481
Epic Games Store is offering developers 100% of revenue for six months of exclusivity
(www.videogameschronicle.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2023
481 points (94.8% liked)
PCGaming
6463 readers
24 users here now
Rule 0: Be civil
Rule #1: No spam, porn, or facilitating piracy
Rule #2: No advertisements
Rule #3: No memes, PCMR language, or low-effort posts/comments
Rule #4: No tech support or game help questions
Rule #5: No questions about building/buying computers, hardware, peripherals, furniture, etc.
Rule #6: No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
Rule #7: No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts
Rule #8: No off-topic posts/comments
Rule #9: Use the original source, no editorialized titles, no duplicates
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The first few months of a game release are absolutely critical, no matter the size of the studio. I won't buy anything on Epic just out of principle, and I'm sure there are countless other people who share the mindset. A 100% share, vs a 70% one, is definitely appealing at first glance, but it'll butcher your numbers for short-term gain
As a patient gamer, who hates enticements to get stuck in yet-another-walled garden, I refuse to go with Epic. The benevolent kingdom of steam never forces exclusivity deals, and just out of self interest i wont reward behavior that removes options from me.
I guess this means I'll have to wait at least 6 months for some games to show up on steam
I'm ok with other ecosystems, if they treat people right, like GoG, I'm cool with GoG.
Waiting 6 months means you will find out if the game was any good anyways
Found lot of the big titles that go to epic have been terribly unoptimized too at launch requiring fixes anyways, and I don't want to pay more to be a beta tester. I don't want to pay more for early access for a game that will be a better experience for customers who buy it much later.
It raises a fun ethical question: Is piracy moral if you fully intend on buying the game at full price when it hits Steam in six months?
Spare me the “piracy is always moral” arguments; Even as a fellow pirate, the mental gymnastics to justify it get old quickly. Just admit that you won’t/can’t pay for something. So the question is whether or not the morality comes into play when you DO intend on buying the game as soon as it’s available on your preferred platform.
Patient gamer does mean actually be patient. If someone is playing a pirated game I would say that doesn't count as patience with them not depriving themselves of anything.
I mean it when I say im a patient gamer... ill wait and no play it
Some games are already like this. Borderlands stuff has been an Epic exclusive for a year ish in the past. I played on other platforms to avoid it. I don’t know if that’s still the case or if Borderlands 3 was the exception.
So if a game is stuck in Steam's walled garden it's ok, but if it's stuck in Epic's walled garden then it's wrong?
Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think Valve went out of their way to bribe 2k into signing a contract to prevent them from releasing on other platforms. Like Xbox did with Tomb Raider preventing launch release on Sony.
Or do you not understand the distinction? At least play the "well it's PC so what is the big deal over downloading another launcher" card if you are going to try and argue the exclusive angle.
Difference between knowing a game isn't being prevented from coming to the PC like Yakuza and Persona 5 before they got PC ports versus knowing it will never happen, so not even entertaining the possibility like Zelda. Even with Epic exclusives its the difference between knowing that eventually the game will be available outside Epic versus being locked there forever. And it's why I've decided to wait patiently for a Ghost of Tsushima release on the PC versus getting a PS5 or getting it for my PS4. Maybe you are a day 1 purchaser, but I am willing to wait if there is a chance of a game being released on my preferred platform. So its pretty important. Otherwise, I'd get a PS5 if I knew that no amount of waiting would result in PC ports.
Like I said before. You are so much better off saying you don't care about exclusives if you are going to be an Epic apologist.
You just seem to be falling back to hypotheticals to try to downplay third party exclusives. You say exclusives suck but then don't bother putting in half the effort of actually calling out a verifiable recent actions of paying to remove the game from other platforms. Like the most infamous example being Metro Exodus that was set to release on Steam getting paid to pull it by Epic, and being the most lasting impression Epic left on consumers. It's instead hypothetical 2k exclusives that bother you more than actual concrete current events.
