But I do wonder: Does the extra cut developers get make up for sales they are missing from people that refuse to use the epic storefront? I doubt there are real numbers about that out there, but I wonder...
I thought Epic pays money out of their own pocket for exclusive. Else I dont' see why developers would make exclusive for the extra small cut.
The money they are paying are guarantees for items sold so that the game doesn't fail financially if it doesn't sell on their store meaning they are essentially pre-buying x amount of copies which they sell afterwards at their store and further sales go to their standard 88/12 split in favor of the developer/publisher. 18%, in some cases 23%, is not really a small cut. Think about it - what if you got 18% increase to your current salary and all of your future salaries? Wouldn't you really like that?
Q) Exclusives are anti-consumer, why would you do this? (you monster)
A) OK, so that’s a little complicated. And our answer is long-winded. Bear with us.
So, before Valve and the 70/30 split it was pretty darn rough to be an indie (both in terms of royalty share and in terms of the ability to sell things without a publisher). We can all thank Valve for using their leverage to make that happen, and usher in the era we have now. We think it’s safe to say that a large percentage of the games made today wouldn’t exist without it.
Epic is using their leverage to push that even farther, to 88/12. That’s another whole strata of developers who can survive.
Would we like that to become the new standard? Yes.
Can that be done without leverage? No.
Is some form of exclusive content required to get the momentum to make that happen? Yes.
And we’re willing to get on board to make that happen. The only way this gets any traction is with some exclusive content and we’re willing to be one of the canaries in the mineshaft.
Do we hope there is a big upside for us? Sure. That’d be amazing. But we also hope this is the start of establishing a new standard.
Q) That just means more money in your pocket, (you monster!!)
A) I mean yes, ideally. It’s a new store right now though, and that prospect is more of a long term one. Right? But we really hope and suspect that in the long run this will be better for us financially. That’s how we make more and better stuff.
Since a lot of the games are also available for purchase on Humble, Fanatical, and Green Man Gaming now the store exclusivity angle is kinda in limp mode. There are options to purchase and some even support charities. It is obviously possible so if a game is not available elsewhere that is on the devs or publishers to make those agreements as well.
Unless we're talking launcher exclusivity like Steam had for years, but everyone is cool with. Then I guess that still stands...
The money they are paying are guarantees for items sold so that the game doesn't fail financially if it doesn't sell on their store meaning they are essentially pre-buying x amount of copies which they sell afterwards at their store and further sales go to their standard 88/12 split in favor of the developer/publisher. 18%, in some cases 23%, is not really a small cut. Think about it - what if you got 18% increase to your current salary and all of your future salaries? Wouldn't you really like that?
You also loss potential buyer by making game Epic exclusive. So weather it'll be more profitable is debatable. But 18% is indeed a big cut.
I wish they could just sell the games cheaper on Epic. Some people say steam prohibited games to be sold cheaper else where... Not sure if that is true.
The money they are paying are guarantees for items sold so that the game doesn't fail financially if it doesn't sell on their store meaning they are essentially pre-buying x amount of copies which they sell afterwards at their store and further sales go to their standard 88/12 split in favor of the developer/publisher. 18%, in some cases 23%, is not really a small cut. Think about it - what if you got 18% increase to your current salary and all of your future salaries? Wouldn't you really like that?
You also loss potential buyer by making game Epic exclusive. So weather it'll be more profitable is debatable. But 18% is indeed a big cut.
I wish they could just sell the games cheaper on Epic. Some people say steam prohibited games to be sold cheaper else where... Not sure if that is true.
Well, it depends IMO. Some players would go to any store to play a game and some would be drawn by reviews. There doesn't seem to be that many people who would boycott Epic - if we can judge by the amount of refunds requested from kickstarter campaigns it seems that about 3% of players request refunds. As for the long-tail of sales - sure, I guess Steam could provide some of that but the exposure on Steam currently is atrocious due to the large amount of trash that Valve allows on there. Epic seems to actually offer a better exposure for smaller games mostly due to that every game that gets there is not smothered by a bunch of crap and I've actually found several interesting games that way. And even if there is some potential loss from Steam - the game would launch there a year later anyway so there's that.
There are a few games that went down in price after they were launched on Epic as exclusives so there's that. As for Steam - they do seem to expect prices parity but the details are kept hidden as those contracts are confidential.
are they add cloud save game option ? it is only reason why I am not interested in Epic,yet, but prefer steam,gog,origin
Cloud saves are definitely enabled for some games but I cannot really say if they are enabled for all of them.
I'm not familiar with cloud saves. Are they a specific game thing using game (publisher) cloud storage, or do the saves go to a store's cloud area?
