-
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.
Epic CEO Tim Sweeney Says Only Exclusive Deals Can Combat Steam (see staff post for discussion guidelines)
- Thread starter RevengeTaken
- Start date
Hey says many things that are complete bullshit. Where are those updates or are you devs busy crunching on fortnite every night
They really couldn't have picked a worse photo of Sweeney lol
With a 12% cut, GoG probably wouldn't exist anymore
I agree with the premise that games are what drives people to storefronts, so getting exclusives to force people to go to it if they want to play it is the way to do it (though in all honesty the timed exclusivity makes it so people can just wait). What I don't like is how he's trying to act like Epic are being the "good guys", just admit that you want your client to be successful without adding in the extra bullshit.
GOG definitely doesn't 'compete' with Steam and the PC Game Pass is a completely different thing. And also just came out.
It would also be nice if, instead of trying to "fix" the entire gaming market, Sweeny would first make sure his employees don't have to work 70 hours weeks to churn out Fortnite content.
Yes it does. I chose to buy a number of games during the GOG Summer sale that are also on Steam because I like the store and GOG Galaxy.
It's an unsustainable cut which even scumbag Sweeny himself have admitted to. They're obviously bleeding money and it's propped up by Fortnite money.
To be fair, there are stores that still offer cuts like that (itch and I think Discord) but they are tiny. I
GOG is barely breaking even and Steam kills it in marketshare. Epic doesn't want to be GOG levels, they want to be Steam levels.
....OR you'll continue to give everyone the shits when they're forced to buy that 1 game out of 10 they desperately want you get the exclusive to on EGS, while the rest they will happily wait for the Steam release.
I just don't see this strategy working. I'm just a bit baffled at Epic's approach here. Without an ecosystem that binds people in a proper way these attempts at carving out a share out of the market are futile. People only buy the exclusive game and generally won't otherwise buy other games. (not at this pace at least).
Without a mature storefront with chat channels/friend list and other community features I feel it's wasted money.
Without a mature storefront with chat channels/friend list and other community features I feel it's wasted money.
I think that post may have be sarcasm but you got to remember to many one here, especially with regards to the EGS debate, competition for Steam only means you are as big as Steam. Any platform that sells the same games as Steam in the PC realm is a competitor, regardless of what people think or how big they are. Steam has plenty of competition.
GOG is barely breaking even because they don't accept a lot of games either.
There's still no explanation of the arguments that more money for the developers leads to game being cheaper (or more games for that matter, but that's another story).
Well, GOG is my main storefront because of their DRM-free stance, if they abandon that it'd just eliminate my entire reason for going there over Steam for my first choice.
We don't need a feature war. But do have the right to demand the most basic expected functionality when they buy exclusives and force us onto a new client.
It's not simply that Steam has more features, it's that the EGS client is shit, plain and simple. When you don't have cloud saves, and don't even show installation sizes for the games, then you're not where you need to be.
It's weak that he just tries and deflect this to a discussion about feature wars.
It's not simply that Steam has more features, it's that the EGS client is shit, plain and simple. When you don't have cloud saves, and don't even show installation sizes for the games, then you're not where you need to be.
It's weak that he just tries and deflect this to a discussion about feature wars.
Well, their DRM free stance is the reason big publishers dont release on their platform. But GOG's curation also is a problem.
Of course it's bullshit, as I said he's saying a true statement (use games to force people to use your store) but because he doesn't want to just say that outright he's trying to add a whole bunch of other justifications.
He's right if your goal is more to hurt Steam than just to build your own platform up.
I'd rather see Epic hurt though, and no one's buying that Epic will be more benevolent than Steam has been. This is where Steam's fairly light touch monopoly is paying dividends. I'd rather have Valve's monopoly than Epic in the market.
I'd rather see Epic hurt though, and no one's buying that Epic will be more benevolent than Steam has been. This is where Steam's fairly light touch monopoly is paying dividends. I'd rather have Valve's monopoly than Epic in the market.
Also, if his goal was to release more games at cheaper prices, Epic would actually fund some instead of moneyhatting.
I'll always be amused by Mr. Sweeney.
He was hailed by many as the champion of PC gaming for taking on the evils of Microsoft's draconian plans for a UWP future.
Now he is almost universally detested by PC gaming at large for bringing the "evils" of console-style exclusives to the PC space.
The old saying is true, "You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain."
He was hailed by many as the champion of PC gaming for taking on the evils of Microsoft's draconian plans for a UWP future.
Now he is almost universally detested by PC gaming at large for bringing the "evils" of console-style exclusives to the PC space.
