Which platform is better? Steam #2 - Which platform has better deals? My guess is, neither. #3 - Which platform takes less of developer / publisher costs? Epic
Based off those 3 key things, I'd love for one of you Epic ponies to please explain the advantage of being FORCED to use Epic as beneficial to players / gamers? I certainly don't see any advantage to being FORCED to use Epic.
The obvious outcome being, if developers / publishers offered their games on every platform and let players decide, you'd definitely be seeing more purchases from Steam. If that isn't enough proof in the pudding that Epic Store is a barebone pile of developer / publisher ass kissing, I don't know what is. There's a reason Epic is doing exclusives and it's NOT because their platform is better.
The advantage of being forced to use epic is that the devs and publishers get 25.7% more income for the same sale. If the devs could use more money on game development, without having to charge me any more, then I'm all for it.
I agree that Steam is lot better than Epic's store, but it's not worth the price.
Also if Steam doesn't sell games that are sold cheaper on some other digital store, then Epic store is not gaining exclusives because they'd make so good offers to publishers. Epic store is gaining those exclusives because if a publisher offers the game to every digital store at same price - say for example publisher gets $40 for each game and the store can add their own share of revenue on top of that - Valve flat out refuses to sell that game on Steam. Valve's refusal then leads to Epic gaining yet another exclusive game.
Steam vs Epic. Two blood sucking vampires fighting over gamer blood. Why don't you introduce amazon, facebook and google to it and have a perfect customer apocalypse. Only morons think any of those companies work in customer interesst.
That's what i find sad, brand loyalty (and i mean both Steam and Epic fanboys) fighting over their store of choice.
Epic is smart though. Seeing how neglected developers have felt over the years with Valve's complacency and control over pc gaming, Epic seized the oportunity to use a Pro-developer focus to gain their favor and with the exlusive games, consumers will eventually come even if some of them boycott their practices (boycotts are useless most of the times anyways). Tim sweeny (Epic CEO), whatever you think of him, you have to admit the man knows his business.
Now, Valve lack of action is what puzzles me, they either think that Epic won't be able to keep their exclusity tactics for a long time or they're planning something else.
But is interesting to see how all this develops, but i'm gonna need more popcorn for that.
Steam vs Epic. Two blood sucking vampires fighting over gamer blood. Why don't you introduce amazon, facebook and google to it and have a perfect customer apocalypse. Only morons think any of those companies work in customer interesst.
That's what i find sad, brand loyalty (and i mean both Steam and Epic fanboys) fighting over their store of choice.
Epic is smart though. Seeing how neglected developers have felt over the years with Valve's complacency and control over pc gaming, Epic seized the oportunity to use a Pro-developer focus to gain their favor and with the exlusive games, consumers will eventually come even if some of them boycott their practices (boycotts are useless most of the times anyways). Tim sweeny (Epic CEO), whatever you think of him, you have to admit the man knows his business.
Now, Valve lack of action is what puzzles me, they either think that Epic won't be able to keep their exclusity tactics for a long time or they're planning something else.
But is interesting to see how all this develops, but i'm gonna need more popcorn for that.
How have developers been neglected by Steam? Give us an example.
"You have to give us 30% of the revenue from selling your game, even though someone else could distribute it profitably for only 12%."
I think Steam offers a sizeable playerbase and a platform that many of these games would never have had.... 30% from the game maker seems fair in exchange....If they think their game is big enough then don't go to Steam.
Steam vs Epic. Two blood sucking vampires fighting over gamer blood. Why don't you introduce amazon, facebook and google to it and have a perfect customer apocalypse. Only morons think any of those companies work in customer interesst.
That's what i find sad, brand loyalty (and i mean both Steam and Epic fanboys) fighting over their store of choice.
Epic is smart though. Seeing how neglected developers have felt over the years with Valve's complacency and control over pc gaming, Epic seized the oportunity to use a Pro-developer focus to gain their favor and with the exlusive games, consumers will eventually come even if some of them boycott their practices (boycotts are useless most of the times anyways). Tim sweeny (Epic CEO), whatever you think of him, you have to admit the man knows his business.
Now, Valve lack of action is what puzzles me, they either think that Epic won't be able to keep their exclusity tactics for a long time or they're planning something else.
But is interesting to see how all this develops, but i'm gonna need more popcorn for that.
How have developers been neglected by Steam? Give us an example.
I need to clarify, when i said that they felt neglected, i mean mostly indie devs. AAA publishers just want more money.
That being said, how about the 30% cut that Valve refuse to reduce to start? or the fact that they reduce it only for those big AAA hits?. This has been an issue for a long time before Epic store came but Valve has control over the PC market, so you either release your game in steam or good riddance (if your indie without an established fanbase).
