• 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.

LewieP

Member
Oct 26, 2017
18,161
a lot of shops do this.
Feel free to point out any equivalent shops that do, as in PC game download services.

All of this is pretty easily resolvable by Epic if they implement a policy that allows devs to get up to 88%, and allow them to accept less in regions that require special payment processing fees. Generally those regions don't contribute that much to overall revenue anyway, so it's not a huge revenue loss.

They grabbed a lot of headlines with their (obviously oversimplified) 88% revenue share for developers and publishers. I don't disagree that it would be preferable if they were more upfront about this stuff, but that's basically the only major reason they have provided for their existence.
 
May 17, 2018
3,454
From what I can tell, the only game that's passing along any savings to the end-consumer as a result of this better revenue split is Metro Exodus which is selling for $49.99

Every other "major" title -- The Division 2, Borderlands 3, Control, Darksiders III, The Sinking City, etc. -- is selling for the standard $59.99.

So exactly where the hell is the benefit to me as a consumer of this superior revenue spilt for the developer/publisher?

I doubt we'll see many devs take this deal. Revenue split makes much less sense when you're charging less. Might as well have stayed on Steam at that point.
 

Kyougar

Cute Animal Whisperer
Member
Nov 3, 2017
9,416
From what I can tell, the only game that's passing along any savings to the end-consumer as a result of this better revenue split is Metro Exodus which is selling for $49.99

Every other "major" title -- The Division 2, Borderlands 3, Control, Darksiders III, The Sinking City, etc. -- is selling for the standard $59.99.

So exactly where the hell is the benefit to me as a consumer of this superior revenue spilt for the developer/publisher?

only in the US. it is the same price or more expensive in Europe/South America/Asia, or rather the whole world except US.
 

Astra Planeta

Member
Jan 26, 2018
668
Not only eat the cost in other regions but offer developers free key generation that they can sell outside of steam while still providing customers same experience as they bought game on Steam Store.

It is very pro-consumer, but valve gets to keep everyone in the steam ecosystem. Still I kind of feel like I am paying more so other countries can pay less, since part of the reason valve can afford to do this at all is steam is so wildly profitable. I am not really sure who is in the right here, I don't really want to subsidize games for other people, but I also don't want them to be out of reach in other countries. This is an interesting topic though.
 

Carlius

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,000
Buenos Aires, Argentina
funny how ppl sayh its competition when it only benefits developers and publishers. Funny how an ex valve developer is saying valve is toxic and was ruining pc gaming, yet hes a developer and not a consumer. So yes, funny how its not good for consumers but great for developers. Who gives a shit about the 12% cut if it only benefits one side.

I get the worst prices in my country from epic store, its not even funny. diviison 2 costs 62 dollars, while i can get THE DLEUXE EDITION for uplay (region price) for 35. Sp much for consumers and helping the industry.
 

Kyougar

Cute Animal Whisperer
Member
Nov 3, 2017
9,416
All of this is pretty easily resolvable by Epic if they implement a policy that allows devs to get up to 88%, and allow them to accept less in regions that require special payment processing fees. Generally those regions don't contribute that much to overall revenue anyway, so it's not a huge revenue loss.

Over 30% of the games bought on Steam comes from Asia.
 

Facism

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,947
From what I can tell, the only game that's passing along any savings to the end-consumer as a result of this better revenue split is Metro Exodus which is selling for $49.99

Every other "major" title -- The Division 2, Borderlands 3, Control, Darksiders III, The Sinking City, etc. -- is selling for the standard $59.99.

So exactly where the hell is the benefit to me as a consumer of this superior revenue spilt for the developer/publisher?

only in the USA. The shift to EGS made Metro more expensive for me in the UK.
 
OP
OP
dex3108

dex3108

Member
Oct 26, 2017
22,859
All of this is pretty easily resolvable by Epic if they implement a policy that allows devs to get up to 88%, and allow them to accept less in regions that require special payment processing fees. Generally those regions don't contribute that much to overall revenue anyway, so it's not a huge revenue loss.

Well that is not true

86f98da6cefb41f3d83321587a82217d65da621b.png


It is very pro-consumer, but valve gets to keep everyone in the steam ecosystem. Still I kind of feel like I am paying more so other countries can pay less, since part of the reason valve can afford to do this at all is steam is so wildly profitable. I am not really sure who is in the right here, I don't really want to subsidize games for other people, but I also don't want them to be out of reach in other countries. This is an interesting topic though.

