They lose because they don't have a bigger wallet and don't have Tencent backing if things go south
The best way to win this game is not to play it IMO
-
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.
Tim Sweeney: "Battles will be won on the basis of game supply, consumer prices, and developer revenue sharing"
- Thread starter qrac
- Start date
They lose because they don't have a bigger wallet and don't have Tencent backing if things go south
The best way to win this game is not to play it IMO
It's linking to the correct post now but it still says my name at the top of the quote
It's cool though
Even ResetERA needs to work on it's algorithm apparently!
Between UE4 fees, third party funding, and Fortnite, Epic almost certainly has more money than Steam.
Yeah, that's what I meant by "third party funding". I wasn't sure if they had other big investors or not.
do we have numbers? Steam has had a huge profit margin since like 2008. Almost $5 billion worth of games were purchased on Steam in 2017 alone, that's 1.5 billion, and I don't know what that counts stuff like DLC and micro transactions.
Forgot about tencent, yeah they have all the money in the world.
It would be interesting to watch the war if Valve decided it would be in their best interests to retaliate, possibly even attempt to completely trivialize the EGS in the process to make an example of them.
This 1000x
A big chunk of my favorite games simply wouldn't have a place on curated Steam. They clearly don't in Epic Store.
If they do , I hope they get console exclusive games on steam
Why's that funny?
I can email our Google rep about featuring and get a reply back in hours.
Can a PC dev email someone at Valve and get a response in a reasonable time frame?
You can rip on Google for not supporting their products long-term, but working with the Play Store is a great experience.
Well human beings are better at responding to emails than algorithms
And that's one of the reasons EGS is probably going to be fine in the long term.
Consumer impact aside, they're building relationships with developers and publishers. That's immensely attractive.
A lot of the complaints over EGS are tangential to that fact--there's no world where communication, curation, moderation, and human interaction are mutually exclusive with features. The combination of those is literally the standard model used on every other platform. It's crazy that Valve has rejected so many of these things for so long, just as crazy that EGS is so slow to adopt (or will not adopt) basic features.
User banned (3 days): needless hostility + history of similar behaviour
Two things:
Curation and Dev contacts have zero to do with each other. Google's curation is non-existent with even blatant pirate apps going through. Lmao at even implying they have curation.
And developer contact? Another fucking lmao, I invite you to read this https://android.jlelse.eu/google-ju...blisher-account-on-christmas-day-5cb69a454da0
I'm really confused at what you're trying to get at here.
Are you saying that because people have had bad experiences with Google that Steam should not bother with building business relationships with devs and pubs?
Or are you just trying to shit on Google and sidetrack the thread?
I mean, yeah, people are going to have bad experiences. Anecdotally, I've only had good experiences with Apple and Google. Apple tends to be more responsive, but both are amenable.
Anecdotally, Steam has built plenty of business relationships with Devs and pubs.
Things are so bad with Epic we are rooting for an EA-published game to screw them over XD
I'm still waiting to see what their plans are for smaller devs. I will be rather annoyed if they aren't planning to help the smaller devs out after all this talk on revenue share. Especially when they're the one's who actually need it more than most.
So far it's been all "triples indies" or otherwise well-known games and publisher-backed studios. Let's see how it goes, but I suspect they'll be left to wait until the floodgates open at the end of 2019.
EGS exclusives don't bother me, and because they're helping an actual competitor to Steam get a foothold I sort of cheer them on. They might bother me a bit if the launcher interface felt sluggish like Origin does, but it loads fast and feels snappy so I don't mind using it.
I want there to be a viable alternative to Steam, and this is the only way it happens.
Oh I expect that, i'm just saying I hope there isn't a bad case of "you don't make the cut". GoG was doing that for awhile on even some decent games like Cook Serve Delicious 2 and it irritated me to no end.
Being a fan of RPG Maker stuff, i'd imagine those sort of things will come under a lot of scrutiny on EGS. But I hope that won't be the case .
Ok. I disagree that it is the only way it becomes a viable alternative to steam, but Phoenix Point wasn't just a steam game.
Thoughts on crowdfunded backers promised Steam and GOG keys on losing their platform of choice after funding the game?
That trickle down economics will pay off any day now!
Having my retail options for buying The Division 2 vanish is for the greater good!
sTeAm Is A mOnOpOlY, lE CoMPeTiTiON
Yeah, this. Valve has done a lot to foist the labor of maintaining their platform onto consumers under the guise of freedom and control. Meanwhile, when it comes to actually developing games that, like, make the service a service at all, they've been extremely bad about informing people of policy they should be aware of or letting them know where the line is to be drawn. Rape Day is an obviously cheap and tawdry product that will recoup its cost from Steam's nearly-free advertising now, whereas it's much harder for a struggling dev with something worth publishing on the service to get past the walls in place. Not that Steam is their only or even best option, which is why I'm banging the itch.io drum so loudly now (well, that and a larger argument that Steam vs. Epic is a false dichotomy fueled by capitalist obsession but that's maybe a bit too high-concept for folks here)
See my problem with this line of thinking is that I don't want to necessarily block out AO content! My issue is that there's not a lot that the service does about providing context around games that involve sexual encounters, because that context is a huge component about whether or not the game is actually good. I mean, even then there's plenty of bleak objectification and pandering out there (we have a big ol' thread on it!) that doesn't go on the other side of that filter.
If someone promised a Steam version and then took it away, that's a good reason to be annoyed. Other than that, though, it's all fair
Yeah, I'm pretty curious about this aspect too... especially whether it'll ever actually happen.
It seems to me that Epic, at this stage anyway, isn't interested in fighting for parity on features or content.
So maybe they're perfectly happy with RPG Maker games, VN's, or other niche titles staying on Steam. The titles they curate are just as much about promoting the EGS brand as they are about "competing" with Steam. Basically if they can build EGS to be a place for quality games, that's a pretty strong selling point already.
I disagree. While steam is miles ahead of every competition there are to me at the very least 5 problems with steam:
- UI in non BPM is crap.
- It is incredibly hard to manage your game library.
- offline mode is a "joke".
- family sharing is very basic. I'd like more features with this idea
- curation algorythm still allows far too many fake games.
May i enquire what EGS does that makes it "better for everyone in the long run"?
Ok. And other resellers/stores? GOG?
This isn't a pure "Steam vs Epic" situation. Its gone beyond that now.
Just take a look in the Division 2 thread we had a while ago and the Phoenix Point thread on the front page.
I really doubt that Steam dosn't have humans dealing with business relationships with at least large publishers or big indies.
There you have it folks, Epic must directly interfere in the delivery of crowdfunded products, there is simply no other way to compete!
So the spiel about the suffering unknown developers was just false marketing.
Because zero percent of them will ever hit the EGS as it it now.
Maybe others have had better experiences with Valve than me. I'm pretty biased, lol.
I really can't sing the praises of Google/Apple enough though. They're really fantastic to work with, to the point where they'll do studio visits. Obviously not everyone's going to have that same level of support (especially if they're one-man operations), but even working at small indie studios, mobile platform holders have been very accommodating and responsive, and will really try to help your product succeed.
yes pissing off your consumers is definitely the only way youre right
Were Valve so inclined, they could very easily sell equity to Tencent or whoever for vast sums of money.
I very much doubt that they would need to any time soon though.
His store is guilty of many of the transgressions he has attacked others for (e.g. Microsoft) for years.
It's incredibly disappointing.
It's incredibly disappointing.
But aren't we back to square one with this? We are back to the days of Minecraft being knocked back on Steam or when the latest Zachtronics game got knocked back from GOG for looking like a mobile game. Or the fact that Stardew Valley would have been prevented from releasing on Steam under the old curation days.
Curation is great until it is your game that's being prevented from entering.
We're not back at square one, precisely because now there's actual competition, and they can always publish on Steam.
In the old Steam days, there was no viable alternative to self-publish. That was an effective monopoly--not due to Steam's fault, but simply because there was nowhere else you could self-publish and still hit a reasonable audience. If EGS ever ends up at a point where it becomes the only viable place to publish, then we'd be back at square one.
LewieP had a post, about the attitudes of indie developers at large. Generally it's a "fuck you, got mine" attitude.
First they were whining about curation preventing their game from getting on steam. Now that it is easy to get on steam, they're complaining that they have to compete with others.
And that still doesn't explain why EGS had their big marketing campaign on the outset about the suffering, unknown indie developers that are swamped on Steam.
When 99% of them will never hit the EGS?
But here's the problem, the logic is they can't make money on Steam any more (for whatever reason). Epic comes along with some proclamations that they are offering a better cut and will help the small developers. But the catch is that it is heavily curated for "Quality" games. So all those indie devs who couldn't make money on steam still can't make money on Steam and are locked out of Epic because of their curation policies.
Has the Epic Game Store had a store-wide sale yet? Steam sales are large part of what makes it so appealing to consumers and I feel it would be remiss of Epic to not capitalize on that if they want to curry more goodwill.