I don't agree. Money in the bank is great but for word of mouth to kick in you need actual humans playing your game.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Epic Games paid 9.49M€ for Control exclusivity
- Thread starter KoolAid
- Start date
I don't agree. Money in the bank is great but for word of mouth to kick in you need actual humans playing your game.
And they are. It's available on both consoles and people can play on their PC with a different launcher. And people can play on steam later that dont want to use Epic.
For a studio like Remedy this was the smart play short term and long term.
The internet outrage about epic is just people shouting in the wind.
Well I played the game on EGS.
I didn't buy it on EGS, but I did play it on it.
Doing some quick math it seems like if it was an advance on copies sold it was not a good deal for Remedy/505. If it was a lump sum for exclusivity, it was not a good deal for epic considering the number of copies needing to be sold including revenue split to break even.
We don't know yet if EGS-exclusive games will have a good launch on Steam or if they will fail. Game releases are usually heavy frontloaded so it's more likeley that those games won't achieve huges sales on Steam once they release there (or GOG, Itch, Twitch, Whatever) with a 12 months delay.
Also there is only one example of a more or less successful EGS exclusive title and that is Satisfactory. All others seem to have low sale numbers.
Technically true, yet Remedy does not gain any profit for any sales right now.
I wonder what the price of all of these exclusives will be when they do come to steam. Quantum break launched on steam at $39.99 after being xbox exclusive and then briefly a windows store exclusive.
That's a fair point.
But with this money they are minimizing risk and that's why so many studios are taking the money. I'm thinking they are betting on already having recouped all budgets by that time and already collecting profit so by the time the exclusive period ends it's just gravy on top.
Obviously they've run the numbers and think it's the best play.
Is the 9.5m a payout with no extra strings (other than EGS 1 year exclusivity) or is it simply a guaranteed sales buffer? I believe most of the EGS deals have been the latter, basically "We guarantee at least $9.5m in sales on the epic store for control in the first year, if it sells less we will cover the difference".
Its interesting though that if it is indeed a guarantee, that they will pay up front. It doesn't really matter much to them I guess, they will collect the sales numbers and keep the money until it hits $9.5m but its gotta be a huge difference to Remedy/505/etc who see the money up front.
Although thats just pure guessing on my part, if they managed to get a deal to get a $9.5m bonus AND still keep all the sales, that would be crazy.
Its interesting though that if it is indeed a guarantee, that they will pay up front. It doesn't really matter much to them I guess, they will collect the sales numbers and keep the money until it hits $9.5m but its gotta be a huge difference to Remedy/505/etc who see the money up front.
Although thats just pure guessing on my part, if they managed to get a deal to get a $9.5m bonus AND still keep all the sales, that would be crazy.
It's always the one thing that made no sense to me when games launch late on another platform and are asking full price day 1 when the other platform is discounted heavily.
Epic want to hurt Steam more than make profit and raise set of users.
Based on what Tim has said on twitter and reddit, Epic pays 12 months (exclusivity period) projected sales as guarantee and possibly some development funding/marketing funding. Safe to say, Control didn't sell 12 months sales in 1 month.
I'm guessing $40 for Metro Exodus base version and $50 for the deluxe. Probably $40 for control as well. Prices for both will going down quickly though.
Yes, which is why I was talking about the exclusive deals that are happening.
EGS is throwing a bunch of free games out to get more people on their launcher (and some are pretty solid), but most have also been out for a while and can already be gotten else where for cheap. Cheap is still more expensive than free.
Bbut so far we haven't seen any of publishers selling their games on EGS for less than other markets due to the increased revenue share.
So is it an exclusive payment or an advance on future revenue?
im ok with either.
I think the first groups of games to break out from the exclusivity are going to be full price. Somebody's gotta test the waters and see if the customers will treat the game coming to the platform they want as literally the launch of the game.
Time and time again it has been shown that Twitch numbers are unreliable when it comes to demonstrating any significant trend. You might be right. You might be wrong. When a handful of streamers with 10k plus viewers can massively influence Twitch viewership ranks, there is no meaningful data to be culled, at least on a short term basis.
Also from the same report, Bloodstained sales were 13,8M€, as of June 30th (after one week).
Cool, maybe they should patch it.
These deals are typically structured as minimal sales guarantees. The platform holder pays you an advance against selling X units on the platform. Once they recoup, normal splits for units beyond that. Likely also contractual guarantees around store placement/featuring during specific periods.
And? Not taking this money doesn't guarantee actual humans will play the game either. The game is readily available to 140 million-plus gamers on console already and the sales still didn't set the world on fire.Extremely smart move in hindsight.
Is there any disclosure of digital sales?
Also, it was bundled with Nvidia cards, they would have made some money there as well.
You know the old saying, bros before 505 Games.
The article doesn't said sales advance, at all. Every deal is unique.
You don't know that, or give me the sales figures of EGS. Keep your agenda out of this please.
That's kind of the point. The game needs as many people playing it and talking about it precisely because it didn't set the world on fire.
Yeah, this makes much more sense to me. Blank check for 9.5m EUR for a game with limited appeal like Control (no offense to Remedy) is too much.
Maybe true, but it will damage their longterm potential on PC. Hopefully for them those Playstation acquisition rumors are true.
