Tim Sweeney: Epic Games Store is making the industry better but gamers don't see that

[Armaros]

im surprised that you guys spent so much time arguing with someone that said

thats such an instant non-starter for arguing in good faith. If there is one thing valve has done more than literally all other platforms, including consoles, its innovated on features.

Click to shrink...

The fact that epic store supporters constantly reference all the steam features as the reason why Epic can't compete without exclusives.

But you do see them constantly intersperse that Steam is also somehow doing nothing. Like these features just popped into existence without Valve doing anything.

 

[Mentalist]

What?
All games are monopolies. Naturally, obviously and unmistakably - the developer of a game is the sole source of that game.
There is no 'competition' in selling a game.
There's 'competition' in selling ancillary services to said game, which currently has one quasi-monopolist in the PC platform - Valve, who has enormous advantages due to being first-mover and network effects.

Does really the ancillary service of steam matter so much that it overrides making sure as much as your money is going to whoever made the art you're consuming?
And flaming endlessly about it?

Steam has innovated when absolutely forced to by competitors or regulators. See: Refunds.
This is the competition Steam needed to put a spotlight on the cut% issue.

What you're not actually getting is that the industry is healthier with as little middlemen as possible, taking as little as possible.
There's no 'competition' in the sense of companies getting more 'efficient' to make games at lesser budgets that can be sold for less. There hasn't been in a long time, and crunch \ dev underpay is already an issue enough.

Click to shrink...

Many of us don't care about that.

We care about our interests as consumers- the ones putting money into the "industry"

-epic store means higher prices because it's exclusivity removes 3rd party stores and plentiful sales and discounts
-epic store also means worse user experience due to missing or outsourced features in their half-baked storefront.

If Epic apologists continue addressing this purely from the angle of "developers and publishers are getting a better deal" and expecting the Epic detractors to be happy with the promised "trickle down effect" for the industry... well, this conversation will always go around in circle.

Epic has to address consumer concerns and explain what tangible benefits this exclusivity provides to the consumers

Not "oh, competition is good for everyone in the long run". Not " oh, well, the developers get more money". Not "oh, well, Steam has a monopoly and it needs to be curtailed" . Actual, tangible benefits for the paying consumer from removing a game from Steam and making it EGS exclusive.

Until they do, they will be (quite rightly) called out every time Sweeney tries to piss on PC gamers and tell them it's raining.

 

[Demacabre]

We definitely need a primer of the concerns in detail when the parroting "just another launcher" or "Good for devs" or "ruthless to break up a monopoly" narratives comes up.

It's not like we can link to an article from a reputable source that takes up this torch....... (which is sad and concerning as hell)

 

[scitek]

What?
All games are monopolies. Naturally, obviously and unmistakably - the developer of a game is the sole source of that game.
There is no 'competition' in selling a game.
There's 'competition' in selling ancillary services to said game, which currently has one quasi-monopolist in the PC platform - Valve, who has enormous advantages due to being first-mover and network effects.

Does really the ancillary service of steam matter so much that it overrides making sure as much as your money is going to whoever made the art you're consuming?
And flaming endlessly about it?

Steam has innovated when absolutely forced to by competitors or regulators. See: Refunds.
This is the competition Steam needed to put a spotlight on the cut% issue.

What you're not actually getting is that the industry is healthier with as little middlemen as possible, taking as little as possible.
There's no 'competition' in the sense of companies getting more 'efficient' to make games at lesser budgets that can be sold for less. There hasn't been in a long time, and crunch \ dev underpay is already an issue enough.

Click to shrink...

I'll tell you what my biggest deal is with Epic, I don't trust them. On top of their recent comments and actions, which quite literally show they don't give a shit about their customers. Their main sources of income are Fortnite, a fad that will inevitably wane in popularity, and a game engine that isn't used by nearly as many game developers as its prior iteration. Right now their store is nothing more than an experiment, and in five years, if they haven't made enough money to justify its existence, I could honestly see them killing it off. In other words, who knows what access I'll have to my games in the long run?

