Epic CEO Tim Sweeney Says Only Exclusive Deals Can Combat Steam (see staff post for discussion guidelines)

[danm999]

Like I said the strategy of "stealing" steam games instead of developing or paying for new games might be wrong because it's backfired a bit.

Doesn't invalidate his larger point.

Also you don't disentrench a major player in an industry like steam overnight.

They probably got the second biggest store in the world off the back of fortnite; it caught them by surprise and they made this move so they went for it while fortnite was still hot.

They probably thought paying for ground up exclusive content would take too long to capitalize on fortnites popularity to build up the store, so stealing steam games was the fastest way to build up the library.

Click to shrink...

No I see what they're going for but Ubisoft, EA, Activision Blizzard have all had a go at this with their own exclusive titles being tied to their own stores and not being on Steam but honestly it hasn't worked at all.

Maybe the EGS will go harder at it than any of them did, but I'm skeptical they'll achieve a meaningful market share before it becomes unsustainable to keep signing deals like they've done.

 

[danmaku]

A lower cut means games are cheaper to make, which means better games or cheaper games can be made. Ultimately you play games, not steam... I think he's got a point there. Especially if it's true that the 30% cut is higher than the profit (and that's not unbelievable)

Click to shrink...

No, not at all. A lower cut for the store means the publisher gets more money, period. What the publisher decide to do with the extra money is up to them. They could decide to invest in more games, they could also decide to make the same games as before and invest more in marketing, or give higher dividends to shareholders. There's no cause/effect relationship here.

 

[svacina]

No, not at all. A lower cut for the store means the publisher gets more money, period. What the publisher decide to do with the extra money is up to them. They could decide to invest in more games, they could also decide to make the same games as before and invest more in marketing, or give higher dividends to shareholders. There's no cause/effect relationship here.

Click to shrink...

And what it certainly does not mean is cheaper games.

 

[Monster Zero]

He is right. If the games I wanted were on Steam and not the Epic Store I would have bought them there. They have already got me for Metro Exodus, Control, and Outer Worlds.

 

[Custódio]

Content platforms always compete on availability of content. Steam did the exact same thing early on with Half Life. Look at what's happening in the streaming video space. Look at console gaming.

Click to shrink...

"It's shitty over there too" is an horrible argument to defend something.

 

[elyetis]

Even if you end up accepting that argument. They made the choice of paying for exclusivity of pretty much already made game ( say Metro, Ubisoft titles, etc ), even freaking crowdfunded ones, over funding development of new exclusive titles which wouldn't be made otherwise ( think nintendo and bayonetta ).

I guess it technically "sorta" happened. Epic paid for exclusivity for a bunch of games, then paid them even more so that he could list the games as cheaper during the Mega sale and try to get more interest.

Click to shrink...

Just like those exclusivity deal are made in a way that most likely make Epic loose money, that sales where Epic took all the cost is only a reality because they are at a phase where they try to get marketshare. That's not an example of developer/publisher giving us games at a lower price thanks to their bigger cut.

Neither the free games or those kind of sales are things that we can be sure of seeing long term, and except for select region with regional pricing where Steam does not have it yet, those are the only things EGS did that ever benefited the consumer.

IMHO the only thing which makes sense with EGS current direction is that they want to increase their paying userbase enough so that publisher/dev release exclusively ( even if only timed ) on EGS by themselves. Otherwise the result will always be the same, people who have both EGS ( because of previous exclusive deal ) and Steam, will buy the game where there is the better service ( and often the better price of bought outside of steam ), so EGS would get little to no $$ and the publisher doesn't benefit from the different cut.
Attracting people with exclusive is only usefull in two scenario :
- if you keep having new exclusives
- if you convince your now consumer, to keep using your store because it's as good or better than the competition
Currently everything point to Epic aiming for the first one ( among other thing, by using a different cut for game made with unreal engine to lead to that scenario ), not the second. And nothing realistically lead me to believe gaming is the only business where trickle down economics is real, and it's really suprising how many people on Era actually think it does.

 

[ioriyagami]

Remember Bayonetta 2? Shadow of the Tomb Raider? Street Fighter V? That's the problem here.

Click to shrink...