And if the game really bombed without an exclusivity deal Remedy would be unlikely to stay open long enough to find any other investors. Until there is real proof that an Epic deal hurts a game's sales publishers and management at development studios would be negligent to not take such obviously lopsided deals.
505's parent company took half, but yes, between the two entities they recouped more than their initial investment. The fact that they're running it through a few corporate layers is likely nothing more than a tax dodge. The overall publisher entity got their money back and then some.
Remedy already got almost this much money up front from the publisher and would obviously have other instruments for future payments in this, possibly from the half of this that 505 received. We're seeing a very narrow view into this deal, but even that makes it really clear that the Epic payout was a non-trivial part of the game's total budget, guaranteed.
Sure. But they'd have an even harder time without deals like this effectively protecting a "floor" for the game's revenue.
Hence why deals like this have been incredibly popular since Epic started offering them. Whether its an indie studio who can now staff up and really deliver on their intended project, a mid-sized solo like Remedy who can defer a lot of risk, or a major publisher who just wants a bigger cut of the pie than what Steam has been giving them.
I don't know, 10M is about a day or two of money from the Fortnite money fountain, and while Control might not be a big retail success it has gotten a ton of critical acclaim. You could argue that this is basically their version of an art house film, paired alongside a summer blockbuster this fall (Borderlands 3), to generate maximum interest.
Your argument relies on the belief that being on EGS is hindering sales despite:
1. not performing on the consoles any better than PC.
2. Borderlands 3 bragging up 2x the concurrent player count as BL2, despite being EGS exclusive, just this week.
3. Multiple EGS exclusives talking about how well their games have done, even when on EGS.
There is no clear proof that being an EGS exclusive, especially for games that are also released on the consoles, is a meaningful anchor on sales. For something like Control where this, a Playstation exclusive content deal, and a pack in with RTX series cards all existed, you can see where they're getting a lot of funding from non-standard sources. The second and third from that list also bring attention/coverage, which has led to a lot of gaming media absolutely gushing over the game. Its getting coverage. It isn't the kind of coverage single player action/adventure games need to really break though, as Sony's first party team has changed the game on that genre this generation.
Which is why I wouldn't be surprised if the exclusive content deal was just step one towards an eventual Sony purchase of Remedy, as their style of games and pedigree would absolutely explode with a Sony 1st party budget and marketing push. But thats a different discussion.
The game would have bombed even if it launched on steam and egs same day.
And companies need money to even make games in the first place. The game is available to 140-plus million console owners and everyone with a capable PC who is actually interested in playing it. Being available to everyone doesn't guarantee sales, that's the point. This was a great deal for Remedy, especially considering they recouped nearly half the cost of the game before one unit shipped.
Can't blame Remedy/505 for taking the deal, played it safe and smart, as would most in their position.
Some of ya'll gotta get it into your heads that it's really, really, really hard to create a hit, you can do everything right, make the best game possible, pick the perfect release date, have great reviews and your game can still fail. Hell many indie devs that have created hit games in the past have struggled to replicate that success.
I'm not saying Epic are right to moneyhat games and I'm not even saying you have to like smaller devs and pubs like 505 or the Ooblets devs taking these deals, but understand and respect why they do it. Guaranteed money in such a scattershot marketplace is not to be sniffed at.
Some of ya'll gotta get it into your heads that it's really, really, really hard to create a hit, you can do everything right, make the best game possible, pick the perfect release date, have great reviews and your game can still fail. Hell many indie devs that have created hit games in the past have struggled to replicate that success.
I'm not saying Epic are right to moneyhat games and I'm not even saying you have to like smaller devs and pubs like 505 or the Ooblets devs taking these deals, but understand and respect why they do it. Guaranteed money in such a scattershot marketplace is not to be sniffed at.
My only concern is that Remedy is okay. Doesn't seem that the game took off, but finishing Control last night, it might be my favorite game of the year. Or it's atleast a strong contender.
And who wouldn't take that deal?
And who wouldn't take that deal?
Makes it easier for me to skip games from my favourite developers now that Epic's footing the bill
Why do people think that Remedy had any voice in this decision or that this deal has even affected their financial agreements with 505? The money was paid to the publisher's parent company. Remedy got what they've agreed upon when they've signed the publishing deal, and this is unlikely to have changed in any way no matter how much money Epic paid to Digital Bros for the exclusivity period after that deal was made.
Not to say that it was 100% Remedy's decision, just that the new positive result for them is a no brainer.
Is it? What it likely looks like from their perspective is their newest title being limited to one obscure PC distibution platform with no apparent benefit to its makers. Less word of mouth sales, shorter tail, smaller community around it, etc.
The only one who's in net positive here is the publisher who got ~1/3rd of development costs refunded to them by Epic - and for all we know this may have been ~100% of what 505 invested into the game's development.
Recouping dev costs means more money to spend on future products. Bigger, more expansive products. Sales and word of mouth/community for the games have been good............ what's really the evidence that it's drastically hurt anything? Especially considering the whole console thing. If it was PC only........ maybe.
Also "obscure PC distribution platform" is sort of absurd. EGS is shitty but it's clearly not obscure.