Randy Pitchford explains his support for EGS. (See Staff Post)

Conkerkid11

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
5,478
These sorts of arguments in favor of EGS from developers who’ve entered exclusivity deals always come across as dishonest when they don’t seem willing (or contractually allowed?) to acknowledge that the deal even exists. Like, Take Two didn’t decide to publish Borderlands 3 on EGS exclusively because competition is good. They did it because they expect to make more money (sales plus whatever Epic is paying) than they would’ve made on Steam in that time frame. We can’t have the whole conversation, so we’re left with guys like Randy pretending to be freedom fighters tearing down a monopoly that doesn’t actually exist.
Especially when Gearbox pulled the whole, "let's reveal the game on March 28th, but not announce the timed exclusivity until April 3rd" shit.

Hmm... I wonder which announcement is which?

 

Jobbs

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,397
Nothing he said sounded outrageous or wrong to me. People pissed about egs are only thinking incredibly short term.

What will the argument against it be once its features are as good or better than steam's? And yes, that is going to happen. I'm looking forward to hearing the new reasons for hating it
 

Kadin

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,094
US, California
The simple fact of this whole deal with EGS vs Steam is that that the former offers me, the consumer, absolutely nothing of an advantage. In no way is it better or cheaper for me to use it. So they keep saying it's better for the consumer but they can't back it up in a way that I can see. Sure they can say it is better in the long run or whatever but that's just a guess or 'hope' on their part.

Looking through Randy's tweets/replies just shows how much of a child he can be in his responses. Incredibly defensive, very argumentative and condescending. Won't be playing BL3 at launch, and that's fine. Not even sure I'll get it day one on Steam now tbh.
 

fracas

Member
Oct 27, 2017
767
I don't understand what you're arguing here.

You think that Epic's moneyhats are going to bring in more companies that otherwise wouldn't have released their games on PC? You think their deals with Epic are going to make them work harder to get your money? I don't get it.
From what I understand, EGS is currently trying to build a user base by buying up exclusives. That seems to be the easiest, if not the most economical, option to get more installs.

Obviously, they can't do that forever, or they'll go bankrupt. I don't have it on me, but the storefront feature roadmap seems to be the next step. After you've got a decent enough install base, then you can start to differentiate yourself from Steam in terms of feature set.

And maybe I'm wrong, but I'm hoping this ends up with actual competition between Steam and EGS for my money, be it new compelling features, crazy sales or something else. Valve is no longer the last word when it comes to PC gaming, and something will have to give eventually. I agree with most people here that buying up exclusives doesn't foster competition on its own, but I absolutely think it's the most obvious way to stand out and get users on your platform, then keep them coming back with new client features, sales, etc.

I might be off base with this. For all we know, Epic might just be banking on moneyhats to eventually help them turn a profit and there's no long term solution to differentiate their store and offer more value to customers and a higher cut to devs.
 

Solid

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,920
Oh and Randy, you lame douchebag, your name hits my tongue like acid, and I hope your disingenuous bullshit catches up with you and leaves you with a newly sullied reputation
 

lazerfox

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,066
Switzerland
One way I'd be interested to see Epic use their money to gain a foothold in the market is to subsidize the cost of games. If a game is $60 on Steam but $50 on EGS surely they could gain some market share and it would be better for gamers/gaming than exclusivity. In this way everyone gets what they want: gamers retain choice, publishers make more money, and EGS still gets to use cash to acquire users.
We've already seen with UPlay titles that PC players are willing to pay a premium price to get the Steam feature set. R6, The Division and AC come to mind.

That's probably why Epic went with the exclusives route instead.
 

Chairmanchuck

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,273
China
Nothing he said sounded outrageous or wrong to me. People pissed about egs are only thinking incredibly short term.

What will the argument against it be once its features are as good or better than steam's? And yes, that is going to happen. I'm looking forward to hearing the new reasons for hating it
But its not like that and its not better now. People are rightfully pissed about Nintendos piss poor online system and I think people can be pissed about a launcher not even have achievements or cloud saves and actually mostly nothing to make the consumers experience better.

Also here is a reason: Chinese will still not be able to use it, because with the 12% it wouldnt make sense to launch in China, because Epic would need to pay their taxes there.

And when will that happen that I get a BPM on EGS?
Or that I can see gameguides while playing?
Upload screenshots?
Have a profile?
Earn some pocket change?
Use VR stuff to play games.
Share the library with my wife?

People talked about uPlay and Origin like that and what do they have? Still just achievements, cloud-saves and for uPlay a profile. Thats it.
 

Papacheeks

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,421
Watertown, NY
Nothing he said sounded outrageous or wrong to me. People pissed about egs are only thinking incredibly short term.