The old saying is true, "You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain."
I have to wonder how much thought Epic has given to broader goals. It is so very late to the PC DD party, and with such an exceedingly basic service that has barely improved in the six months since launch, that the moment it stops paying for exclusives (and I imagine that time will come sooner rather than later), the developers/publishers it is aggressively courting will again release their games on Steam in addition to wherever else, and EGS will become a blip on the radar as GOG, Discord, etc. are. The fundamental issue with scoffing at the idea of features and sidelining their implementation is that Epic isn't giving anybody a reason to stick around -- buying exclusives may be a sound way to build up a userbase in the short term, but it's throwing good money after bad if you're not thinking long-term and ignoring the service component. Those who aren't fussed by Epic's inherently anti-consumer, borderline monopolistic tactics may be customers, but they're not buying into an ecosystem as there isn't one to buy into.
I know why, but that's why I said Epic isn't trying to be GOG levels, they're trying to be Steam levels. GOG isn't really a direct comparison because they are catering to a certain niche while Epic want as many PC gamers as they can.
Also you talk about breaking even: Epic is bleeding money as of right now.
Epic just want to be a monopoly and do nothing while operating on razor thin margins.
I mean you could compete by offering a better service. I heard people mockingly say PC people will be upset by yet another launcher when PC Gamepass became official but everyone raved about Gamepass so I think we should put the "yOu'Re UpSeT iT's AnOtHeR lAuNcHeR" argument to rest (people won't)
Of course that would require a better strategy than (trying to) buying your way to the top because you have more money than God and a sort of trumpian PR war by calling your competition the "Game Developer IRS" while also using trickle down econnomics as an argument for your store. Not speaking of the problem what comes after buying exclusives.
But what do I know
Of course that would require a better strategy than (trying to) buying your way to the top because you have more money than God and a sort of trumpian PR war by calling your competition the "Game Developer IRS" while also using trickle down econnomics as an argument for your store. Not speaking of the problem what comes after buying exclusives.
But what do I know
They're emulating the business model of a lot of airlines, healthcare providers and ISPs.
They don't want or can't offer a better service or substantially lower prices so they create a captive audience by creating a situation where consumers are given very little choice but to use their substandard product.
They don't want or can't offer a better service or substantially lower prices so they create a captive audience by creating a situation where consumers are given very little choice but to use their substandard product.
They're bleeding a ton of money now in the hopes that they'll eventually able to gather a userbase. If they succeed in doing so I see them stopping the exclusivity payments and 88/12 cut, in order to increase profits.
I think the goal is fairly simple for Epic:
They're not trying to convince customers. They're trying to convince publishers. If you read all their PR, it's aimed at publishers.
That's the reason why Epic covers a minimum of copies. They're trying to prove something here:
"By skipping Steam, you're not losing much sales yet you gain higher margin".
What Epic wishes is that publishers drop Steam altogether for their revenue sharing and review policy.
They're not trying to convert the users to shop regularly. They're trying to convert the publisher to release exclusively there for their own benefit, to push that 12% cut.
I don't think anyone is asking for a feature war just the industry standards from 10 years ago to in a modern storferont/launcher. This is just Sweeney being the dickbag that his is.
Steam pushed quality of service and additional features, and made it easier and cheaper to buy games in many regions even if not directly from the steam store, this made buying games a better choice.
Epic is pushing exclusivity without feature parity, making games more expensive or unavailable in many regions, and making unethical deals that make gamers dislike the EGS, this is pushing some people back into piracy.
Epic is pushing exclusivity without feature parity, making games more expensive or unavailable in many regions, and making unethical deals that make gamers dislike the EGS, this is pushing some people back into piracy.
Last edited:
And when will people understand that unless the dev is the publisher, they won't see the extra margins, that goes directly to the publisher. The dev won't see an extra penney unless they negotiate for it. This is directly benefitting Time and publishers first and foremost.
And journalists needs to start to push him on that issue, and the others. Sites like Kotaku needs to stop with their "it's just another launcher" mentality and look at things from the customers perspective.
Im not about to defend epic, but didnt gog make like 1k dollars of profit last year, for the entire year?
Also, on topic.. tim if you wanted to compete with steam, didnt you think it would be useful to have, i dont know.. a half decent storefront first?
Well, that's the thing: the only net benefit to releasing on EGS is the bag of cash you currently receive for doing so. Once that well dries up, there'll be no pot of gold, just dirt. Even Ubi still sees value in Steam despite being Epic's strongest partner by a significant margin.
Last edited: