Friday, April 26th 2019
Epic's Tim Sweeney Says They'd Stop Hunting for Exclusives if Steam Matched Epic Games Store in Comission Rates
Epic CEO Tim Sweeney has come out with an interesting commitment: that EPIC would stop hunting for exclusives in the PC platform is Steam were to match them in their 88% return to developers for each game sold. Being a developer themselves, Epic games have certainly looked into creating their own storefront as a way to escape the clutches of Steam's cut in the digital, PC distribution market (a move that had already been done by the likes of EA and Ubisoft, if you'll remember). A commitment to stop hunting for exclusives (and thus segregating the PC games offering across different platforms) is a clear indicator of Epic's mission with the Epic Games Store: to bring back power and returns to developers such as them (while taking a cut from the profits for themselves, obviously).
Check out after the break for the full content of Sweeney's remarks regarding their Games Store and the problem with Steam. I, for one, don't see much of a problem with virtual segregation of games across multiple PC-bound platforms - one of the strengths of PC gaming is actually the ability to install multiple applications that increase functionality, after all. But if the end game of all of this is simply to give more back to developers and Epic's move facilitates that by forcing Valve's hand in matching them for fear of drying profits - then so be it.
Source:
DSO Gaming
Check out after the break for the full content of Sweeney's remarks regarding their Games Store and the problem with Steam. I, for one, don't see much of a problem with virtual segregation of games across multiple PC-bound platforms - one of the strengths of PC gaming is actually the ability to install multiple applications that increase functionality, after all. But if the end game of all of this is simply to give more back to developers and Epic's move facilitates that by forcing Valve's hand in matching them for fear of drying profits - then so be it.
If Steam committed to a permanent 88% revenue share for all developers and publishers without major strings attached, Epic would hastily organize a retreat from exclusives (while honoring our partner commitments) and consider putting our own games on Steam.30% store dominance is the #1 problem for PC developers, publishers, and everyone who relies on those businesses for their livelihood. We're determined to fix it and this is the one approach that will effect major change.
Such a move would be a glorious moment in the history of PC gaming, and would have a sweeping impact on other platforms for generations to come.
Then stores could go back to just being nice places to buy stuff, rather than the Game Developer IRS.
The key "no major strings attached" points are: games can use any online systems like friends and accounts they choose, games are free to interoperate across platforms and stores, the store doesn't tax revenue on other stores or platforms (e.g. if you play Fortnite on iOS+PC)…
More "no major strings attached": if you play the game on multiple platforms, stuff you've bought can be available everywhere; no onerous certification requirements. Essentially, the spirit of an open platform where the store is just a place to find games and pay for stuff.
Tim Sweeney (@TimSweeneyEpic) April 25, 2019
224 Comments on Epic's Tim Sweeney Says They'd Stop Hunting for Exclusives if Steam Matched Epic Games Store in Comission Rates
I’m well aware of the issues, and I say if that prevents you from enjoying a game today when you could be dead tomorrow, what have you accomplished except to deny yourself some fun entertainment.
When and if ever the EGS becomes hugely popular or gets close to the same amount of users as Steam currently has and the upkeep cost goes trough the roof as they need to increase back-end and content server capacity , customer service, etc. dramatically, then I wonder how long will it take for EPYC to raise their fabled commission rates.
Epic (or any other company for that matter) is not hiding anythign or doing anything illegal, how do you think ANYTHING EVER gets exclusive deals? with money... thats how it works.
If you want a developer to limit its exposure only to your platform (so people go to your platform), be it a TV channel, be it a Game console, be it anything at all,
you have to pay that difference that they would have made otherwise (from all those different/other platforms), to them.
Otherwise why would any developer go for that....
Again, this anger makes no sense to me at all.
As for the 70/30 Steam cut, the argument is pure bullshit as you can clearly see when looking at the Steam reviews for games, that 30-40% of keys are purchased from other sites and then activated on Steam and Valve gets 0% cut from those. So in reality Steam is taking on average less than 20% from lifetime sales of a game (ant that is not including the new split of 80/20 for games with over 10mil in revenue).
You want to make Steam go down with its 30%?
Create a platform that is actually competing with Steam so they actually have to catch up with competition.
Epic store is spyware garbage that noone wants to use, make it great, make it 12% and make developers and gamers move to that platform by choice. Using exclusives only turns people away from your sorry creation even more.Because Steam is not a spyware, that would be 1 thing. People abused Metro Exodus for EXCLUSIVITY BULLSHIT. Noone really cares which platform dominates the market. People will use whatever platform is the best(Epic store, even after excluding spying, is just horrible piece of software that does not match steam in any way). What PC gamers don't want is EXCLUSIVITY. Console users accept it cause they are dumb as shit and they think that saying "lol i can play uncharted cause I have playstation, playstation the best" makes them special/superior, without realizing they simply got rammed in the ass by a corporation.
