Epic takes no cut for first $1 million in annual per-game revenue under new plan.
See full article...
See full article...
Epic Games Store completely eliminates revenue fees for smaller developers
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Upvote
98
(101
/
-3)
I've always taken issue with breaks for the people who can afford it and no breaks for those who can't. Sweeney might be a sweaty taint of a man and reprehensible for being a billionaire in general, but he's right on this.
Upvote
86
(95
/
-9)
Because the real money is in the big developers.
Cheap for Epic to waive the fees to get goodwill and collect data into new indie games that they can buy (or worse) later.
Upvote
66
(78
/
-12)
Upvote
55
(55
/
0)
Article points out that they opened the store to self publishers in 2023.
Upvote
63
(67
/
-4)
Sweeney is quite insufferable when he cosplays as a champion of small businesses. It’s about as convincing as when Zuckerberg tried to do it to argue against app tracking transparency when he was bitching about Apple.
Upvote
20
(54
/
-34)
You can attract as many developers as you want, epic. Your store is trash and your reputation is tainted from the exclusive shenanigans you pulled early on.
Have you considered doing CUSTOMER friendly things? You have supply. Do you have demand?
Have you considered doing CUSTOMER friendly things? You have supply. Do you have demand?
Upvote
1
(49
/
-48)
There's logic in both approaches. The Valve/Steam approach is fair in that there is a cost (not all monetary) to listing another game on Steam, as it dilutes the storefront. The higher percentage on early sales reflects this, while a game that brings in millions in sales is only additionally costing bandwidth. The Epic approach is fair in that the small developers benefit more from the reduced fees, while those large publishers with millions in sales can offset that.
I don't see one approach as being right and the other wrong.
I don't see one approach as being right and the other wrong.
Upvote
56
(59
/
-3)
Upvote
47
(49
/
-2)
Not sure if you're straw manning or making a good faith post that just comes off a bit… strong.
I'm not making any proposals, simply commenting on the absurdity of the concept.
It's like how pretty girls never have to buy their own drinks at bars. It might be the norm, but it's shitty that the people already winning are getting the red carpet rolled out for them.
Upvote
31
(36
/
-5)
Competition can only be good. They'll turn the screws once they have more market position, but an equilibrium will be lower than what Steam charges now, so that's not bad.
I wish google had a real competitor.
I wish google had a real competitor.
Upvote
17
(19
/
-2)
Competition is always good but the backlog I have in Steam and GOG is just ridiculous. My great grandkids will be inheriting games I've never even played. There's no reason I need another storefront to purchase from.
Upvote
36
(39
/
-3)
Customer friendly things? Like, uh, free game giveaways constantly?
I say as someone who doesn't even use or like the Epic store.
Upvote
50
(53
/
-3)
- Add bookmark
- Featured
- #21
Only problem is nobody buys games on the Epic Store, so a 100% cut of $0 is $0.
Upvote
48
(60
/
-12)
You can’t call it cosplaying while he has a track record and is actively championing small business.
Wild to me the people hating on epic for doing something great for small developers with no strings.
Upvote
-7
(23
/
-30)
Oh sweet child, those game giveaways aren't customer friendly.
They're all about user acquisition and data collection.
Funniest part is that it never really worked for user acquisition. People would log in and claim the free game but still buy all their games on Steam.
Epic's "customer" with their store is still game publishers. That's why they've bought exclusivity deals which publishers like as it's just "free" sales. It's why the UX to actually buy games is hugely lacking and it's lacking in features to actually make it an enjoyable platform to use/comminicate with friends.
Upvote
19
(44
/
-25)
From the article, they have 1 billion in annual sales. That’s much smaller than steam, but 10% of 10 billion is still a massive number.
Upvote
50
(51
/
-1)
You can when he’s only doing so in an attempt to make more money himself.
He doesn’t give a shit about small businesses or consumers, only about how he can increase his own bottom line. The pretence that he just cares soooo much is the cosplay.
I can guarantee someone somewhere at Epic has run the numbers and they suggest the PR & potential increase in devs using the platform outweigh the potential losses. Even one indie game that blows up will cover the “losses” of hundreds or thousands of tiny devs not paying fees on the first $1m. That’s the bet they’re making.
You really think the Apple lawsuit would have happened if Cook had cut them a sweetheart deal?
Upvote
9
(28
/
-19)
You may want to look at the terms and conditions on those accounts again. They're not transferable, so your great grandkids may not be inheriting anything.
https://meincmagazine.com/gaming/2024/05/after-you-die-your-steam-games-will-be-stuck-in-legal-limbo/
https://meincmagazine.com/gaming/2024...ves-game-account-but-only-with-a-court-order/
Upvote
25
(27
/
-2)
The thing still keeping me from outright enthusiasm is that there needs to be better features. Steam Input alone puts it over the top for me, with the Steam Deck and Big Picture coming in a strong second and third.