What will the argument against it be once its features are as good or better than steam's? And yes, that is going to happen. I'm looking forward to hearing the new reasons for hating it
So far there is not benefit for shopping there. Hopefully we see games that are on Epic sold through third party sites. Competition is good for consumers. And honestly it took steam a long time to have the community features it has.
 

Villein

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
677
Not trying to cause an argument but why are Valve a ”growing problem” ?
You don't see a problem in their position as market leader on PC? Considering how slow they are to improve Steam and their lack of curation of the store. Steam would be a far better place if Valve wasn't the only place in town. But let me be clear my criticism of Valve does not mean I like what Epic is doing in any way.
 

collige

Member
Oct 31, 2017
4,842
- Epic does not need exclusivity to get the fortnite crowd buying other games from their store. Free in-game items for Fortnite for each game sale on EGS would do that job even better.
For real. Look at all this shit:
https://wiki.teamfortress.com/wiki/Promotional_items

Fortnite is way bigger than TF2 ever was and people fucking love skins. Making Fortnite tie-ins for other games is a win for everyone except that it takes more effort on Epic's part.
 
Oct 27, 2017
1,224
Nothing he said sounded outrageous or wrong to me. People pissed about egs are only thinking incredibly short term.

What will the argument against it be once its features are as good or better than steam's? And yes, that is going to happen. I'm looking forward to hearing the new reasons for hating it
It's still going to be their practice of buying exclusivity. Fuck every single thing about that.
 

Ge0force

Self-requested ban.
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
5,265
Belgium
Nothing he said sounded outrageous or wrong to me. People pissed about egs are only thinking incredibly short term.

What will the argument against it be once its features are as good or better than steam's? And yes, that is going to happen. I'm looking forward to hearing the new reasons for hating it
What a disgusting comment. People aren't just hating EGS to hate. Comments like these are a huge middle finger to all these people who have bothered to explain here on Era why they don't like what Epic is doing.

Also, you don't know better than us when or if Epic will get better features than Steam.
 
Last edited:

Conkerkid11

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
5,478
Nothing he said sounded outrageous or wrong to me. People pissed about egs are only thinking incredibly short term.

What will the argument against it be once its features are as good or better than steam's? And yes, that is going to happen. I'm looking forward to hearing the new reasons for hating it
Oh come the fuck on. You've participated in enough of these threads by now to know exactly what the arguments against the store are.

You know for a fact that at the moment, EGS is in very early access, so regardless of what it's going to look like several years from now, the fact of the matter is that rather than waiting until the store was actually in a decent state before releasing it, they're buying up timed exclusives.

Literally nobody would have a problem with their store if they weren't buying up timed exclusives.

Randy also literally opens up by stating that essentially the only way for EGS to be successful is if Steam dies in its place. If in his mind, Steam is a monopoly, that would just be replacing one monopoly with another.
 

Zefah

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,200
From what I understand, EGS is currently trying to build a user base by buying up exclusives. That seems to be the easiest, if not the most economical, option to get more installs.

Obviously, they can't do that forever, or they'll go bankrupt. I don't have it on me, but the storefront feature roadmap seems to be the next step. After you've got a decent enough install base, then you can start to differentiate yourself from Steam in terms of feature set.

And maybe I'm wrong, but I'm hoping this ends up with actual competition between Steam and EGS for my money, be it new compelling features, crazy sales or something else. Valve is no longer the last word when it comes to PC gaming, and something will have to give eventually. I agree with most people here that buying up exclusives doesn't foster competition on its own, but I absolutely think it's the most obvious way to stand out and get users on your platform, then keep them coming back with new client features, sales, etc.

I might be off base with this. For all we know, Epic might just be banking on moneyhats to eventually help them turn a profit and there's no long term solution to differentiate their store and offer more value to customers and a higher cut to devs.
So, basically, you're hoping Epic gets enough of a user base to not cancel this whole initiative and then maybe use that as an incentive to beef up their features and discounts to actually compete with Steam. Yeah, I'll maybe take a look when that happens and not give them the benefit of the doubt when they haven't earned it in the slightest. If anything, their history has done nothing but earn my skepticism. No thanks to vague promises of trickle down economics.

Also, for a lot of us, Valve hasn't been the last word in PC gaming for quite some time... I'd say well over half of my purchases in the last few years have been from GreenManGaming or GOG.
 

Chairmanchuck

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,273
China
Considering how slow they are to improve Steam and their lack of curation of the store. S
Spoken like someon not using Steam.
Steam literally got more added last year than any other store in the PC Gaming space.

We got a streaming app for Android (and more TV models).
We got a new chat system.
We got a new 18+ policy.
We got new controller support (Switch Pro controller, several dance mats etc.)
We got new VR support.
We got a new game.
We got new publisher/developer pages.
Added more curator options.
Changed how new releases look like (Popular, all new releases etc).
New regional currencies and payment options added.

