Supergiant about Epic Store: "Competition is good for everybody. It's good for customers. It's good for people working in the industry"

[Laser Man]

The term "love" for a platform is not something I personally would ever use consciously, the right term to use in the PC sector is "trust"! That is what Steam has earned over the years with a lot of people and what Microsoft has flushed down the toilet with XboxLive for PC and UWP. It's what EA & co still have to work on more than someone like GOG, it's also what Epic has build up. For the masses out there that might not count for anything, they are fine with free games, but that's how I look at that space!

 

[JustinP]

You seem to be the one arguing this, considering you think Epic monopolising a product is good.

Click to shrink...

Are you guys high?

 

[khamakazee]

Yeah. Reasonable criticism is one thing. You're dense, fuck you, you're stupid, etc. about Supergiant is another. I just find the level of anger about it so strange. I can't imagine getting that worked up over something like this.Lol I know

Click to shrink...

It's why I have some on my ignore liost, it seems like a few just can't go a day without something to bitch about. Some have reasonable concern, make a few posts and that's about it. Others will go that extra mile and just go on and on and on. The way I see it is this is all a buisiness and nothing should be taken for granted. It is far worse on the console level. This is what, an inferior free launcher we are all up in arms about?

There's been countless ones trying to have exclusives
Guess how well that ended up? Not very, because, guess what, exclusives don't make shitty stores better. Actual features do.

Click to shrink...

You think Steam started off as this awesome store? It will take time so why are some of you thinking this is it, Epic Store will never improve? No publisher should feel bounded to a certain store and the PC is a perfect platform for a free market to exist. I also give a lot less leniency to Steam now that Valve hardly ever makes any more games that interest me.

 

[Tovarisc]

How about Epic spend some of their Fortnite money actually developing exclusive games for the store? I really want to see another Unreal Tournament and that would be a good get IMO.

Click to shrink...

They had UT in works for few years.

Then they pulled devs from that project to work on Fortnite.

 

[GhostTrick]

Are you guys high?

Click to shrink...

Are you even able to formulate an argument ? Or are you going to be condescending with other posters this way anymore ?

 

[eonden]

Stumpokapow used to rant about him fucking up the statistics side of things when presenting margins of error which was amusing too.

What's less amusing is that Galy is taking in ~160,000 US dollars per annum through Patreon to run opposition research on his principle competitor.

Click to shrink...

I mean, my main rant is how he is the worst type of statistician:
He never publicly warns about the major flaws of it system and only takes about the good parts. When MHW was clearly showing unbelievable numbers, he should have come out and said it was very likely an outlier, but he let a ton of media and people believe those were the correct numbers (and profiting of the extra media attention).

Another issue too is using a polluted population (that mean, a population that has a certain bias) to calculate the statics of something is always going to end up being tainted results, so him saying it is still viable (but with a much higher margin of error) is kinda eh.

 

[tulpa]

He did lambasted Steam for not publicly disclosing those numbers and was really salty when privacy changes pretty much fucked how he calculated the games. The fact that now he is in the same situation as Steam and does the same after years of saying how badly Steam does in that regard is not a great look. (Edit: I will also say that still being connected to Steam Spy and financially profiting from it is quite a big ethical issue that is not widely disclosed, he should have divested from it and passed the project to someone else.)

But Galy has pretty much fucked up a ton of things he wrote about how to sell games with the launch of EGS (mainly discounts, how F2P game successes do not mean anything to other games, etc) so who knows.

Click to shrink...

Sure, and I don't dispute that he's said and done hypocritical things. But it doesn't then follow that if Epic doesn't immediately reveal figures, games aren't selling well. I doubt it's even within his gift to publish those figures.

 

[hey it's that dog]

How are there less choices? Its on the PC, you can buy it on your PC.

Click to shrink...

Where can you buy it, at what price point, and how often will it get discounted? All objective measures of consumer choice that strongly favour Steam.

There are so many places that sell steam keys now, therefore many opportunities for the consumer to compare prices, and also many more opportunities to buy games at a discount because each storefront has periodic sales.


