Epic paid $10.5 million upfront for Control exclusivity

[M76]

The cat is out of the bag. It was unintentionally revealed from the earnings report of the publisher's parent company registered in Italy that Epic likely paid at least 10.5 million USD to get their hands on Remedy entertainment's Control game.

Even if this is a down payment against future sales, it shows how deep Epic's pockets are, and the lengths they are willing to go to in order to fragment the market and create further division between developers and gamers alike, while claiming to be only doing what is best for gaming.

Whoever didn't already adopt the EGS will only be driven further away by these backroom deals.

Source

 

[Ranger101]

Bought Anno 1800 last night at the EGS after getting all the Batman games for free....not sure there is any point in me farting in the face of a hurricane

 

[Inacurate]

not sure there is any point in me farting in the face of a hurricane

It's not a hurricane, but even if it were the issue many have is that it's being forced on them in a shady manner by paying for exclusivity and with a poor solution in place, AKA the actual EGS that has no justified reason to be a decade behind Steam in terms of features and capabilities. Nor does Origin, Battle.net, uPlay, etc. Some of these are improving, but it's clear the profit driven nature of those making the decisions are doing 'just enough' for their launchers to get by.

I have several games via EGS, purchased and free, like I do with Origin and uPlay, but they ALL lack the features & support systems that make Steam great.

I'm all for competition, but it *has* to be competitive for the consumer and with the EGS it simply is not by any common sense metric.
The developer is receiving trucks of cash, Epic is creating friction by fragmenting the market and the consumer still has one choice at the same price as before.
On those points, it's worth making your voice heard if you have a dissenting opinion on Epic's path forward.

If the end goal is to put pressure on Valve to reduce their fees, I'm not sure this is the best approach.

Good on the developer for taking advantage of an offer, I hope it works out for them.
I am interested in the game, but I don't feel it's worth $30 and will wait for a sale.
If one never comes, then neither does the sale!

 

[Armenius]

 

[RPGWiZaRD]

Unfortunately the only way this madness stops is if Epic's cashcow is milked dry aka. Fortnite.

 

[zamardii12]

Unfortunately the only way this madness stops is if Epic's cashcow is milked dry aka. Fortnite.

Even that wouldn't matter... Epic has a huge cash cow for a partner. Namely China/Tencent.

 

[dgz]

Missed opportunity with the title. Should've been "Epic paid $10.5 million upfront to Control exclusivity"

 

[vegeta535]

It's not a hurricane, but even if it were the issue many have is that it's being forced on them in a shady manner by paying for exclusivity and with a poor solution in place, AKA the actual EGS that has no justified reason to be a decade behind Steam in terms of features and capabilities. Nor does Origin, Battle.net, uPlay, etc. Some of these are improving, but it's clear the profit driven nature of those making the decisions are doing 'just enough' for their launchers to get by.

I have several games via EGS, purchased and free, like I do with Origin and uPlay, but they ALL lack the features & support systems that make Steam great.

I'm all for competition, but it *has* to be competitive for the consumer and with the EGS it simply is not by any common sense metric.
The developer is receiving trucks of cash, Epic is creating friction by fragmenting the market and the consumer still has one choice at the same price as before.
On those points, it's worth making your voice heard if you have a dissenting opinion on Epic's path forward.

If the end goal is to put pressure on Valve to reduce their fees, I'm not sure this is the best approach.

Good on the developer for taking advantage of an offer, I hope it works out for them.
I am interested in the game, but I don't feel it's worth $30 and will wait for a sale.
If one never comes, then neither does the sale!

Idk maybe steam been out for 20 years and EGS is relatively new. Don't act you don't remember what a shit show steam was on release. Far worse then EGS is now. Now in 5 year the EGS hasn't improved much then you have a right to complain.

 

[Snowdog]

Meanwhile Borderlands 3, just had biggest opening sales for the franchise and the company ever.

People grumbling about Epic and stating the will not buy until Steam, really are looking more like someone said above. "farting in the face of a hurricane".

This is another one of those vocal, but insignificant minority things.

Most people simply don't give a shit which store hosts their games.

 

[Newbie_52]

thats no excuse for egs, steam blazed that trail long time ago, You can't compare building a storefront/client in 2003 to building one in 2019. With the amount of money they are throwing around they could have put that into making a better store but chose to put that into exclusives.

now in saying that im still downloading all the free games

 

[Draax]

While this exclusive launcher stuff sucks ... it makes me remember console exclusive titles back in the day (Sega / Nintendo / Playstation). If you didn't own the right system you didn't even get to play certain games. With this, at least you can play the game you just need to put up with another useless launcher.