Or their complete lack of curation?, where steam has so many asset flips on a daily basis, that the decent indie games that come are overshadowed by a mountain of garbage.
I'm not saying that Steam is all bad things, they do offer things that help indies like their forums, workshop or the steam keys and others.
Point being that there's problems that Valve have refuse to address for a long time and now that there is a new competitor who's using the pro dev strategy to appeal them is just a matter of time before more want to change ship.
Steam vs Epic. Two blood sucking vampires fighting over gamer blood. Why don't you introduce amazon, facebook and google to it and have a perfect customer apocalypse. Only morons think any of those companies work in customer interesst.
That's what i find sad, brand loyalty (and i mean both Steam and Epic fanboys) fighting over their store of choice.
Epic is smart though. Seeing how neglected developers have felt over the years with Valve's complacency and control over pc gaming, Epic seized the oportunity to use a Pro-developer focus to gain their favor and with the exlusive games, consumers will eventually come even if some of them boycott their practices (boycotts are useless most of the times anyways). Tim sweeny (Epic CEO), whatever you think of him, you have to admit the man knows his business.
Now, Valve lack of action is what puzzles me, they either think that Epic won't be able to keep their exclusity tactics for a long time or they're planning something else.
But is interesting to see how all this develops, but i'm gonna need more popcorn for that.
How have developers been neglected by Steam? Give us an example.
"You have to give us 30% of the revenue from selling your game, even though someone else could distribute it profitably for only 12%."
"profitably" is a very interesting word you claim there. When it's the only source where one can buy the game, it's hard to prove such a point.
Anyway, I'm honestly sick and tired of mmorpg staff pushing so much on this topic (not to mention the clear jabbing on steam) to get more views and clicks on the site. Makes me post less and less seeing the same news over and over. If I wanted to know about the latest drama I'd watch keemstar.
Personally I detest the idea of one company having such a stranglehold over PC gaming.
"I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)
What a bunch of tosh. Pure and simple Steam created and improved a digital storefront for selling games. And by doing so gathered up a quit large and desirable customer base. That's why developers decided to sell their games there and pay that 30%. A tax on the industry my ass, nobody held a gun to their heads and made them sell there. Any company worth its salt can set up a quick and easy digital store, and many have done so. Some like EA and Ubisoft have even come up with their own version of Steam. So painting Steam as some kind of bully forcing companies to use their service is a complete load of shit. And painting Epic as some kind of saint is just as much of a steaming pile of shit. All Epic is doing is cutthroating their competition to try and corner a percentage of the market. And doing so while offering a much inferior storefront to their customers. This isn't some good verses evil, little guy vs a titan, its simply commerce. One group of rich bastards is trying to make a profit via enticing customers away from their competition, yet another group of rich bastards. Trying to spin this as anything else is severely disingenuous.
Indie devs don't have much of an option regarding their own launcher or store because even the big AAA that have them, don't make a dent in steam dominance. So indie devs are stuck with steam.
Regarding Epic however, i do agree, perception is a powerful thing and regardless if we like it or not that's how Epic are playing their cards.
Epic saw an opportunity and are using it to their advantage, they just want their own monopoly like the one Valve has, that's all.
What a bunch of tosh. Pure and simple Steam created and improved a digital storefront for selling games. And by doing so gathered up a quit large and desirable customer base. That's why developers decided to sell their games there and pay that 30%. A tax on the industry my ass, nobody held a gun to their heads and made them sell there. Any company worth its salt can set up a quick and easy digital store, and many have done so. Some like EA and Ubisoft have even come up with their own version of Steam. So painting Steam as some kind of bully forcing companies to use their service is a complete load of shit. And painting Epic as some kind of saint is just as much of a steaming pile of shit. All Epic is doing is cutthroating their competition to try and corner a percentage of the market. And doing so while offering a much inferior storefront to their customers. This isn't some good verses evil, little guy vs a titan, its simply commerce. One group of rich bastards is trying to make a profit via enticing customers away from their competition, yet another group of rich bastards. Trying to spin this as anything else is severely disingenuous.
Indie devs don't have much of an option regarding their own launcher or store because even the big AAA that have them, don't make a dent in steam dominance. So indie devs are stuck with steam.
Regarding Epic however, i do agree, perception is a powerful thing and regardless if we like it or not that's how Epic are playing their cards.
Epic saw an opportunity and are using it to their advantage, they just want their own monopoly like the one Valve has, that's all.
I disagree with the first part. That's the curse of being an indie studio, lack of cash flow. That's no one's fault but their own. In the past these companies had the choice to remain a small independent studio, and pray for one of their games to become a serious hit. Or to sign on with a big game publisher to gain more funds, and recognition. Just looking at how many indie studios went to their grave at EA, shows that was rarely a good step for the little guy. And then along came Steam, and gave them a venue to sell their games without selling their souls. And funnily enough over the past couple of years, the biggest gripe I've seen people mention is they feel Steam has let too many indie, low talent game makers sell there.
