-
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.
The Epic Store, In Its Current State, is Not Good for Anyone by David Galindo
- Thread starter dex3108
- Start date
- Status
I can deal even with "fuck you, got mine". That's a natural impulse, especially in our capitalist society.
It's the disingenuous arguments that truly annoy me.
Especially since it's Epic, we aren't talking about some plucky underdog here who needs time to figure out how any of this works.
Of course not, it's do as I say, not as I do.
Obviously, but I'm not a developer. I'm a customer and I need some actual incentive to be attracted to the service beyond moneyhatted indie games. It may be a better deal for you but it's a worse deal for me and, not to put too fine a point on it, I care more about myself than I care about you. Just like the developers that took those deals care more about their bottom lines than the fact that their customers get a worse deal. I don't begrudge them for it, each party is looking out for its interests, but these developers need to understand that they shouldn't count on any sort of emotion-based support for them when they themselves are making cold business decisions.
So in the end the situation pretty simple. You are trying to force me to use a service that I don't want to use so I will try to force you to use a service that I want to buy from. You can defend your choice and I can criticize it and we'll see who wins in the end.
Last edited:
That's because ResetEra is awful about handing out their verified tags. Despite working on a commercial release right now and owning my own company since 2014, they won't give me a verfied tag despite putting in the request through their form.
Yeah, this will basically be the premise of Microsoft's GamePass if/when they make a big push for it on PC. That and game streaming, though that's farther out. Either way it's going to have to be something "disruptive" that shifts the basis of competition onto ground that Valve doesn't already dominate.
Off-topic, but a streaming service will never beat Steam - large swathes of the world have internet that's too awful in too many ways for streaming to take off worldwide. But, yeah, I agree - it's going to be something disruptive and entirely different to "we moneyhatted some indie games" that'll bring Steam down.
BuT ThE STEam MoNOPOly! CompetITion by REmoVing SaID coMPetition is gr8! NO bIG DeAL juST TaKE it LikE its DeaLT.
Some times a verified tag is an annoying thing to have, plenty of devs on here don't ask for it. Myself included.
Please. Please. Don't do the crossingeden alt caps posts. I can't stop you can i lol.
User Banned (1 Day): Hostility towards other users
Much more reasonable points than the usual Steam fanboy screeching, for a change. Good read.
Of course, the thread then immediately gets derailed by the fanboys, but that's gamers for you, unthinking tribalism to the end, since ~Steam is our friend~.
There's an even better argument against the store, too, here summed up by a twitter user:
And an even better one, although it's probably too progressive an argument for gaming side:
(Context: Said when Alex Jones got kicked off twitter.
If that's their approach, the Epic store may become an even bigger haven of alt-right content than Steam already is)
Of course, the thread then immediately gets derailed by the fanboys, but that's gamers for you, unthinking tribalism to the end, since ~Steam is our friend~.
There's an even better argument against the store, too, here summed up by a twitter user:
And an even better one, although it's probably too progressive an argument for gaming side:
(Context: Said when Alex Jones got kicked off twitter.
If that's their approach, the Epic store may become an even bigger haven of alt-right content than Steam already is)
Most of those points have been made multiple times in all the previous threads ive read. The best part is that the same points get posted page after page yet somehow they still get missed by the "le competitione" crowd who seem to a) not game on PC b) not understand the PC market in its current form at all.
Ofcourse its gonna turn into a shit show when half of the people dont want to get into basics before commenting the same stupid shit.
It really is a mystery that PC gamers do not want to support them.
That's where I disagree.
First of all, Humble is a storefront, not really a platform.
GoG and Itch.io are but they never tried to compete with Steam, rather than being their own thing, offering a different service.
And on top of that, Humble and Itch.io never try to disrupt the market by fragmenting it. Buying on Humble (which I do far more than buying on Steam) or Itch.io provides me Steam keys to redeem on Steam and still have access to my amazing services.
As for the rest, you're right. If Epic bought everything, they could force people to come to their client. But that's not competition anymore. With such a move, how do you make Valve to improve Steam (because after all, that's what some people seems to ask for ?). You compete on the same turf, and if Epic's way of competing is buying exclusives, then it means if Valve wants to compete it'll be on the same turf. And instead of competition, we'll have another case of small monopolies.
As for it being the way to do thing, I disagree highly that services aren't that important.