 

[GoodBoy]

I might like Control. It would be cool to have another RTX title.

I don't have a problem with Epic having their own client. No problem with competition in the space.

What I do not like is exclusivity deals.

Borderlands 1,2, steam, Borderlands 3 epic?

First 4 years of Rocket league sales/players, Steam, but all new ones going forward, Epic? What kind of shit is this.

So while I have the Epic client installed, I've bought 0 games, spent 0 dollars. And do not plan to until they stop the "exclusive" shit. They might want to add/improve features too.

There's a reason why many gamer's prefer Steam, there is a lot more to it. The money spent on exclusive shit would be better spent developing the client... But it's a shit client, so their "competition" is not in the traditional sense, where you market a product, improve features or add new ones to meet or beat the competitor's offering. Instead, it's these damn exclusive deals and I will not support their platform with any purchases while this remains their modus operandi.

 

[Snowdog]

thats no excuse for egs, steam blazed that trail long time ago, You can't compare building a storefront/client in 2003 to building one in 2019. With the amount of money they are throwing around they could have put that into making a better store but chose to put that into exclusives.

now in saying that im still downloading all the free games

Why do they need an excuse for trying to break into a market dominated by one player? It's just business.

 

[Jagger100]

Steam can offer sales because of volume. Epic offers discounts and exclusivity deals out of investment money they expect to make back eventually.

 

[Lakados]

Valve has gotten lazy, I welcome any player to the market that can shake up the status quo. I don’t get to play a lot of games, I just don’t have the time. But when I do sit down to play I don’t really care what launcher I have to use to play it, at the end of the day though I prefer to go direct rather than through a 3’rd party.

 

[ChadD]

The mistake all the publishers are making is simple. Not working together.

Steam blazed the trail but its time for it to die in favor of a publisher CO-OP. Not be replaced by Epic... or splintered into 101 different launchers.

The publishers should found a non profit distribution company... one with a simple goal. Provide download and update servers, and a central store front. Push the vast majority of profits to developer regardless of size, with "commission" rates adjusted quarterly with the express goal of breaking even. Take all historic consumer sales from Steam / Epic / GOG and any of the other also ran stores and add those titles to users accounts.

That would solve the multiple launcher BS. Build a good launcher that properly advertises new titles to consumers who have previously purchased games from said developer. Market upcoming titles to fans of specific genres. Basically make the non profits goal to forward the gaming industry. In this way the major studios could save a ton of money on marketing (not reduce to zero but drop costs for sure), smaller developers could get exposure.... and consumers would be happy.

The way to break the steam monopoly isn't more of the same. If publishers are really sick of paying the Steam tax... jumping in bed with Epic is no long term solution. When Epic can justify it, there tax rate will increase as well. If all these smaller AAA publishers that are trying to now launch their own stores... would band together and start one launcher to rule them all Steam and Epic could both be out of the game in a matter of months. (well once folks exclusive contracts expire anyway lol)

 

[Aireoth]

Meanwhile Borderlands 3, just had biggest opening sales for the franchise and the company ever.

People grumbling about Epic and stating the will not buy until Steam, really are looking more like someone said above. "farting in the face of a hurricane".

This is another one of those vocal, but insignificant minority things.

Most people simply don't give a shit which store hosts their games.

Absolutely, the broader consumer market just doesn't care, they want what they want and as long as you don't make it prohibitively difficult for them to get it you are fine.

thats no excuse for egs, steam blazed that trail long time ago, You can't compare building a storefront/client in 2003 to building one in 2019. With the amount of money they are throwing around they could have put that into making a better store but chose to put that into exclusives.

now in saying that im still downloading all the free games

No, but Steam could easily have done anything to counter EGS, why do people always act like steam is some kind of white night. They are a bigger POS company than EA frankly, when was the last time Valve did anything but shoot hookers and blow up Gabe's nose?

The mistake all the publishers are making is simple. Not working together.
The way to break the steam monopoly isn't more of the same. If publishers are really sick of paying the Steam tax... jumping in bed with Epic is no long term solution. When Epic can justify it, there tax rate will increase as well.

They don't care about that, the money now is what matters and when the fee becomes problematic they will just launch their own store front, as we have seen from many AAA publishers already.


That aside, I hate all these storefronts, and resent Steam/Valve for taking a do nothing stance and allowing them to flourish.