When it comes to Valve, their entire existence hinges on Steam's success, so they have much more of an incentive to do what their customers want. Over the past decade, they've made many decisions that improved PC gaming as a whole, and as a result, they've seen their platform grow exponentially. They took the time to learn what works and what doesn't, and earned my - and many others' - trust in the process. Epic seemingly has no interest in doing that, which means they won't be getting my support.

 

[Sean Mirrsen]

I actually really really love itch.io, that is my ideal storefront. Itd be great if that model could be extended or scaled to steam size

Click to shrink...

Well that's kind of the thing, innit? Itch.io supports all of two payment methods, and doesn't do regional pricing, because it simply can't afford to do more. There's no way to scale it to nearly comparable reach, it'd just collapse.

Epic, with developing UE4 and it's licensing terms, has done more good for game development than any other entity in the last few years.

Click to shrink...

*raises eyebrow in Unity*

Don't get me wrong, UE4 is a great engine. Scalable, powerful. But Unity did far more for enabling game development, and its continued progress in giving better and better features is impressive, despite not taking 5% of your game sales like UE4 does. (except if you're one of the chosen for the EGS deals, in which case you also don't pay the 5%)

Which is another thing, Epic Games takes 5% of sales off of any game made using their engine - on any store, including Steam. Why didn't they start with removing that, if they wanted to help the devs using their money?

 

[Deleted member 5621]

We definitely need a primer of the concerns in detail when the parroting "just another launcher" or "Good for devs" or "ruthless to break up a monopoly" narratives comes up.

It's not like we can link to an article from a reputable source that takes up this torch....... (which is sad and concerning as hell)

Click to shrink...

As those threads have proven again and again though, it doesn't matter. Either people ignore the points, try to spin around them or disappear without replying after being called out.

We got someone saying that Valve charges devs for servers in one of the threads.

 

[daninthemix]

Which is another thing, Epic Games takes 5% of sales off of any game made using their engine - on any store, including Steam. Why didn't they start with removing that, if they wanted to help the devs using their money?

Click to shrink...

Any game using Unreal Engine sold on EGS doesn't have to pay the 5% UE royalty. So in the case of UE the split is literally 88% vs 65%.

 

[Sean Mirrsen]

Any game using Unreal Engine sold on EGS doesn't have to pay the 5% UE royalty. So in the case of UE the split is literally 88% vs 65%.

Click to shrink...

Yes - 65% to the developer, 30% to Steam, 5% to Epic Games. Or 90% to the developer, 5% to itch.io, and 5% to Epic Games. And you need to be one of the lucky picks to even get on the Epic Store if you want to avoid it. So the question again - if they wanted to help developers make more money, why not start with making UE4 royalty-free, like Unity?

 

[Deleted member 42]

Yes - 65% to the developer, 30% to Steam, 5% to Epic Games. Or 90% to the developer, 5% to itch.io, and 5% to Epic Games. And you need to be one of the lucky picks to even get on the Epic Store if you want to avoid it. So the question again - if they wanted to help developers make more money, why not start with making UE4 royalty-free, like Unity?

Click to shrink...

That's not good business whatsoever and is a hella bad idea for them to implement

 

[Mentalist]

Any game using Unreal Engine sold on EGS doesn't have to pay the 5% UE royalty. So in the case of UE the split is literally 88% vs 65%.

Click to shrink...

Aren't they gonna rimplement that "influencer's" cut in the near future?
That's gonna be even higher than the engine license fee.

 

[Deleted member 42]

UE4 literally went from a 19 dollars a month per device fee to this 5% fee after your first 3k in sales per quarter

They took the barrier to entry waaaaaaaaayyy down already

 

[opticalmace]

Went to sign up for an Epic account when I saw The Witness is free... only to be told that I already had an account, which I've never signed up for (or got an email about). I use 2FA and Google hasn't shown anything suspicious (gmail account). I did a password reset and the account is in someone else's name in a different country, yet they were able to sign up with my email address?!? Sent an email to Epic support. Freaky deaky.

edit: after googling this seems to be a very common thing, OK panic over.

 

[Deleted member 15476]

UE4 literally went from a 19 dollars a month per device fee to this 5% fee after your first 3k in sales per quarter

They took the barrier to entry waaaaaaaaayyy down already

Click to shrink...

