It's an empty statement because he knows that a storefront with all the payment methods that Steam has (many of which are necessary for the international market) can't drop their cut to 12% and still remain profitable.
-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Tim Sweeney: “If Valve commits to a permanent 88% revenue share, we’ll stop making new exclusive deals” (Read Staff Post)
- Thread starter Carlius
- Start date
Without exclusives Epic Store doesn't have a chance. So I personally don't believe him. But that's not the point. Point is that he is asking Valve to do something that would destroy big part of why Steam got successful.
Try selling your own game on your own website/store for 100% cut and you'll suddenly see dozens of reasons. (Edit: Well, unless you're EA, Ubisoft, or Blizzard)
PROTIP: You can sell steam keys of your game on your own website/store for 100% cut
if it was actually "practically zero reason", Epic wouldn't need to toss money at developers/publishers in the first place
the revenue share would be enough
Valve can't lower their cut to 12%, that is not enough for them to run Steam at the current level. That is why people are calling out Tim on this one.
How is that relevant to what I said? Unless you are suggesting that Valve should remove features to give publishers a better cut?
Should they stop paying the processing fees and let consumers pay them like the EGS does?
Should they make consumers pay $1-2 more for Steam Wallet Cards instead of absorbing the retailer's fee?
Really, what feature that currently cost them money should they remove?
If there's zero reason for a digital retailer to receive any portion of the sales why isn't Epic giving publishers 100%?
Yeah, Epic's 12% cut always came off as a sort of promotional deal to me. I fully expect once they have enough ground gained in the PC landscape, that cut gradually increases. Likely not to Steam's levels, but still - it goes up.
Doesn't change the fact that Valve should be decreasing their own cut to compete, rather than continuing to coast on market share.
What would hurt the other regions if Valve only took a 12% cut universally?
100% serious, 30% for a digital store is ridiculous. Have they lowered that?
As long as it doesn't inconvenience them at all in any way, then yes they are.
I don't think he's lying at all but he knows Valve ain't giving up a penny.
Because in other regions payment methods have higher cost than credit cards do in the US. There's a reason that in other regions Epic is passing their costs on to their costumers and tacking on a payment processing fee.
What about that is unsustainable? Why are you more pro-publisher (not developer) than consumer, who winds up bearing the extra transactions fees that Epic tacks on? Why do people who come in with these silly drive by posts never know that Steam *already has* variable revenue share?
How do we know they can? Epic storefront feature set isn't even a fraction of Steam and payment processing is relegated to consumers.
Yeah you'd stop because you'd have to spend a lot more money to lock up those deals. Tim's a real prick. I wonder how long until Epic raises their cut. Maybe when one day Fortnite is no longer brining in as much money.
Fuck off. If any of the executives at Epic give a shit about developers then they'll stop working their Fortnite people to the bone.
This isn't about developers. It's about trying to cripple Valve. That's why he didn't name any other storefronts. It isn't about providing a better service, better customer relations, or any value at all to consumers.
Regardless, the same people that don't play games on PC will be out in droves to tell us all why this is good, and that we need to stop getting upset over launcher wars.
This isn't about developers. It's about trying to cripple Valve. That's why he didn't name any other storefronts. It isn't about providing a better service, better customer relations, or any value at all to consumers.
Regardless, the same people that don't play games on PC will be out in droves to tell us all why this is good, and that we need to stop getting upset over launcher wars.
Yes, especially for Nintendo since they don't offer many services.
Have you seen the payment info from emerging markets in Asia? Over 80% of purchases are made with valve cards bought in physical stores, Valve eats the retailer cost on these so the consumer gets 1 to 1 on their money, stuff like this is where that 30% cut goes.
My hidden gem last year was a small hockey game made by a independent finish developer. The game is Super Blood Hockey. I could not buy that game on my favourite store, GOG, due to curation lucky I could buy it on Steam. I don't think I can buy it on the EPIC store as the EPIC store is only pro already known developers.
It seems that steam also is better at expanding the global market than EPIC store. Which also is pro developer.
What I am trying to say is that it is not as easy to day that 12% is pro developers and 30% is anti developers.
It's not. I have more experience here than basically anyone on this forum TBH.
I have both worked with Valve/Steam for close to a decade and also spent 5 years running an independent digital store (playism)
Valve offers an absolute great value at their 30% cut because compared to other digital stores it is not a goddamn headache to release a game and
actually has easy to access data and marketing features. Not to mention the fact that you get unlimited keys (within reason) basically for free, which is not the case on any other platform.
Companies aren't people. What does it even mean for a corporation to be benevolent?...
First of all, you should probably learn what a monopoly is. Second, if 30% is unsustainable the video game industry should be ending sales of physical copies as soon as possible since publishers get less from that than a digital sale. Being you're so pro-developer I'm sure you're hoping that the next generation of consoles are online digital sales only.
LOL this guy is delusional. When all business are shifting into being completely customer oriented, this guy is telling them what to do. Like if we don't have enough games in Steam to buy XD.
Steam allows unlimited free key generation. Seems pretty pro-developer to me.
The initial deal was that they would also pay for the 4% for the influencers cut, after a 1 year launch window for the store, the devs would pay it from their hand (and would start competing with other devs for them). The 12% is supposed to be there forever.
Er, could you define "unsustainable" for me? How long past a decade of domination, wild sales, and high customer satisfaction does it have to go to earn the apparently elusive "sustainable" designation?
It is simple Valve supports over 100 payment methods where fees range from 2% up to 15% or even more. Also Steamworks has way more features and it is constantly updated. And now Valve offers anticheat and DDoS protection for free with dedicated servers for developers incoming (probably for free) on their private network (Valve has their own global server and infrastructure, they are not using AWS like Epic). And Steam has much more features that cost money because they operate truly global store that adapts to the different markets.
Epic operates global store based on US/Western Europe standards and wants all markets to adapt to them.
That is why Valve can't lower their cut that much.