Not quite the same, you don't need to buy another gaming platform to play an EGS exclusive. You just have to let go some loyalty features (trophies, chat, friends) and partition your game library in two "shelves". I'd say is not such a big inconvenience.

As for your second point, developers getting more benefits do not benefit customers in any way.

Click to shrink...

Arguably it is. The Steam cut is big enough to reduce benefits so much that some studios can't afford to even publish, or just keep existing after mediocre sales. Studios with more benefits can invert more in their staff and improve faster than studios that can barely survive, which in the end should result in better games. But yeah I guess this point is mostly speculation (on your side as well).

 

[svacina]

He is right. If the games I wanted were on Steam and not the Epic Store I would have bought them there. They have already got me for Metro Exodus, Control, and Outer Worlds.

Click to shrink...

The question is would you buy games that released on Steam and EGS at the same time on the EGS as well? If the answer is not yes then his strategy is fucked.

 

[AmbientRuin]

Not quite the same, you don't need to buy another gaming platform to play an EGS exclusive. You just have to let go some loyalty features (trophies, chat, friends) and partition your game library in two "shelves". I'd say is not such a big inconvenience.

Click to shrink...

Ah shit all my controllers stopped working. Now what

 

[z1ggy]

A lower cut means games are cheaper to make, which means better games or cheaper games can be made. Ultimately you play games, not steam... I think he's got a point there. Especially if it's true that the 30% cut is higher than the profit (and that's not unbelievable)

Click to shrink...

The cost of an item doesnt define its price. Basic economy.

Anways, digital games have a better cut on any platform vs retail and still games cost 60$ so yeah.

Trickle down doesnt work.

 

[Deleted member 21003]

Ah, I was hoping to go one day without uttering "Fuck off Sweeney". I guess this is not the day.

 

[Katonix]

Nothing can combat steam fool.

 

[Custódio]

He points out other publishers like EA have run stores for years some with more features, and haven't made a dent in Steam

Click to shrink...

I've stopped reading what that guy says long ago, but if he said that, he's lying lol

 

[danm999]

The question is would you buy games that released on Steam and EGS at the same time on the EGS as well? If the answer is not yes then his strategy is fucked.

Click to shrink...

Exactly.

You have to keep everything on EGS and off Steam for years.

 

[Powerofthecloud]

I thought better services and features can but what do I know

 

[Pryme]

It really seems like he doesn't understand that consumers were happy with where PC gaming was before EGS. No one was sitting around thinking "I wish someone would come along and take out Steam!" because it has been for the most part a great service.

People are able to shop around for Steam keys for different prices or buy on GOG for DRM free stuff. itch.io can be a great place for small devs (and they get a 100% cut) and Origin and uPlay are decent enough that people will generally be okay buying EA and Ubisoft games from there.

Valve have done a lot for PC gaming and Epic have done sweet fuck all recently other than take away people's choice of where they buy certain games. It is so blatantly obvious that Sweeney is only interested in taking down Steam so he can reap all the profits from PC games. It has nothing to do with benefitting anyone other than Epic and its shareholders.

Click to shrink...

And you don't seeM to understand that there are two sides of the equation. Developers matter too, and many of them are increasingly unhappy with giving up 30% to Valve.
This is well documented, but y'all don't care.

But they won't. Time and time again the gaming journalist prove they are typically more about star-fucking than actual journalism.

Click to shrink...

No. The gaming journalists also know developers matter.

 

[Dr. Ludwig]

And journalists needs to start to push him on that issue, and the others. Sites like Kotaku needs to stop with their "it's just another launcher" mentality and look at things from the customers perspective.

Click to shrink...

A lot of journalists genuinely believe EGS is a force for good and that Steam "NEEDS TO BE STOPPED!" for... reasons.

A lot of the complaints they keep repeating in their articles about how Steam is oh so filled with trash is just isn't true (I'm not gonna deny the problem didn't exist when Valve introduced their algorithm recommendation system) based on my experience. For the last year, Steam has recommended me a slew of interesting and quirky games. Low budget sure but they're not the asset flips that youtubers like Jim Sterling keeps shouting about which I haven't ran into based on my user experience.

Let's not even get into EGS's godawful curation policy which ensures that small time developers won't even get a chance to compete in the market.