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
are they add cloud save game option ? it is only reason why I am not interested in Epic,yet, but prefer steam,gog,origin
Cloud saves are definitely enabled for some games but I cannot really say if they are enabled for all of them.
I'm not familiar with cloud saves. Are they a specific game thing using game (publisher) cloud storage, or do the saves go to a store's cloud area?
They way it works with Steam is that every save for every game you play gets uploaded to their server so if you uninstall it and play it again years later all your old saves will be there and available.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
are they add cloud save game option ? it is only reason why I am not interested in Epic,yet, but prefer steam,gog,origin
Cloud saves are definitely enabled for some games but I cannot really say if they are enabled for all of them.
I'm not familiar with cloud saves. Are they a specific game thing using game (publisher) cloud storage, or do the saves go to a store's cloud area?
They way it works with Steam is that every save for every game you play gets uploaded to their server so if you uninstall it and play it again years later all your old saves will be there and available.
It's also so different devices can use the same saves.
are they add cloud save game option ? it is only reason why I am not interested in Epic,yet, but prefer steam,gog,origin
Cloud saves are definitely enabled for some games but I cannot really say if they are enabled for all of them.
I'm not familiar with cloud saves. Are they a specific game thing using game (publisher) cloud storage, or do the saves go to a store's cloud area?
Basically the storefront uploads syncs your save files to a cloud storage and downloads them if needed. Still games put their save files in different directory paths so there is a bit of customization for each game. And of course some games do not store the save files on your PC at all. It is not a hard thing to configure all games to support cloud saves but I would not presume to say that every game on the store supports them mostly because not all games on Steam support cloud saves either. It is up to the developers to configure cloud saves for their games once the storefront supports them.
But when you compare how "ungreedy" Epic is with loot boxes compared to Steam they’re practically saints (no ability to mass buy or open, results known before opening, slowly removing loot boxes in their IPs, and having favorable season passes with actually good loot).
I think if they truely cared they'd get out of the loot box market entirely. But you know the motto Milk them for every dollar.
Honestly, can the Epic style lootboxes even be called lootboxes in the traditional sense? If you know what you're getting beforehand, it literally isn't gambling. It's a regular microtransaction at that point.
I would use the Epic store for a new Unreal Tournament. I know Fortnite is Epic's golden goose right now but I have no interest in that game. The currently in limbo Unreal Tournament showed a lot of promise even in a pre-Alpha stage.
I think they could have put more work into their storefront to be honest, it just feels hurried.
One of the reasons I hated the Epic storefront because it's bare-bones. I hated Epic because I hate Fortnight and the people who play it. I also hated Epic for the fact that they suck up what look to be good games yet I wouldn't know because they have no review system. I also like my games in one place, and since I open Steam daily it's easier to remember what games I do own on that platform.
On that note as of recently I can't get the idea out of my head that the haters are a bunch of cry-tit drama queens. It turns out I hate the haters more than Epic store itself due to their toxic Juvenal sniveling over epic store exclusives. Now I just don't care anymore who gets what as an exclusive, I just can't support that fight anymore.
I think they could have put more work into their storefront to be honest, it just feels hurried.
That's my thought, too. I guess I shouldn't be surprised seeing how many games relase in this hurried state, and fixed-on-the-fly, if ever.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
But when you compare how "ungreedy" Epic is with loot boxes compared to Steam they’re practically saints (no ability to mass buy or open, results known before opening, slowly removing loot boxes in their IPs, and having favorable season passes with actually good loot).
I think if they truely cared they'd get out of the loot box market entirely. But you know the motto Milk them for every dollar.
Honestly, can the Epic style lootboxes even be called lootboxes in the traditional sense? If you know what you're getting beforehand, it literally isn't gambling. It's a regular microtransaction at that point.
You can call them not-so-surprise-boxes. That makes it all okay.
I like the "I Totally Saw This Coming Box." Sounds like fun.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
One, I am confused as to how people can throw out the word "monopoly" so casually, because I have played games for 20 years and have never needed or have had a Steam or Epic account. I think I have played every game I really wanted to, although I never needed to play a game day one release. I might have paid more though.
Two, exclusivity is a monopolistic behavior, but does not mean that company actually has a monopoly (nobody has a monopoly on any large percentage of PC games). It is hard to argue that exclusivity is good for the customer per se. I think it's harder to fault companies like Nintendo for not porting their games to competitor platforms, than EA for negotiating a contract that forbids other companies from making games for NFL, NBA, etc or for a platform to payoff independent companies from selling their games elsewhere. All of it is legal, but certainly not good for us.