On general topic: I'm not going to hold it against Supergiant for defending a business partner (and their own choices), and Hades is really fucking good, but needless to say I don't agree with their spin on this.

 

[Deleted member 3058]

The funny thing about this is, as a consumer, this just removes competition from me for their game Hades.

There is a single store I can buy the game from at a single price point.. which is a stark reduction of choice from every other Supergiant game on the PC.

 

[eonden]

It's why I have some on my ignore liost, it seems like a few just can't go a day without something to bitch about. Some have reasonable concern, make a few posts and that's about it. Others will go that extra mile and just go on and on and on. The way I see it is this is all a buisiness and nothing should be taken for granted. It is far worse on the console level. This is what, an inferior free launcher we are all up in arms about?



You think Steam started off as this awesome store? It will take time so why are some of you thinking this is it, Epic Store will never improve? No publisher should feel bounded to a certain store and the PC is a perfect platform for a free market to exist. I also give a lot less leniency to Steam now that Valve hardly ever makes any more games that interest me.

Click to shrink...

Again, the issue is that EGS is not launching when Steam launched. It is launched years later, in a market that has evolved. Right now:
EGS is worse than the eShop. It does not even have categories nor a search function. (and the eShop is the worst console shop)
EGS is worse than Origin when it launched (the last big competitior for Steam) more than 5 years ago.

Nintendo gets lambasted because their online infrastructure is the worst in all consoles, yet people here are batting to defend EGS which doesnt even ask for email confirmation when creating an account. Again, I am not asking EGS to be super great and better than current Steam, but they should not be shit. EGS is competing right now with Steam, not 10 years ago.

You cannot launch a product that is more than a decade behind in functionality and just say that it will improve with time. Yes it will, but if the store was "years in the making", where did all that time go?

 

[Tart Toter 9K]

You think Steam started off as this awesome store? It will take time so why are some of you thinking this is it, Epic Store will never improve? No publisher should feel bounded to a certain store and the PC is a perfect platform for a free market to exist. I also give a lot less leniency to Steam now that Valve hardly ever makes any more games that interest me.

Click to shrink...

What Steam is now and what it was on release are two different things. Sure the Epic launcher could improve over the years (It hasn't in the 3 years it's been out) but why should i use it today when it doesn't provide the things i want? I'd probably use it when/if it provides the same amount of features as Steam does today.
So how much time do they need? GOG managed to have more features in the beta than EGL has today...

They had UT in works for few years.

Then they pulled devs from that project to work on Fortnite.

Click to shrink...

I remember the demo and it was pretty good. Shame they stopped working on other games than Fortnite.

 

[Deleted member 27751]

The competition they're trying to get is between Valve and Epic. This is all about the long game of trying to get Valve to lower their cut by using EGS to lower Valve's market share.

EGS is not going to succeed unless it can get consumers on board, and it's going to take more than the exclusives they have to do this.

Click to shrink...

I'm honestly starting to believe this more and more. Devs know Epic can't float the moneyhat boat for too long, even with Fortnite. It isn't financially viable and it would not serve Epic in the long run of building up a decent userbase.

So what do you do instead? You basically pit the storefronts together as a dev, pushing for them to compete on percentage cuts so that you, the dev, end up getting the best outcome. It sucks as a consumer level because we are currently being locked into a monopoly that apparently isn't a monopoly with terrible client UI offerings but it works for the devs and they are the ones making the games we play.

But yeah, seriously stop with the whole "competition is good" when it is so clear the only reason a dev would go on Epic Store is purely monetary gain. That dev cut is too tasty to say no, and if Epic are throwing some extra cash to go exclusive why the fuck not? Short term gain is better than a long term gain for some devs who just want to recoup and get ahead.

Oh yeah also Steam has no exclusives bar their first party titles and even they were on Origin at one point. Games on Steam are more than welcome to sell on other stores, Valve doesn't own their exclusive rights or anything, just up to the developers to be bothered.

In what way have services got worse and prices got higher? In the case of the recent Metro Exodus "fiasco," the service got better (Epic added regional pricing, including for regions never before covered by any other store) and the price of the game went down.

