• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Epic Games Store Keeps Losing Money, Expected Unprofitable Until 2027, Even with a Massive $500 Million Investment Behind It

Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
5,027 (3.07/day)
Location
Norway, currently in Lund, Sweden
System Name Hotbox
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
Motherboard ASRock Phantom Gaming B550 ITX/ax
Cooling Aquanaut + Laing DDC 1T Plus PWM + Corsair XR5 280mm + 2x Arctic P14
Memory 32GB G.Skill FlareX 3200c14
Video Card(s) PowerColor Radeon 6900XT Liquid Devil Ultimate, UV@950mV/2050MHz/180W
Storage 2TB Adata SX8200 Pro
Display(s) Dell U2711 main, AOC 24P2C secondary
Case SSUPD Meshlicious
Audio Device(s) Optoma Nuforce μDAC 3
Power Supply Corsair SF750 Platinum
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Cooler Master MasterKeys Pro M w/DSA profile caps
Software Windows 10 Pro
Why did they fail, though? Probably the same reason why Epic is unpopular at the moment - they didn't offer anything of value over Steam. The market needs innovation, not another mainstream alternative.
But is that the reason EGS is unpopular? Or is it because of the massive hate campaign launched against them for daring to challenge the sacred and holy entity that is Gaben? Because it mostly sure looks like it's the latter. If you're claiming that most "never EGS" people have tried it and found it lacks features and is too barebones, rather than got swept up in an uproar over nothing, well... I disagree with that assessment. Wholeheartedly.

Also, that argument to a large extent builds on the assumption that you can't (reasonably be expected to) use both. Which... of course you can. If you want Steam chat, community features, or anything else, we'll then Alt+Tab out of your EGS game and do so. It really isn't a big deal.
I'd much prefer them to offer something of value instead. Exclusive deals are a money making tool of a company that doesn't have a better idea.
Nah, it's a tool of someone whose main resource is money, and who is fighting a decade+ incumbent. If your demands is that they offer something Steam doesn't offer (beyond specific games), then... what would that be? It would need to be mind-blowingly good to suddenly make EGS win in terms of features - and that kind of development effort takes years and years.
It actually does benefit gamers - all your games and services integrated into one single launcher isn't a bad thing. I'm not taking sides, though, just trying to visualise the argument from both sides. :)
You're overstating the value of that benefit though. That's like saying it'd be good if Amazon just bought out every other store chain out there, as you'd have one storefront for everything. It's myopic and simplistic at best. And besides, GOG, Playnite and others offer unified cross-platform game libraries.
And the 12% Cut benefits you as a customer because...?

That would make sense if the games were actually cheaper, but Games in EGS are still as expensive as on Steam or Origin. You might add that more of that cash will go toward developers, but we all know it's BS. Since most of that will actually go to the CEO, President or top execs.
... because those 18% now go to the developer - i.e. the company providing by far the most benefit to the customer - instead of the company providing a storefront, a forum, a cloud save service and some other stuff? Like, what are you paying for, using Steam or playing games?

And yes, executive salaries and bonuses are horrible. But how does that affect whether Steam or the developer deserves your money when buying a game?
What's really apparent is the people who have issues with why other people make their choices - pretty much if you don't think like them then you must be inferior. Just look through the thread...

Ironically I hated Steam when it first came out because I wanted to retain control over my games, but now I just want them all in one easy to manage library. If Epic wanted to compete with Steam they should come out with a better product instead of paying for exclusives and giving away games... that's not the way to build, all they are doing is trying to disrupt rather than innovate.
Man, sorry, but aren't we allowed to argue for (or against) things? Nobody here has said anyone else is inferior, at least that I've seen. Saying someone's reasoning is weak or poor is not saying they are inferior. It's how things improve. If we can't challenge each others' opinions, how is anything ever going to evolve?
Yes, since the goal is to stop using successful software distribution platforms, maybe I should start using the Orgin store just to make a point...

Better yet, let's stop using Windows 10 and begin using Linux just to make point. Don't worry about using the operating system that supports you the most and provides the most content.

The goal is no longer to use the platform that offers the best experience, but to use the anti-platform to stick it to the big guy.

Funny how people go out of their way to find "alternatives", opting to use the platform that is basically still in beta. As far as software distribution platform rankings go, I would provide the following: Steam > Battle.net > Orgin > Epic.

Maybe by 2027 this will change.
This is a silly and overblown taking to extremes of a hollow straw man argument. Arguing for the value of competition and the value of EGS as a realistic competitor to Steam is not arguing that people shouldn't use Steam. There are valid reasons to dislike Valve and Steam, and there are valid reasons to be unhappy with Epic's storefront. But presenting arguments for adopting multiple options as if they're arguing for dismissing previous options? Sorry, but that's just poor reading comprehension at best, or bad-faith misrepresentations of your opponents at worst. Either way it's inaccurate and not conducive to constructive debate.
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2011
Messages
150 (0.04/day)
Location
Israel
System Name Negra5
Processor i5 6500
Motherboard ASUS Z170M-Plus
Cooling Cooler Master Hyper TX3
Memory Kingston HyperX 16GB DDR4
Video Card(s) PNY GTX-1070, XFX RX480
Storage Gigabyte 256GB SSD, WD 1TB HDD, WD 4TB HDD.
Display(s) SAMSUNG 32" FullHD
Case GAMING EAGLE WARRIOR CG-06R1
Audio Device(s) nVidia HD Audio
Power Supply Corsair GS800W 80 Plus Bronze
Mouse Cooler Master Devastator MS2k
Keyboard Cooler Master Devastator MB24
Software Windows 10 20H2
Benchmark Scores Pfft

medi01

"Because it goes to those into making games."

lol? how innocent of you. Tell that to Randy Pitchford from Gearbox. He's been defending Epic Shenaningans while raising his own salary and keeping low those of actual developers. Keep Dreaming dude. I read articles of the same type of BS with EA, Blizzard and others.

medi01

"How shortsighted."

