Realistically, how do you see this whole Epic Games Store thing ending? (Read OP)

[GhostTrick]

I imagine the store will continue to improve and people will slowly stop getting so heated about it and just accept it as a thing that exists

Click to shrink...

The thing is, there are areas where the store wont improve because that's not the policy Epic pursue. Some features wont happen because Epic believes that they shouldn't happen. That it goes against their message.

On top of that, the problem isn't Epic existing in their own side and being just like it. The problem is Epic's influence on the bigger picture. The problem is that Epic aims not only to gain a marketshare but also to change the landscape and multiple aspect of the PC market, from the 3rd party distribution, to the key generation, to the place of the customer among that market.

 

[MikeE21286]

Acceptance.
I think it'll improve as a store and the whole exclusive thing will become more forgiving

Click to shrink...

Agreed.

Remember micro transactions in 2006...

 

[Delusibeta]

1) I do suspect that Epic is in a situation whereby as soon as they stop pumping money into it, their store instantly becomes irrelevant. Subsequently, I do suspect that they'll continue trying to secure exclusives until the plug gets pulled.
2) No. The store cut argument is a total irrelevence, since Epic is guaranteeing large quantities of money. There is very little evidence that EGS is taking away from Steam's market share, although admittedly it is a bit early to draw conclusions.
3) Given that its been three quarters of a year since launch, and the only public-facing changes has been a search box in the store and a couple of games getting cloud saves, I have very little faith in the EGS team's ability to improve the experience in the short term.
4) No. Exclusives don't sell platforms, marketing does. Given the high importance of word of mouth in games marketing, I do think EGS bring the most reviled thing in PC gaming since StarForce is going to ultimately nail its coffin.

 

[Swenhir]

Question 1: Will Epic stop buying exclusives and, if not, to what extent will they keep doing it?
I think Epic will keep on pumping only as long as they need to. It is clearly a loss-leading strategy which means that as soon as it's not necessary anymore, the miracle of free moneyhats will go away. For good, I should hope. The extent is impossible to predict without knowing their finances nor what the board of directors and decision makers have in mind for their global PC gaming strategy.

Question 2: Will Steam decide to lower its percentage and, if so, what will happen afterwards?
No. Absolutely no reason to at this point in time. It isn't the industry standard, nor is it viable to match anything approaching Epic. A discussion about percentage also is meaningless without adding to it context. Regional pricing, and how much the platform absorbs. Not to mention that the percentage never was the point considering that Steam's percentage can already be 0% through key resellers. The only thing that could push Steam to lower its percentage would be a global market shift across all of gaming. In that light, they are already lower than average with the new cut scaling.

Question 3: Will Epic improve its service and, if so, what will the reaction be?
If EGS's short history is anything to go by, no. They will taunt people on Twitter, further damage their image toward core PC gaming and stir up controversies. I have no doubt that within such a large amount of time, some work will be done but I don't trust Epic to put any significant resources toward a better customer experience. The customer is, ironically, not their focus. I surmise that the reaction will be articles praising such "disrupting" and "daring" choices, comparing them to charter airlines and other such spin ignoring the reality customers and the PC ecosystem might face as a consequence.

Question 4: Will Epic even be around in the long-term?
I do not think they will. The EGS has no relevancy or reason to exist beyond removing consumer choice. Even if they somehow came to their senses and focused on service, not anti-competitive behavior, they have scorched too much earth with PC gamers. I don't give them long once Fortnite - or investors - forces them to reevaluate the financial viability of their store as well as ongoing development efforts.

 

[Madjoki]

Not sure, but Steam getting Halo and other Microsoft titles was a bigger get than anything Epic managed, I doubt Valve had to pay for that.

Click to shrink...

Is not just Steam, Microsoft tried to get Halo Mcc to epic store too, but epic didn't want because it's on steam.

 

[LewieP]

The same thing that happened when Origin launched. There was a lot of moaning and complaints then, but in the end it carved out a nice little niche for itself with origin access.

Click to shrink...

Which third party games sell well on Origin?

 

[Ionic]

Is not just Steam, Microsoft tried to get Halo Mcc to epic store too, but epic didn't want because it's on steam.

Click to shrink...

