Epic Games Store

Status
Not open for further replies.

Sycraft

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 9, 2006
Messages
4,802
Epic vs: Steam is like Coke and Pepsi wars in the 80s.

Except that right now Epic's offering is very half-assed. I have no issue with more stores. On the contrary, I'm a GOG head and buy my games there preferentially, only going to Steam if I can't get them there. However what I want in competition to Steam is something that is better. A better interface, better (or at least as good) features, a well curated collection, etc. Right now, the Epic Store has none of that. All they have is bribing developers to not release their game on other stores... which of course means less competition.

It's not a case of "two options that are very similar, just minor differences that one person might prefer over another," it is a case of Epic having a very half baked product and trying to push it by throwing money at devs.
 

Kardonxt

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
3,279
"two options that are very similar, just minor differences that one person might prefer over another"

I agree with your post, other than you don't seem know Coke is infinitely superior to the pig swill known as Pepsi lol.
 

sharknice

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 12, 2012
Messages
2,206
Steam was just for Valve games when it first came out. Steam only exploded its user base and income when they opened the storefront up to everyone. Valve has never made any deal or forced any developer to release exclusively on Steam. They have, in fact, encouraged the exact opposite.

With Half-Life 2's launch in 2004 Steam had just over one million users. It took 10 years to break 100 million. To give an idea of the growth curve, it took 9 of those 10 years to break half that (50 million).

Steam's first big growth spurt happened more than 3 years after its launch with the release of The Orange Box in 2007. Valve released a killer app. Epic already has their killer app with Fortnite, so why do they need third-party exclusivity deals to help their store?

Polygon = level-headed? I read the article anyway, and the mainstream game journalists are all still parroting the same talking points. The difference here is that Charlie Hall is attempting to sound more "reasonable" by presenting this piece as a mythbusting article.

No one in the press has yet made a compelling argument why the EGS is good for consumers. It's always about how good it is for developers.

So you think EGS should be forced to wait 10 years to be competitive with Steam?
 

Viper87227

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 2, 2004
Messages
17,874
No one in the press has yet made a compelling argument why the EGS is good for consumers. It's always about how good it is for developers.

I'd like to hope that more money going to developers will equate to better games. Maybe I'm being naive and they're going to squirrel away the extra cash and we'll see no benefit, but I'd like to think that won't happen (at least not everywhere). Could a greater profit share lead to better post-release support? More timely patches? Better DLC? Could it be used to take bigger risks on new projects? Will it make PC a more enticing platform for major publishers, bringing better quality ports? Or ports of games that may have otherwise been exclusive to the more profitable consoles?

For me personally, what it boils down to is that I'm done giving a shit about what launchers are on my PC. 8 years ago, I was a little miffed when BF3 never showed up on Steam, but that feels like a lifetime ago now. Anymore, it just doesn't matter to me. I'll buy the games I want wherever I'm required to, with no complaints. It's not worth getting mad about. And if in the process, anything at all positive can come out of developers getting more of my money, all the better. Even if it doesn't get reinvested into games, I guess I'm happy knowing that the folks who have given me my primary means of entertainment over the past 20 years get a little bonus. I just don't care anymore about launchers, and nobody is going to convince me that publishers and developers getting paid better is a bad thing.

Steam was just for Valve games when it first came out. Steam only exploded its user base and income when they opened the storefront up to everyone. Valve has never made any deal or forced any developer to release exclusively on Steam. They have, in fact, encouraged the exact opposite.

I get what you're saying here, but I don't think you can compare the growth of Steam to the growth of EGS. We're talking about a decades difference here. Steam grew the way that it did because it really was the only option. They were the first platform to bring digital distribution to the masses, and the more they grew the more people wanted to be on their platform. It all happened very organically.

I truly believe that luxury doesn't exist in 2019. You can't just come out with a new launcher and have people organically switch. Steam is too big. Major publishers have done the same thing Epic is doing now, they've simply kept it in house. EA was the first company to figure out that if people want their games bad enough, they will (begrudgingly) install their platform and eventually they will get over it. Now every major publisher has their own launcher. Epic came along and is offering publishers who aren't big enough to challenge Steam on their own the same opportunity. The bottom line is that despite the fact that Steam is great for us consumers, it's obviously losing it's appeal to the people who make our games. If it wasn't, we wouldn't see the intense fragmentation we are today.