How so? Epic was bragging about the 12% cut because IT MADE GAMES CHEAPER. Was Epic Lying then? Did you read what i wrote of David Brevik? HE SAYS the 30% cut on Steam and Xbox IS FINE and he is a small indie dev. David seems to be one of the few Developers on record giving his opinion on the matter... apart from Epic lol. Why are we not seeing a mass exodus of Developers and Publishers dumping Steam into EGS? It seems only those devs and publishers who Epic blatantly bribed have PARTIALLY moved to EGS.I bet the vast majority of developers also think the 30% cut is just fine. Would they like it to be lowered if possible? of course, human greed.

In any case, EGS store is a fail from all points of view. Steam will remain with the biggest piece of the market and so will the 30% cut. That 12% cut dosen't seems like it's working for epic and the devs who have moved to EGS, or they wouln't be losing hundreds of millions lol.

Competition and more options are good, but Epic isn't even competing... this is still a massacre. If only they would stop bribing devs for exclusives... let the end user decide where he want to buy his games from all available stores.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,349 (0.61/day)
Location
VT
Processor Intel i7-10700k
Motherboard Gigabyte Aurorus Ultra z490
Cooling Corsair H100i RGB
Memory 32GB (4x8GB) Corsair Vengeance DDR4-3200MHz
Video Card(s) MSI Gaming Trio X 3070 LHR
Display(s) ASUS MG278Q / AOC G2590FX
Case Corsair X4000 iCue
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair RM650x 650W Fully Modular
Software Windows 10
In any case, EGS store is a fail from all points of view. Steam will remain with the biggest piece of the market and so will the 30% cut. That 12% cut dosen't seems like it's working for epic and the devs who have moved to EGS, or they wouln't be losing hundreds of millions lol.

Worth mentioning, Valve no longer takes a flat 30% cut. That was changed quite a while ago to be a sliding scale. Granted, that system benefits bigger game devs because it trends down based on total sales/revenue, but it's not a flat 30% as a lot of people indicate. Interestingly enough, GOG took 30% until pretty recently and nobody ever complained about it--to be fair, they did have a program for small developers that was only a 10% cut--despite them offering almost no added value (No Cloud Saves, Guides, Forums, Social elements, etc.). 30% is the industry standard, not some abnormality. The fact that so many people cannot see Epic isn't doing this to be benevolent really baffles me. Epic doesn't give a shit about other developers or their cut honestly, this is all about taking in more money themselves, and trying to draw more people into their cash cow Fortnite (or whatever other games they have cooking).
 
Joined
Jun 8, 2021
Messages
72 (0.52/day)
lots of good research on here.. maybe if someone could apply these tips to games maybe we would all be happy instead of trying to make it work around cheaters.
 
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
695 (0.71/day)
ah the 30% cut argument again ?

This news just show you exactly how 12% cut isn't gonna financially support this business and EPIC would be bankrupted long long time ago if there isn't some mysterious cash coming from so-called "investors" who are willing to support a non-profitable company until 2027.

Isn't this news just told you that 12% isn't gonna cut it when the business went into exa-scale ?
 

64K

Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
5,121 (1.84/day)
Processor i7 7700k
Motherboard MSI Z270 SLI Plus
Cooling CM Hyper 212 EVO
Memory 2 x 8 GB Corsair Vengeance
Video Card(s) MSI RTX 2070 Super
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB and WD Black 4TB
Display(s) Dell 27 inch 1440p 144 Hz
Case Corsair Obsidian 750D Airflow Edition
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply EVGA SuperNova 850 W Gold
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Logitech G105
Software Windows 10
ah the 30% cut argument again ?

This news just show you exactly how 12% cut isn't gonna financially support this business and EPIC would be bankrupted long long time ago if there isn't some mysterious cash coming from so-called "investors" who are willing to support a non-profitable company until 2027.

Isn't this news just told you that 12% isn't gonna cut it when the business went into exa-scale ?

It's no mystery where the money is coming from. Fortnite brings in billions of dollars from microtransactions. They make a lot of money licensing versions of the Unreal Engine. The most popular game engine with Developers for 20+ years. Tencent bought a 40% stake in Epic.

 
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
695 (0.71/day)
It's no mystery where the money is coming from. Fortnite brings in billions of dollars from microtransactions. They make a lot of money licensing versions of the Unreal Engine. The most popular game engine with Developers for 20+ years. Tencent bought a 40% stake in Epic.


Oh yea both methods you have mentioned aren't mystery at all and they are directly tied to the 12% Fight.
Themselves as a developer wanted to get more cut in microtransaction in their own games in varies platforms.
Then the developers using Unreal engine could reach their 1,000,000 dollor revenue line sooner so they can collect more licensing fee.

No wonder they wanna keep the money-losing EGS for as much as possible.
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
1,660 (0.35/day)
System Name Lailalo / Edelweiss
Processor Ryzen 1700 @ 3.8Ghz / i7 3610QM @2.3-3.2Ghz
Motherboard Asus X370 Prime/ Lenovo Y580
Cooling Noctua / Big hunk of copper
Memory 16GB DDR4 3200 Ripjaws with Samsung chips / 8GB Hyundai DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) XFX R9 390 / GTX 660M 2GB
Storage Crucial 1TB MX500 SSD, Segate 3TB, 64GB Synapse SSD as Pagefile drive / Western Digital 1TB 7200RPM
Display(s) LG Ultrawide 29in @ 2560x1080 / Lenovo 15.6 @ 1920x1080
Case Coolermaster Storm Sniper / Lenovo Y580
Audio Device(s) Asus Xonar DG / Whatever Lenovo used
Power Supply Antec Truepower Blue 750W + Thermaltake 5.25in 250W / Big Power Brick
Mouse G602
Keyboard G510s
Software Windows 10 Pro / Windows 10 Home
Steam gives away a game sometimes and so does GOG but Epic is giving away 2 games every week. That's a lot of games. They are giving away A Plague Tale: Innocence right now which is supposed to be a good game. That's a $40 game on Steam.