Upvote
20
(20
/
0)
I came here to say "I know game development is pretty expensive, and the equivalent of Amex charging 30% to a small business for a transaction system would be pretty unconscionable, but I'm still upset that a new competitor used money to try and break a monopoly, forcing me to open up two applications to play my games, so none of that matters to me."
But I got beat to it.
Obviously, the whole Epic exclusives thing came on pretty strong, and it's more complicated than I meme about above, but I'm not really sure how you break a monopoly otherwise.
Upvote
26
(27
/
-1)
Man, I know people like to hate on Epic, and there's plenty of reasons to do so. But that 30% charge stings when you are looking at a small bottom line. And you should also recognize that Unreal Engine has been good for developers and fan communities, and Epic has offered a lot of free games from its shop for customers. And yes, they do have demand:
(emphasis added) Source: (https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/news/epic-games-store-2024-year-in-review)
I haven't looked at their storefront in years, I only have an Ubuntu system and it doesn't support Linux. I think the last Epic game I played was the UE4 open source Unreal Tournament they were doing while it was in development, which IIRC was cancelled because Fortnite. But it shouldn't be that hard to recognize and acknowledge that competition in the market is good, there's room for more than Steam, they do have a lot of users, and at least they're not EA or Ubisoft.
Upvote
30
(34
/
-4)
On paper, sure.
I somehow doubt they're going to get to the point of tying steam accounts to social security numbers and shutting them down when someone dies, though*. So you just make sure your credentials and MFA are passed on.
* on the other hand, with this timeline one never knows
Upvote
14
(15
/
-1)
- Add bookmark
- Featured
- #34
I have no issue with this as long as this does not force devs into exclusivity. The thing some folks do not realize is that it does take some effort to list your game on multiple stores and can be daunting. As such, smaller shops are more likely to use the behemoth that is steam for the better shot of success.
I hate epic (mostly because I really do not like Tim Sweeney), but competition is good as long as you don't lock it away from my choice of stores.
I suspect though that this is epic trying to find the next big thing, then buy out the developer and ruin a game like they did with Rocket league and Fall guys.
I hate epic (mostly because I really do not like Tim Sweeney), but competition is good as long as you don't lock it away from my choice of stores.
I suspect though that this is epic trying to find the next big thing, then buy out the developer and ruin a game like they did with Rocket league and Fall guys.
Upvote
14
(18
/
-4)
Yes, I’m aware the for-profit company is not doing things from a place of altruism. The phrase is customer friendly, after all.
Upvote
29
(30
/
-1)
"... doesn't even use or like..." is really the crux of the matter. Steam prints money because they respect their customers and have set a standard for it that most MBA poisoned storefronts would be utterly blind and oblivious of.
Upvote
10
(19
/
-9)
At the end of the day it is a PR Stunt and nothing more. Epic as a company is absolutely horrible. IF they really wanted to acquire customers and help make the gaming industry better for gamers they would put policies in place to protect customers/gamers. The few policies they do have in place is because they have to have them in place in order to even try to compete with Steam. Steam is constantly fighting for gamers while they essentially hold the monopoly on the gaming storefront which is something Epic would never do. Things like preventing gaming companies from putting ads inside games. If it weren't for Steam we'd be wading through ads in our PC games every 5 seconds like what has happened in the world of mobile gaming apps. The unedited reviews is another huge pro-gamer / consumer move that the developers absolutely hate but for customers you know what you are actually getting into when you buy a game from steam whereas Epic let's developers buy their way out of bad reviews and just puts meaningless Star reviews in place and then let a handful of curated "professional reviews" that doesn't tell the buyer anything about the game they are purchasing aside from the narative that the developer has paid the "professional reviewing companies" to say about them. All of Epic's "battles for the little guy" are so they can get a bigger slice of the gaming revenue for themselves. They do ABSOLUTELY nothing for gamers other than what they absolutely have to do to try get a bigger piece of the action for themselves.
Upvote
-5
(15
/
-20)
Fortnite has customers. EGS is severely lacking in paying customers as evidence by the paltry $1b in sales compared to steam's 10b. Epic wanted to hit $5b by now.
Unreal Engine? Completely different story compared to EGS. I applauded the opening of and developer friendly moves for unreal engine when they happened decades ago. EGS, however, has been an ongoing trainwreck. They have not been customer friendly and they have not done any real, serious work on making their store consumer friendly.
Free games is whatever. It's a much better tactic than buying exclusives for gaining an install base. But a shitty store front isn't converting that install base into paying customers. And Epics underhanded tactics of sniping nearly complete games for exclusivity, especially our from under the nose of preorder or Kickstarter backers, has earned them their current reputation.
Is competition good? Yes. Do I like how epic decided to compete? HELL naw. I was cautiously optimistic when EGS was announced. You can check my chat history right on Ars for those first articles. The caution was warranted.
Upvote
20
(29
/
-9)