Click to shrink...

You've probably been quoted multiple times already but I just wanted to add my experience with the Metro fiasco to ensure you understand maybe to not generalise next time. I'm Australian, and on Steam it was actually priced reasonably cheap at about $75AUD from memory. Now see, the problem with Epic wasn't just removing the game on Steam and putting it on their own, it was that it also increased the price to $92AUD AND charged us in USD. We don't get AUD regional pricing because apparently that's really hard or something compared to other countries, so we are actually penalised twice for wanting to buy a game we have no option of buying elsewhere.

That's fucked.

 

[Duxxy3]

I'm still trying to understand how Epic and its lack of features and price competition is good for consumers. Can't wrap my head around that one.

 

[Ascheroth]

It'd be one thing if they made it a timed exclusive like Discord or something, but they don't.

Click to shrink...

They are all timed exclusives for 1 year as far as we know.

 

[Chairmanchuck (另一个我)]

So what do you do instead? You basically pit the storefronts together as a dev, pushing for them to compete on percentage cuts so that you, the dev, end up getting the best outcome.

Click to shrink...

In an interview that Coffee stain studio guy said that excplicitly. He said that he wants to put pressure on Steam IIRC which in the end would mean to him: "No one is mad at us, we get APIs, maybe a better cut and we profit from it."

 

[Tart Toter 9K]

I'm still trying to understand how Epic and its lack of features and price competition is good for consumers. Can't wrap my head around that one.

Click to shrink...

I think the argument is it's good for consumers because it might make valve reduce their cut which might mean publishers give some of the extra money to developers which might mean developers can work on more games which might mean we get more games in the future!

Simple math really!

 

[hydrophilic attack]

great to see a new competitor in the pc market

valve was getting complacent and slow so this was sorely needed

 

[hydrophilic attack]

maybe valve needing exclusives because of competition is what will FINALLY making them get out of their own ass and release

Spoiler

portal

3

 

[GhostTrick]

great to see a new competitor in the pc market

valve was getting complacent and slow so this was sorely needed

Click to shrink...

I dunno. You're telling me Valve is complacent and slow (the year Proton has been made a thing, well done) yet it takes time for Epic to implement stuff like Cloud saves because these things actually takes time to be made. :")

 

[khamakazee]

Again, the issue is that EGS is not launching when Steam launched. It is launched years later, in a market that has evolved. Right now:
EGS is worse than the eShop. It does not even have categories nor a search function. (and the eShop is the worst console shop)
EGS is worse than Origin when it launched (the last big competitior for Steam) more than 5 years ago.

Nintendo gets lambasted because their online infrastructure is the worst in all consoles, yet people here are batting to defend EGS which doesnt even ask for email confirmation when creating an account. Again, I am not asking EGS to be super great and better than current Steam, but they should not be shit. EGS is competing right now with Steam, not 10 years ago.

You cannot launch a product that is more than a decade behind in functionality and just say that it will improve with time. Yes it will, but if the store was "years in the making", where did all that time go?

Click to shrink...

Nintendo Switch launched many years after the other consoels yet their online services are years behind. We should not just take things for granted, even PSN on the PS3 was inferior to XBL in the beginning. I've used Epic Store and I don't have any issues with it.

What Steam is now and what it was on release are two different things. Sure the Epic launcher could improve over the years (It hasn't in the 3 years it's been out) but why should i use it today when it doesn't provide the things i want? I'd probably use it when/if it provides the same amount of features as Steam does today.
So how much time do they need? GOG managed to have more features in the beta than EGL has today...

I remember the demo and it was pretty good. Shame they stopped working on other games than Fortnite.

Click to shrink...

Why use it? For the games obviously. Sam,e reason why I use Anthem on Origin and why I use Xbox Live for Forza Horizon 4. Nobody is going to compete with Steam if they have the same games regardless, so of course they will use exclusives as a means to get you to their store. Of course it's not ideal, Steam is better. Same notion with buying games on a console like an Xbox One X, the game is usually better but costs the same but is everyone buying the Xbox One X version?