Tbf If you want to be a professional and can't afford to make up $20 per month for a software license, then you probably have no place being a professional tbw. Nevertheless, it definitely makes the proposition more attractive.

 

[MrBob]

For a big publisher its closer to 88 vs 75 for ue4 game, 88 vs 80 for non ue4. 88 Is a problem for consumers too since we see epic charging additional fees to consumers for some payment types. Consumers shouldn't be eating this fee for epic and publishers.

If one wants to argue valve should consider a flat 20 percent rate for all I would be for that. Or Valve could make it easier to hit the 20 percent rate cut for indies. Perhaps make the rate by msrp price where a 20 dollar game has to hit a 1/3 number as a 60 dollar game.

 

[Deleted member 42]

Tbf If you want to be a professional and can't afford to make up $20 per month for a software license, then you probably have no place being a professional tbw. Nevertheless, it definitely makes the proposition more attractive.

Click to shrink...

Tell that to all the freelance graphic designers who just use Adobe CS3 forever because they can't afford the Creative Cloud sub

It's so people who want to tinker and learn can do so without anything but time and effort equity

 

[Deleted member 2171]

Which is another thing, Epic Games takes 5% of sales off of any game made using their engine - on any store, including Steam. Why didn't they start with removing that, if they wanted to help the devs using their money?

Click to shrink...

You don't have to pay royalties on Unreal Engine games unless it makes >3,000$ and you only have to pay the 5% on the money above 3,000$, so if you made 4000$ you only have to pay 50$ in royalties. It is entirely risk free to release an Unreal Engine game re: engine costs.

Unity has similar terms, where you can launch risk free on the engine costs.

Source requires 40-50,000$ upfront before you can sell copy #1, because Valve doesn't cover third party fees for you like the other two do and it's illegal to even sell a single copy of a Source game without the Havok and RAD licenses paid in full.

 

[Geode]

Have any developers come out on the record (or leaks) on why they support the Epic games store? I'm sure most can't talk about it since they're NDA'd, but I'm surprised there aren't any leaks. I just would like to hear more from the devs. It would probably be a good thread to make.

 

[Death Penalty]

What?
All games are monopolies. Naturally, obviously and unmistakably - the developer of a game is the sole source of that game.
There is no 'competition' in selling a game.
There's 'competition' in selling ancillary services to said game, which currently has one quasi-monopolist in the PC platform - Valve, who has enormous advantages due to being first-mover and network effects.

Does really the ancillary service of steam matter so much that it overrides making sure as much as your money is going to whoever made the art you're consuming?
And flaming endlessly about it?

Steam has innovated when absolutely forced to by competitors or regulators. See: Refunds.
This is the competition Steam needed to put a spotlight on the cut% issue.

What you're not actually getting is that the industry is healthier with as little middlemen as possible, taking as little as possible.
There's no 'competition' in the sense of companies getting more 'efficient' to make games at lesser budgets that can be sold for less. There hasn't been in a long time, and crunch \ dev underpay is already an issue enough.

Click to shrink...

I know you've already been banned, but my lord this post shows a ton of ludicrous misunderstandings and false equivalencies. It also seems to be willfully ignoring most of the issues with EGS, which seems to be depressingly common in this thread.

 

[dex3108]

Went to sign up for an Epic account when I saw The Witness is free... only to be told that I already had an account, which I've never signed up for (or got an email about). I use 2FA and Google hasn't shown anything suspicious (gmail account). I did a password reset and the account is in someone else's name in a different country, yet they were able to sign up with my email address?!? Sent an email to Epic support. Freaky deaky.

Click to shrink...

Epic doesn't use confirmation email after account is created. You literally can make account with any email address without owner of that email knowing that you used that address.

Have any developers come out on the record (or leaks) on why they support the Epic games store? I'm sure most can't talk about it since they're NDA'd, but I'm surprised there aren't any leaks. I just would like to hear more from the devs. It would probably be a good thread to make.

Click to shrink...

Some of them talked and it was more-less "Epic gave us tons of money and we took it".