 

[ChadD]

They don't care about that, the money now is what matters and when the fee becomes problematic they will just launch their own store front, as we have seen from many AAA publishers already.

That aside, I hate all these storefronts, and resent Steam/Valve for taking a do nothing stance and allowing them to flourish.

I agree its a tall order and will never happen. Just you see all these companies like Rockstar trying to launch stuff now. Its too late they will never really sell much through their own store. For the big AAAs lower royalties at launch are where the biggest potential "savings" are. Its not shocking Epic is getting publishers to sign on. Lower royalties during their launch window... and Epic guaranteeing min sales dollars is a no brain move for them. Epic is removing their financial risk and offering them a better return on sales.

Who knows perhaps at some point some bored long time game developers will found a Steam alike with the purpose of not making boat loads of money but to unify the industry into one platform. Perhaps when VR finally dies and Musk makes it to Mars Carmak will have nothing better to do or something. Basically what I am suggesting would be the Hulu of the game industry. I guess asking big developers... and the evil ones after as much data as they can collect to work together is basically never going to happen. lol

 

[Snowdog]

They don't care about that, the money now is what matters and when the fee becomes problematic they will just launch their own store front, as we have seen from many AAA publishers already.

It's kind of like how everything is fragmenting now. It used to be just Netflix, now there are multiple streaming services. Similar in music.

Now game launchers. As far as pain points. Game launchers is the most painless, since you are paying monthly for the music/TV/Movie streaming.

 

[Aireoth]

It's kind of like how everything is fragmenting now. It used to be just Netflix, now there are multiple streaming services. Similar in music.

Now game launchers. As far as pain points. Game launchers is the most painless, since you are paying monthly for the music/TV/Movie streaming.

Monthly fees for games are coming. If either monthly fees or streaming becomes mandatory to play new games, well that's when I'll be out.

 

[Newbie_52]

Why do they need an excuse for trying to break into a market dominated by one player? It's just business.

They dont, just no need to compare a client from 15 years ago to one now and say hey steam had issues 15 years ago so it makes it ok now'. (i know that wasnt you just sayin) ....

i dont care about egs either way, but if their client already had some of the more common features that most clients have, it can only help them.

 

[Accursed]

Most people simply don't give a shit which store hosts their games.

Yeah I've pretty much stopped caring anymore. And while it's nice to see the "Games Owned" in Steam keep rising, I try to buy from GoG if possible. I have no problem with Epic really, as they seem to be doing a pretty good job, and raining down free games. I also think it's probably a good idea to loosen Steams grip in the market place.

 

[Armenius]

They dont, just no need to compare a client from 15 years ago to one now and say hey steam had issues 15 years ago so it makes it ok now'. (i know that wasnt you just sayin) ....

i dont care about egs either way, but if their client already had some of the more common features that most clients have, it can only help them.

 

[Mystique]

Anyone defending steam is simply oblivious to what a fair market looks like and just wants 2 or three less clicks in their life.

You are throwing away the possibility of that 20-40% of wasted revenue making you a better game, fyi.

Steam is a pretty big monopoly and a terrible one. Stop paying Steam for other people to make games when Steam hasn't changed in 12+ years, let alone released any titles.

Valve had cool games in the 90s and 2000's, but lets not pretend they're doing anything other than skimming now.

 

[Aireoth]

View attachment 188943

Naa, steam isn't evil, they are however a lazy POS of a company that only does one thing well, collects a boat load of money for it, and should be treated like the lazy and self-indulgent company they are. Steam has the pockets to do everything ESG has, they have the base to do more than ESG and other can, yet they actively chose to do nothing in the face of rising multiple store fronts except for some crappy UI overhauls.

They can't make a game to save their lives these days, all they are is a glorified online Gamestop.

 

[Darth Ender]

valve does a good deal of funding around wine ...allowing a huge number of windows games to install and run in linux without really any manual adjustment on the end user side.

None of the other game distributors do that. So they can all burn in hell for all I care.

 

[Comixbooks]

That is crazy money game looks floaty but then again waiting for a Epic sale. I mean if they are giving away that type of money a sale twice a year wouldn't hurt. I don't worship Epic but basically have no choice for my Fomo addiction which is researched like a funnel.

 

[NickJames]

Idk maybe steam been out for 20 years and EGS is relatively new. Don't act you don't remember what a shit show steam was on release. Far worse then EGS is now. Now in 5 year the EGS hasn't improved much then you have a right to complain.