We also have to look at the developers and what they want because two sides make an agreement. All I can say is Valve has made a fortune over the years but have invested very little of that into actual games. Epic and Microsoft and EA invest far more into games and their stores are not as good. If the games are interesting, that's where I go. It's the way this business works and not PC is not any different.

This does not exclude them from criticism at all either and the only way Epic improves is if they hear about it. I am just explaining that even on a level playing field (same games, same service) Steam would dominate in sales.

 

[Chairmanchuck (另一个我)]

great to see a new competitor in the pc market

valve was getting complacent and slow so this was sorely needed

Click to shrink...

Slow about what?

They literally released Proton last year, so 99% of Windows games can be played on Linux.
SteamLink was released for Android in 2018 so you can stream games to any Android device.
They released Artifact.
They worked on the 18+ policies.
They changed and reworked the internet café rules.
They added VAC to every dev that wants to use it and dedicated servers (for devs who want to beta test them).
They added developer and publisher pages.
They added streaming to the storepages and to the frontpage.
They added a whole new chat system similar to discord.

While constantly updating their running games and SteamVR environment.

In 2018.

 

[eonden]

Nintendo Switch launched many years after the other consoels yet their online services are years behind. We should not just take things for granted, even PSN on the PS3 was inferior to XBL in the beginning. I've used Epic Store and I don't have any issues with it.

Click to shrink...

And everyone complains about Nintendo Online Infrastructure and only fanboys really go bat for it (more now that it is paid). That was the idea behind that statement.

Edit: Same with PSN, when it launched everyone called it shit when compared to the XBL and the only good excuse fans had was "well at least it isnt paid". Case in point, they were always compared with their competitors yet here we are making the statement that we cant call EGS shit because it is not as old as other services.

 

[Jawmuncher]

Curious to see the upcoming details on sales and cuts from Epic. We have a lot of "great to see competition" but there hasn't been any word on how sales are even doing on EGS.

Like if we're gonna talk serious impact for EGS, really only Metro and the Ubi move are big enough to really change anything on the steam side. The current indies on the platform aren't exactly going to have steam wanting to change all that much.

 

[Yarbskoo]

Competition is good, I agree.

But if I can only buy your game from one store, there is less competition happening than there would be if I had the ability to choose from multiple stores.

 

[GhostTrick]

Slow about what?

They literally released Proton last year, so 99% of Windows games can be played on Linux.
SteamLink was released for Android in 2018 so you can stream games to any Android device.
They released Artifact.
They worked on the 18+ policies.
They changed and reworked the internet café rules.
They added VAC to every dev that wants to use it and dedicated servers (for devs who want to beta test them).
They added developer and publisher pages.
They added streaming to the storepages and to the frontpage.
They added a whole new chat system similar to discord.

While constantly updating their running games and SteamVR environment.

In 2018.

Click to shrink...

Also add Steam Input for VR. Yet Epic Games Store cant be bothered to have cloud saves which was a thing 10 years ago on Steam... nor preloading, which was a thing 15 years ago on Steam... nor a fuckin search bar which was a thing 20 years ago with Google. :""")

 

[Deleted member 27751]

In an interview that Coffee stain studio guy said that explicitly. He said that he wants to put pressure on Steam IIRC which in the end would mean to him: "No one is mad at us, we get APIs, maybe a better cut and we profit from it."

Click to shrink...

It honestly makes the most sense. Who else but developers are going to be the ones profiting the most and I really don't blame them. Indie development is fucking hard and if you've got a storefront literally paying you to have your game upfront and centre then heck yeah you will. Of course, Epic aren't exactly opening the floodgates and curating like mad to only the best of the indie dev scene which is another problem in and of itself in monopolising on namesake but still, money talks.

great to see a new competitor in the pc market

valve was getting complacent and slow so this was sorely needed

Click to shrink...

Mmm, so complacent. That complacent I can stream my PC games from my desktop to my TV with extreme ease or even better allow my friends a chance to try a game I really like and want them to buy without them throwing their hard-earned cash down. Searching is so yesterday, pfft only Steam and its monopoly needs a search bar!