 

[AntiMacro]

This kind of sounds like the times Tim Sweeney was convinced Microsoft was destroying games, but people just didn't see it.

 

[inner-G]

just use Adobe CS3 forever

Click to shrink...

No content-aware fill? No thank you 👋

 

[rickyson33]

I'll tell you what my biggest deal is with Epic, I don't trust them. On top of their recent comments and actions, which quite literally show they don't give a shit about their customers. Their main sources of income are Fortnite, a fad that will inevitably wane in popularity, and a game engine that isn't used by nearly as many game developers as its prior iteration. Right now their store is nothing more than an experiment, and in five years, if they haven't made enough money to justify its existence, I could honestly see them killing it off. In other words, who knows what access I'll have to my games in the long run?

When it comes to Valve, their entire existence hinges on Steam's success, so they have much more of an incentive to do what their customers want. Over the past decade, they've made many decisions that improved PC gaming as a whole, and as a result, they've seen their platform grow exponentially. They took the time to learn what works and what doesn't, and earned my - and many others' - trust in the process. Epic seemingly has no interest in doing that, which means they won't be getting my support.

Click to shrink...

personally on top of that,market concerns,feature concerns etc I don't even trust them in an even more direct sense

that whole collecting steam data thing,reports i've heard from people about poor account security etc

I flat out don't even feel comfortable installing their program on my computer or entering my payment information into their store

 

[Sean Mirrsen]

That's not good business whatsoever and is a hella bad idea for them to implement

Click to shrink...

UE4 literally went from a 19 dollars a month per device fee to this 5% fee after your first 3k in sales per quarter

They took the barrier to entry waaaaaaaaayyy down already

Click to shrink...

Yet it's somehow good for Unity. Free to use until 100k revenue per year, Plus tier for $25/month until $200k/year, Pro tier for $125/month afterwards.
If you're a small team with a few titles to your name, you'd end up paying $1500 per year on over $200k of revenue, or under 0.75% per Pro license, lowering as you earn more. Whereas for UE4 you pay a flat 5% from every sale. There's the potential to pay a higher percentage with Unity, if your team is large and your earnings not as much (i.e., you use more than 7 licenses and earn just over 200k per year), but it's overall an advantage.

Coupled with the fact that I've been seeing more and more Unity-based games that actually run decently on my gaming potato of a tablet PC, it really makes me wonder if Valve shouldn't make a play for Unity synergies with their service and engine. If nothing else, prevent Unity from being bought out by Epic, who see them as a primary threat to UE4's success at the moment. Source Engine features and content available in Unity by default would be pretty neat. Of course, it would have to come at no cost, or be included in the Pro subscription. I'd imagine Valve could get pretty creative with dev-side benefits for Unity games on Steam.

 

[Geode]

Some of them talked and it was more-less "Epic gave us tons of money and we took it".

Click to shrink...

If that's the case, then I'm surprised more people aren't upset with developers accepting these deals. I definitely wouldn't be giving Take-two (or others) any of money even after the 6 month exclusivity deal ends. I know it probably wouldn't hurt them much since they got paid from Epic, but I still wouldn't want to reward them.

 

[Deleted member 2171]

Yet it's somehow good for Unity. Free to use until 100k revenue per year, Plus tier for $25/month until $200k/year, Pro tier for $125/month afterwards.
If you're a small team with a few titles to your name, you'd end up paying $1500 per year on over $200k of revenue, or under 0.75% per Pro license, lowering as you earn more. Whereas for UE4 you pay a flat 5% from every sale. There's the potential to pay a higher percentage with Unity, if your team is large and your earnings not as much (i.e., you use more than 7 licenses and earn just over 200k per year), but it's overall an advantage.

Coupled with the fact that I've been seeing more and more Unity-based games that actually run decently on my gaming potato of a tablet PC, it really makes me wonder if Valve shouldn't make a play for Unity synergies with their service and engine. If nothing else, prevent Unity from being bought out by Epic, who see them as a primary threat to UE4's success at the moment. Source Engine features and content available in Unity by default would be pretty neat. Of course, it would have to come at no cost, or be included in the Pro subscription. I'd imagine Valve could get pretty creative with dev-side benefits for Unity games on Steam.

Click to shrink...

Unity is looking to go public sometime in the next couple of years. It's a matter of time until someone owns them, and they're gonna be working on pleasing shareholders instead of developers.

They also constantly phone home telemetry in the editor that they can use to pitch sales. They'll even email you out of nowhere asking why one of your developers is idling on the editor screen. They also randomly go around harassing devs to pay for full Pro licenses even though they aren't even working on the projects they're being asked to pay up for.

I've had my issues with Epic, but Unity's recent actions have not been a good look for them :/

 

[GrrImAFridge]

Source requires 40-50,000$ upfront before you can sell copy #1, because Valve doesn't cover third party fees for you like the other two do and it's illegal to even sell a single copy of a Source game without the Havok and RAD licenses paid in full.

Click to shrink...

The Steamworks documentation doesn't mention this, but Valve will cover third-party licensing fees if you're willing to have your cut reduced to 40% (i.e. Valve's cut doubles). It's how Garry's Mod became a paid product, and I'd guess the same is true of Prospekt, Black Mesa, and other paid indie Source games, too. But, yeah, it's a comparatively poor deal, especially since the cut applies for life and not just until the licensing fees have been recouped.

With Source 2, the only caveat is that you must release your game on the Steam Store (not exclusively, to be clear), but it's anyone's guess as to when Valve will ship an SDK.

 

[opticalmace]

Epic doesn't use confirmation email after account is created. You literally can make account with any email address without owner of that email knowing that you used that address.

Click to shrink...

Wait really? That is the stupidest thing I've ever heard!

 

[dex3108]

Wait really? That is the stupidest thing I've ever heard!

Click to shrink...

That's one way to make sure you get tons of accounts that you than can boast about.

 

[Raspyberry]

What Epic Games is doing is actually pretty good for developers, and I support that.

If gamers don't wanna see that, is ok, they can wait for Steam releases and even cheaper prices. Because let's not fool ourselves, everyone already has a massive backlog of stuff to enjoy, that with the ongoing multiplayer stuff (most of it free to play).

Not a popular opinion, but in this case, I'm on the developers side. Gamers have been entitled for too long and few dare to peek behind the curtain to see what game development really is and how it works.

Click to shrink...

Wow. Entitled for protecting their consumer rights?

 

[Ploid 6.0]

Transistor soon, I already played it on console, but I'm up for another playthrough. Also seeing Quantic Dreams games in the store still seem like a dream.. unrea... crazy. I wonder if another console bound game will come to the store. Also the store is filling out, there's a lot of games.

 

[svacina]

Also seeing Quantic Dreams games in the store still seem like a dream.. unrea... crazy.

Click to shrink...

One you can't wake up from!

I wonder if another console bound game will come to the store

Click to shrink...

Not unless it was coming elsewhere first.

Also the store is filling out, there's a lot of games.

Click to shrink...

Thank god Epic deigned to bless us undeserving reprobates with a search function then.

Just don't get all excited and try buying all the games at once, cos you'd have to do it one at a time.

 

[eonden]

Transistor soon, I already played it on console, but I'm up for another playthrough. Also seeing Quantic Dreams games in the store still seem like a dream.. unrea... crazy. I wonder if another console bound game will come to the store. Also the store is filling out, there's a lot of games.

Click to shrink...

Quantic Dreams (and Journey and Flower) seem to be smaller ips where Sony allowed it to be ported to PC, Epic had nothing to do with the port (as Galyonkin has stated).

 

[Sir Swish]

Epic doesn't use confirmation email after account is created. You literally can make account with any email address without owner of that email knowing that you used that address.

Click to shrink...

Wait really? That is the stupidest thing I've ever heard!

Click to shrink...

Yeah this is true, a few weeks ago my epic account was hacked, I e-mailed epic and they asked me to provide:-

• Your public IP address(es) (IPv4), which you can find by searching "What is my IPv4 address" in your internet browser; if you use multiple devices, please include all IPv4 addresses
• Date when you created your Epic Games account (which you can find in the inbox of the email address you used to create your account)
• An invoice ID for any Epic Games purchase you made on the account (the Invoice ID begins with an "A," followed by 8 digits; example: A12345678)
• Locations (city, state/province) where you made purchases on the account
• Original display name for the account
• Last 4 digits of the first payment card used on the account
• Date of your last login
• Names of any PlayStation, Switch, Twitch, or Xbox accounts connected to your Epic Games account and the dates when they were connected

I was able to provide all the information except credit card info (as I had never bought anything) and the date my account was created years ago as I tend to delete unimportant e-mails. They e-mailed me back saying that they wouldn't help me. So I tried to make a new account using my other e-mail to find, like you that some one else had used it to create a account. I never received any e-mails no confirmation e-mail or spam etc.
The weird thing is when I e-mailed them to delete that account they never asked for any proof that I owned the account, they just deleted it straight away.

 

[nikwhatsup]

I don't care about the developers revenue split, I care about how good your service is and that is shite.

They have to understand that the devs aren't their end-consumer.

 

[eonden]

Yeah this is true, a few weeks ago my epic account was hacked, I e-mailed epic and they asked me to provide:-

• Your public IP address(es) (IPv4), which you can find by searching "What is my IPv4 address" in your internet browser; if you use multiple devices, please include all IPv4 addresses
• Date when you created your Epic Games account (which you can find in the inbox of the email address you used to create your account)
• An invoice ID for any Epic Games purchase you made on the account (the Invoice ID begins with an "A," followed by 8 digits; example: A12345678)
• Locations (city, state/province) where you made purchases on the account
• Original display name for the account
• Last 4 digits of the first payment card used on the account
• Date of your last login
• Names of any PlayStation, Switch, Twitch, or Xbox accounts connected to your Epic Games account and the dates when they were connected

I was able to provide all the information except credit card info (as I had never bought anything) and the date my account was created years ago as I tend to delete unimportant e-mails. They e-mailed me back saying that they wouldn't help me. So I tried to make a new account using my other e-mail to find, like you that some one else had used it to create a account. I never received any e-mails no confirmation e-mail or spam etc.
The weird thing is when I e-mailed them to delete that account they never asked for any proof that I owned the account, they just deleted it straight away.

Click to shrink...

I still dont understand how they assume you get some of that information (locations you made purchases on? all ip addresses of devices you use?) and why they actually need it. It just seems like a way to avoid closing accounts.

 

[Ge0force]

Any game using Unreal Engine sold on EGS doesn't have to pay the 5% UE royalty. So in the case of UE the split is literally 88% vs 65%.

Click to shrink...

Not for games like Borderlands 3, which will easily sell enough to reach the 20% cut. And there's this as well:

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019...ets-less-than-30-percent-of-steam-game-sales/

 

[eonden]

Not for games like Borderlands 3, which will easily sell enough to reach the 20% cut. And there's this as well:

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019...ets-less-than-30-percent-of-steam-game-sales/

Click to shrink...

Also, AAA companies negotiate flat fees rather than the 5% cut.

 

[CommodoreKong]

The Steamworks documentation doesn't mention this, but Valve will cover third-party licensing fees if you're willing to have your cut reduced to 40% (i.e. Valve's cut doubles). It's how Garry's Mod became a paid product, and I'd guess the same is true of Prospekt, Black Mesa, and other paid indie Source games, too. But, yeah, it's a comparatively poor deal, especially since the cut applies for life and not just until the licensing fees have been recouped.

With Source 2, the only caveat is that you must release your game on the Steam Store (not exclusively, to be clear), but it's anyone's guess as to when Valve will ship an SDK.

Click to shrink...

I wonder how many people at Valve work on Source 2. Given how many employees they have and how many other projects they work on it can't be very many, especially compared to Unreal or Unity.

Honestly I feel like Source 2 is probably well behind those engines and probably won't have decent console support for a long time. Unless Source 2 is actually much further along than we think I wonder if Valve working with Unity (by partnering with them or buying them if that was a viable option) would have been better than what's probably like a dozen Valve employees working on Source 2.

 

[GrrImAFridge]

I wonder how many people at Valve work on Source 2. Given how many employees they have and how many other projects they work on it can't be very many, especially compared to Unreal or Unity.