You as customer are paying the same amount. Price won't go down for you if cut changes.
 

Irnbru

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
2,141
Seattle
Payment method deployment is a very complex integration task and it sounds like they need more headcount to integrate the global market. It takes time and banks are notoriously slow as well.
 

Mentalist

Member
Mar 14, 2019
18,205
Thanks for taking the time to lay it out like that.

It feels weird to me. I buy a lot of games on 3rd party seller sites or GOG when they are featured on sale. If it wasn't for those notification e-mails, I probably wouldn't know about a quarter of the games I own. If it wasn't for the "see more games like this" discoverabilty tools, I'd miss out on many more. And if it wasn't for the sales discounts, I wouldn't buy most of those games.

Epic's exclusivity and its desire to focus on "influencers" as key source of discoverabily removes all that. I don't use twitch, and I don't follow any streamers on YouTube (I do regularly watch trailer compilations on a few channels but those videos normally get a few thousand views, so I doubt they'd make Epic's cut for the "6% referral fee" lists).

I mean right now, one of the best things about every EGS exclusive game is that they are in a middle of a PR campaign and that makes them more visible. If the situation "normalizes" though how will those "exclusives" make themselves stand out? Scrolling down the list of ugly tiles that aren't even alphabetized is pretty tedious, and i'd imagine it'll only get worse once the store reaches over a hundred titles
 

Deleted member 3208

Oct 25, 2017
11,934
Over 30% of the games bought on Steam comes from Asia.
Can't back it up since I don't have data, but other regions like Latin American or Russia or Eastern Europe must also sell high numbers of copies now that Valve implemented regional pricing.
 

Pilgrimzero

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
8,129
I honestly don't have the slightest idea how I, as a consumer, am benefited by this. Sweeney promised cheap games, but that hasn't happened. And I doubt that will happen.

If anyone believed that epic was going to sell you it's games cheaper because the devs got more money needs to stop and look at how the world really works.
 

Delusibeta

Prophet of Truth
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
5,648
I legitimately cannot stress how irresponsible those tweets from that Valve rep are RE: paying for retail wallet card fees
The subtext was pretty clear: Epic cannot sell wallet cards without passing some form of cost to either the end user or the developer, given that they can't absorb the 10-15% cut to the actual shop selling the wallet card. The caveat is that 10-15% is the industry standard for wallet cards, which might actually strengthen the subtext.
 

LifeLine

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,779
I mean right now, one of the best things about every EGS exclusive game is that they are in a middle of a PR campaign and that makes them more visible. If the situation "normalizes" though how will those "exclusives" make themselves stand out? Scrolling down the list of ugly tiles that aren't even alphabetized is pretty tedious, and i'd imagine it'll only get worse once the store reaches over a hundred titles

Yes, because clearly the service would stop growing and changing like all other service and literally stay the same.

EGS is a step forward for PC gaming. It's not perfect. But not many services are when they launch. It takes time and Epic is headed in the right direction and they're clearly devoted to being better.
 

Astra Planeta

Member
Jan 26, 2018
668
You as customer are paying the same amount. Price won't go down for you if cut changes.

Isn't that argument here? Steam could in theory take 20% and sell games for $49.99 for people that use preferred payment methods, and then pass on expensive payment processors to the customer. These are just made up numbers, I'm not sure the math works out on those specifically.
 

BasilZero

Member
Oct 25, 2017
36,499
Omni
Wow so their policy for using PayPal is the same as PSN which is garbage

Guess I won't be buying directly from the store then - unless they provide third party sellers keys or have cash cards - I don't see myself getting anything from their store other than free games lol

I am not putting my credit card on their store
 
Oct 27, 2017
12,238
Isn't that argument here? Steam could in theory take 20% and sell games for $49.99 for people that use preferred payment methods, and then pass on expensive payment processors to the customer. These are just made up numbers, I'm not sure the math works out on those specifically.
Prices are set by publishers, why would they lower their price when their take is more, especially when people already buy them at full price.
 