I almost find that hard to believe. Bloodlines 2 is getting a release on EGS, Steam, and GOG. If a Paradox game is enticing enough for Epic to let a dirty non-exclusive on to their store, then the chance to get Halo should've been an absolute no-brainer. I'd think Halo would have enough star power for Tim to not turn it away just to preserve some kind of hoity-toity air of exclusivity about his store.

 

[AshenOne]

Question 1: Will Epic stop buying exclusives and, if not, to what extent will they keep doing it?

They will eventually stop it because its absolutely not gonna work the way they want to work and the amount of marketshare and profit they want to have. Their shitty barebones launcher/storefront is no doubt working against them, majority of the PC gamers will keep not buying from their store and eventually they'll consider this strategy a failure. Its inevitable. Just take a look at their lots of missed goals for each month and their first big test for sales aka Borderlands 3 is right around the corner and they got no preload to take quite a bit of strain off their servers from launch. RIP their servers.

Question 2: Will Steam decide to lower its percentage and, if so, what will happen afterwards?

I don't think they will and even if they do, do it, it will be on conditional grounds like how much more/less revenue developers/pubs generate and how much the split between them and valve will be going in their favor. I do not expect a straight more share for the publisher/devs unconditionally because its not feasable for steam. They already give out a lot of features to consumers and devs without them paying valve for it.

Question 3: Will Epic improve its service and, if so, what will the reaction be?

Honestly i don't know. From the Store's announcement till this very moment, their priorities and intent are fully focused on buying out third party exclusives with very little to no improvements to the EGS monthly. They're not looking at this service for the longer term but just how much they can squeeze in marketshare and profits in the short term. They want to go big at the start and swoop in the marketshare without any proper planning. Its all just rushed behavior and planning from them.

Question 4: Will Epic even be around in the long-term?

If it were any other company then i'd say yes, even if their store wouldn't work and reek profits and marketshare like they expected they would still be in the game just like EA's Origin is.

But this is Epic we are talking about. They're the same company with the same CEO who ran away from developing PC games when it didn't workout from them as they expected with Gears of War 1. They called us PC gamers 'pirates' even. So this is just my hunch and iam particularly confident about it but i think they might just run away from this store business if their plans do not work as they expected. They clearly do not believe that features make Steam what they are right now and put it on low priority. They just think that shoving money onto the devs/pubs will win them the marketshare and the customers with it.

 

[Delusibeta]

I do think it's very telling that Origin is a common point of comparison in this thread with EGS. The Origin client is crap, the multiplayer infrastructure isn't much better, and I get the impression that EA has given up on selling games and is instead focusing on the subscription services.

 

[Lothars]

I do think it's very telling that Origin is a common point of comparison in this thread with EGS. The Origin client is crap, the multiplayer infrastructure isn't much better, and I get the impression that EA has given up on selling games and is instead focusing on the subscription services.

Click to shrink...

Origin is still much better than egs. It's still not even a fair comparison.

 

[Tovarisc]

I almost find that hard to believe. Bloodlines 2 is getting a release on EGS, Steam, and GOG. If a Paradox game is enticing enough for Epic to let a dirty non-exclusive on to their store, then the chance to get Halo should've been an absolute no-brainer. I'd think Halo would have enough star power for Tim to not turn it away just to preserve some kind of hoity-toity air of exclusivity about his store.

Click to shrink...

Phil Spencer
You mentioned wanting to get your games onto as many platforms as possible. Does that include the Epic Games Store and GOG?

GOG has some specific rules that they set, as does Epic right now, about what games we can put [on them], what other stores they can be available in. We're still in the situation of what I said in the blog post of, we recognise that there are other stores out there. We want to be supportive of the other stores that are at scale—because I can also spend a lot of time porting to a ton of different stores and not actually make progress with the games, which I think is the most important part. Focused on Steam because it's the biggest and they were very supportive of the work we wanted in order to make sure our ecosystem stayed connected. So always looking at the future, there's nothing against GOG or EGS that says we wouldn't be able to support those, but right now we're focusing on the two stores that we've announced.

Your strategy is moving towards more openness and choice. What do you make of Epic Games' exclusive strategy on PC?