People need to remember how PC gaming was in 2008-2011. High piracy rates, Western publishers leaving the platform.
Heck, just some quotes:
https://www.pcgamer.com/pc-gaming-has-around-a-93-95-per-cent-piracy-rate-claims-ubisoft-ceo/
And one from our dear saviors competition:
https://bit-tech.net/news/gaming/pc/epic-pc-piracy-drove-us-to-consoles/1/
What did make people come back to buying games ?
Sure, sales helped but not as much as people might think.
After all, free is cheaper than 5 dollars.
The answer is the service. The service makes the game have MORE values. It becomes a legit product compared to the counterfeit pirate version. And the legit product is easier to get than the counterfeit one.
Now if you rely only on a launcher and a buying spree, here's what happens: You raise piracy again. Because what's the difference between the game bought on Epic Store and on illegal download sites ? The price only.
Heck, in the case of Bethesda, since you dont have to rely on their broken launcher, the illegal version is even a better product.
A fragmented PC market by artificial constraints such as buying out exclusivity, without any convenience and good services leads to only one thing: Piracy.
That's something I hear (dont quote me on that) that is happening with streaming platforms since they keep spawning everywhere and making it a hassle for people.
Ideally, if a storefront dont want to compete on the service side, then they better just rely on Steam keys and not fuckin up the market. Heck, Epic Game Store would be a more appealing offer if, despite the horrible moneyhating, they were using Steam keys.
Instead Epic seems to think the good thing is no service and bringing devs in the hope it brings customers. The only thing that kind of strategy brings is more piracy.
The problem with accurately describing gamers is that any such description is unflattering.
Hey hey you entitled Steam worshipping fanboy, everyone else does it so why not on PC? Also console gamers pay for the privilege to use P2P so I think its high time that PC gamers get to join in on that.
I'm too tired of this trick to fall for it. Let's just sit back and see who you can reel in.
Wut
They are literally all the points people have already brought up in these threads as infinitum. The twitter post you just linked is also a point endlessly made in those threads.
Did you, like, not read these threads at all?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
Of course not they didnt. I mean, when we say it's anti-competitive, that services and features matters, we're just fanboys.
Basically, people not playing on the platform telling us what's good for us and proceed to call us fanboys. Lol.
How about you stop making it easy for yourself by just casually dismissing lengthy threads with the fanboy term. You're really not painting a picture of yourself as someone worth listening to.
When intelligence fails, namecalling happens.
You brillantly illustrated this today. Congratulations.
they made the decision to make their game exclusive and if they don't like how their sales end up than that's something they will have to deal with. I'm not going to feel bad for them when it's a decision they made and my decision is not to buy the game on the epic store.
Wait.. he is honestly blaming GDPR for that?On top of everything that has been said here Epic Store is currently breaking few GDPR rules. This is one example
Notice how he is trying to spin things? You are FORBIDEN to formulate things as opt-out.
OP
OP
That seems to be a common trend from devs related to Epic Store, play dumb instead of being honest.
There's being a dishonest prick, and then there's this. "We wanted to not spam you, but the mean EU made us do it." Fuck off.On top of everything that has been said here Epic Store is currently breaking few GDPR rules. This is one example
Notice how he is trying to spin things? You are FORBIDEN to formulate things as opt-out.
Also, as dex3108 says, this is actually the opposite of following GDPR rules:
Regardless of what your opinion ends up being on this issue, thanks for taking the time to read the arguments and evaluating them in good faith.
Steam HAS a monopol. Sure, there are other stores but no ones uses them because they are niche. Its just useless for most devs to invest time to bring their games to other stores when they reach 99% of the potential audience only with Steam.
Epic is the first store that has a chance to really compete Steam and break the monopol. Yes, obviously they have only a chance of breaking Steams monopol with exclusives. Moneyhatted or not is irrelevant, no one blames Nintendo or Sony for not bringing exclusives games to competitioners.
Obviously you don't start a storefront from 0 to 100. Steam has grown its functionality over many years.
Epic is the first store that has a chance to really compete Steam and break the monopol. Yes, obviously they have only a chance of breaking Steams monopol with exclusives. Moneyhatted or not is irrelevant, no one blames Nintendo or Sony for not bringing exclusives games to competitioners.
Obviously you don't start a storefront from 0 to 100. Steam has grown its functionality over many years.
I really want a Steam competitor. Having two storefronts compete usually means lower prices for consumers. I just don't think Epic's store in its current form is a particularly good competitor, though Epic could moneyhat themselves into being competitive.
To fully compete with Steam, you'd need major titles that aren't on Steam at all, and beat Steam on price point on some things on Steam. That's expensive and difficult. I'd rather see GOG be the competitor, but they don't have the resources or desire to do that.
Isn't Epic also owned by Tencent some- if that's the case, I really don't trust them.
If I was Epic, my strategy would be to sign exclusivity deals for next-gen console games, especially MP ones. I'd be looking at Japanese devs like Namco as well. I'd also be trying to look at games that are popular with kids- it's going to be hard to wean the 30+ crowd off of Steam, but teenagers might be easier.
To fully compete with Steam, you'd need major titles that aren't on Steam at all, and beat Steam on price point on some things on Steam. That's expensive and difficult. I'd rather see GOG be the competitor, but they don't have the resources or desire to do that.
Isn't Epic also owned by Tencent some- if that's the case, I really don't trust them.
If I was Epic, my strategy would be to sign exclusivity deals for next-gen console games, especially MP ones. I'd be looking at Japanese devs like Namco as well. I'd also be trying to look at games that are popular with kids- it's going to be hard to wean the 30+ crowd off of Steam, but teenagers might be easier.
Yeah, no one uses Humble Bundle or Greenmangaming.
Guess what: Devs dont need to invest time. They can generate unlimited steam keys for free. Heck the "monopoly" called Steam is the one that made that possible.
It's so useless to do that most indie devs do so and sell them on Humble Bundle, Itch.io, Fanatical, Greenmangaming and many more.
Also tell me: Why should Epic "breaks" Steam's "monopoly" ?
I mean, save for "monopoly is bad" "'competition is good" mantras.
Explain me what do the market gain by having a competitor that is less pro-consumer ?
Why is it good that we have two big ecosystem, with one doing less than the other and just buying a userbase ?
Wouldn't it make more work for devs since they'd have to support TWO different ecosystems with TWO different builds which may not even have crossplay for online ?
How is that desirable ?
Lastly, the time argument is bullshit.
Most features Steam integrated have been integrated in the last 4 years. Because before they didnt exist.
It tooks 100 years for cars to have airbags and GPS and many other stuff. Yet I didnt see Tesla releasing a car that was like a 1920 car.
Tell me: How do you get cheaper prices if Epic moneyhat games to be only there ?
Yea i can see why some devs. won't ask for one because it can often lead to toxic spamming by certain gamers who for any reason can possibly target a dev.
It is bad for consumers in general, because it removes the choice they would have if the exclusive deals were not signed.
Too many good games means competition for developers. It has nothing to do with consumers. Besides which, it's a terrible point.
Let's take Ashen as an example. I want to buy Ashen on Steam and play it on PC. However, I'm on a $1 Xbox Game Pass trial, which Ashen is a part of. If Ashen were therefore on Microsoft's PC store, and I could download the game there, I'd play it.
I'm also eyeing a weekend to subscribe to Origin's pass and spend a few days playing the likes of Unravel, Titanfall 2 and Burnout Paradise Remastered (assuming these games are on there, I've not looked into this that much).
I also (until all their social media fuckery) preferred buying old PC games from Gog, because it made sense to have the older games in once place. I believe (and I could be totally wrong) Gog actually configures each old game they sell to work on modern platforms, whereas I'm not sure if Steam does.
The point I'm making is fuck yes there are ways to compete with Steam beyond 'do what Steam does but worse, but pay completed third-party games for temporary exclusivity'.
Steam is a monopoly but there are other stores ... so we're agreed that Steam isn't a monopoly.
And again, Epic is competing with Steam in 2018, not Steam in 2004. Expecting now basic features like regional pricing, big picture mode and cloud saves is not in the least bit unreasonable.
Really? Epic brings pirated games bsck and everyone should sell Steam keys?
Without exclusives no store has even a little chance to compete with Steam. Moneyhatted or not. Because most customers doesn't care if devs get more money, but they care about exclusives.
Nonetheless, what I read here as arguments against the Epic Store are mostly assumptions (curation will be bad) and or simply made up stories. There serm to be some people that really don't want competition in the PC store market.
Maybe not on those games, but on the games that are on both platforms.
If you dont want to make good services, dont make a launcher. It's simple as that. Because handling a launcher is handling a LOOOONG term service. Because if that launcher dies, your library dies with it.
The same happened with Games for Windows Live. That was 5 years ago.
You keep saying "competition" "monopoly" "competition" yet you never explain it.
Because as I said, if you're idea of competition is Epic Games moneyhatting games to be sold in one storefront, theirs (no humble, no greenmangaming, just their store) and using their outdated service (no cloud saves yet ? No communities, no reviews, no universal controller support, no universal VR support, no family sharing, no automatic refunds (limited to 2 for the lifetime of your Epic account)), well yes, I dont want competition if the only thing they bring to the table is their own anti-consumer monopoly.
Your arguments are nonsense and continue to be, third party exclusive are not acceptable for them to do and are hopefully continuing to be called out. If epic really wants to compete they need to improve their store but it doesn't look like they care to do that.
So, like what we're getting today with GreenManGaming, Humble Bundle, Voidu, Wingamestore and such ?
Which, btw, is made possible because of unlimited Steam key generation for free (seems like it's not possible yet with Epic ? If ever ??) AND because the 30/70 split is the norm (because discounts are made on the 30% storefront cut for 3rd party storefronts).
That's not how its works. Honestly to imply Steam is not a monopol is hilarious.
Why would any customer use the epic store only to pay the same price and get the same games as on Steam. 99% of the customers don't care if devs get more money on Epic store. They don't care about devs, they care about games.
Obviously a store that even want to have the slightest chance to break the Steam monopol must have exclusives or be cheaper than Steam, but the last one is no real option.
Customers care about ease of use and features. Piracy is huge, how do you think Steam managed to be successful? They made it more convenient to buy on Steam than to pirate a game. Features and ease of use will allow you to compete against Steam.
Did you forgot how Games for Windows Live ended up? Or how the Windows Store is currently? While at the same time you have a platform like GOG how's managing to find success.
The difference between the two is that GOG offers something worthwhile to the customers which Epic isn't even doing. Was there a pushback when GOG came around? Or when they launched GOG Galaxy? No because they offered something. You can't expect Epic to just come around offering nothing to the customers and them being happy.
GoG is irrelevant, its a niche store for a niche audience. Its no competition for Steam.
Steam is were 99% of the customers are, and that is bad for a market, obviously.
Yes some customers likes monopols because its easier to install only a Steam client and be finished. But its bad for devs who are forced to accept everything Steam is throwing at them.
More competition would be better for devs, not necessarily for customers who would have the "inconvenience" to install more than one client.
Reposting since I adresses that 3 posts up:
Yeah, no one uses Humble Bundle or Greenmangaming.
Guess what: Devs dont need to invest time. They can generate unlimited steam keys for free. Heck the "monopoly" called Steam is the one that made that possible.
It's so useless to do that most indie devs do so and sell them on Humble Bundle, Itch.io, Fanatical, Greenmangaming and many more.
Also tell me: Why should Epic "breaks" Steam's "monopoly" ?
I mean, save for "monopoly is bad" "'competition is good" mantras.
Explain me what do the market gain by having a competitor that is less pro-consumer ?
Why is it good that we have two big ecosystem, with one doing less than the other and just buying a userbase ?
Wouldn't it make more work for devs since they'd have to support TWO different ecosystems with TWO different builds which may not even have crossplay for online ?
How is that desirable ?
Lastly, the time argument is bullshit.
Most features Steam integrated have been integrated in the last 4 years. Because before they didnt exist.
It tooks 100 years for cars to have airbags and GPS and many other stuff. Yet I didnt see Tesla releasing a car that was like a 1920 car.
There is no definition of monopoly that Steam fits. You don't know what you're talking about. There's a very good article in the OP that rebuts every point you have or will make. I suggest reading it.
To the bolded, first that's not true, second I don't see how that's bad for the market. Steam has been the primary driver for progress on the PC space for both customers and developers, they don't control prices and allow to bypass the store completely to get 100% cut or to sell on a different store. It's possible to by steam games on Ubisoft for exemple.
And for your last point then yeah, if there's no value for customers it's worthless for them and developers won't be finding success there.
Do you have a degree in economics? Care to define a monopoly? How does steam fit that mold?
This is getting tiresome. People should use the correct terms. You've been corrected about this already.
- Status