The 3 main reasons that gamers cite when they are criticizing EGS is Epic's policy about making games exclusive to EGS. Their store isn't as feature rich as Steam. Their ties to Tencent in China (they fear their personal info will be harvested by the Chinese Government). None of these really bother me.
Exclusivity isn't all. There is a process that is more of a hassle to getting games on EGS. Steam you pay $100 and you are set. They don't care much as long as the game works. EGS you gotta get formal approval and go through a process. Which is frankly, hurting them a lot. They want to entice devs with 10% fee but then make it difficult to release on. This kills the indie side and makes it difficult to really make a huge marketplace like Steam.
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2020
Messages
511 (1.14/day)
Location
::1
That's true. And it's obviously a shame that there are few legitimate ways of app store-less app distribution/installation on smartphones. But the truth of the matter is that volume matters the most, and the vast majority of users want easy access and auto-updates far more than they want absolute freedom of choice, and the number of users thinking otherwise is far too small to reach any type of user base sufficient to maintain self-hosted installers for most applications. That's just reality.
[ ... ]
Yeah, uploading your .apk to your website on top of an appstore's fucking hard, apparently ...

[ ... ]

I sincerely hope the Epic v. Apple judge will see reason and deny Apple the right to enact wholesale monopolist control over the devices they make - but I agree that this is far from a done deal, and there's sufficient leeway in the law (not that odd given how decades of unchecked corporate lobbying has undermined most ideas of "fairness" in the law) for it to go either way. But even in a predatory capitalist system it's difficult to accept someone's right to be a monopoly, and especially their right for that monopoly to cascade outwards from an initial controlled venue (the app store out to in-app purchases). Which is why I'm somewhat hopeful.

[ ... ]
Truth be told I am not very hopeful. You can thank Nixon & Reagan for that.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
266 (0.07/day)
System Name Matar Extreme PC.
Processor Intel Core i9-9900KF
Motherboard Z370
Cooling Corsair H60 +Arctic MX-4
Memory 4x8 32GB DDR4 2666MHZ HyperX Fury
Video Card(s) Nvidia RTX 2070 Super OC Edition
Storage 256GB Nvme for OS +1TB 2.5" SSD for Games & 1TB HDD storage
Display(s) Lenovo 34" Ultra Wide 3440x1440 144hz 1ms G-Snyc
Case Custom
Audio Device(s) Internal
Power Supply 850 Watts , Gold
Mouse Logitech M500 Lazer Mouse
Keyboard ASUS keyboard, & Xbox ONE Wireless Controller
Software Windows 10 Home
Benchmark Scores https://www.youtube.com/user/matttttar/videos
Guys Epic has given us over 50 AAA Games for free if the game is on Epic support them, don't buy it from steam if its the same price buy it from epic.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2019
Messages
1,432 (1.41/day)
Location
Midlands, UK
System Name Nebulon-B Mk. 3
Processor Intel Core i7-11700
Motherboard ASUS TUF Gaming B560M-Plus (WiFi)
Cooling be quiet! Shadow Rock LP
Memory 4x 8 GB Kinston Fury Beast 3200 MHz CL16
Video Card(s) EVGA GeForce RTX 2070 Black
Storage 512 GB ADATA SU900, 1 TB Crucial P5, 1 TB Crucial P2, 1 TB Seagate Barracuda 2.5"
Display(s) Samsung C24F390, 7" Waveshare touchscreen
Case Corsair Crystal 280X black, 2x be quiet! Silent Wings 3 HS 14 cm, 2x be quiet! Silent Wings 3 14 cm
Audio Device(s) Genius SP-HF160, AKG Y50
Power Supply Seasonic Prime Ultra Platinum 550W
Mouse Cherry MW 8
Keyboard MagicForce 68
Software Windows 10 Pro
But is that the reason EGS is unpopular? Or is it because of the massive hate campaign launched against them for daring to challenge the sacred and holy entity that is Gaben? Because it mostly sure looks like it's the latter. If you're claiming that most "never EGS" people have tried it and found it lacks features and is too barebones, rather than got swept up in an uproar over nothing, well... I disagree with that assessment. Wholeheartedly.
It might be the reason, I don't know. It is certainly my reason for not wanting it.

As for the hate campaign, it all fired up when Epic announced Epic store exclusivity of certain titles - mainly Metro: Exodus, which upset me too, to be honest. In the end, I decided to boycott Epic and bought the game on Steam a year later. I'm not protecting Gaben, or anyone else's wallet (other than my own), but since around 80% of my games are on Steam (15% on GOG and 5% on Origin), I do not wish to register for and install a game launcher that brings absolutely no value to me. Making this (or any) decision should be my right, just as much as it is yours to look for the best deals among storefronts.

Also, that argument to a large extent builds on the assumption that you can't (reasonably be expected to) use both. Which... of course you can. If you want Steam chat, community features, or anything else, we'll then Alt+Tab out of your EGS game and do so. It really isn't a big deal.
I can use both. I can also use a bike, or walk to make my 12-mile journey to work every day. It doesn't mean that I want to. Also, we all know that alt+tabbing can completely wreck certain games.

Nah, it's a tool of someone whose main resource is money, and who is fighting a decade+ incumbent. If your demands is that they offer something Steam doesn't offer (beyond specific games), then... what would that be? It would need to be mind-blowingly good to suddenly make EGS win in terms of features - and that kind of development effort takes years and years.
Exactly. Let it be mind-blowingly good! If the guys at GOG managed to create a DRM-free online distribution service, I'm sure Epic can come up with something too. I acknowledge their fight (if we think of it as a fight, and not another money-making device like it actually is), but making titles exclusive is the wrong means to their goal. It's like flipping the chess board over to declare victory - and hide the fact that you don't know how to play chess.