And I am sure stuff I forget.

Edit: Forgot Proton. You can literally play 95% of Windows games on Linux now.
 

Conkerkid11

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
5,478
You don't see a problem in their position as market leader on PC? Considering how slow they are to improve Steam and their lack of curation of the store. Steam would be a far better place if Valve wasn't the only place in town. But let me be clear my criticism of Valve does not mean I like what Epic is doing in any way.
Can you point me to a competitor that's doing more than they are?
 

Papacheeks

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,421
Watertown, NY
For real. Look at all this shit:
https://wiki.teamfortress.com/wiki/Promotional_items

Fortnite is way bigger than TF2 ever was and people fucking love skins. Making Fortnite tie-ins for other games is a win for everyone except that it takes more effort on Epic's part.
Yup.

And it's actually more costly to hire a whole team of software developers and engineers for however how long to create/integrate that. Epic seems to just make money and go the easy way of putting up a one time deal for a developer for money upfront.

The long term would require way more effort and more money for having actual development teams to make all of that work for EPIC GAMESTORE let alone other games.

On top of making new titles from internal teams.

So far all this shows is they have money to throw around, but it's not long term investment. I would rather they have started working on unreal tourn release it as a F2P with spin off modes that continually get updates with unlocks like skins. Then those skins could be traded, used within their own market for other games, or be traded for actual money so people then can go and use that money right back into EGS for a new game or something.

But that would be too much work for Sweeney.
 

Demacabre

Member
Nov 20, 2017
2,030
Can you point me to a competitor that's doing more than they are?
Well duh, they have a road map! Shopping carts are coming soon.

It's like you people want everything.

Edit: These things take time. It's not like buying these exclusives are cheap.


Man, y'all that are fetishising competition are weird.
Agreed. You know what is also weirder?

People who fetishize competition, trickle down economics, and billion dollar corporations are a savior.

Hmmmm what does this sound like?
 

Deleted member 50949

User Requested Account Closure
Banned
Dec 16, 2018
489
Man, y'all that are fetishising competition are weird.

Considering how slow they are to improve Steam and their lack of curation of the store.
you can follow curators on steam tho.

Spoken like someon not using Steam.
Steam literally got more added last year than any other store in the PC Gaming space.

We got a streaming app for Android (and more TV models).
We got a new chat system.
We got a new 18+ policy.
We got new controller support (Switch Pro controller, several dance mats etc.)
We got new VR support.
We got a new game.
We got new publisher/developer pages.
And I am sure stuff I forget.
proton allowing you to play on Linux is a big one.
 

fracas

Member
Oct 27, 2017
767
So, basically, you're hoping Epic gets enough of a user base to not cancel this whole initiative and then maybe use that as an incentive to beef up their features and discounts to actually compete with Steam. Yeah, I'll maybe take a look when that happens and not give them the benefit of the doubt when they haven't earned it in the slightest. If anything, their history has done nothing but earn my skepticism. No thanks to vague promises of trickle down economics.

Also, for a lot of us, Valve hasn't been the last word in PC gaming for quite some time... I'd say well over half of my purchases in the last few years have been from GreenManGaming or GOG.
I would say eventually, the well will run dry and Epic will have to find a way to entice users without dropping loads of cash. There's no way they can keep buying exclusives without making their client better.

And yeah, I definitely understand you not trusting it'll work out. I don't really care for the epic launcher in it's current state either. That said, I think if Epic really wants to compete with Steam, this is the next step. Exclusives are enough to get me to use EGS to play individual games but not enough to have me log in every day and check the store, forums, etc.

I should have been more clear on your last point. I was just talking about Steam as a launcher, not necessarily as a place to buy games. Anecdotal, but Steam sales haven't been that great for me lately, so I get most of my games from third parties, too.
 

Papacheeks

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,421
Watertown, NY
Well duh, they have a road map! Shopping carts are coming soon.

It's like you people want everything.
I think the point is, they should have had a lot of this stuff in place along ass time ago pre-fortnite. it shows that the money they have, and popularity of fortnite slowly dipping has them wanting a longterm plan. And them turning into a storefront without their own games to show made it hard for them, so they took the easy way out and started cutting checks to big well known developers/publishers. Without having things in place for the people who follow those games to use their store in the way that they want.
 

WarRock

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,550
You don't see a problem in their position as market leader on PC? Considering how slow they are to improve Steam and their lack of curation of the store. Steam would be a far better place if Valve wasn't the only place in town. But let me be clear my criticism of Valve does not mean I like what Epic is doing in any way.
Remind me which other store allows people from all over the world to buy games in their currency and using local payment methods outside of US-centric PayPal and CCs. Or which allows any game bought on it to be played on Linux. Or with ANY gamepad in existence, including full rebinds. Or that has mod support like the Steam Workshop. Or that has built in streaming, voice chat, curation lists and user reviews.
 