 

[bbq of doom]

Not trying to offend anyone, but I seriously don't understand the outrage with all of this. Exclusive deals are standard free market business practices in effect. Consoles have always had exclusive titles and I have not heard anyone calling that anti-consumer. It should be clear at this point that no store is ever going to be able to compete with Steam if they don't use this type of practices. This is exactly how Steam got this big to begin with, when Valve gatekeeped access to Half-Life 2 via Steam.

And yes, the main reason behind all of this is Epic getting a big piece of the digital sales cake, but I don't think is unreasonable to argue that developers will have more benefits when getting sales under EGS and that that is a good thing for them and therefore for their customers.

Click to shrink...

Imagine if a game had been marketed, represented, and even sold as a multi platform game. A few days before release Sony/MS pays the dev a ton of money and unless you preordered, you can no longer buy it anywhere else. If it's a multiplayer game you can no longer play with your friends on that system, etc.

That is essentially what has been happening.

These aren't console exclusives where manufacturers publish their first party titles or have long cemented/known timed exclusivity deals. These are games close to release that, at the last minute, are pulled from one platform so as to artificially benefit another.

It's not remotely the same thing as on consoles and the console mindset—and that argument—has no defensible place in the debate, IMO.

 

[ioriyagami]

Ah shit all my controllers stopped working. Now what

Click to shrink...

Interestingly enough, in my experience EGS has worked much better than Steam accepting non Xbox controllers. I have a very old Logitech controller that under Steam I need to setup with x360ce or it would just not work properly, but worked right away under the games I have played in EGS. But yeah, of course this would be a problem, and something EGS would need to fix with high priority.

 

[Monster Zero]

The question is would you buy games that released on Steam and EGS at the same time on the EGS as well? If the answer is not yes then his strategy is fucked.

Click to shrink...

I would buy them on Steam. That's why them having exclusive games forces me to do business with them no different than the consoles.

 

[PrimeBeef]

The only thing Sweeney and EGS has accomplished so far with their "buying 3rd party exclusives" strategy is made sure that I'll never ever buy anything in EGS in my life.

If they actually wanted to compete through exclusives then they should've went and made some new games for their store. Y'know, like Valve did back at Steam's launch with HL and HL2 and such.

Click to shrink...

Make sure you never buy any game that us

Not quite the same, you don't need to buy another gaming platform to play an EGS exclusive. You just have to let go some loyalty features (trophies, chat, friends) and partition your game library in two "shelves". I'd say is not such a big inconvenience.



Arguably it is. The Steam cut is big enough to reduce benefits so much that some studios can't afford to even publish, or just keep existing after mediocre sales. Studios with more benefits can invert more in their staff and improve faster than studios that can barely survive, which in the end should result in better games. But yeah I guess this point is mostly speculation (on your side as well).

Click to shrink...

18% ain't gonna keep a studio open if a studio was on the brink of collapsing from mediocre sales. Also, if they want more opportunity to be seen they should be on as many platforms as possible including the largest one. Limiting yourself to one for a few extra bucks, if you could go under if you don't sell well, seems like a bad choice.

 

[AmbientRuin]

And you don't seeM to understand that there are two sides of the equation. Developers matter too, and many of them are increasingly unhappy with giving up 30% to Valve.
This is well documented, but y'all pretend not to understand or care.

Click to shrink...

Thats nice and I'm not required to buy anything

Interestingly enough, in my experience EGS has worked much better than Steam accepting non Xbox controllers. I have a very old Logitech controller that under Steam I need to setup with x360ce or it would just not work properly, but worked right away under the games I have played in EGS. But yeah, of course this would be a problem, and something EGS would need to fix with high priority.

Click to shrink...

Sounds like a game supported it because EGS has no APIs for controllers.

 

[ioriyagami]

Imagine if a game had been marketed, represented, and even sold as a multi platform game. A few days before release Sony/MS pays the dev a ton of money and unless you preordered, you can no longer buy it anywhere else. If it's a multiplayer game you can no longer play with your friends on that system, etc.

Click to shrink...

Ok, I see that. But that problem, in my opinion, can not be blamed exclusively (or even at all) on Epic, but mainly on the game publisher.

 

[svacina]

Hence the "Only Exclusive Deals Can Combat Steam."

Click to shrink...

But that only works if you only have exclusive deals. That's not sustainable.

EDIT: Yeah, he's banking on the pubs seeing that people will buy whenever when the choice is taken away and releasing EGS exclusive without monetary incentives beyond the split, I'm not stupid. Problem is that we have no sale numbers that could be meaningfully compared.

 

[kiguel182]

A lower cut means games are cheaper to make, which means better games or cheaper games can be made. Ultimately you play games, not steam... I think he's got a point there. Especially if it's true that the 30% cut is higher than the profit (and that's not unbelievable)

Click to shrink...

Games will cost the same to make. They will need less copies to sell to turn a profit.

The cost for devs, artists and the amount of time to create the game will remain the same. They would make more money if the cut was smaller sure. But the problems I see a lot of devs talk about like discoverability is something the Epic isn't solving. They have one thing "we take less money from devs" which is not new (plenty of stores already do that) and he uses that to justify offering a worst experience to consumers.

Also, Epic's whole pitch of streamers getting money out of games sold from their channel seems like a terrible idea but that's another point.

And yes, I play games. And games continue and will continue to be made regardless of Tim Sweeney. Epic Games is not trying to salvage video-games. And they are "competing" in a way that doesn't benefit consumers and trying to guilt trip people into "won't you think of the devs!" is ridiculous because when I buy PC games I often check if they are on itch.io where I know the cut is much better. You know what itch doesn't do? Buy exclusives and paint themselves as "we are saving video games".

GOG (despite being a shit company) have a pretty consumer facing strategy, Itch.io also as a purpose and is dev and consumer first. Epic can only scream about saving video games because of a lower cut while offering a pretty lacklustre consumer experience.

EDIT: Also, they have bought exclusives that were kickstarted and even had Steam pre-order pages. Not even Microsoft does that.

 

[Magyscar]

And you don't seeM to understand that there are two sides of the equation. Developers matter too, and many of them are increasingly unhappy with giving up 30% to Valve.
This is well documented, but y'all don't care.




No. The gaming journalists also know developers matter.

Click to shrink...

Then they can sell their Steam keys elsewhere for a 100% cut if they really want. Something you can't do on EGS. Are these developers also angry at literally every other platform that also takes a 30% cut? Steam offers more features than every gaming distribution service out there and those features benefit both consumers and developers.

 

[Pagusas]

Imagine if a game had been marketed, represented, and even sold as a multi platform game. A few days before release Sony/MS pays the dev a ton of money and unless you preordered, you can no longer buy it anywhere else. If it's a multiplayer game you can no longer play with your friends on that system, etc.

That is essentially what has been happening.

These aren't console exclusives where manufacturers publish their first party titles or have long cemented/known timed exclusivity deals. These are games close to release that, at the last minute, are pulled from one platform so as to artificially benefit another.

It's not remotely the same thing as on consoles and the console mindset—and that argument—has no defensible place in the debate, IMO.

Click to shrink...

That is a BS comparison unless you are going to add "oh yeah; also you can play said game still on your Xbox or PlayStation, you just have to use a different store front". Pc game store exclusives ARE NOT the same as console exclusives, stop trying to make that comparison. You can still play any PC game you want with your current hardware, wether it's on Epic or steam. It doesn't cost you any more, you don't have to pay to download the store app, and you can still add a game shortcut to steam and have all your library right there to launch from.

 

[dgrdsv]

They did, it's called fortnite. Let's not kid ourselves that the entire user acquisition strategy for EGS is "Fortnite is really popular."

Click to shrink...

Fortnite is popular, sure, but it's hardly everyone's cup of tea. The fact that the majority of Fortnite userbase don't even have Steam accounts says a lot about its appeal and its ability to compete with Steam.

 

[SteveWinwood]

i wish he would just go away

 

[PrimeBeef]

No. The gaming journalists also know developers matter.

Click to shrink...

This isn't about devs. The EGS operating platform of 88/12 is unsustainable according to the guy who brags about it. There is no competition, games are bign limited to one platform for distribution, unable to be seen by others that my be interested if it came across their screen in other storefronts. This isn't about devs and never has been. Once again people were sold a bill of goods.

 

[khamakazee]

It backfired oh him because he does not know when to shut the fuck up. If somebody broke his fingers to stop him from tweeting there would be much less outrage.

Click to shrink...

That still doesn't disprove what I said. Even if all things were equal it would be a tall order to expect EGS to sell just as well as Steam, that's the point he is trying to make and exclusives do help. Look at how people buy Nintendo games even though their online is subpar and their hardware cannot compete with the others.

 

[MercuryLS]

He's right, features alone isn't enough due to how entrenched Steam is/was. Its like MS trying to compete with Windows phone, having a better looking OS is not enough. You need content, especially exclusive content to get people to use your platform.

 

[Cecil]

A lot of journalists genuinely believe EGS is a force for good and that Steam "NEEDS TO BE STOPPED!" for... reasons.

Click to shrink...

That's once stance that can be understood, but they cannot just stop at that, not ask Tim Sweeney the hard questions, not let things like broken crowdfunding promises slip, and not understand that customers complaints can be understandable ones.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

Not quite the same, you don't need to buy another gaming platform to play an EGS exclusive. You just have to let go some loyalty features (trophies, chat, friends) and partition your game library in two "shelves". I'd say is not such a big inconvenience.

Click to shrink...

That's your opinion, but it's factually the same thing. A platform holder pays a developer to prevent the release of its game on another platform.

Arguably it is. The Steam cut is big enough to reduce benefits so much that some studios can't afford to even publish, or just keep existing after mediocre sales. Studios with more benefits can invert more in their staff and improve faster than studios that can barely survive, which in the end should result in better games. But yeah I guess this point is mostly speculation (on your side as well).

Click to shrink...

Now there's several assumptions here.

First, that the reason some studio can't survive is because of Steam. That's clearly not true since the platform allowed them to find an audience. Remember that PC is an open platform, if a studio doesn't think that the cut is worth it, they can simply not publish on Steam and release the game themselves entirely. The reason they don't is precisely because Steam as tremedous value both for consumers and developers. What's happening is that just like in any capitalistic industry, developers want more and more money. Steam went to several steps to ensure that small developers had a means to make money from Steam, we had Greenlight and Steam Direct for exemple, all driven by the idea that Steam was wrongly limitating access to their platform, preventing them for making money.

Second, that Epic is actually trying to help struggling studios. A quick look at the games they moneyhatted shows that it's not the case. I don't think that Ubisoft, Take Two or Deep Silver are particularly struggling.

Finally, that the surplus of money will be reinvested to make games better. That's likely to be honest, but that's not how business work, or should work. You assign a budget based on a much you think you can earn per dollar invested, having more money doesn't necessarly means that more money will be invested in the game since no company is going to pour money they know, they'll hardly recoup.

 

[Gacha Santa Alter]

That time again huh?



Grown man stomping his feet and making a fool of himself because Valve won't pay attention to him. And why would they? They just have to wait it out, this shit isn't sustainable. Kids won't play Fortnite forever. Then what?

 

[Sailent]

Wonder why so many people made the jump to PC Game Pass then. Or how GOG still exists.

Click to shrink...

You say this like using one platform on PC excludes you from using others. I use both Steam and the EGS, also I have Game Pass and I have my share of games in BNet. I enjoy all of them and I don't choose one over another, every other of these platforms have their diferences and their games (I use steam chat though, but I'm using more and more discord over Steam in the last months).

EDIT: TL;DR people didn't "made the jump", they can just "jump" to another platform without rejecting another.

 

[PrimeBeef]

A lot of journalists genuinely believe EGS is a force for good and that Steam "NEEDS TO BE STOPPED!" for... reasons.

A lot of the complaints they keep repeating in their articles about how Steam is oh so filled with trash is just isn't true (I'm not gonna deny the problem didn't exist when Valve introduced their algorithm recommendation system) based on my experience. For the last year, Steam has recommended me a slew of interesting and quirky games. Low budget sure but they're not the asset flips that youtubers like Jim Sterling keeps shouting about which I haven't ran into based on my user experience.