OP
OP
dex3108

dex3108

Member
Oct 26, 2017
22,859
Isn't that argument here? Steam could in theory take 20% and sell games for $49.99 for people that use preferred payment methods, and then pass on expensive payment processors to the customer. These are just made up numbers, I'm not sure the math works out on those specifically.

Steam is not dictating prices, developers and publishers are. Epic Store takes 12% cut and yet some people need to pay extra 7% on full 60$ price.
 

SFLUFAN

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,477
Alexandria, VA
EGS is a step forward for PC gaming.

When I'm able to purchase EGS titles on third-party storefronts at discounts similar to those that I receive for Steam titles, then perhaps I might be somewhat willing to agree. Because then -- and only then -- will I regard them as "legitimate" competition for Valve/Steam.

But until that time - no chance in hell.
 

Deleted member 3208

Oct 25, 2017
11,934
Yes, because clearly the service would stop growing and changing like all other service and literally stay the same.

EGS is a step forward for PC gaming. It's not perfect. But not many services are when they launch. It takes time and Epic is headed in the right direction and they're clearly devoted to being better.
Please, explain how EGS is a step forward for PC Gaming.
 

Nacho

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,144
NYC
Yeah this kind of stuff seems like the obvious trade off. Epic will stick around by catering hemselves to devs and publishers, but the fringe benefits of steam being able to afford some of the plusses won't really ever happen until epic can afford to be profitable while doing that stuff.
 

RavFiveFour

Banned
Dec 3, 2018
1,721
It's impossible to please developers on the business side. Steam as great as it is, just promotes indie games and one year they had a bunch of AAA games.
 

Mentalist

Member
Mar 14, 2019
18,205
Yes, because clearly the service would stop growing and changing like all other service and literally stay the same.

EGS is a step forward for PC gaming. It's not perfect. But not many services are when they launch. It takes time and Epic is headed in the right direction and they're clearly devoted to being better.

I'm yet to hear how this benefits the consumers in any tangible manner.

It's great for developers, I get that. But what does EGS offer me, the paying customer?
 

deadman322

Member
Oct 29, 2017
2,396
Isn't that argument here? Steam could in theory take 20% and sell games for $49.99 for people that use preferred payment methods, and then pass on expensive payment processors to the customer. These are just made up numbers, I'm not sure the math works out on those specifically.
valve don't set prices. publishers/devs do amd they aren't going to lower the price, no matter what percentage they get.
 

Oticon

Member
Oct 30, 2017
1,446
Everyone keeps trying to frame this arguement from the developer/publisher POV but what about the consumer POV? I am not seeing any price reductions on my side. In fact, I am seeing a price increase because other outlets like GMG or Humble aren't selling games on EGS with the discount they would offer. This is a completely and blatantly a negative for me.
 

Deleted member 3058

User requested account closure
Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,728
From what I can tell, the only game that's passing along any savings to the end-consumer as a result of this better revenue split is Metro Exodus which is selling for $49.99

Every other "major" title -- The Division 2, Borderlands 3, Control, Darksiders III, The Sinking City, etc. -- is selling for the standard $59.99.

So exactly where the hell is the benefit to me as a consumer of this superior revenue spilt for the developer/publisher?
It's only $50 in the USA and, even then, you were able to buy a steam copy from a third party store for cheaper before the exclusive deal was announced. So even that price was a price increase.
 

Ge0force

Self-requested ban.
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
5,265
Belgium
Looking at how bare bones the store is, and how Epic is shifting certain costs to developers and consumers, their 12% cut is not so impressive anymore.

Don't get me wrong: devs deserve as much money as possible and I do hope that other storefronts will lower their cut as well. But Epic using their lower cut as an excuse to turn pc gaming into a huge mess is becoming ridiculous.

It's so sad to see people criticizing Epic's strategy being labeled as Steam loyalists. I own games on Steam, GoG, Origin, uPlay and Battle.net, and once Microsoft dumps or opens up UWP, I will use the Windows Store as well. But I strongly dislike what Epic is doing, and I will keep raising my voice and voting with my wallet against them.
 

SteveWinwood

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,726
USA USA USA
Yes, because clearly the service would stop growing and changing like all other service and literally stay the same.