You're overstating the value of that benefit though. That's like saying it'd be good if Amazon just bought out every other store chain out there, as you'd have one storefront for everything. It's myopic and simplistic at best. And besides, GOG, Playnite and others offer unified cross-platform game libraries.
I'm (over)stating it because it currently outweighs what Epic has to offer. Once Epic starts innovating and incorporating features that are actually useful to gamers, we can talk about pros and cons. So far, not a single pro comes to my mind when I'm comparing the Epic store to Steam or GOG (don't mention revenues and where the money goes, because those things are ultimately useless facts for the average gamer).

Man, sorry, but aren't we allowed to argue for (or against) things? Nobody here has said anyone else is inferior, at least that I've seen. Saying someone's reasoning is weak or poor is not saying they are inferior. It's how things improve. If we can't challenge each others' opinions, how is anything ever going to evolve?
With that, I completely agree.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
155 (0.05/day)
Processor Ryzen 9 3900x
Motherboard MSI B550 Gaming Plus
Cooling be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4
Memory 32GB GSkill Ripjaws V 3600CL16
Video Card(s) 3060Ti FE
Storage Samsung 970 EVO 1TB, Samsung 840 EVO 1TB, WD Green 1TB
Display(s) ASUS ProArt PA278QV
Case be quiet! Pure Base 500
Power Supply Super Flower Leadex III 650W
Mouse A4Tech X-748K
Keyboard Logitech K300
Software Win 10 Pro 64bit
I'm doing my part.
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
488 (0.38/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 3900X
Motherboard Asus ROG Crosshair VIII Hero WiFi
Cooling Corsair Hydro H115i
Memory 16Gb CL14 Ripjaws V @3666MHz
Video Card(s) MSI GeForce RTX2070
Storage Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD
Display(s) Korean Unbadged
Case Cooler Master Cosmos
Audio Device(s) O2 USB Headphone AMP
Power Supply Corsair HX850i
Mouse Logitech G703
Keyboard Crap!
Pure PR BS. Feel sorry for us, we fight nasty Apple FOR THE GAMERS!
 
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
5,027 (3.07/day)
Location
Norway, currently in Lund, Sweden
System Name Hotbox
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
Motherboard ASRock Phantom Gaming B550 ITX/ax
Cooling Aquanaut + Laing DDC 1T Plus PWM + Corsair XR5 280mm + 2x Arctic P14
Memory 32GB G.Skill FlareX 3200c14
Video Card(s) PowerColor Radeon 6900XT Liquid Devil Ultimate, UV@950mV/2050MHz/180W
Storage 2TB Adata SX8200 Pro
Display(s) Dell U2711 main, AOC 24P2C secondary
Case SSUPD Meshlicious
Audio Device(s) Optoma Nuforce μDAC 3
Power Supply Corsair SF750 Platinum
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Cooler Master MasterKeys Pro M w/DSA profile caps
Software Windows 10 Pro
In most countries this is illegal practice and akin to bribery and market manipulation. Their aim: destroying Valve.
I think you have some very, very, very skewed ideas of the power relations in play here. "Destroying Valve" is a ludicrous idea given their size and entrenched market position. Epic has made essentially zero inroads on this. Also, bribery? By giving away games? Is there a condition of not buying games off Steam attached to the giveaway? Because otherwise it can't be a bribe... As for market manipulation: again, that requires having the power to meaningfully affect the market. So far there's zero indication of this being the case. While Valve isn't a publicly traded company and we thus know nothing specific about their finances, they are massively, overwhelmingly profitable, and there is no reason to believe this is changing.
It might be the reason, I don't know. It is certainly my reason for not wanting it.

As for the hate campaign, it all fired up when Epic announced Epic store exclusivity of certain titles - mainly Metro: Exodus, which upset me too, to be honest. In the end, I decided to boycott Epic and bought the game on Steam a year later. I'm not protecting Gaben, or anyone else's wallet (other than my own), but since around 80% of my games are on Steam (15% on GOG and 5% on Origin), I do not wish to register for and install a game launcher that brings absolutely no value to me. Making this (or any) decision should be my right, just as much as it is yours to look for the best deals among storefronts.

I can use both. I can also use a bike, or walk to make my 12-mile journey to work every day. It doesn't mean that I want to. Also, we all know that alt+tabbing can completely wreck certain games.

Exactly. Let it be mind-blowingly good! If the guys at GOG managed to create a DRM-free online distribution service, I'm sure Epic can come up with something too. I acknowledge their fight, but making titles exclusive is the wrong means to their goal. It's like flipping the chess board over to declare victory - and hide the fact that you don't know how to play chess.

I'm (over)stating it because it currently outweighs what Epic has to offer. Once Epic starts innovating and incorporating features that are actually useful to gamers, we can talk about pros and cons. So far, not a single pro comes to my mind when I'm comparing the Epic store to Steam or GOG (don't mention revenues and where the money goes, because those things are ultimately useless facts for the average gamer).
To me, that sounds like a very low bar for an outright boycott. Which begs the question of biases affecting the decision. I completely understand people having a positive view of Steam - it's been an incredibly useful application for a long time after all - but I don't see how that can extend to a default negative view of alternatives unless they offer something meaningfully different beyond variety. That's outright irrational. Steam being a reasonably good application doesn't make anyone not at feature parity automatically bad, especially considering the 15-year development advantage. I would love it if EGS had remote play and a few other features, but ... meh. It's really not a big deal (and there's always AMD Link). And given the popularity of Discord and other third party apps for social features and the like, neither does it seem like it is for a huge swathe of "gamers". If Alt+Tabing out of games was such a huge deal, those apps wouldn't be as popular as they are. Of course Discord has a launcher-agnostic in-game overlay, entirely bypassing issues like that.