I won't disagree for a second that EGS has some growing to do, and that it lacks a lot of the features that makes Steam the better platform. But I'm willing to give EGS time to grow, just like I did with Steam. I think in time it could become the superior platform, but it obviously needs support from both content creators and consumes to make that happen.
 
Last edited:

Viper87227

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 2, 2004
Messages
17,874
GTA V sold over 10 million copies on steam, Take2 would be crazy to make it an EGS exclusive.

Perhaps they think that RDR2 is a game people want bad enough to buy it no matter where they sell it? No doubt, people would lose their fucking minds over it.... but would they actually boycott it? Makes me think of that picture of the boycott MW2 group where almost every member is playing MW2. People seem to be real grumpy about this EGS thing... but when it comes to major exclusives (especially if they aren't timed), who's going to fold first?
 

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
11,080
I agree with your post, other than you don't seem know Coke is infinitely superior to the pig swill known as Pepsi lol.

Coke is better than Pepsi but I still drink both even though I shouldn't. :p

At this time there is no doubt that Steam is better than Epic. Seems like in 5-6 months though all of the major useful features will be on Epic's platform.

Perhaps they think that RDR2 is a game people want bad enough to buy it no matter where they sell it? No doubt, people would lose their fucking minds over it.... but would they actually boycott it? Makes me think of that picture of the boycott MW2 group where almost every member is playing MW2. People seem to be real grumpy about this EGS thing... but when it comes to major exclusives (especially if they aren't timed), who's going to fold first?

Also this. RDR2. A tiny percent, probably less than 1%, would skip this game over it not being on Steam.
 
Last edited:

Denpepe

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 26, 2015
Messages
1,717
GTA V sold over 10 million copies on steam, Take2 would be crazy to make it an EGS exclusive.

I tought Rockstar also had their own launcher, I got GTAV via GMG or similar and that did not activate on steam but the whatsitcalled social club something or other.
 

Eshelmen

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
4,928
At what point does a digital platform become a monopoly? I think this is the early fear of EGS, they have a ton of money and they're willing to spend it on becoming the biggest digital platform store out there.
 

Denpepe

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 26, 2015
Messages
1,717
At what point does a digital platform become a monopoly? I think this is the early fear of EGS, they have a ton of money and they're willing to spend it on becoming the biggest digital platform store out there.

Well steam kind of had the monopoly, but a lot of publishers have made their own launcher/shop imo not to try and compete with steam but to get a bigger share of the money and maybe better control over their software and even playerbase and cheaters etc..

Thing is these others mostly stick to their own stuff, battle.net only recently added a couple of activision games and those are online based.

EGS on the other hand want to make for some competition, but for us consumers there is little in the way of competition, it's more of a bidding war to get the popular games on their new shop to attrack an audience that goes further then just the fortnite crowd.

Now Epic should have had to common sense to
  1. make sure their software was at least as functional as some of the bigger players out there iso some barebones alpha like excuse of a launcher
  2. should have offered some good games at a better price then the competition to compete with those iso the exclusivity crap they do now.
  3. offer something exclusive to their platform the competition does not have (not a game but some functionality or whatever) that entices people to have (another) reason to join them.
I think Epic might be a little late to the party as the bigger players have already made their version, but who knows maybe with the smaller publishers/studios and an incentive to the players they might grab a decent chunk of the market. I would advise them though to stop the exclusivity bs.
 

Bigbacon

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
17,680
What amazes me is steam/valve have not responded in any way. The could have killed Epic off already but just lowering their percentage or something. 80/20, better percentages after X amount of sales, some kind if tiered thing.

Instead they just sit.

Or the exclusivss, just put it on egs for 49.99 and on steam for 69.99. Let us choose with our miney what platform we want the game on.
 

tunatime

Well...OK
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
4,165
What amazes me is steam/valve have not responded in any way. The could have killed Epic off already but just lowering their percentage or something. 80/20, better percentages after X amount of sales, some kind if tiered thing.