Steam was revolutionary for its time, a time that was still dealing with Dial-Up modems. EGS being new isn't an excuse. You can't release a car with 1999 features and expect it to compete with today's tech. They have plenty of money and talent to make their platform good.

 

[Aireoth]

That is crazy money game looks floaty but then again waiting for a Epic sale. I mean if they are giving away that type of money a sale twice a year wouldn't hurt. I don't worship Epic but basically have no choice for my Fomo addiction which is researched like a sive.

It feels floaty at first, but the reality is far from it, they spent a massive amount of time in mo-cap, your character doesn't move like a video game, they move like a person. Its similar to my initial problems with RDR2, and its jarring because most games just let you move without any consideration for inertia, legs, feet, body pivot points, etc.

Took me about 3 main missions to really start getting a handle on it, by the end of the game I felt like a living god, both in terms of in game upgrades as well as learning the system and improving. I had a blast and enjoyed the RTX features, the video's I've seen don't do it justice compared to actually playing the game.

 

[Archaea]

No, but Steam could easily have done anything to counter EGS, why do people always act like steam is some kind of white night. They are a bigger POS company than EA frankly, when was the last time Valve did anything but shoot hookers and blow up Gabe's nose?

Wrong

In the last couple years off the top of my head;

1)Steam implemented a chat room system that is so close to the primary internet leader in this space (Discord) it may very well be Discord.

2)Steam implemented full refunds on any game purchased for up to 2 hours of playtime so you can get your money back if a game is buggy unfinished or misadvertised.

3)Big Picture enhancements along with steam box integration and offline family play enhancements.

4)Linux integration improvements

5)Opened up wider the allowances for various game genres. (Adult content included)

6)a major interface overhaul is due out before the end of the year.

I didn’t look anything up for this. There’s surely other things also - but to act like Steam isn’t moving the ball forward the last few years and is stagnant is flat out wrong. Heck even full game save cloud space allowances seem to be mostly in place now. Uninstall your game? Replace your computer? Pick up where you left off next PC with all the game saves. Have a game installed on one PC in the house but not the other. Stream the game to the second PC over your local network. Want to watch a friend play a game right click and watch him. Game workshop spaces allow mod and added content with easily integrated installers...etc etc etc.

 

[Aireoth]

Wrong

In the last couple years off the top of my head;

1)Steam implemented a chat room system that is so close to the primary internet leader in this space (Discord) it may very well be Discord.

2)Steam implemented full refunds on any game purchased for up to 2 hours of playtime so you can get your money back if a game is buggy unfinished or misadvertised.

3)Big Picture enhancements along with steam box integration and offline family play enhancements.

4)Linux integration improvements

5)Opened up wider the allowances for various game genres. (Adult content included)

6)a major interface overhaul is due out before the end of the year.

I didn’t look anything up for this. There’s surely other things also - but to act like Steam isn’t moving the ball forward the last few years and is stagnant is flat out wrong. Heck even full game save cloud space allowances seem to be mostly in place now. Uninstall your game? Replace your computer? Pick up where you left off next PC with all the game saves. Game workshop spaces allow mod and added content with easily integrated installers...etc etc etc.

1) Their new chat room system is crap, I hate it and Discord works 10 times better (and I'm not a discord fan either). Their changed friends list is also crap compared to the old one.

2) But you cannot refund outside of that time for any reason as they only use algorithms and not real people. Case in point I tried out a DnD game last year that was crap, but I wanted to see if the editor was robust enough to fix it, after 6 hours I knew it wouldn't be and tried for a refund. Any living person could have done this, but not with steam.

3) Big picture is a buggy mess.

4) Completely niche market, I am glad someone is servicing it, but it isn't important to the main and broader gaming market.

5) Mostly garbage, and again niche market.

6) Moving to a UI based off phones, great.

Steams cloud saves have been around for a while, and their workshop is great, about the only two things they've done right in a long time.

Compared to their revenue, the investment into Steam as a platform is a joke.

I say this and Steam is my favorite online store, I can both criticize their shortcomings, lack of initiative, lack of quality control, and still like them. I want steam to do better, but they shown little interest in doing so. They will become blockbuster if they aren't proactive.

 

[Armenius]

Anyone defending steam is simply oblivious to what a fair market looks like and just wants 2 or three less clicks in their life.

You are throwing away the possibility of that 20-40% of wasted revenue making you a better game, fyi.

Steam is a pretty big monopoly and a terrible one. Stop paying Steam for other people to make games when Steam hasn't changed in 12+ years, let alone released any titles.