 

[Phrozenflame500]

Very happy that Epic and Supergiant are doing well, hope to see more releases on the Epic Store going forward.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

Putting your game on one store only isn't creating competition.

Click to shrink...

It has turned me off. I was so looking forward to playing Maneater but now it's exclusive to Epic for a year. Fuck 'em.

 

[BernardoOne]

great to see a new competitor in the pc market

valve was getting complacent and slow so this was sorely needed

Click to shrink...

Oh look another person who has made no research whatsoever.
2018 was one of Valves biggest years in terms of improvements to Steam. They made more improvements this year than Epics entire store will have for its lifetime.

It's also hilarious that you think this would make Valve make more games (they were already working on several new ones way before the Epic store was a thing btw), when Epic killed every single one of their non-Fortnite games

 

[Hamchan]

It certainly hasn't been good for me as a consumer. Haven't seen any benefits on my end.

Anyways, as someone who has bought every Supergiant game on day one, mainly because of Greg and his work with Giant Bomb making me a fan, I think I can hold out until the eventual Steam release. Happy that Supergiant can get paid big bucks by Epic but don't patronize me by pretending this is good for consumers.

 

[TitanicFall]

Good for customers would mean being able to buy it from multiple stores.

 

[khamakazee]

And everyone complains about Nintendo Online Infrastructure and only fanboys really go bat for it (more now that it is paid). That was the idea behind that statement.

Click to shrink...

Did I say Epic store is good? I said it works for me. It seems like some of you only work in extreme conditions and cannot tolerate anyone supporting it, so it it makes you feel better suggesting I'm a Epic Store fanboy then so be it.

What I will say is it was a shit move to pull games like Metro off of Steam (but they did honor pre-orders). Like I said, it's just business which is why I don't get overly excited about it. It's a free launcher. The console space is far far worse and they poach developers all the time to make exclusive content. Games played on Epic Store still grant me better options and better performance than the console versions too.

 

[Tart Toter 9K]

Why use it? For the games obviously. Sam,e reason why I use Anthem on Origin and why I use Xbox Live for Forza Horizon 4. Nobody is going to compete with Steam if they have the same games regardless, so of course they will use exclusives as a means to get you to their store. Of course it's not ideal, Steam is better. Same notion with buying games on a console like an Xbox One X, the game is usually better but costs the same but is everyone buying the Xbox One X version?

We also have to look at the developers and what they want because two sides make an agreement. All I can say is Valve has made a fortune over the years but have invested very little of that into actual games. Epic and Microsoft and EA invest far more into games and their stores are not as good. If the games are interesting, that's where I go. It's the way this business works and not PC is not any different.

This does not exclude them from criticism at all either and the only way Epic improves is if they hear about it. I am just explaining that even on a level playing field (same games, same service) Steam would dominate in sales.

Click to shrink...

The games you mentioned were made by EA & Microsoft. I'd love it if Epic made their own games, exclusive to the EGL! That'd be a good way to compete with Steam like EA & MS are doing.
And you must see how being forced to use a store you deem inferior would make some people upset, some people might take it too far but we're all passionate about different things.

 

[Durante]

your love for one platform doesn't need to come at the exclusion of another

Click to shrink...

Unless your bribe requires that exclusion, of course.

 

[asynchrny]

How dense can you be as a consumer to think that Epic is doing anything for you.

If they were actually doing anything for the consumer they would have no need for this moneybagged exclusivity.

They're not confident enough to let the consumer decide, knowing they don't stand a chance against Steam.

It's not like these games were only made possible because Epic is "publishing" them.

This also shows how these devs care more about the money than the players in a very transparent way.

 

[Danzflor]

I'm on the rooting for Epic Games side. Happy for Supergiant Games and let's hope this paints a brighter future for them and developers. Developers need to be treated better and get better payments for their efforts. And for everyone complaining about the lack of features on the EGS, remember what Gabe Newell once said:

"This things, they take time."