Nov 14, 2017
913
This is a succinct way to put it, and the real distinction at the heart of this controversy that has made all of the EGS apologists look completely out of touch with dedicated PC players. From a consumer's standpoint, Steam's purported monopoly is not a problem in need of solving, so throughout this whole mess, players on Steam have justly felt pushed around by forces and interests totally out of their control.

For one thing, it's certainly not the case that Valve has been sitting on their cash and not investing in the platform. Whatever you think of Pitchford, the premise that Steam is a lumbering monolith riding off momentum simply does not ring true (contrary to how it might for, say, Facebook, an unmitigated catastrophe of software and services that everyone has wanted to desert for an eternity now, only they can't afford to lose the networks they have built). It's easy to point at Valve as a stagnant company that doesn't make games anymore and can't count to three, a perception that has stuck to their game development side for almost a decade now, but it's not even remotely true of the services, which have been refined and iterated upon in minute and meaningful ways that are only possible on a mature platform where all of the basics can already be taken for granted. Steam is now at the point where it is able to attend to extremely specific demands, essential to a tiny number of corner-case players and invisible to everyone else.

*

I've mainly stayed out of the EGS/Steam threads as there isn't much for me to add that hasn't already been said, but the situation with Borderlands 3 has been on my mind lately, as my main game all April has been The Pre-Sequel, and I think walking through my anecdotal "user story" is illustrative here.

In March, the Handsome Collection went on sale. I looked up a third-party price tracker to see how often this went on sale, how deeply, and for how long (and this isn't a Steam service, I know, but a side benefit of public access to this data over a long stretch of time). I checked whether there was a bundle price adjustment for already owning vanilla Borderlands 2. I looked over the activity stats just out of curiosity, even though I mainly intended to play solo. I scanned over reviews of The Pre-Sequel, the main draw for me here and a game I've been putting off for five years, mostly to estimate how much playtime I could expect and be alert to any known issues. (Steam reviews may not be that useful as review content, but they're exceptionally useful for getting a picture of what the experience is like after X hours, as games aren't the same experience at 10 hours as they are at 50 or 500.) I saw that reviews were mostly negative, but was also presented with a convenient bar graph illustrating a recent spike in negative reviews, informing me that some form of review-bombing was going on so I could look into the cause myself and assess if it would affect my decision (as it sometimes does, in the case of game-breaking patches or rough transitions from early access to release).

Then I bought the game, in my regional currency—knowing that a two-hour refund window would be there if I needed it, with zero overhead of dealing with customer service. Now, one thing you have to know about me is that I am an extremely (some would say irrationally) fussy player when it comes to controls. I resent dual-analogue controls for FPS and have always played them with a mouse and keyboard, but was also frustrated with how Borderlands 2 was so visibly designed for controllers first that the KB+M experience was dreadful for both vehicles and UI/inventory navigation. As a Nintendo player I also can't abide the backwards ABXY layout and confirm/cancel placement on the Xbox pad. Luckily, Steam allows me to link up my Switch Pro Controller with out-of-the-box support for the Nintendo layout, and with a vast range of configurability for gyro controls that first came in with support for the Steam Controller.

So I put about 50 hours into TPS with motion controls and Nintendo buttons—a happy compromise between tolerable aiming and Borderlands' controller-centric menus/driving—and it was by far the best FPS experience I have ever had with a controller. I plan to replay Borderlands 2 this way later in the year, and it has also done more than anything else to pique my interest in Borderlands 3, which I will want to play this way, or not at all.

I never considered picking up BL3 on the Epic Games Store anyway, as I'm patient and would be happy to wait several years for DLC-complete editions and steep discounts to kick in (all on Steam). I expect to play it in 2024, and we'll see how the platform war looks then. But looking over my entire history with TPS this month—from the initial purchasing decision to the configuration to the playing experience (and not even getting into benefits I take for granted like cloud saves that work over PC/Mac cross-buy)—it has become forcefully clear to me that Steam is an even more critical piece of the puzzle than I took it for. Steam is a part of this story from start to finish.

*

Now, something like playing with motion controls and the Nintendo layout is the kind of highly specific use case that individual developers will practically never address themselves; you need a services-level solution. And maybe it's the kind of thing that EGS will implement eventually, if we credulously buy into Pitchford's bet that Epic's investment in services will outpace Valve's. But the key to why PC players are so attached to Steam is that while they might not be dependent on this feature set, many of them rely on some feature set at this level of obscurity. And much of what I've talked about here, from user-configurable gyro support to review-bombing protection, comes from recent and active support of Steam for benefits that many people won't ever think about—things we never knew we wanted but now can't live without.