Instead they just sit.

Or the exclusivss, just put it on egs for 49.99 and on steam for 69.99. Let us choose with our miney what platform we want the game on.
Um no games shouldnt be costing $70. Also its not the lower rate that is putting games on egs my bet is epic is paying devs millions to move to epic. The question is if in the long run if this hurts them or not.

I myself would have no problem with egs if they just put them on both stores for the same price or steam 60 and egs 50 let the market chosec where to buy.
 

Gabe3

2[H]4U
Joined
May 23, 2006
Messages
3,214
What amazes me is steam/valve have not responded in any way. The could have killed Epic off already but just lowering their percentage or something. 80/20, better percentages after X amount of sales, some kind if tiered thing.

Instead they just sit.

Or the exclusivss, just put it on egs for 49.99 and on steam for 69.99. Let us choose with our miney what platform we want the game on.
steam probably did. its just that they dont have the kind of money epic has.
 

Bigbacon

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
17,680
steam probably did. its just that they dont have the kind of money epic has.

pretty sure Valve has TONS of money.

Um no games shouldnt be costing $70. Also its not the lower rate that is putting games on egs my bet is epic is paying devs millions to move to epic. The question is if in the long run if this hurts them or not.

I myself would have no problem with egs if they just put them on both stores for the same price or steam 60 and egs 50 let the market chosec where to buy.

prices were just examples but they could do whatever they wanted.70 dollars isn't unheard of anyway when you start having games be 59.99 already or toss in all the 'upgraded' editions people are still buying.
 

Blade-Runner

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 25, 2013
Messages
3,458
Except epic doesn't allow 3rd party sales of games. And that is the main problem, no 3rd party sales, no price war, 80 or $100 games here we go.

Precisely, exclusive deals like what has been brokered with Ubisoft has demonstrably reduced the number of storefronts from which you can buy digital games. With The Division not only could you buy it from Uplay, Steam and Origin, official digital keys were available from numerous third party sellers. Now with The Division 2 you literally only have two options, with there being no competition in price whatsoever.
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
22,819
What amazes me is steam/valve have not responded in any way. The could have killed Epic off already but just lowering their percentage or something. 80/20, better percentages after X amount of sales, some kind if tiered thing.

Instead they just sit.

Or the exclusivss, just put it on egs for 49.99 and on steam for 69.99. Let us choose with our miney what platform we want the game on.
Steam changed their percentage to a tier-based system on sales months before EGS launched. Valve isn't doing anything more because they know what Epic is doing isn't sustainable.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
11,487
Steam changed their percentage to a tier-based system on sales months before EGS launched. Valve isn't doing anything more because they know what Epic is doing isn't sustainable.
I'm pretty sure it's illegal as well in many countries (operating at a loss for the sole purpose of hurting the competition)
 

Kinsaras

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 8, 2009
Messages
3,614
Richard Geldreich was working at Valve from 2009 to 2014. On Twitter he wrote a lot of stuff. I'll post a few things he said.

https://twitter.com/richgel999

Steam was killing PC gaming. It was a 30% tax on an entire industry. It was unsustainable. You have no idea how profitable Steam was for Valve. It was a virtual printing press. It distorted the entire company. Epic is fixing this for all gamers.

It’s not potential spyware, that’s insane. Anyone with procmon and some knowledge can see this. I worked for Valve and believe me they gather huge amounts of data about virtually everything you do with the Steam client. Yet no one calls Steam spyware.

If it wasn’t for Epic the entire industry would still be crunching away to support Valve’s 30% revshare. Most of these profits went to a tiny handful of people who could care less about the industry or working conditions. Thank the gaming gods for Epic.
 

Comixbooks

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
15,847
Red Dead Redemption 2 is rumored going to be on Epic floating around if you search for it you might as well put every game on Epic.
Never was a fan of the social club that came with my Max Payne 3.
 

TheToE!

[H] Brewmaster
Joined
May 17, 2005
Messages
7,638
For me the important features are :
1.Refunds because most PC games are ports and devs are always doing something stupid.
2. Review system.
3. Forums.

I've not installed EGS because i've had no need to. Not sure if it's got those features yet.
 

delita

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
1,667
Last name is suspicious.

I'm not totally against Epic Store, as I'm not one to complain about free games, and that gravy train won't last forever.

I'm not totally against the Epic Store either - just in it's current state. I think it's nice that the developers are getting a better cut, but as it stands, we the players, are getting a shit deal because we have to deal with their crappy store in it's infancy with a huge lack of features that Steam provides. It's not like Epic doesn't have the resources to make their storefront rival Steams. When it does, I'll consider buying a game there. Until then, they can fuck off.
 

Aix.

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
1,899
Richard Geldreich was working at Valve from 2009 to 2014. On Twitter he wrote a lot of stuff. I'll post a few things he said.

https://twitter.com/richgel999

I'm inclined to agree with him based on the company's inability to follow through on pretty much anything:

- they've all but stopped making games, and the one game they did make was a fucking digital card game that was so heavily monetized that it's averaging 300 concurrent players after just a few months. I guess it shouldn't be surprising considering the amount of lootboxes that are present in their signature games like CS:GO and TF2, along with the associated Steam Marketplace selling fees, etc.
- their own "new" engine Source 2 has a whopping two games on it: Dota2 and Artifact.
- their foray into hardware with Steam Machines fizzled and they've now discontinued the Steam Link.

By all accounts their "do what you feel like" corporate structure isn't exactly driving results, but I guess when you've got unlimited money rolling in from Steam and you aren't publicly traded there doesn't have to be any urgency. The way EPIC has treated Fortnite BR, OTOH, has been with non-stop development, community interaction, and attempts to push the boundaries - and I gotta say it's been pretty refreshing after everything I described from Valve above. I get that this will impact the cheap key sellers and all that, but people claiming that EPIC is ruining the industry and that the devs are stabbing gamers in the back seem to be unwilling to look at the big picture.
 

jiminator

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 2, 2007
Messages
11,618
Steam changed their percentage to a tier-based system on sales months before EGS launched. Valve isn't doing anything more because they know what Epic is doing isn't sustainable.
What is epic doing that is unsustainable? That is just nonsense. essentially they have a storefront and a download service and they get a 12% cut of the profit.
People complain about steam and the ludicrous money printing machine that their store had become. Welp, the jig is up.
12% of something for doing virtually nothing is pretty good money. 30% of nothing that steam is getting for new big releases.... well, gaben may need to rethink his business model.
If I was epic I would buy up every single game possible. It is just easy money.
 

ThatITGuy

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 5, 2017
Messages
410
Just give me the ability to download and install the game without your stupid launchers. Not a fan of Epic limiting release to only one "sales platform". Why not do like with retailers, where each has their own preorder bonus. Buy from Valve, no bonus. Buy from Epic store you get in game items and skins.
 

Denpepe

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 26, 2015
Messages
1,717
Just give me the ability to download and install the game without your stupid launchers. Not a fan of Epic limiting release to only one "sales platform". Why not do like with retailers, where each has their own preorder bonus. Buy from Valve, no bonus. Buy from Epic store you get in game items and skins.

Strangely enough I got the metro exodus physical version (CE) from a local online store so there are exeptions possible it seems. My order did get delayed for almost 2 weeks though, the transparent cover had an EGS sticker over the steam print and inside the game box was a wee manual with the EGS code (which I assume the steam one was swapped out for this one, hence the delay).

but since it seems that physical releases are going the way of the dodo this might be one of the few ones where this happens.
 

daphatgrant

Fi-yah!
Staff member
Joined
Jun 15, 2003
Messages
18,557
Maybe I'm old but I just want to use Steam. I broke down and finally got a Origins account. Chances are pretty high I'll get an Epic account. I just get leary of dumping money into a new service/marketplace/whatever you want to call it. Hopefully if one were to struggle they'd just get absorbed by another and you wouldn't lose your paid for content.
 