It's not like these games were only made possible because Epic is "publishing" them.

Click to shrink...

Considering how the last Supergiant Games went in sales, I'm pretty sure they needed back up and Epic Games was the most viable solution for them to still be able to do their work without recurring to Kickstarter.

This also shows how these devs care more about the money than the players in a very transparent way..

Click to shrink...

I have no issues with this, most of the gaming population is super entitled and often forget this is not a charity. It's a business after all.

 

[eonden]

Did I say Epic store is good? I said it works for me. It seems like some of you only work in extreme conditions and cannot tolerate anyone supporting it, so it it makes you feel better suggesting I'm a Epic Store fanboy then so be it.

What I will say is it was a shit move to pull games like Metro off of Steam (but they did honor pre-orders). Like I said, it's just business which is why I don't get overly excited about it. It's a free launcher. The console space is far far worse and they poach developers all the time to make exclusive content. Games played on Epic Store still grant me better options and better performance than the console versions too.

Click to shrink...

The initial point I am answering to is this one:

You think Steam started off as this awesome store? It will take time so why are some of you thinking this is it, Epic Store will never improve? No publisher should feel bounded to a certain store and the PC is a perfect platform for a free market to exist. I also give a lot less leniency to Steam now that Valve hardly ever makes any more games that interest me.

Click to shrink...

It is a common point not only by you but a lots of people defending EGS. Saying the store needs time to catch up.You cannot shield yourself with "it takes time, it will be great in 5 years" when you are competing now. It happened with the console market and it should happen in PC. It is fair to compare the store with its competitor and call it out.

I have said several times I dont expect the EGS to be as good as Steam on launch, but to at least be better than Origin at launch. As of right now is barely better than Steam at launch.

I also gave examples of how EGS is pretty bad. It doesnt even have a search function in the store (which yeah, the eShop did at launch). It doesnt ask you to verify your email while creating an account (which has been a staple in account creation since... decades?).

 

[Nerun]

Well, in the end it depends, how much money Epic is giving to the devs/publisher, so they go for the Epic Games Store instead of Steam and the overall sales in the end. If it doesn't work out for them, the next game of the developer will be back on Steam anyway. I get it, that some indie studios are going for the Epic Games Store, less products, maybe a prominent feature on the Store and not being a game between lots of others buried on Steam and of course the initial payment and lower share for Epic.

From a purely spoken customers perspective: they usually don't care about how much money a dev gets, they are missing achievements, forums, reviews, marketplace, chat/mp options in parts, steam workshop and other great stuff. So well...I can understand if players want to stick to Steam for the moment at least. On the other hand you have people that complain anyway, I mean just think back about the time that Steam actually launched and the pure hate for it. That hate is still around for Uplay, DRM complains, Linux users complaining anyway about everything all the time, etc. ;)

It get's kind of annoying to use Battle.net, Origin, Uplay, Steam, Epic Launcher, Bethesda, Wargaming, etc. you can also count Discord, which has a store front or Twitch with their free games and their own Launcher...which actually keeps me from claiming some of those free games.

 

[Durante]

The console space is far far worse

Click to shrink...

It is, which is why some of us are concerned about moving the window of acceptable offerings and practices further towards the console end.

How dense can you be as a consumer to think that Epic is doing anything for you.

If they were actually doing anything for the consumer they would have no need for this moneybagged exclusivity.

They're not confident enough to let the consumer decide, knowing they don't stand a chance against Steam.

It's not like these games were only made possible because Epic is "publishing" them.

This also shows how these devs care more about the money than the players in a very transparent way.

Click to shrink...

Propaganda is effective.

 

[GhostTrick]

It is, which is why some of us are concerned about moving the window of acceptable offerings and practices further towards the console end.

Propaganda is effective.

Click to shrink...

This cant be stated enough. Lowering their standards instead of raising them.
"Why do you complain about exclusives ! It's a thing on consoles !"
"Console players never complained about online paywall ! Why are you so mad ?"
"We never needed mods on consoles you know !"

I can keep going on with that. And it definitely betrays some posters true intentions.