No, none of this was there when I first installed Steam on the promise of a free Portal giveaway and a looming Civilization V exclusive back in 2010. But EGS isn't competing with the Steam of 2010, the platform of free Portal and flash sales. It's competing with the modern PC ecosystem itself.

This is not a crumbling platform that anyone is desperate to leave on the consumer side, not even with the hook of freebies and exclusives, and for all the lip service we're getting about how the features might be there someday once the players are there, it should be incredibly clear to anyone looking at this with their head on straight that Epic isn't even particularly interested in established PC players as their market. They're pulling in the Fortnite crowd and perhaps younger players with no money to spend and no accumulated backlogs or friends lists to worry about. I find it very telling that I've seen Epic's free giveaways promoted and circulated by people on my social networks that have never touched a video game in their lives and have no idea a storefront conflict is going on, just in case their friends were interested. All the implicit messaging suggests to me is that existing PC players on Steam are not the audience.
Fucking nailed it.
 
Oct 25, 2017
12,369
Tampa
I mean you can tell he is really confident in all of these words given that everything else Gearbox is doing is coming out on Steam and not the EGS.
 

Crayon

Member
Oct 26, 2017
9,709
Nothing he said sounded outrageous or wrong to me. People pissed about egs are only thinking incredibly short term.

What will the argument against it be once its features are as good or better than steam's? And yes, that is going to happen. I'm looking forward to hearing the new reasons for hating it
If epic had half the features of steam and stopped snatching games left and right, things would be very different. You want to imagine the reception would be the same?

Animals react to their environment, or in this case their situation. Go ahead. Imagine that you can drastically change the situation yet see the same behavior from the animals. Close your eyes and make-believe.

Edit: sorry I didn't realize your inbox is already getting blown up. I like dogpiles better when I'm not in them.
 

Deleted member 32374

User requested account closure
Banned
Nov 10, 2017
8,458
Nothing he said sounded outrageous or wrong to me. People pissed about egs are only thinking incredibly short term.

What will the argument against it be once its features are as good or better than steam's? And yes, that is going to happen. I'm looking forward to hearing the new reasons for hating it
1. Saying that EGS moneyhatting is a "GIFT" to devs (Yes) and customers (No.) Also saying that this is the moment when PC Digital Distribution Stores become "unmonopolized" because a major games company paid for games to be available only on their service. :/ The reasonable shit seems like cover for the shilling.

2. We have no idea that the features will ever be "as good as steams". We know that Epic Games intends to compete on "Game Supply" (which is not a bad euphemism for money hat tbh, I like it).
 

Villein

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
677
User Banned (3 Days) - Lazy Dev Rhetoric and Ignoring Staff Post
Remind me which other store allows people from all over the world to buy games in their currency and using local payment methods outside of US-centric PayPal and CCs. Or which allows any game bought on it to be played on Linux. Or with ANY gamepad in existence, including full rebinds. Or that has mod support like the Steam Workshop. Or that has built in streaming, voice chat, curation lists and user reviews.
I don't need to remind you of anything as that has nothing to do with my point that Valve is getting lazy and has been lazy for some time simply because they do not feel threatened in their king of the hill position. I never said that another store is better, my point was that Valve could evolve Steam a lot more if they had real competition (But I do not think EGS is that competition yet)
 

Demacabre

Member
Nov 20, 2017
2,030
I think the point is, they should have had a lot of this stuff in place along ass time ago pre-fortnite. it shows that the money they have, and popularity of fortnite slowly dipping has them wanting a longterm plan. And them turning into a storefront without their own games to show made it hard for them, so they took the easy way out and started cutting checks to big well known developers/publishers. Without having things in place for the people who follow those games to use their store in the way that they want.
Agreed. And if they did and wanted their hook to be the 12/88 cut and not moneyhatting exclusives, there wouldn't be controversy.

If they specifically reached out to indie devs and focussed their push for those indie devs (and not just proven indies/publisher back devs) I'd be cheering them.

Edit: That is investing into the PC ecosystem that will create new games for the good of consumers and up and coming developers.

Edit 2: Yah know what? I could accept and look past a bare bones launcher with a 'road map' if there was no exclusivity deals AND their push was for solely small indie devs. I would buy into it then.
 
Last edited:

EloKa

GSP
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
475
Nothing he said sounded outrageous or wrong to me. People pissed about egs are only thinking incredibly short term.
What will the argument against it be once its features are as good or better than steam's? And yes, that is going to happen. I'm looking forward to hearing the new reasons for hating it
EGS having less features than Steam is only a small portion of the criticism and I'm sure you know that. After all you have entered every single EGS thread in the last month, trolled and always bailled as soon as people started to ask you questions about your "opinions". You should at least be familiar with the matter at this point.
 
OP
OP
Thinkdifferent
Dec 30, 2018
1,492
You don't see a problem in their position as market leader on PC? Considering how slow they are to improve Steam and their lack of curation of the store. Steam would be a far better place if Valve wasn't the only place in town. But let me be clear my criticism of Valve does not mean I like what Epic is doing in any way.
I don’t see their position as a problem, I am however always open for more competition in the market 100% and a viable alternative that is not indulging in anti-consumer practices like EGS would be welcomed by myself.

I always purchase games on GOG whenever I can and wish they were the market leader on PC, sadly until developers and publishers no longer want DRM GOG will never be a viable contender to Steam and Steam is frankly the best alternative as things stand.

Their lack of curation is widely overstated as well, they were widely criticised when they had stricter curation and now they are criticised for essentially having none, they need to find some sort of middle ground but the issue is, what is “fun” and “good” is very subjective.


That’s why Epics curation policy is a backwards step, THEY are deciding what is worthy of being on their store and denying indies and like I said, quality is a subjective thing for the most part (things like rape day for example though should never EVER be allowed on a store as a matter of human decency and I think Valves statement about the removal of that game was disgraceful tbh, that’s where they need to improve massively.)

I also think Valve are pretty good at updating steam and adding features but I do agree some things on their platform need updating but the UI (at least to me) is perfectly acceptable.
 

Kadin

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,094
US, California
I mean you can tell he is really confident in all of these words given that everything else Gearbox is doing is coming out on Steam and not the EGS.
I have a funny feeling that everything moving forward will be going to EGS though. Stuff prior to BL3 to me can be expected to go to Steam but with his position on the matter, I can't see them going that route from here on out. He's clearly indicated they want to support EGS now, at least that's what I'm gathering.

Although I guess they could move the existing stuff from Steam to EGS still...
 

Shengar

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,047
From what I understand, EGS is currently trying to build a user base by buying up exclusives. That seems to be the easiest, if not the most economical, option to get more installs.

Obviously, they can't do that forever, or they'll go bankrupt. I don't have it on me, but the storefront feature roadmap seems to be the next step. After you've got a decent enough install base, then you can start to differentiate yourself from Steam in terms of feature set.

And maybe I'm wrong, but I'm hoping this ends up with actual competition between Steam and EGS for my money, be it new compelling features, crazy sales or something else. Valve is no longer the last word when it comes to PC gaming, and something will have to give eventually. I agree with most people here that buying up exclusives doesn't foster competition on its own, but I absolutely think it's the most obvious way to stand out and get users on your platform, then keep them coming back with new client features, sales, etc.

I might be off base with this. For all we know, Epic might just be banking on moneyhats to eventually help them turn a profit and there's no long term solution to differentiate their store and offer more value to customers and a higher cut to devs.

To you and any other poster who argued exclusivity as a way for Epic to increase their install base: I do understand this, since there is really no point at all in installing EGS if you already got Steam, so indeed exclusive title is a way to invite people into the ecosystem. But moneyhatting isn't the only, not the SOLE way of making games exclusive to the store. Do you realize what I mean by the emphasized word in my previous sentence? Yes Epic could and honestly should developed first party or second party title to their Store. Just like how the main attraction Origin and Uplay is the place for EA and Ubisoft 1st party respectively. Nobody complained when Destiny 2 is Battlenet exclusive because at that time it was released by Activision. How is this hard to get? How do we keep forgetting the alternative to exclusive which Epic could do without angering and disrupting the PC market?

This makes it even more apparent how Epic trying to 'compete' in the least competitive way possible, wanting for quick cash grab (ironic since their strategy is wasting money). Developing store AND games took times and Sweeney, being the compulsive person he is, couldn't make do with that strategy. Before EGS all of their games except Fortnite was killed so they can focused on that title instead. It really shows how Sweeney really lacks any capacity for long term thinking.
 

Conkerkid11

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
5,478
EGS having less features than Steam is only a small portion of the criticism and I'm sure you know that. After all you have entered every single EGS thread in the last month, trolled and always bailled as soon as people started to ask you questions about your "opinions". You should at least be familiar with the matter at this point.
Glad someone else has taken notice. I thought I was taking crazy pills.

I have a funny feeling that everything moving forward will be going to EGS though. Stuff prior to BL3 to me can be expected to go to Steam but with his position on the matter, I can't see them going that route from here on out. He's clearly indicated they want to support EGS now, at least that's what I'm gathering.

Although I guess they could move the existing stuff from Steam to EGS still...
Gearbox published Risk of Rain 2 on Steam the same day they announced Borderlands 3.

He then posted this, despite Risk of Rain 2 being a massive success on Steam:

 
Oct 25, 2017
12,369
Tampa
I have a funny feeling that everything moving forward will be going to EGS though. Stuff prior to BL3 to me can be expected to go to Steam but with his position on the matter, I can't see them going that route from here on out. He's clearly indicated they want to support EGS now, at least that's what I'm gathering.