Btw, you comparing using EGS at all to biking or walking 12 miles to work rather than driving - that necessitates some fleshing out. How much do you use Steam's in-game features? How often? In how large a percentage of the games you play? Are you constantly using Steam chat, browsing the forums, or doing something else with the overlay? If not ... then all you're doing is demonstrating bias. If using another launcher for some games feels like that much of a hassle for you, that's a mental block on your side, not an issue with the launcher, particularly when you are already using several others.

As for EGS bringing "absolutely no value to [you]", well ... a lot of people would say free high quality games constitute something of value, as does a competitive game sales market. Or just more sales, coupons, and opportunities to get games cheaper? Some of us would even say that fairer compensation to game developers is valuable too, though that is of course less tangible and directly beneficial to customers in the short term. But again, your bias is showing.

And my entire point of the "how good would that feature need to be?" rhetorical question was to illustrate that it's really damn hard to come up with something like that. What would it be, exactly? Can you name something that your gaming experience is sorely lacking right now? Or something brand-new, never heard of before that would tangibly improve it? Something that would convince you that EGS is valuable? Because that's an impossible ask for a single feature. And, again, given both your demonstrated bias and what the hate campaign against them has shown, adding a feature that Steam already has would do nothing to shift things in their favour - rather, it would likely be mocked and derided as a me-too effort, copying Steam, etc.

And again, as to "outweighing what Epic has to offer" - the main point is a storefront, no? A place to get access to games? I'll gladly admit that the EGS application is ... pretty mediocre. But so what? It covers the basics, lets me buy, download, update and play games. That's the important part. Everything else is a bonus. You're of course welcome to value other features higher than I do, but again, treating those as make-or-break features of a game storefront and launcher is ... pretty out there. Even social features, important as they are. There are free, functional and trivial to use alternatives. And the "not a single pro comes to mind" line of thinking just shows that you're not starting from a baseline of "choice is good for us" or anything like that, but a tacit support of monopolism as it provides everything you need. Which is deeply, deeply problematic.

Also, the "don't mention revenues and where the money goes, because those things are ultimately useless facts for the average gamer" line - I would really hope for a tad more perspective than that. Does it help gamers when buying games, here and now? Obviously not. But is it beneficial to gaming overall in the long term? Absolutely. Or are you actually saying that you're entirely fine with developers - the people actually making the games! - getting a maximum of 70% of the sales price (though likely less as publishers also take a significant cut), with 30% (seriously, consider that this is nearly 1/3rd of the price!) going to the company providing the storefront, file hosting, cloud saves, a chat function and some forums? Is that fair in your mind? Are those features worth nearly a third of the money for every single game you buy? Because if so ... that's stunning to me. Utterly and completely incomprehensible. Even if the infrastructure you build is fantastic, it does not deserve 30% of the price of anything sold through that infrastructure. That's an absurd idea. What that massively skewed split does, is enrich the owners of Valve, allow them to operate as a "game developer" despite making ... what, a single semi-notable game in the last decade? and let them rest on their laurels while their account balances balloon. Sure, they do some good stuff. The Steam Deck is really cool (I'm signed up for a 512GB one, and in this case think Valve is indeed actually providing something of value), and over the past 17 years Steam has gained a decent collection of good features. But have they actually deserved 30% of everything you have ever spent there? That's absurd. In my case - and I don't have the biggest Steam library by any stretch of the imagination - that would amount to nearly 350€ over the past 13 years (I know I had a Steam account prior to 2008 as well, but apparently not with this email). Has Valve deserved 350€ of my money in that time? ~2€ a month? For a tiny amount of server bandwidth and (mostly) some extremely basic software, developed long ago? Not even close. The value for money in the features provided is terrible. And knowing the vast majority of that money goes straight into their pockets, giving nothing of value back to me? That's a travesty. That's why I welcome competition. And why I'm very, very positive towards any efforts towards directing that money towards the people actually making the games. Why? Because they are the ones providing value to me, not the platform owners.

Pure PR BS. Feel sorry for us, we fight nasty Apple FOR THE GAMERS!
Wait, what? This is information presented by Apple in court, from documents Epic had to present them as part of the lawsuit. Are they doing PR through Apple? Don't be absurd.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
155 (0.05/day)
Processor Ryzen 9 3900x
Motherboard MSI B550 Gaming Plus
Cooling be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4
Memory 32GB GSkill Ripjaws V 3600CL16
Video Card(s) 3060Ti FE
Storage Samsung 970 EVO 1TB, Samsung 840 EVO 1TB, WD Green 1TB
Display(s) ASUS ProArt PA278QV
Case be quiet! Pure Base 500
Power Supply Super Flower Leadex III 650W
Mouse A4Tech X-748K
Keyboard Logitech K300
Software Win 10 Pro 64bit
the way i see it majority of consumer simply like monopoly. when there is new competitor try to bring in more competition they are being hated. sometimes for a very simple matter like needing to install another launcher.
Buying out exclusive contracts for games is not competition. In order for EGS to be a competitor, it has to offer the same games at a better price of with better platform features. It does neither, and neither does it force Valve to take a profit cut on Steam games.

Uplay, Origin, GOG are competitors, because at least they are offering better deals on their own games on their own platforms, while EGS is just loading your CPU while all it does is running in the background doing nothing (other than spying on you).

The only thing going for EGS is the "DRM free" games, but GOG does that already anyway.
 