Honestly I feel like Source 2 is probably well behind those engines and probably won't have decent console support for a long time. Unless Source 2 is actually much further along than we think I wonder if Valve working with Unity (by partnering with them or buying them if that was a viable option) would have been better than what's probably like a dozen Valve employees working on Source 2.

Click to shrink...

Incidentally, some of Valve's VR stuff uses Unity (e.g. portions of The Lab).

 

[Alexandros]

In the end I feel that customers aren't obliged to accept an anti-consumer business practice in the name of "making the industry better". Better for who? I support and advocate for business practices that make the industry better for customers. I don't support business practices that make the industry better for publishers and developers but worse for customers.

 

[Kyougar]

Yeah, and the data calc'd out ended up netting 24-28% cuts for most games.
And that's not counting the grey market shenanigans keys experience, or that keys tend to sell at a lesser price than store-bought.


Then, exactly, can somebody explain to me why i got jumped for saying "If EGS pushed Steam to lower it's cut, then it surely did make the industry healthier"?

Click to shrink...

I can't take People seriously who say the Industry would be healthier if the Publishers get more money from the stores and the customers.

1. the whole Oxymoron with arguing that there are too much games releasing every day and arguing for a better cut to developers so that more games can be created.
2. If more money to Pubs/devs is good for the industry, why aren't they raising the prices (officially). You know, there is a very good explanation why they don't.
3. Pubs/devs haven even less revenue from Retail and Console sales. All the people who argue that devs should go exclusively to Epic should also argue that the games should not release on Retail or Consoles. You know, because they even get "fucked" even more out of their money in those places.

 

[legendofjelda]

Made an Epic Games Store account today and my email address was already in use. Got access through "Forgot Password" and it was set up with some bogus display name and as living in Thailand. They're really going to need to add email confirmation...

 

[Nassudan]

Made an Epic Games Store account today and my email address was already in use. Got access through "Forgot Password" and it was set up with some bogus display name and as living in Thailand. They're really going to need to add email confirmation...

Click to shrink...

Their entire account management process seems so poorly thought out, I just don't feel comfortable have *any* payment information stored with them. Sweeney can boast all he wants about EGS, the fact remains it's a mess.

 

[legendofjelda]

I've 2-factor'd the account now... I do hope that'll keep it out of the wrong hands.

Another weird thing is that my username was also already in use, but not linked to my e-mail address. Never had the issue of someone else calling themselves LegendofJelda before (it's a silly pun on my name), so I suspect there's a random other spam account already created using my handle. Oh well.

 

[Deleted member 1273]

Tbf If you want to be a professional and can't afford to make up $20 per month for a software license, then you probably have no place being a professional tbw. Nevertheless, it definitely makes the proposition more attractive.

Click to shrink...

This is absolutely disgusting, and I hope you really dropped the /s

 

[Deleted member 15476]

This is absolutely disgusting, and I hope you really dropped the /s

Click to shrink...

Not at all. Funnily enough, I know a case of an office that used cracked CAD software on their computers since they couldn't afford to pay for the licenses. Needless to say, they got caught by a government agent, were issued a massive fine and closed down as a direct result. Nothing wrong with lowering the entry barrier, but professional grade software costs money. It's just how things work.

 

[svacina]

Needless to say, they got caught by a government agent

Click to shrink...

LOL
How and why did the government care? Was it incidental to some other fuck up?

 

[svacina]

LOL
How and why did the government care? Was it incidental to some other fuck up?

Click to shrink...

ETA: I agree that using pirated software for work is amateur hour, it's just it's usually some private entity that just sues you for breach of copyright.

EDIT: FUCK, I fucked this up.

 

[spam musubi]

This is absolutely disgusting, and I hope you really dropped the /s

Click to shrink...

I mean, the alternative is pirating the software you need, which I'd say is more disgusting and will get your business in big trouble if caught.

 

[Nassudan]

LOL
How and why did the government care? Was it incidental to some other fuck up?

Click to shrink...

Probably got caught in some audit. When I worked for a small company not too long ago we had to verify the software tools we used were legit.