Although I guess they could move the existing stuff from Steam to EGS still...
There are several Gearbox Publishing titles that are Steam only, including Risk of Rain 2 which got a special deal from Valve.
 

WarRock

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,550
You don't see a problem in their position as market leader on PC? Considering how slow they are to improve Steam and their lack of curation of the store.
*gets a reply with a bunch of steam improvements in the last few years*
that has nothing to do with my point that Valve is getting lazy and has been lazy for some time simply because they do not feel threatened in their king of the hill position.
lmaok
I never said that another store is better, my point was that Valve could evolve Steam a lot more if they had real competition (But I do not think EGS is that competition yet)
yes it certainly could be better
literally anything could be better
valve gets shit all the time
none of this any weight to the idea that EGS is going to help Steam improve with their current model nor proves that Steam doesn't have improvements/Valve is lazy
 

GhostTrick

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,050
Nothing he said sounded outrageous or wrong to me. People pissed about egs are only thinking incredibly short term.

What will the argument against it be once its features are as good or better than steam's? And yes, that is going to happen. I'm looking forward to hearing the new reasons for hating it

Funny how I just thought the opposite. That the people rooting for EGS are actually the ones looking short term (often devs and for their own picket, cant blame them though).
Because what does EGS means in the long term ?
- Fragmentation which means devs will have to handle different builds for different launchers and sometimes different multiplayer servers.
- The death of 3rd party stores unless authorized by Epic... And running on a 12% cut which means the death of price competition.
- The rise of piracy led by the terrible service offered by Epic (Because as much as you want to say they will match Steam, it's not just happening because it's a design decision. You wont get communities. You wont get big picture. You wont get Remapping input. You may not even get game sharing or in home/out home streaming).

That is the 3 main points I see problematic in the mid term/long term.

But if EGS was to become the go-to store:
Death of indie gaming.
Sounds harsh ? Not really. Unless you're high profile enough, you'll just get denied.
 

Zefah

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,200
But its not like that and its not better now. People are rightfully pissed about Nintendos piss poor online system and I think people can be pissed about a launcher not even have achievements or cloud saves and actually mostly nothing to make the consumers experience better.

Also here is a reason: Chinese will still not be able to use it, because with the 12% it wouldnt make sense to launch in China, because Epic would need to pay their taxes there.

And when will that happen that I get a BPM on EGS?
Or that I can see gameguides while playing?
Upload screenshots?
Have a profile?
Earn some pocket change?
Use VR stuff to play games.
Share the library with my wife?

People talked about uPlay and Origin like that and what do they have? Still just achievements, cloud-saves and for uPlay a profile. Thats it.
And when Origin actually competed on features instead of moneyhats? Well, Steam responded with a refund system of their own that actually works better now.
 

Zefah

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,200
You don't see a problem in their position as market leader on PC? Considering how slow they are to improve Steam and their lack of curation of the store. Steam would be a far better place if Valve wasn't the only place in town. But let me be clear my criticism of Valve does not mean I like what Epic is doing in any way.
Absolutely not. They are the market leading store, but they don't block anyone from releasing their games elsewhere, or even selling keys that work on Steam outside of Steam for which Valve get 0% of the money!

Valve has consistently shown that they are developing Steam with consumers in mind and I can't think of an online system/store platform that has evolved more over the same period of time, even though you seem to think they are slow to improve Steam.
 

Ge0force

Self-requested ban.
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
5,265
Belgium
I don't need to remind you of anything as that has nothing to do with my point that Valve is getting lazy and has been lazy for some time simply because they do not feel threatened in their king of the hill position. I never said that another store is better, my point was that Valve could evolve Steam a lot more if they had real competition (But I do not think EGS is that competition yet)
I just don't understand why you're calling Valve "lazy" when they are responsible for more features and pro-consumer policies than any other games store on pc or console?

I'm also pretty sure that the majority of pc gamers want competition. But not like Epic is doing right now. Forcing people to use a new store by taking every other option away isn't what we were hoping for.
 

DeadlyVenom

Member
Apr 3, 2018
136
Easiest answer:

They did not compete on consumer pricing, features, and a better ecosystem but instead by attrition of third party exclusives to funnel people into a far more barebones ecosystem that in many cases makes it more expensive and outright unavailable for pc consumers.

This only got exacerbated when EGS, industry people, and the gaming press ignored consumer concerns and began holding hollow PR talking points as gospel without any nuance or full discussion. "Competition is good" "Better cut for devs"

They were in lock step with the same talking points page AND ignoring/discrediting any and all concerns.

This is an aggressive and multifacetted marketing push to barge into a sector in a industry with no benefit to the consumer. This is crony capitalism of large corporations making decisions for the consumer in backroom deals on full display. This is not organic competition.
Can we pin this to everyone that comes in to talk about it being another launcher?
 