We're taking an approach of, as you say, open, and going with the approach that people should be able to buy the games in the stores that they want. But I'm not...Tim is someone I've known for years, he's a friend of mine, he's a got a strategy that they want with Epic. I believe that Epic is working from what they believe is what's best for both them and their creators and their players, and I've never seen them act in a different way, so I'm not judging.

We're picking a different strategy. I guess we'll see, in the end, what works. But I think all-up Epic has been incredibly important to gaming, not just PC gaming. The role that Unreal has played over the years in unlocking creators at all different levels, the games that they've built—I've got a ton of respect for them and they're trying to go do. They're taking their approach and I get it, and we're just taking a different approach.

Click to shrink...

https://www.pcgamer.com/uk/xboxs-phil-spencer-on-game-pass-steam-and-the-epic-games-store/

 

[Ionic]

https://www.pcgamer.com/uk/xboxs-phil-spencer-on-game-pass-steam-and-the-epic-games-store/

Click to shrink...

From this it feels more like Microsoft didn't really bother trying to get the game onto EGS. The first question about focusing on Steam because they are the largest and gave them a lot of support towards their goals leads me to believe not launching on EGS is less about EGS rules and more about Valve being more likely to facilitate Microsoft's goals with their recent PC pushes. As I said earlier, if Bloodlines 2 could break through the EGS exclusivity wall, so too could Halo.

 

[dabri]

Question 1: Will Epic stop buying exclusives and, if not, to what extent will they keep doing it?

No. It will most likely slow down dramatically. I see buying exclusives as a short term early part of the process of getting EGS onto peoples systems and getting eyes on their market. I do think Epic will shift from buying exclusives to partnering with devs as more of a publishing role, obviously with exclusive store rights. Not on the volume they are operating at now.

Question 2: Will Steam decide to lower its percentage and, if so, what will happen afterwards?

I doubt it. Maybe one day. Steam still pushes enough sales that they don't need to do anything to respond to Epics actions. They print money and will continue unless people actively drop use of their store, which isn't happening.
Pretty safe to say everyone using EGS are still using Steam.

Question 3: Will Epic improve its service and, if so, what will the reaction be?

Yes. Reactions will be positive everywhere except for gaming forums. I'm pretty sure no matter what features come out, angry video game "enthusiests" will still complain that it's "too little, too late" or not as good as Steam.
I mean, I've even heard the argument on these very forums that an aspect of EGS (technical functionality) was bad because Tim Sweeney said something that they didn't like.
Yes, a technical feature was bad because someone said something unrelated that they didn't like.



Question 4: Will Epic even be around in the long-term?

 

[LewieP]

I almost find that hard to believe. Bloodlines 2 is getting a release on EGS, Steam, and GOG. If a Paradox game is enticing enough for Epic to let a dirty non-exclusive on to their store, then the chance to get Halo should've been an absolute no-brainer. I'd think Halo would have enough star power for Tim to not turn it away just to preserve some kind of hoity-toity air of exclusivity about his store.

Click to shrink...

We don't know if Paradox just decided to put Bloodlines 2 on EGS, or if there was an upfront payment from Epic (albeit a much smaller one than there would be for exclusivity).

 

[Cipherr]

Marketshare craters in about 18 months even though they won't have much anyway, and it just kinda exists while everyone still massively uses steam. Itll stick around and eventually fade away into nothing when the money for buying big exclusives dries up.

 

[Dinjoralo]

For people bringing up Halo and Steam, Microsoft's current strategy seems to be building a lot of bridges to other environments to foster goodwill and a positive image, and to try to get some money from everyone rather than getting all the money from people who're willing to fully dive into their ecosystem. This isn't just in gaming, but for most of their business divisions, like cloud computing and Windows. So for PC gaming, they want to put games where people want them while also making their own platform a worthwhile alternative. Association with the Epic Store would do a lot of harm to their image and hurt that strategy.

 

[Kilgore]

With an explosion

 

[chrominance]

I think the most likely scenario is that EGS-exclusive games get filed in the same headspace as EA/Origin games, and people accept that they have to keep EGS installed for those exclusives but likely won't migrate over to EGS en masse. EGS will continue to improve their client and services, but at a relatively slow pace. Steam will make few changes but could potentially start buying exclusives if EGS keeps up their campaign for an extended period of time (like years).