Valve had cool games in the 90s and 2000's, but lets not pretend they're doing anything other than skimming now.

 

[Aix.]

Monthly fees for games are coming. If either monthly fees or streaming becomes mandatory to play new games, well that's when I'll be out.

Well the current trend is free-to-play - the opposite of monthly fees. EA and Activision love their quarterly DLC and would certainly charge a sub fee if they could, but I don't see how either could demonstrate that they have product worthy of such an expense when they've basically been copying each other and rehashing the same games for 10+ years. Stadia is an unproven concept beyond ideal conditions.

 

[Aireoth]

Well the current trend is free-to-play - the opposite of monthly fees. EA and Activision love their quarterly DLC and would certainly charge a sub fee if they could, but I don't see how either could demonstrate that they have product worthy of such an expense when they've basically been copying each other and rehashing the same games for 10+ years. Stadia is an unproven concept beyond ideal conditions.

There are several subscription services already, the oldest being Playstation and xbox, but Origin has Prime.

 

[Aix.]

There are several subscription services already, the oldest being Playstation and xbox, but Origin has Prime.

Well the thread is not about consoles, so the only subs I can think of would be EA's Origin Access and stuff like WoW's monthly sub. From what I understand about Origin Access it allows you to play their entire catalog of games, and although you won't own any of the games you'll generally get good value if you play more than a couple of them throughout the year.

The F2P model has already proven to be very lucrative and anyone considering running a subscription service will be competing with games that are literally free (barrier to entry vs no barrier). I think only those offering a truly unique game/experience will be able to consider going the sub route unless the entire industry somehow makes the shift, but F2P seems to be the real money maker.

 

[thesmokingman]

Epic is muscling in on the game. I'm not throwing my money at it.

 

[GoodBoy]

Anyone defending steam is simply oblivious to what a fair market looks like and just wants 2 or three less clicks in their life.

You are throwing away the possibility of that 20-40% of wasted revenue making you a better game, fyi.

They charge the dev more upfront, but here we are what 15+ years after steams release, and I:

1) can still download a fully patched copy of a game I bought 15 years ago
2) still have a license to play a game I bought 15 years ago

You don't think that costs money?

And these dev studios got short memories... even at Steams current %share of any games' sale price, its more profitable (for the game dev) than Physical copies.

These newer Launcher/Storefronts? Who knows where they will be in 10 or 15 years...

"well, we didn't charge enough years ago when we sold you this game, so we gotta close. Sorry, your license and save games are gone too."

Steam is a pretty big monopoly and a terrible one.

Monopoly? Let's see, there's Steam, Battle.net, Origin, UPlay, GoG, Bethesda, Epic launchers so far, with more coming from Rockstar and likely others. Not only that, most games on Steam are not exclusive to steam.

Terrible? Opinion

Stop paying Steam for other people to make games when Steam hasn't changed in 12+ years...

What? You don't pay Steam so that third party dev's will make games...

And steam has changed as others pointed out.

let alone released any titles.

Valve had cool games in the 90s and 2000's, but lets not pretend they're doing anything other than skimming now.

This is not relevant to topic.

 

[M76]

Idk maybe steam been out for 20 years and EGS is relatively new. Don't act you don't remember what a shit show steam was on release. Far worse then EGS is now. Now in 5 year the EGS hasn't improved much then you have a right to complain.

The Ford Model T was also far worse than the Tesla Roadster.

 

[UnknownSouljer]

You are throwing away the possibility of that 20-40% of wasted revenue making you a better game, fyi.

That isn't how game development works. For an analogous example, that's like saying a book would be written better with a better split for the writer versus the publisher. Or a song would be better with a better split for the artist versus the record company.
The work is already completed before it goes on sale. The platform these titles are sold on and the split they get has nothing to do with how good development is.
Also Steam isn't nor has never been the only game in town. So your "20-40%" can't even be accurate, depending on physical or digital, and then which platform.

 

[4saken]

big fan of Origin/Uplay/MS Store/etc that give you the cheap sub model. Doesnt work for everyone sure, but as a fair weather gamer, which just a few titles i really will get excited about and be day one purchases, I much prefer to being able to play anything from a publishers catalog w/o having to pay full price. Don't really care about sales or indie titles anymore on steam. Client wise, steam is the best hands down by eons.

Steam is going to have to figure this out for folks like me, everything in life is going subscription. I know that's not a popular opinion here, but I do rather enjoy it.