this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2026
447 points (97.9% liked)
PC Gaming
15725 readers
869 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Tim Sweeny: "Is there anything we are better at than steam? Literally anything? I will take anything we can market, no matter how pathetic and desperate it seems."
Going forward we optimize for "restore from system tray" time. That'll be a game changer.
I can't wait! I'm really going to notice a 0.1s faster restore time.
That's just a "uses more memory whilst minimised."
Unreal is better than Source.
In terms of graphical features, sure, probably. In my (admittedly limited) experience Source games tend to have much better performance and modding, which I find much more important.
Yeah, while the graphics capabilities of Unreal are about a decade ahead with dynamic occlusion culling, hyperrealistic lighting, a very very large set of libraries of 4k and 8k textures, and volumetrics...
the downside is that Unreal Engine is difficult to optimize and harder to use with low level programming.
I expect things to get much worse as they continue to slop-ify. They already advertised an "AI-assisted" build when they published the comparison.
IDK about anyone else, but I'm kind of over hyperrealism in games at this point. Facial animations are still uncanny after multiple decades of trying to figure it out, but less realistic styles have looked great that whole time. Hell, I've seen pixel graphics with more expressiveness and emotion than some Unreal engine games. Sure the lighting and set pieces are pretty, but stuff like that doesn't do it for me nearly as much as good animations, good gameplay, and good story.
That's up to developers that use it. Though I haven't much experience with Valve's profiling tools it being closed source makes it harder for devs that want to rewrite any given feature
Yeah but the performance is mostly due to its age. It's much more limited in what you can do. BSPs are great for efficiency, but they're a huge pain to work with when creating a map. Unreal is leagues better to work with in just about every way.
The licensing for source is better than unreal. Its only stipend it has to be published on steam. (Which you're most likely to do anyway) while unreal requires 5% royalities over 1mil gross revenue (outside of epic store, which lets be real... wont account for much)
FWIW Steam takes a 30% cut from sales
And for that cut they provide hosting, cloud saves, promotion, distribution, community support, workshop availability, DLC handling, and a store page. The cut is also much less than what larger publishing companies charge for less service. Self publishing is very feasible on Steam.
As does every store, digital and physical, except EGS and Microsoft. That's the standard retail cut.
every unreal game i’ve played since UE3 has run worse than it’s contemporaries :c
Until Unreal is completely sloppified
Then it'll live up to the name!
He was recently quoted in an article saying that in order to be successful, games need to launch on the Steam platform.