I think whether EGS sees better fortunes than that depends largely on its sale/discounting strategy. We've only seen one major sale from EGS so far, and while it was a doozy, it also showed a certain lack of experience on Epic's part. Origin in its early years proudly declared that deep discounts were for suckers who didn't understand how they devalued games, only for the service to turn around a few years later and offer 75% discounts on games on a semi-regular basis.

EGS is already behind the curve in a sense because they don't have that robust ecosystem of official key resellers (GMG, Fanatical, etc.) using the Steam platform; this may be better for publishers in the short-term and bigger fish like Ubisoft could potentially get away with eliminating third-party key storefronts permanently, but there's probably a swath of publishers that follow a strategy that relies in part on third-party sellers. Indies have a greater reliance on bundles, and it's unclear to me how EGS fits into that ecosystem as well.

A lot of people seem concerned that EGS will lead to higher prices for consumers across the board due to lack of third-party key sellers, but I honestly don't think so. This is the same industry that's refused to budge from the $59.99 price point in the States for over a decade, and have resorted to other means beyond raising the list price to make up the revenue. If EGS games end up retaining a higher price on average, I think fewer people will buy them, full stop.

 

[Mentalist]

Best case scenario: in a few years EGS is GFWL 2.0, it's unceremoniously retired and we all remember the exclusivity pushes like it was a fever dream.

Worst case scenario: in a few years, WB, 2K, Squeeenix and a bunch of other publishers all sell their games exclusively on their own launchers- the quality is approximately that of Bethesda launcher right now.

Realistic scenario- Epic continues its moneyhats, but people shrug and move on, because they get all the features anyways though the "one launcher to rule them all" -aka, Galaxy 2.0. EGS also introduces more currencies support, and a few barebones features (like achievements). It's prices are still terrible compared to GamePass or steam key resellers, but people buy more games in holiday sales.

 

[Delusibeta]

Realistic scenario- Epic continues its moneyhats, but people shrug and move on, because they get all the features anyways though the "one launcher to rule them all" -aka, Galaxy 2.0.

Click to shrink...

Speaking as someone who is in the Galaxy 2.0 beta; this won't happen, as you'll still need the various clients installed to handle updates and running the games, which IMO defeats the purpose of having a meta-client. There's also no sign of the cross-platform friends list yet, nor any associated chat features.

If you want to experience a very close approximation of GOG Galaxy 2.0, install Playnite.

 

[Shadout]

Best case scenario: in a few years EGS is GFWL 2.0, it's unceremoniously retired and we all remember the exclusivity pushes like it was a fever dream.

Worst case scenario: in a few years, WB, 2K, Squeeenix and a bunch of other publishers all sell their games exclusively on their own launchers- the quality is approximately that of Bethesda launcher right now.

Realistic scenario- Epic continues its moneyhats, but people shrug and move on, because they get all the features anyways though the "one launcher to rule them all" -aka, Galaxy 2.0. EGS also introduces more currencies support, and a few barebones features (like achievements). It's prices are still terrible compared to GamePass or steam key resellers, but people buy more games in holiday sales.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, three probable scenarios.
Cant imagine Galaxy 2.0 will get particularly useful, but it would be awesome if it does. Seems like platform-agnostic modding support for example could be hard to pull off (as in, one that works reasonably well and is easy to use. We obviously got the expert version already from Nexus etc)
The big letdown with exclusives is the price formation though. Lack of competition wont do anything good for game prices. That is not something shared platform-agnostic tools can solve.

 

[Swenhir]

https://www.pcgamer.com/uk/xboxs-phil-spencer-on-game-pass-steam-and-the-epic-games-store/

Click to shrink...

I love that last question. Paraphrased, his answer is pretty fun.

"We aren't idiots, and let me say it before your readers even remotely associate us with that dumpster fire : "open". There you go. But Tim is a friend. Epic has a strategy. Those are words. They are screwing up and I'm not about to tell them."

 

[Barrel Cannon]

Question 1: Will Epic stop buying exclusives and, if not, to what extent will they keep doing it?

Click to shrink...

I don't see them stopping this ever tbh. They can afford it for the long haul. I do however see them slowing down eventually on the number of exclusives they get. They'll definitely be eyeing up a ton of big properties for their store to build up that userbase.

Question 2: Will Steam decide to lower its percentage and, if so, what will happen afterwards?

Click to shrink...

Steam has but they likely won't go as low as Epic ever. I do wonder what features will be added to Steam to elevate it more over the next few years

Question 3: Will Epic improve its service and, if so, what will the reaction be?

Click to shrink...

Epic's already made a lot of improvements, and they still have a ton of things they can improve on. I'm certain they will keep rolling out more updates at a fast pace within the next 2 years or else they won't be able to get a good market share even with the money-hatting of exclusives.

Question 4: Will Epic even be around in the long-term?

Click to shrink...

Yea for sure. They are loaded with cash and can easily play the long game.

 

[Teeth]

Worst case scenario: in a few years, WB, 2K, Squeeenix and a bunch of other publishers all sell their games exclusively on their own launchers- the quality is approximately that of Bethesda launcher right now.

Click to shrink...

I think Epic's business proposal to major pubs is that the 12% is low enough that they would be making a poor business decision to make their own platforms (as it will cost them more in real monetary terms and abstract headaches than just going with Epic's store).

 

[fourfourfun]

when the money for buying big exclusives dries up

Click to shrink...

Will this one even happen? They could be quite aggressive -> "you will get a discount on royalty costs for using Unreal Engine 4 if you release your game exclusively on our platform"

Plenty of leverage for them outside of Fortnight cash. Royalty on big titles must be pretty huge.

This will be their ecosystem end-game though. Pipeline stretches from dev tools to publishing / in life tools. They own the entire lifecycle of a game.

 

[Cirrus]

Will this one even happen? They could be quite aggressive -> "you will get a discount on royalty costs for using Unreal Engine 4 if you release your game exclusively on our platform"

Click to shrink...

I think they already do this

 

[Tygre]

Will this one even happen? They could be quite aggressive -> "you will get a discount on royalty costs for using Unreal Engine 4 if you release your game exclusively on our platform"

Click to shrink...

That significantly narrows their scope for exclusives to Unreal Engine titles, and is also a drop-in-the-bucket value wise compared to their current offer.

Nobody would take that offer when the penalty is restricting your addressable PC audience to single digit percentages.

 

[LewieP]

I think they already do this

Click to shrink...

But their publicly stated policy doesn't say that this requires exclusivity.

 

[BradGrenz]

Point of my post was that EGS transfers payment method fees to end consumer (which they do, e.g. Paysafe Card is payment method even if not used by majority) as they have processing fees that EGS doesn't cover. In comparison Valve covers processing fees of payment methods. If I'm wrong about that and they transfer fees let me know, just haven't heard about it or walked into info about such transfer.

At how large scale such transference happens is arguing semantics of my overall point.

Click to shrink...

The way you worded it, it seemed your original statement made a deliberate attempt to imply the practice impacted far more people than it actually does. It's not semantics if your goal is to promote a deliberately misleading narrative. No one is disputing that Epic passes that cost along to users. I don't begrudge them that. By contrast, people who use those high transaction fee processors on Steam are subsidized by the majority who use industry standard payment methods with reasonable fees.

 

[Cipherr]

Will this one even happen?

Click to shrink...

Yes. Absolutely and no doubt about it. Epic didn't have this epiphany and desire overnight you know. They would have done this earlier, but they couldn't afford it. That kind of burnable income doesn't last without an absolute sure thing. Fortnite is fine and all, but its not going to eternally bring the bucks. Its a joke to assume it would. And it won't be easily replaceable either; to verify that, just ask its competition.

The money wont flow as freely as it is now. And the scale and size and importance of the games moneyhatted will drop to match the lower spendable cache. Once that happens around the time the exlusive windows are also closing for the most important titles (12 to 18 months from now) they will require some new non-sense to even manage to stay on gamers minds, let alone maintain relevance. That will also be about the time that sunken costs into both these investments and development on what will for at least 5+ years remain a second best store in terms of features will begin to eat at them.