Papacheeks

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,421
Watertown, NY
Glad someone else has taken notice. I thought I was taking crazy pills.
Your not crazy Conker lol. It's just there are too many people who are uneducated in what steam offers outside of a store. Like half the people supporting EGS in this thread don't know me included to some of the features that steam has that makes it more than a store.

Like it's literally a fucking OS. Runs on MAC, LINUX , VR, steam link, has it's own trading system. Which to me is the biggest thing for keeping people within your ecosystem.

That's what EGS needs, and it needs to have its own games that cross pollinate features like a market place where you can trade, buy items/skins that keeps you in the EGS.

What they are doing honestly is just fucking lazy and the mudd slinging is just kind of garbage. I'm surprised a lot of press haven't gone into detail on this, like the only thing they seem keen on focusing on is the Revenue split with Developers. And backlash from people like us.
 

Zefah

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,200

Conkerkid11

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
5,478
Easiest answer:

They did not compete on consumer pricing, features, and a better ecosystem but instead by attrition of third party exclusives to funnel people into a far more barebones ecosystem that in many cases makes it more expensive and outright unavailable for pc consumers.

This only got exacerbated when EGS, industry people, and the gaming press ignored consumer concerns and began holding hollow PR talking points as gospel without any nuance or full discussion. "Competition is good" "Better cut for devs"

They were in lock step with the same talking points page AND ignoring/discrediting any and all concerns.

This is an aggressive and multifacetted marketing push to barge into a sector in a industry with no benefit to the consumer. This is crony capitalism of large corporations making decisions for the consumer in backroom deals on full display. This is not organic competition.
This is an amazing post.

Yeah, and they make bank on season passes because of those skins. Epic isn't about to start devaluing them by attaching them as pre-order bonuses.
Maybe I'm misreading this post, but I'm pretty sure Epic's already done this with a PS4 exclusive skin, and one specifically for people who bought a Galaxy S9 and downloaded the game from the Galaxy Store.

It really wouldn't take much effort on their part to make a single skin in the theme of a game releasing on their platform and make it exclusive to a pre-order on EGS. Honestly haven't heard anybody talk about this as a possibility before, and surprised they aren't doing it this way instead.

Yeah, If Pitchford were to be right and Steam goes away, there'd also be nobody to stop Epic from raising that 12% up past what Valve offers and beyond. I absolutely gurantee you all that they're not going to keep that 12% forever and even how it's going now, and I bet they'd still push the processing payments onto the customers still
Yup, even they've admitted this isn't viable. There's a reason the 30% cut is so common.
 
Last edited:

Sidebuster

Member
Oct 26, 2017
548
California
Funny how I just thought the opposite. That the people rooting for EGS are actually the ones looking short term (often devs and for their own picket, cant blame them though).
Because what does EGS means in the long term ?
- Fragmentation which means devs will have to handle different builds for different launchers and sometimes different multiplayer servers.
- The death of 3rd party stores unless authorized by Epic... And running on a 12% cut which means the death of price competition.
- The rise of piracy led by the terrible service offered by Epic (Because as much as you want to say they will match Steam, it's not just happening because it's a design decision. You wont get communities. You wont get big picture. You wont get Remapping input. You may not even get game sharing or in home/out home streaming).

That is the 3 main points I see problematic in the mid term/long term.

But if EGS was to become the go-to store:
Death of indie gaming.
Sounds harsh ? Not really. Unless you're high profile enough, you'll just get denied.
Yeah, If Pitchford were to be right and Steam goes away, there'd also be nobody to stop Epic from raising that 12% up past what Valve offers and beyond. I absolutely gurantee you all that they're not going to keep that 12% forever and even how it's going now, and I bet they'd still push the processing payments onto the customers still
 

Shengar

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,047
Maybe I'm misreading this post, but I'm pretty sure Epic's already done this with a PS4 exclusive skin, and one specifically for people who bought a Galaxy S9 and downloaded the game from the Galaxy Store.

It really wouldn't take much effort on their part to make a single skin in the theme of a game releasing on their platform and make it exclusive to a pre-order on EGS. Honestly haven't heard anybody talk about this as a possibility before, and surprised they aren't doing it this way instead.
Fortnite skin is definitely the way of granting exclusive without being complete asshat to the market as a whole. In fact, isn't that what Valve did with TF2 and Dota 2? It sure is use less resources than developing a complete game while avoiding all these EGS-savior-of-pc-market narrative bullshit.
 

voOsh

Member
Apr 5, 2018
788
Not that I disagree with you, but:
This tweet is unlikely to age well. Permanent is a strong word. He could have said "We have no intention of changing our revenue sharing rate at this time." and the result is nearly the same but provides much more flexibility. Again, Tim if you're reading this, get a PR person.