The leaps in logic you take to try and downplay paid third party exclusives as being as egregious as a dev or publisher not bothering to release on multiple platforms is an interesting one... But, I guess you have to do that if you are both claiming you hate exclusives, but then also trying to defend Epic and having to resort to hypotheticals.
Honestly, if you want to downplay criticisms towards Epic you are much better off saying you aren't bothered by exclusives. I'm not sure why you are going through such a round about approach when you end up coming off as a fanboy with the leaps in logic and reliance on constant hypotheticals while downplaying or ignoring actual events that could hurt Epic.
Trust me. It's way better to just say I like the Epic launcher being bare bones and I don't care about exclusives. It's just a launcher. This is by far the worst attempt to defend Epic I've seen. Bravo.
It's that upfront money they give that's the big thing for some of these devs I can't blame them for taking that upfront influx of development capital.
Still not buying it from Epic, I hate console exclusivity, including Nintendo, and I'm not going to support it on PC.
As a gamer living in eastern Asia, Epic's exclusives that could only be bought in certain countries due to payment processors pissed me off enough to boycott. I generally don't touch any games that started as exclusives there, either. The couple of exceptions I have, I waited until they were a couple of years old and > 50% off on Steam or GoG
A game that sells 10,000 copies on Epic may sell 20,000 or more on Steam since Steam is so popular. If the game sold for $20 they would get $200,000 from Epic or $280,000 from Steam in that scenario.
That’s why Epic has to offer this. They NEED this to remain competitive.
Or they could make a launcher that offers features that Steam lacks.
Or even just has the same features. The EGS launcher is hilariously bad. It’s barebones and intentionally difficult. It’s basically just a shell for their website API, when then raises the question of why they even have a launcher when it’s just a glorified browser.
And the lack of a shopping cart on their store is just plain aggravating. Maybe I don’t want to do a purchase for each individual game/DLC. But I’m sure they did a focus study somewhere, which found that having a shopping cart encourages people to second-guess their purchasing decisions. Like if you allow people to cart things, they may rethink some/all of those purchases once they get to the final checkout screen and see the grand total. So instead, they’ve opted to make the user experience worse, by forcing you to immediately check out for every single individual item.
Not that I want to defend EGS here, but I would like to point out that they actually have had a shopping cart for a bit now. Hilarious how long it took them to implement, but they do in fact have one now.
What's even more hilarious is they have had one in the Unreal Engine store for much longer.
If you want to criticize the product you should at least stay up to date on what they offer because now we know you don't know what you're talking about :)
On the other side of the same coin, it proves that I don’t use the EGS because the launcher has historically been (and still continues to be, as far as I can tell) hilariously bad.
By that logic fuck steam because it sucked when half life 2 launched
Who judges products by the standards from over a decade ago as opposed to current offerings?
It's got all functionalities required by a launcher, get over it.
That's an awfully generous ratio. I don't recall all the specifics, but a year or so ago an indie game dev posted the sales stats of his game and left out the Epic Store numbers. When asked, he said that EGS accounted for less than 1% of his sales. Now, I'm not saying that's going to be the case for all games, but considering EGS's status as the "black hole of videogame marketing" I would say a 10-1 Steam/EGS ratio wouldn't be surprising.
Tbh EGS discovery of games is shit. I feel that's their largest issue.
It's their largest issue and they literally just won't fix it.. Ostensibly because they don't "track user behavior". Yeah sure Epic, go with that.
There's no winning with you guys is there?
"We don't track you..."
"I don't believe you, I'll use that paycheck that I know for a fact is tracking me, fuck you!"
"Eh..."
Why the fuck do you care if I don't like your favorite multibillion dollar corporation? Fuck I wish I could find someone who loves me as much as you love Epic Games Store of all things
It's Tim. Why else would he be personally offended on behalf of epic when people say they don't use it. He got offended I didn't install the launcher and play the games despite having an account and at least claiming them on the browser.
I just like pissing you guys off because you're acting like child
Yeah same, but I also won't touch anything that goes Epic Games exclusive even when it comes to Steam.