I'm not denying the achievements that Valve has made with steam over the years (thanks to them and their regional prices i became a pc gamer) and yes, steam gave the pc platform an stable storefront where even single individuals could sale their games.
However, things have change and steam quality (from the developer perspective) have decline over the years, which could be attributed to their monopoly over the pc platform and that's where Epic comes and starts catering to them:
- a better % cut
- no royalties fees from the unreal engine
- curated store
And they offer those 'sweet' exclusive deals. One example is an incoming game from an indie studio called Phoenix Point one of the recent games that became Epic exclusives, did you know that Epic besides giving them a huge stack of cash, they gave them a guarantee sales offer that if their game underperform in the Epic Games Store, Epic will pay their losses.
After all that, do you think that would not tempt any indie into going with Epic?
You know you have hit a new level of stupid when you are comparing VHS and Beta. Maybe next we can do BluRay vs HD DVD. Or how about Vanilla vs Chocolate. The old timers loved that vanilla then those damn inventors discovered Chocolate.
Here is to hoping all developers just self publish on their own company specific launchers in the future. Then we can watch the PC gaming world truly explode. I guess no one will ever buy a PC game again at that point. But I am a watch the world burn kind of guy so bring it on.
You're calling it stupid when you can't even wrap your brain around an analogy of 2 products where one was CLEARLY black and white on paper superior but lost the market battle. Then you insert chocolate vs vanilla as a comparison when that's literally a matter of taste and preference.
I'll raise your "stupid" accusation, to what you're saying is F@#$ING RETARDED. Reformat your counterpoint.
"As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*"
Its hilarious people are clamoring over "Epic fanboyism" when in reality it's the Steam fanboys that started this horrible mess. Logical thinkers just came out to try to knock sense into people (what a joke) and suddenly they are the fanboys. Irrational thinking wins I guess.
Steam vs Epic. Two blood sucking vampires fighting over gamer blood. Why don't you introduce amazon, facebook and google to it and have a perfect customer apocalypse. Only morons think any of those companies work in customer interesst.
That's what i find sad, brand loyalty (and i mean both Steam and Epic fanboys) fighting over their store of choice.
Epic is smart though. Seeing how neglected developers have felt over the years with Valve's complacency and control over pc gaming, Epic seized the oportunity to use a Pro-developer focus to gain their favor and with the exlusive games, consumers will eventually come even if some of them boycott their practices (boycotts are useless most of the times anyways). Tim sweeny (Epic CEO), whatever you think of him, you have to admit the man knows his business.
Now, Valve lack of action is what puzzles me, they either think that Epic won't be able to keep their exclusity tactics for a long time or they're planning something else.
But is interesting to see how all this develops, but i'm gonna need more popcorn for that.
How have developers been neglected by Steam? Give us an example.
"You have to give us 30% of the revenue from selling your game, even though someone else could distribute it profitably for only 12%."
And? retail takes 50% there is no neglect. Asking for 30% is business. That’s it. Not personal like many here think.
Build yourself a brick and mortar store that has global access to hundreds of millions of people just to sell your game. Tell me how much that costs.
Now build yourself a website to distribute your software.
You're telling me that any of the app stores that charge 30% are earning that keep? Bullshit. You got sucked in, buddy.
As far as I know, Valve has exclusives on Steam since... Always.
Hypocrisy is funny.
More stores more competition, that is good for customers. Monopoly was and will always be bad for us.
All this rage against Epic exclusives is a mix of stupidity and double standards.
What about your own double standards in that Epic is holding a monopoly on certain games for a pre-determined length of time. Is a monopoly always bad for us or only when Valve did it? And Valve never really did it. There were always competition for Valve and they didn't have to demand exclusive deals.
Also if 30% is such a deep and unnecessary cut, does it mean that the games will be cheaper on Epic or will they cost the same? If they cost the same, why go to Epic at all if it didn't hold a monopoly on certain games?
The difference is $7.20 on epic and $18 on steam. 100k copies sold on a platform means $1M difference in earnings for the company making the title. A $60 title on epic store would have to cost $75 for the same copy on steam.
If you want to pay less to the people actually making the game you now have to wait 6-12 months so you can get it on steam.
No, it would still cost $60 on Steam. We're not seeing the price difference so why should consumers care?
You know you have hit a new level of stupid when you are comparing VHS and Beta. Maybe next we can do BluRay vs HD DVD. Or how about Vanilla vs Chocolate. The old timers loved that vanilla then those damn inventors discovered Chocolate.
Here is to hoping all developers just self publish on their own company specific launchers in the future. Then we can watch the PC gaming world truly explode. I guess no one will ever buy a PC game again at that point. But I am a watch the world burn kind of guy so bring it on.
You're calling it stupid when you can't even wrap your brain around an analogy of 2 products where one was CLEARLY black and white on paper superior but lost the market battle. Then you insert chocolate vs vanilla as a comparison when that's literally a matter of taste and preference.
I'll raise your "stupid" accusation, to what you're saying is F@#$ING RETARDED. Reformat your counterpoint.
Way to resort to name calling which I what I come to expect from people. This is all funny to me which you seem to be missing while attempting to hurl insults.
What you cannot wrap your brain around is I find this all funny and just like seeing people get all twisted up over something so completely stupid as this. This whole conversation as you say is fucking retarded. Cannot wait for the article next week to continue this down this road as it really does bring out the stupid in people.
I didn't name call you, you said what I said was "new level of stupid" with a response that I said was f#$%ing retarded (which it actually factually was).
I don't know if you're being obtuse for the sake of argument but you're missing what you're saying and then missing what the response says as well.
I haven't seen anybody in this thread having a problem with EPIC opening it's platform to other developers or offering better splits. The issue is the exclusivity of titles that were non-exclusive previously. By doing that they open themselves up to scrutiny and comparison to other platforms. They suck in comparison.
The counterpoint is "competition gud" (see the above) "it doesn't matter" "you guys are crying about nothing". What everybody does is their own business but scoffing at folks who streamline their user experience does not put anyone among scholars.
"As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*"
Comments
I don't think the argument is that you can't sell a game outside of Steam, it's that Steam won't allow you to undercut their price. If I were to sell a game I would prefer to have it on both platforms but would lower the price on Epic's store to encourage more sales. I would get the same in the end, the consumer has a choice, and the stores can battle for consumer usage via price or products or whatever. The problem is I, as a developer, do not have that option.
I'm not condoning Epics seeming "pirating" of games from steam or its draconian game feedback practices, but also can't condone steams use of it's financial might, online software connections and legions of frothing at the mouth fans to push back and try and harm its competition and keep up it's crazy tax on both consumers and developers. This is business tho, so all parties involved, developers, distributors, and consumers alike, are trying to get the best deal for themselves out of it. I'm simply saying that CHOICE benefits the production and end user alot more than not having a choice. I would love to see the fees both parties charge come closer together so that developers would be able to use both sites, and consumers could also purchase from either site. But with steams industry muscle and large pocketbooks, I don't really see this happening.
I agree that Steam is lot better than Epic's store, but it's not worth the price.
Also if Steam doesn't sell games that are sold cheaper on some other digital store, then Epic store is not gaining exclusives because they'd make so good offers to publishers. Epic store is gaining those exclusives because if a publisher offers the game to every digital store at same price - say for example publisher gets $40 for each game and the store can add their own share of revenue on top of that - Valve flat out refuses to sell that game on Steam. Valve's refusal then leads to Epic gaining yet another exclusive game.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Anyway, I'm honestly sick and tired of mmorpg staff pushing so much on this topic (not to mention the clear jabbing on steam) to get more views and clicks on the site. Makes me post less and less seeing the same news over and over. If I wanted to know about the latest drama I'd watch keemstar.
"I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)
Epic is run by cotton headed ninny muggins.
I'll raise your "stupid" accusation, to what you're saying is F@#$ING RETARDED. Reformat your counterpoint.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Now build yourself a website to distribute your software.
You're telling me that any of the app stores that charge 30% are earning that keep? Bullshit. You got sucked in, buddy.
What about your own double standards in that Epic is holding a monopoly on certain games for a pre-determined length of time. Is a monopoly always bad for us or only when Valve did it? And Valve never really did it. There were always competition for Valve and they didn't have to demand exclusive deals.
Also if 30% is such a deep and unnecessary cut, does it mean that the games will be cheaper on Epic or will they cost the same? If they cost the same, why go to Epic at all if it didn't hold a monopoly on certain games?
No, it would still cost $60 on Steam. We're not seeing the price difference so why should consumers care?
I don't know if you're being obtuse for the sake of argument but you're missing what you're saying and then missing what the response says as well.
I haven't seen anybody in this thread having a problem with EPIC opening it's platform to other developers or offering better splits. The issue is the exclusivity of titles that were non-exclusive previously. By doing that they open themselves up to scrutiny and comparison to other platforms. They suck in comparison.
The counterpoint is "competition gud" (see the above) "it doesn't matter" "you guys are crying about nothing". What everybody does is their own business but scoffing at folks who streamline their user experience does not put anyone among scholars.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