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
695 (0.71/day)
Also, the "don't mention revenues and where the money goes, because those things are ultimately useless facts for the average gamer" line - I would really hope for a tad more perspective than that. Does it help gamers when buying games, here and now? Obviously not. But is it beneficial to gaming overall in the long term? Absolutely. Or are you actually saying that you're entirely fine with developers - the people actually making the games! - getting a maximum of 70% of the sales price (though likely less as publishers also take a significant cut), with 30% (seriously, consider that this is nearly 1/3rd of the price!) going to the company providing the storefront, file hosting, cloud saves, a chat function and some forums? Is that fair in your mind? Are those features worth nearly a third of the money for every single game you buy? Because if so ... that's stunning to me. Utterly and completely incomprehensible. Even if the infrastructure you build is fantastic, it does not deserve 30% of the price of anything sold through that infrastructure. That's an absurd idea. What that massively skewed split does, is enrich the owners of Valve, allow them to operate as a "game developer" despite making ... what, a single semi-notable game in the last decade? and let them rest on their laurels while their account balances balloon. Sure, they do some good stuff. The Steam Deck is really cool (I'm signed up for a 512GB one, and in this case think Valve is indeed actually providing something of value), and over the past 17 years Steam has gained a decent collection of good features. But have they actually deserved 30% of everything you have ever spent there? That's absurd. In my case - and I don't have the biggest Steam library by any stretch of the imagination - that would amount to nearly 350€ over the past 13 years (I know I had a Steam account prior to 2008 as well, but apparently not with this email). Has Valve deserved 350€ of my money in that time? ~2€ a month? For a tiny amount of server bandwidth and (mostly) some extremely basic software, developed long ago? Not even close. The value for money in the features provided is terrible. And knowing the vast majority of that money goes straight into their pockets, giving nothing of value back to me? That's a travesty. That's why I welcome competition. And why I'm very, very positive towards any efforts towards directing that money towards the people actually making the games. Why? Because they are the ones providing value to me, not the platform owners.

Hey , Isn't EGS kept losing money shown exactly 12% cut isn't enough for running the platform at that scale?

And
Don't forget why EPIC wanna fight for the 12% in the first place.
Still remember how they break T&C with Apple / Google ?

They just want more cut in their Fortnite microtransaction , and more revenue cut from Unreal Engine Licensing.
 

big_glasses

New Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2021
Messages
13 (0.17/day)
Worth mentioning, Valve no longer takes a flat 30% cut. That was changed quite a while ago to be a sliding scale. Granted, that system benefits bigger game devs because it trends down based on total sales/revenue, but it's not a flat 30% as a lot of people indicate. Interestingly enough, GOG took 30% until pretty recently and nobody ever complained about it--to be fair, they did have a program for small developers that was only a 10% cut--despite them offering almost no added value (No Cloud Saves, Guides, Forums, Social elements, etc.). 30% is the industry standard, not some abnormality. The fact that so many people cannot see Epic isn't doing this to be benevolent really baffles me. Epic doesn't give a shit about other developers or their cut honestly, this is all about taking in more money themselves, and trying to draw more people into their cash cow Fortnite (or whatever other games they have cooking).
Yep, the 30% isn't really that true. It's sliding down to 20%, if I remember correctly.
AND if you cared about dev cut, you'd buy steam keys directly from the dev's. Steam keys have 0%
so kinda a moot point arguing for the positives of 18% cut, when you can buy with a 0% cut.

This of course excluding a lot of features that may be beneficial for dev's, especially small team/indie. (see GTFO(10 chamber) on some of their reasoning for going steam)
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2021
Messages
57 (0.20/day)
You are not allowed to operate a business by flooding money into a market to lower the price in order to kill the competition if you make no net profits out of it, at least that's how it "supposedly" work for consumables. But I think they circumvent it by making money on their proprietary engine, they might be using loop holes in the "legislation".
 
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
5,177 (0.98/day)
Location
Tennessee
System Name R9 / R7
Processor AMD Ryzen R9 5950X / AMD Ryzen R9 3950X
Motherboard MSI MEG X570 ACE AM4 / Gigabyte B550 Aorus Elite AM4
Cooling Noctua NH-D15 chromax.black
Memory Crucial Ballistix 64GB 3200 MHz DDR4 / Crucial Ballistix 32GB 3200 MHz DDR4
Video Card(s) AsRock RX 6900 XT(XH) OC Formula / PowerColor Red Devil RX 6900 XT(XH) Ultimate
Case Fractal Define R7 / BeQuiet 900
Power Supply Seasonic PRIME PX-850, 850W 80+ Platinum, Full Modular
Software Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
This is a silly and overblown taking to extremes of a hollow straw man argument. Arguing for the value of competition and the value of EGS as a realistic competitor to Steam is not arguing that people shouldn't use Steam. There are valid reasons to dislike Valve and Steam, and there are valid reasons to be unhappy with Epic's storefront. But presenting arguments for adopting multiple options as if they're arguing for dismissing previous options? Sorry, but that's just poor reading comprehension at best, or bad-faith misrepresentations of your opponents at worst. Either way it's inaccurate and not conducive to constructive debate.

There's plenty of competition on the market, Epic included. You missed the point in your effort to try to defend your own position. There is nothing wrong with competition, or the existence of EGS. There just isn't a reason to use Epic over Steam, at all. The EGS is in beta and will be in that stage until 2025 - 2027. The attraction is Fortnite, and the rest is just luring users to an underdeveloped platform by offering free games.

The point isn't anti-competition, the point is why use the underdeveloped beta platform? You are being under-served by EGS; the lower commissions reflect that. Epic isn't Robinhood trying to save the game developers from the tyrannical 30% commission fees. How else would the attract developers to a new and beta software distribution platform? It's no different than a lot of die-hard Linux, anti-MS fans... Going out of their way to avoid all MS products, at the sacrifice of their own workflow or usability.

Go ahead, write paragraph after paragraph of words defending your position like you have done so in this thread, the point remains and can't be undone at this time. EGS is a beta platform which is years, decades behind the competition. If it makes you feel better, then use it. Just isn't logical in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 21, 2017
Messages
156 (0.09/day)
There just isn't a reason to use Epic over Steam, at all.
Well, this basically supports the argument for Epic exclusives. All other things being equal (or, hypothetically, even slightly in favor of Epic), people would still stay with Steam because that is what they know and what they are used to. Exclusives are one of the better ways to attract users. No one has ever suggested a feature that Steam is lacking that, if implemented in Epic's launcher, would incentivize them to switch.
"Exclusives are very anti-consumer/anti-competition because I say so!"
Okay, what do YOU suggest? What would be pro-consumer (or at least not anti-consumer) that would lead to a good portion of the gamers to switch? Nobody has come with anything, which means the "anti-consumer" argument is basically just whining for the sake of whining.

The point isn't anti-competition, the point is why use the underdeveloped beta platform? You are being under-served by EGS; the lower commissions reflect that. Epic isn't Robinhood trying to save the game developers from the tyrannical 30% commission fees. How else would the attract developers to a new and beta software distribution platform? It's no different than a lot of die-hard Linux, anti-MS fans... Going out of their way to avoid all MS products, at the sacrifice of their own workflow or usability.

Go ahead, write paragraph after paragraph of words defending your position like you have done so in this thread, the point remains and can't be undone at this time. EGS is a beta platform which is years, decades behind the competition. If it makes you feel better, then use it. Just isn't logical in my opinion.
Yes, Epic's launcher is somewhat underdeveloped compared to Steam, but it performs the single most important aspect properly: allowing users to download and play games. Everything else is secondary. It is the users' prerogative to enjoy and use any additional functionality, but that doesn't change the fact that said functionality is extra. And if you really need to use Steam's social features, you can just keep it running as well as any other launcher. I mean, Steam is the best of them all and is very well optimized so it can be left to run in the background, right?
 
Joined
Mar 24, 2012
Messages
494 (0.14/day)
Buying out exclusive contracts for games is not competition. In order for EGS to be a competitor, it has to offer the same games at a better price of with better platform features. It does neither, and neither does it force Valve to take a profit cut on Steam games.

Uplay, Origin, GOG are competitors, because at least they are offering better deals on their own games on their own platforms, while EGS is just loading your CPU while all it does is running in the background doing nothing (other than spying on you).

The only thing going for EGS is the "DRM free" games, but GOG does that already anyway.

i did not mean EGS specifically. i said some people simply hate other service than steam because they need install different launcher. that is including origin and uplay. remember those that like to say "no steam no buy"? this kind of people really loves monopoly.
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
16,043 (5.29/day)
Location
USA
System Name GPD-Q9
Processor Rockchip RK-3288 1.8ghz quad core
Motherboard GPD Q9_V6_150528
Cooling Passive
Memory 2GB DDR3
Video Card(s) Mali T764
Storage 16GB Samsung NAND
Display(s) IPS 1024x600
Software Android 4.4.4R5 Custom
Last edited:
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
5,177 (0.98/day)
Location
Tennessee
System Name R9 / R7
Processor AMD Ryzen R9 5950X / AMD Ryzen R9 3950X
Motherboard MSI MEG X570 ACE AM4 / Gigabyte B550 Aorus Elite AM4
Cooling Noctua NH-D15 chromax.black
Memory Crucial Ballistix 64GB 3200 MHz DDR4 / Crucial Ballistix 32GB 3200 MHz DDR4
Video Card(s) AsRock RX 6900 XT(XH) OC Formula / PowerColor Red Devil RX 6900 XT(XH) Ultimate
Case Fractal Define R7 / BeQuiet 900
Power Supply Seasonic PRIME PX-850, 850W 80+ Platinum, Full Modular
Software Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
Well, this basically supports the argument for Epic exclusives. All other things being equal (or, hypothetically, even slightly in favor of Epic), people would still stay with Steam because that is what they know and what they are used to. Exclusives are one of the better ways to attract users. No one has ever suggested a feature that Steam is lacking that, if implemented in Epic's launcher, would incentivize them to switch.
"Exclusives are very anti-consumer/anti-competition because I say so!"
Okay, what do YOU suggest? What would be pro-consumer (or at least not anti-consumer) that would lead to a good portion of the gamers to switch? Nobody has come with anything, which means the "anti-consumer" argument is basically just whining for the sake of whining.


Yes, Epic's launcher is somewhat underdeveloped compared to Steam, but it performs the single most important aspect properly: allowing users to download and play games. Everything else is secondary. It is the users' prerogative to enjoy and use any additional functionality, but that doesn't change the fact that said functionality is extra. And if you really need to use Steam's social features, you can just keep it running as well as any other launcher. I mean, Steam is the best of them all and is very well optimized so it can be left to run in the background, right?

For you first paragraph, I literally stated what you just said. Your reply just restated what I said.

Epic free game exclusives are to lure people to software distribution platform that is underdeveloped, when there is literally no other reason to go to the platform beyond free games, and Fortnite. The lower commission rate is to lure publishers and developers, not to help the consumer. The commission savings aren't being passed to the consumer. Epic positioning itself as the Robinhood in the games industry is comical. From a PR perspective, it's obviously working (on some % of gamers), but from an action versus words perspective it's nonsense. The nonsense doesn't stop on their own platform, but for any comparison be it consoles, brick and mortar, or software distribution platforms that exist on operating systems.

For your second paragraph, you are just making the Linux versus Windows argument. "I don't need all of the features; I just need to be able to play games."

I never stated the EGS or Steam platforms weren't the user's prerogative.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
15,527 (5.99/day)
Location
The Washing Machine
Processor i7 8700k 4.6Ghz @ 1.24V
Motherboard AsRock Fatal1ty K6 Z370
Cooling beQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 3
Memory 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200/C16
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X @ 2100/5500
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 1TB + Samsung 830 256GB + Crucial BX100 250GB + Toshiba 1TB HDD
Display(s) Gigabyte G34QWC (3440x1440)
Case Fractal Design Define C TG
Audio Device(s) Situational :)
Power Supply EVGA G2 750W
Mouse Logitech G502 Protheus Spectrum
Keyboard Lenovo Thinkpad Trackpoint II (Best K/B ever... <3)
Software W10 x64
And again, you're entirely entitled to not liking app stores and stuff like that, but I really don't see how that has any relevance whatsoever to whether smartphones are general-purpose computers or not. If anything, what you're arguing for is that OEMs have no right to lock down their devices to a single app store - which is precisely my point.

Its not just the locking down though. Its much bigger than that. We're talking about near-monopolized markets here where the 'gatekeepers' have absolutely no place defining the entire market for everything that runs on their OS or devices. Look what happened to Windows and its media player and browser. This is really more of the same, except the impact is so much bigger for everyone involved.

Markets diversify and innovate and yet somehow nothing changes in the balance of power. So what you're getting is way too much power ultimately in the hands of just a few huge companies. Big Tech. And since they're on the forefront of all those technologies, anything emergent is immediately scooped up, copied or eliminated. And since its all data, nothing gets missed. There are no surprises if you own and manage all the data in the world. Information = power. Those guns are bigger than nukes.

This alone, the knowledge of 'everything' and the systems to make that visible, categorize it, and analyze it, should be the function of these gatekeepers. They know demand. They can sell their information on the market to whatever and whoever wants to run anything on their devices. There is no way in hell they can also be honest producers of anything in those same markets without warping them and pulling more power towards themselves than we consider healthy for the markets to function, or, be fair.

Your example of how on Android you can load any apk and how that is 'an open ecosystem' is not entirely true, is it. For an average consumer, that is not even the closest idea of choice or a fair market. You have a preinstalled Google Play Store where everything gets vetted (hopefully, lol), and you are secure, versus a free-for-all market full of whatever insecurities you can imagine. That's just about as fair as Apple locking it down completely, except for a happy few that know all the tricks. Same shit, different logo and marketing tbh.

Dystopia is so close, I think we're already way past saving in that sense, unless the masses wake up, but they're too buys clicking Like and retweeting. (Note my profile pic... it summarizes what we are these days)...

lol? how innocent of you. Tell that to Randy Pitchford from Gearbox. He's been defending Epic Shenaningans while raising his own salary and keeping low those of actual developers. Keep Dreaming dude. I read articles of the same type of BS with EA, Blizzard and others.



How so? Epic was bragging about the 12% cut because IT MADE GAMES CHEAPER. Was Epic Lying then? Did you read what i wrote of David Brevik? HE SAYS the 30% cut on Steam and Xbox IS FINE and he is a small indie dev. David seems to be one of the few Developers on record giving his opinion on the matter... apart from Epic lol. Why are we not seeing a mass exodus of Developers and Publishers dumping Steam into EGS? It seems only those devs and publishers who Epic blatantly bribed have PARTIALLY moved to EGS.I bet the vast majority of developers also think the 30% cut is just fine. Would they like it to be lowered if possible? of course, human greed.

In any case, EGS store is a fail from all points of view. Steam will remain with the biggest piece of the market and so will the 30% cut. That 12% cut dosen't seems like it's working for epic and the devs who have moved to EGS, or they wouln't be losing hundreds of millions lol.

Competition and more options are good, but Epic isn't even competing... this is still a massacre. If only they would stop bribing devs for exclusives... let the end user decide where he want to buy his games from all available stores.

Well... there are actually quite a lot of games that are available on EGS and not on Steam - and vice versa, note. Bribed? I think it takes two to tango there, a fact that is often overlooked. Its not just a bag of money... its going to be part of your branding, you 'sold out' to a platform to some, and you're not available elsewhere, etc. The risk goes both ways, as do the opportunities. Those are signs of a fair deal, you know.

Whether it makes games cheaper or actually enables certain games to be made, is anyone's guess. But its completely, utterly, entirely, undisputable that a 30% distribution is 18% more cost than a 12% distribution price tag. 18% that goes on the pile of potential profit and reduction of risk to a project. Simple. Where it ends up? Again: not your game to play. Our game is the games we actually play, the content we actually get, and the quality you get for your dollar. Whether a dev deemed it necessary or not to include MTX and force them on you to make it profitable or not, that kind of stuff. To pile onto that argument, I'd like to remind you that a metric ton of those (free) games on Epic are in fact true gamers games, without or with inconsequential MTX, fair DLC, and pretty neat content, indie or not.

Us customers, we're not even players in that game. Stop trying to, really, because its out of place, a bit like cancel & outrage culture is. Self destructive. We're gaming to game. Judge the games, and by the games, judge the devs and pubs, and a platform by its overall policy and how it feels to you. If you don't like it, stay away, that's the definition of freedom. But this missionary work... out of place.

Exclusivity isn't all. There is a process that is more of a hassle to getting games on EGS. Steam you pay $100 and you are set. They don't care much as long as the game works. EGS you gotta get formal approval and go through a process. Which is frankly, hurting them a lot. They want to entice devs with 10% fee but then make it difficult to release on. This kills the indie side and makes it difficult to really make a huge marketplace like Steam.

It also keeps the content they do serve more relevant. Steam is a shithole of half finished productions, early access that stays there till eternity, etc. Remember Greenlight? Anyone who boots up Source and places five assets on a plane can release its crap. And they DO.

Turning that idea around: so EGS manages refined vetting of whatever they feel is worth selling (quality assurance, not a bad thing) for a mere 12% while Steam can't manage even a remote idea of it for 30%. Cash grab that. Another comparison. I don't know the rate of GOG. But let's say 30%. For that, GoG even makes your game playable on everything. Processes that are pretty beneficial to us I'd say.
 
Last edited:
Top