 

[khamakazee]

The games you mentioned were made by EA & Microsoft. I'd love it if Epic made their own games, exclusive to the EGL! That'd be a good way to compete with Steam like EA & MS are doing.
And you must see how being forced to use a store you deem inferior would make some people upset, some people might take it too far but we're all passionate about different things.

Click to shrink...

Epic made Fortnite which is likely what is fueling their ability to fund these partnerships. To me it's the same concept that's been going on and still goes on at the console level. The PC is really not that different as you can see. If everything came to Steam it would be simple, it would be awesome but that's not going to happen. What will happen hopefully is two things.

1. The store will improve
2. Steam and others will offer better incentives to developers and not just AAA ones.

The initial point I am answering to is this one:

It is a common point not only by you but a lots of people defending EGS. Saying the store needs time to catch up.You cannot shield yourself with "it takes time, it will be great in 5 years" when you are competing now. It happened with the console market and it should happen in PC. It is fair to compare the store with its competitor and call it out.

I have said several times I dont expect the EGS to be as good as Steam on launch, but to at least be better than Origin at launch. As of right now is barely better than Steam at launch.

I also gave examples of how EGS is pretty bad. It doesnt even have a search function in the store (which yeah, the eShop did at launch). It doesnt ask you to verify your email while creating an account (which has been a staple in account creation since... decades?).

Click to shrink...

They don't have many games so I don't see it as a big issue yet for the search and the e-mail thing isn't a big deal for me either. They have 2-step verification.

If I sound like I'm defending them I'm not. I am just explaining that some of these things are not as big of a deal for me. I am not going to try and suggest my views supercede yours. I simply just want to play the games and if Epic or Microsoft or EA have those games and they work then the smaller things (small to me) are not as big as enjoying the games. I still buy the majority of my titles on Steam so that right there is the big invcentive for the others to improve because that is where the majority of my games are bought.

It is, which is why some of us are concerned about moving the window of acceptable offerings and practices further towards the console end..

Click to shrink...

The irony is some of the people voicing their opinion that this is not acceptable are also supporting consoles. They don't get to have it both ways, sorry.

 

[Opa-Opa]

I'm liking Epic Store so far and exclusivity deals are a form of competition, I can't imagine how it is not, not a single argument so far scratches my opinion.

The publisher has the option to take it or not. It's not illegal, unethical or immoral.

It's just business.

 

[Deleted member 4072]

Competition would be good you know, if you were competing for sales of a game against another store. Epic just straight up money hat and claim competition. Pathetic.

 

[Drek]

Competition is only good if the competition is:
1. Occurring with clear ground rules.
2. Transparent to those involved.
3. Has meaningful adjudication in the case of rules violations.

Sports are competitions.

So I would argue that competition is the wrong word to use here.

It also lacks the scope of meaningful competition. There is only one vector of competition (Steam v. Epic), the two parties are only engaging around the margins for the most part (Metro and The Division 2 are the big highlights, the former is mid-tier and the later available on uPlay), and large parts of the industry (console sector, EA, Microsoft, looks like Bethesda now as well) are already checking out before the two sides engage.

The right word to use would have been Choice.

Supergiant and others are choosing to partner with Epic in a clear attempt to create an alternative choice for them in the available distribution platforms.

This doesn't mean there is no choice already available. Supergiant released Pyre on at least three platforms that I know of (Steam, XBL, and PSN). They could add a fourth (Nintendo's storefront), fifth (EA Origin), sixth (the aforementioned uPlay), seventh (Discord), or even eighth (GoG) without needing to be tied for the duration of early access to Steam. The terms from some of those are likely just as bad if not worse than Steam, but there already exists both competition and choice in the digital distro space.

Their choice is to aid Epic in trying to force a viable #2 to Steam is not about competition. Competition already exists. They're choosing assist in an attempt to broaden and strengthen the field of choices for developers.

In so doing they're taking choice away from their consumers. I'm sure the concept is that this is a short lived period of transitional pain but all the same that is the result.