Fighting in any way possible to not have exclusivity garbage on PC platform is far from toxic.
www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/china-how-big-tech-learning-love-party
Wang Xiaochuan, CEO of Sogou, a Tencent-backed search engine, explained this dynamic explicitly in a quote leaked in March of this year:
We’re entering an era in which we'll be fused together. It might be that there will be a request to establish a Party committee within your company, or that you should let state investors take a stake, you know, as a form of mixed ownership
Not a normal capitalist private company.
The point of this thread is the commission rate, and if the commission rate was really the only issue, Epic wouldn't need to give huge lump sums of money to devs for exclusives. Yes, money is how you get exclusives, and the lower commission rate should be enough if the devs thought the platform was worth the lower commission. But obviously that isn't enough. Alternatively, you can have a very well developed and mature platform, that appeals to people. Then you don't need to offer lower commission.
Steam offers more to the developers, offers brand recognition and offers access to biggest customer base, they definately can and should take more money for that. Epic offers less, is shady as hell, tries to intrudce console type of exclusivity (which is absolute cancer and all gamers should finally start fighting that crap until its gone). Ironically enough, they would not have to push for exclusivity at all if only their epic store was actually good and made people and developers switch to it. The fact that they have to bribe developers into taking exclusivity deals speaks miles about the quality of the epic store.
This is not the first time Epic hits the news for spying/potential spying either.There were issues with Epic Games Launcher, their BattleEye (or whatever it was called) anticheat, now their store... They were shady as fuck and they continue to be.
I am all for competition, but in order to compete, Epic needs to stop being shady company and they need to create a product that actually competes and ofc now, fix the mess they've created with "exclusivity" garbage they try to present as being for our own good.
Tencent owns most of Epic, just like it owns most of Riot, and other companies, and they basically dictate how to influence the market with their methods. You're not seeing the whole picture here, in fact you're not seeing any picture at all, that's how much clueless you are.
Let's assume for a moment that Epic did not have exclusives. Furthermore, so many people cite the lack of features as a major deterrent, so let's also assume that the Epic Game Store received the exact same features as Steam.
All features and games being the same, what reason does a user have to purchase a game from the Epic Game Store if he/she already has a Steam account and is comfortable with it? None?
Now let's also assume (in addition to the above) that Epic competes with Steam with lower prices.
How much lower do the prices need to be (on average) to make it worthwhile for consumers to switch from a known client/platform, with which they are comfortable, and instead purchase a game from the Epic Game Store?
How many consumers would rather pay a higher price just so that they don't have to deal with the unknown?
I'd wager the answer would be "rather significantly" for the former question, and "quite a few" for the latter. Especially considering all the FUD that is being spread.
That is why Epic chose to be aggressive, and opted for exclusives -- to give them an extra edge. That is how business works. That's how it has always worked. I know some people have an ideal of how things should be, but reality is much different.
Again, it is still baffling to me how many people (supposedly passionate gamers) throw all these tantrums.
As a gamer and a consumer in gernal, I care about two things: that I get to play good games, and that I get to purchase things/stuff (games in this case) at the best possible price.
I don't defend Epic because I'm their fanboy, or because I hate Steam. I defend Epic because I see this as a potential vehicle to introduce positive changes to the industry that would benefit all consumers, me included. What's the worst thing that could happen? Things would return to the status quo, before the Epic Game Store was a thing?
How boring and/or care-free does one's life need to be if "having to use another game launcher" or "a game being exclusive to EGS for a year" are actual problems that ruin one's day, and cause such outrage. This is as good of an example of a "first world problem" as it can get.
EDIT/ADDED
And how about this proposition?
Plenty of games nowadays are released in less than ideal state, so they require a bit of patching and maybe even additional content to really reach their potential. Factoring that in, one could consider waiting a few or several months anyway, before purchasing the game. If that is the case, what difference does it make where it was initially released?
Maybe nothing will change. If that is the case, so be it. The point is I don't see a downside, only potential/possible upsides.Oh?
Can you provide specific examples of how Epic screws consumers? And I don't mean some nebulous and vague notion of morality and virtue, I mean actual and practical examples of how consumers are significantly harmed by all this.
Where do you live, planet earth or something else? Please answer honestly, because this post i quoted here really made me doubt.
And you people wanna convince me you're not clueless? Come on...
To answer your question, yes, I am indeed from Earth. :)
And now that I've humored you and answered your question, would you be so kind to indulge me as well, and answer my question?
Too bad! if you lived somewhere else it could've been used as excuse.