Let's not even get into EGS's godawful curation policy which ensures that small time developers won't even get a chance to compete in the market.

Click to shrink...

Exactly. Small time devs, which is what alwasy seems to be the topic that comes up about the devs matter arguments, have no say in EGS and are not even on there. That is why I say this EGS shit was never about the devs. It seems to be quickly becoming a think of the children meme.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

No. The gaming journalists also know developers matter.

Click to shrink...

They matter much much less than consumers though. Especially since consumers should be the main audience of gaming journals.

 

[Santar]

I gotta stop reading epic game store threads. The fact that basically none of the posters have realized how disingenuous Sweeney is just boggles my mind.
He's stated himself that 12% is not sustainable!
And that is for the Epic Game Store, a store with basically none of the features Steam offers all developers.

 

[EloKa]

That is a BS comparison unless you are going to add "oh yeah; also you can play said game still on your Xbox or PlayStation, you just have to use a different store front". Pc game store exclusives ARE NOT the same as console exclusives, stop trying to make that comparison. You can still play any PC game you want with your current hardware, wether it's on Epic or steam. It doesn't cost you any more, you don't have to pay to download the store app, and you can still add a game shortcut to steam and have all your library right there to launch from.

Click to shrink...

 

[Kilgore]

He's so full of sh that the toilet is jealous

 

[NookSports]

Steam "NEEDS TO BE STOPPED!" for... reasons.

Click to shrink...

Latest number I could find is that's steam has ~73% market share on digital sales.
Take EGS away, shouldn't we want to promote competition in an industry?

 

[danm999]

But that only works if you only have exclusive deals. That's not sustainable.

EDIT: Yeah, he's banking on the pubs seeing that people will buy whenever when the choice is taken away and releasing EGS exclusive without monetary incentives beyond the split, I'm not stupid. Problem is that we have no sale numbers that could be meaningfully compared.

Click to shrink...

And the engine driving all this, Fortnite revenue, seems to be slowly down precipitously.

How long could they keep it up?

 

[TioChuck]

That time again huh?

Click to shrink...

Oh man, that last one got me hard.

 

[elyetis]

That is a BS comparison unless you are going to add "oh yeah; also you can play said game still on your Xbox or PlayStation, you just have to use a different store front". Pc game store exclusives ARE NOT the same as console exclusives, stop trying to make that comparison. You can still play any PC game you want with your current hardware, wether it's on Epic or steam. It doesn't cost you any more, you don't have to pay to download the store app, and you can still add a game shortcut to steam and have all your library right there to launch from.

Click to shrink...

Metro steam key before the game got exclusive : 39.5€
EGS current price 59.99€

"It doesn't cost you more" clearly doesn't mean the same in english as it does in french I guess, something must be lost in translation.

 

[bbq of doom]

Ok, I see that. But that problem, in my opinion, can not be blamed exclusively (or even at all) on Epic, but mainly on the game publisher.

Click to shrink...

It takes two to tango.

 

[Captain Wreckus]

What pisses me off is his bullshit about the 70/30 split. If the EGS take on a purchase on a game is less, why the hell aren't game prices going down for the consumer?

Every time he bitches about the 70/30 split on twitter, I want to reach through twitter and punch him.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

When I found out Maneater got snagged as an exclusive to EGS for a year I knew I was never going to bother with this company.

 

[Kerotan]

This is where I'm at as well.

Shame EGS squandered all those Fortnite Bucks completely alienating so many.

They can get stuffed.

Click to shrink...

Are titles not selling really well on the EGS?

 

[bbq of doom]

That is a BS comparison unless you are going to add "oh yeah; also you can play said game still on your Xbox or PlayStation, you just have to use a different store front". Pc game store exclusives ARE NOT the same as console exclusives, stop trying to make that comparison. You can still play any PC game you want with your current hardware, wether it's on Epic or steam. It doesn't cost you any more, you don't have to pay to download the store app, and you can still add a game shortcut to steam and have all your library right there to launch from.

Click to shrink...

It can't be a BS comparison if nothing is misstated and everything is accurate. You believing that the outcome is fine—for you—doesn't change that what I stated is objectively what happens.

How we make our own value judgments after the fact is a subjective exercise. How it gets there is not.