ThatITGuy

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 5, 2017
Messages
410
Strangely enough I got the metro exodus physical version (CE) from a local online store so there are exeptions possible it seems. My order did get delayed for almost 2 weeks though, the transparent cover had an EGS sticker over the steam print and inside the game box was a wee manual with the EGS code (which I assume the steam one was swapped out for this one, hence the delay).

but since it seems that physical releases are going the way of the dodo this might be one of the few ones where this happens.
I miss physical releases of old. I still have a few binders with my old games like Quake, Diablo, MDK, MechWarrior: Mercenaries, etc. Occasionally I will throw these on an older laptop (because rarely does the new stuff have an optical drive) and play them. I have to figure that if these had all been only available through proprietary storefonts, many of my games would no longer be available (without me having to buy a digital version), especially considering how volatile the gaming industry has been.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SoFGR
like this

Deathroned

Gawd
Joined
Mar 6, 2015
Messages
554
What amazes me is steam/valve have not responded in any way. The could have killed Epic off already but just lowering their percentage or something. 80/20, better percentages after X amount of sales, some kind if tiered thing.

Instead they just sit.

Or the exclusivss, just put it on egs for 49.99 and on steam for 69.99. Let us choose with our miney what platform we want the game on.

Well Steam actually forbids that from happening, you are not allowed to sell a game cheaper on a direct competitor to steam.
 

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
11,080
What amazes me is steam/valve have not responded in any way. The could have killed Epic off already but just lowering their percentage or something. 80/20, better percentages after X amount of sales, some kind if tiered thing.

Instead they just sit.

Or the exclusivss, just put it on egs for 49.99 and on steam for 69.99. Let us choose with our miney what platform we want the game on.

Actually Valve did respond, they now offer 30%, 25% and 20% fees. The thresholds will cover the majority of the initial full priced sales though. The other advantage Epic has in Unreal Engine 4, which they'll waive their 4% fee for. And UE4 is the indie game engine of choice with games like BL3, The Outer Worlds and smaller studios/games. Valve has...Source 2.

I'll copy/paste a post I made in another thread to show you how a developer may possibly make a good bit more profit by selling on EGS only:

Flogger23m said:
12% vs 34% (30%+4%) for initial sales, 29% for most initial full priced sales and then 24% for all remaining sales many of which are going to be at reduced prices. Some rough math:

2K/Gearbox will loose $7.20 on each sale on EGS when looking at the US $60 price. They will loose $14.40 on each Steam sale after the 20% kicks in, which will start after the initial large sales window has largely passed by at the higher fee rate. At a price of $60 USD they would need to sell over 800,000 copies to reach the 20% fee threshold at $50 million in sales for the $14.40 fee rate. When you account for lower cost regions the number sold may have to be higher because countries like Russia and Poland charge $30 for new games as examples.

So we're talking about paying more than $14.40 per game sold for the first 800,000 to 1,000,000 copies sold. That means between $20.40 for the initial $10 million in sales and $17.40 between $10 million and $50 million.

First 16,700 games sold = $20.40 in fees which is $340,680 in selling fees.
The next 816,600 games sold = $17.40 in fees which is $14,208,840 in selling fees.

833,300 copies sold at $60 = $49,998,000. Just under $50 million threshold for the 20% +4% fee to kick in.

So what we have is selling fees of $14,549,520 for the first 833,300 copies of Borderlands 3 sold if selling on Steam. Selling on EGS is $7.20x833300 = $5,999,760 in selling fees.

The difference: $8,549,760 more to sell on Steam.

Now these are rough numbers and I assumed every sale was $60 when in reality some might be $60, some $30, some $70-80. And I am sure the regional sales breakdown varies greatly from game to game. A game like Metro likely would sell a lot better in Russia where it would be harder to hit the $50 million threshold but I think BL3 would hit it more easily as it is a western game and probably sells better in countries that charge more. But what we can see is that the difference can end up being pretty big. A potential of $8.5 million dollars saved without Epic having to do anything else.

Will some people not buy the game because it wasn't on Steam? Of course. Will the loss be anywhere close to $8.5 million USD? Not even close.

Now if someone can find a big flaw in my rough numbers feel free to point it out.

As for selling it for $50 on EGS and $70 on Steam the developers/publishers still won't get the extra margins from EGS and people will still complain that it costs more on Steam. Especially if the price difference is that large. Obviously it will make some people happy, but the majority will still be pissed at such a scenario.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top