Its probably the right choice for their company. Bastion did really well and Transistor did pretty good but Pyre didn't hit and they aren't the kind of company that can probably risk two mediocre to poor selling titles successively. Ensuring that Hades is a financial win via Epic's subsidy is, almost certainly, the right move for them.

But don't spin it as something stemming from altruism for the end consumer. There are a lot of benefits for Supergiant and the other publishers/developers teaming with Epic on this endeavor. Acknowledge that and own the fact that this puts your customers in an uncomfortable position.

 

[Deleted member 42]

Ehhhh, I think it's definitely far better for the devs than it is for the consumers in this particular scenario fam

 

[Unkindled]

I guess they loved that money they got for putting the game on epic store but yeah competition is great.

 

[elyetis]

I think the argument is it's good for consumers because it might make valve reduce their cut which might mean publishers give some of the extra money to developers which might mean developers can work on more games which might mean we get more games in the future!

Simple math really!

Click to shrink...

Trickle down doing the work.

 

[Tygre]

I just want to point out again that, as of today, the Epic Games Store doesn't have an option to limit the bandwidth of your downloads. It doesn't even meet the bare minimum of competency as a download manager, never mind a storefront.

It's garbage propped up by exclusives that nobody would use by choice.

 

[Alexandros]

I really appreciate your patience (in combination with logic and common sense).

Click to shrink...

Thank you!

EGS allows developers to publish their sales numbers (as does Steam).

EGS and Steam (or any store) cannot legally reveal sales numbers one-sidedly, as those sales numbers are considered a trade secret between both actors.

Click to shrink...

Who ever said anything about one-sided reveal? Both parties (devs and Epic) have multiple reasons to disclose sales numbers at this stage.

Oh come on. The considerations when you're a freelancer trawling through APIs is very different than when you are a paid up employee of a marketplace with the obligations that entails.

Click to shrink...

Different, how? Galyonkin was employed at Epic and running Steamspy at the same time.

 

[khamakazee]

Competition is only good if the competition is:
1. Occurring with clear ground rules.
2. Transparent to those involved.
3. Has meaningful adjudication in the case of rules violations.

Sports are competitions.

So I would argue that competition is the wrong word to use here.

It also lacks the scope of meaningful competition. There is only one vector of competition (Steam v. Epic), the two parties are only engaging around the margins for the most part (Metro and The Division 2 are the big highlights, the former is mid-tier and the later available on uPlay), and large parts of the industry (console sector, EA, Microsoft, looks like Bethesda now as well) are already checking out before the two sides engage.

The right word to use would have been Choice.

Supergiant and others are choosing to partner with Epic in a clear attempt to create an alternative choice for them in the available distribution platforms.

This doesn't mean there is no choice already available. Supergiant released Pyre on at least three platforms that I know of (Steam, XBL, and PSN). They could add a fourth (Nintendo's storefront), fifth (EA Origin), sixth (the aforementioned uPlay), seventh (Discord), or even eighth (GoG) without needing to be tied for the duration of early access to Steam. The terms from some of those are likely just as bad if not worse than Steam, but there already exists both competition and choice in the digital distro space.

Their choice is to aid Epic in trying to force a viable #2 to Steam is not about competition. Competition already exists. They're choosing assist in an attempt to broaden and strengthen the field of choices for developers.

In so doing they're taking choice away from their consumers. I'm sure the concept is that this is a short lived period of transitional pain but all the same that is the result.

Its probably the right choice for their company. Bastion did really well and Transistor did pretty good but Pyre didn't hit and they aren't the kind of company that can probably risk two mediocre to poor selling titles successively. Ensuring that Hades is a financial win via Epic's subsidy is, almost certainly, the right move for them.

But don't spin it as something stemming from altruism for the end consumer. There are a lot of benefits for Supergiant and the other publishers/developers teaming with Epic on this endeavor. Acknowledge that and own the fact that this puts your customers in an uncomfortable position.

Click to shrink...

You think sports are transparent? I could be a seaon pass holder and my number one player gets traded, that's not transparency at all. Epic is guilty of in my eyes removing games from Steam. That to me is unethical.