EGS is a step forward for PC gaming. It's not perfect. But not many services are when they launch. It takes time and Epic is headed in the right direction and they're clearly devoted to being better.
its like 12 steps behind almost everyone else

also they launched 3 years ago
 

Conkerkid11

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
13,990
GreenManGaming's been doing something similar for ages where they take a smaller cut for the keys they sell, encouraging devs to sell their games cheaper, and therefore pushing more traffic to their website. This would be one of many pro-consumer things that Epic could do to push people toward their store, versus what they're currently doing.
 

scitek

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,146
From what I can tell, the only game that's passing along any savings to the end-consumer as a result of this better revenue split is Metro Exodus which is selling for $49.99

Every other "major" title -- The Division 2, Borderlands 3, Control, Darksiders III, The Sinking City, etc. -- is selling for the standard $59.99.

So exactly where the hell is the benefit to me as a consumer of this superior revenue spilt for the developer/publisher?

There really isn't one, but Tim Sweeney couldn't care less about that, or you, or me. And that's backed up by his recent comments that customers "don't see that he's making the industry better," and by Epic deciding as a group they would just ignore their own employee's comment about not wanting to repeat the mess surrounding Metro Exodus again.
 

Phil me in

Member
Nov 22, 2018
1,292
considering nobody buy anything on EGS the 12% cut is minute. Are devs really beggings EGS for tens of millions just to be exclusive there? Epic are destroying PC gaming imo.

I won't be buying anything on there.
 

Astra Planeta

Member
Jan 26, 2018
668
Steam is not dictating prices, developers and publishers are. Epic Store takes 12% cut and yet some people need to pay extra 7% on full 60$ price.

That sucks, but someone has to pay it. It is great that Steam/Valve absorbs the cost, but I'm not sure I'd expect everyone to do the same. So what is the ideal solution here? Epic goes to an 85/15 (or something like that) split and then doesn't charge that fee? How would devs feel about that?
 

Conkerkid11

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
13,990
That sucks, but someone has to pay it. It is great that Steam/Valve absorbs the cost, but I'm not sure I'd expect everyone to do the same. So what is the ideal solution here? Epic goes to an 85/15 (or something like that) split and then doesn't charge that fee? How would devs feel about that?
The ideal solution is to not take such a small cut. That cut exists for a reason. It's not like they're already eating the cost of releasing these games on EGS by throwing potentially more money at publishers than they're making back.

The 12% cut was at best oversimplified and at worst a lie pushed by way too many people
It was always pushed as a pro-dev thing though, never a pro-consumer thing. It's still true, it's just we as the consumer are punished for it.
 
Oct 27, 2017
12,238
That sucks, but someone has to pay it. It is great that Steam/Valve absorbs the cost, but I'm not sure I'd expect everyone to do the same. So what is the ideal solution here? Epic goes to an 85/15 (or something like that) split and then doesn't charge that fee? How would devs feel about that?

Dev cut will inevitably go down, over time. Tim Sweeney himself has said it isnt sustainable. Fortnite wont be eternal, either.

They just need to be honest with devs and consumers.
 

voOsh

Member
Apr 5, 2018
1,665
Funny enough the debate about whether gamers will have to pay $70 for games next-gen doesn't even have to wait until next-gen -- just buy from EGS now.
 
OP
OP
dex3108

dex3108

Member
Oct 26, 2017
22,859
That sucks, but someone has to pay it. It is great that Steam/Valve absorbs the cost, but I'm not sure I'd expect everyone to do the same. So what is the ideal solution here? Epic goes to an 85/15 (or something like that) split and then doesn't charge that fee? How would devs feel about that?

Running global store like Steam is extremely complex thing to do. Saying what cut is best solution without seeing whole picture and data is impossible. But from my perspective passing any costs to the customers is doing things wrong.
 

Sean Mirrsen

Banned
May 9, 2018
1,159
"Supporting developers? Lol good one. The industry can go piss itself"
The industry does nothing but look out for itself and its bottom dollar lately. From AI-guided MTX to GaaS, lootboxes, and the shift to streaming, "the industry" is positioning itself to become an endless siphon of money from every customer it can reach.

If you look around you'll find that the only places that actually support the consumer - even if as part of their own business strategy - are GOG.com with the DRM-free games, and Steam with the everything other than that. Epic Games just took the facts of "developers aren't making enough money" and turned them into the usual "consumers aren't paying enough money" narrative that suits only themselves and their business, and does nothing to address the actual problem with the industry.