Three, why did Epic release shop in that state? For all we know, some manager wanted to strike while the iron was hot, while they had the budget from Fortnite, and saw visions of money and promotion. Who would wait two years to release? Mismanagement? Maybe.
But we all need to consider the 12% cut. We don't have the math to see what the profit margin on that is. We know Steam is doing well, but is it one of the most valuable companies in the world? That's what a real monopoly usually is.
So is 12% cut enough to support the type of return companies want/need? Maybe the 12% cut is the reason why they rushed it out, the lack of features, and the slow progress of basic features being added. My guess is that once Epic gets a foothold, they will increase the 12% significantly in order to justify the investment in the store, unless the synergy with the Unreal engine that another poster talked about is allowed to cover it.
But when you compare how "ungreedy" Epic is with loot boxes compared to Steam they’re practically saints (no ability to mass buy or open, results known before opening, slowly removing loot boxes in their IPs, and having favorable season passes with actually good loot).
I think if they truely cared they'd get out of the loot box market entirely. But you know the motto Milk them for every dollar.
Honestly, can the Epic style lootboxes even be called lootboxes in the traditional sense? If you know what you're getting beforehand, it literally isn't gambling. It's a regular microtransaction at that point.
You can call them not-so-surprise-boxes. That makes it all okay.
I like the "I Totally Saw This Coming Box." Sounds like fun.
I think they could have put more work into their storefront to be honest, it just feels hurried.
That's my thought, too. I guess I shouldn't be surprised seeing how many games relase in this hurried state, and fixed-on-the-fly, if ever.
What features should be implemented so the store would get to an adequate state for you?
A cart, first and foremost. They are competing with Steam. A game review area would be nice. A friend's list so the games you buy on their store can be easily played with friends.
A store is more than "just merchandise" and the all important credit card info and transactions. If you want to compete with someone, you should come close to, if not improving on what your competitor offers, yes? Steam is a community. EGS is not.
In truth, I don't know what EGS has as I don't use it. These are the lacking features I have read about from others. So if I am mistaken, I'm sure I'll be corrected
[edit] I forgot that you asked specifically "for me."
Nothing they do will get into their store. I'm not their target audience. I enjoy "owning" the games I buy, not renting them. GOG.com is my online store of choice because I download the game installation files to my PC. That means I own them. I can install and play them no matter what ha[pens to GOG.
DRM free, baby
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Google is not the only search engine, just the most popular. They have no "exclusive webpages" that only Google can link to and DuckDuckGo, Bing, (Is Yahoo still a thing?), and other search engines can not. Popular does not make a monopoly, just like Steam. It's certainly popular, but I get my games elsewhere, with a few exceptions (like Bethesda games now). Steam does have their own exclusivity, but at least they give value in their storefront to many people.
On the other hand, my area has one cable internet service provider. The phone company is also one. Now there is satellite service providers, too, but I consider the cable company a monopoly because they have the fastest service (no one else comes close in my area) and no valid competition. If you want above 25MB/s, the cable provider is the only choice.
Don't get me wrong, I hate Steam with a passion. I want competition for them. I just wondered why Epic did such a half-assed job at it. I am all for healthy competition and exclusivity is NOT healthy competition (on any side). It is the opposite of that.
How do you define monopoly. It keeps seeming you believe it means 100% market share. Again, this has never been true. The monopolies teddy broke up and have been broken up since in the US didn't have anywhere close to 100%.
Perhaps it seems that way because monopoly does mean one seller has 100% of the market share because there is literally only one seller. A duopoly, two sellers. An oligopoly, a few sellers, which can generally set prices and other market elements through collusion.
Monopolies primarily exist in economic theory, but can also exist in reality. My father worked for one for most of his professional career, in the form of a crown corporation. As such it was through government contrivance, but was the sole seller nonetheless.
That monopolies are few and far between in the real world doesn't change their definition, nor that of the words prefix: mono-, meaning one.
"Achievements are for little kids... " *Spends 8hrs+ grinding for magic sword*
Every time I see these types of posts on MMORPG I understand a bit more how outside got the way it has. Sheesh.
What function does an achievement have? Is it is quest? Does it have tangible value? Does it do something? No. A magic sword would have an impact on my play, and the main focus of the games I play is trying to get more powerful. Would I grind for 8 hours to get one? Probably not. Any game that required me to kill trash mobs for 8 hours to get something means it probably has no content worth doing, and replaced content with childish nonsense like achievements to please low brows who would rather watch a video of someone else grind trash mobs for eight hours to get a sword instead of play an actual game with actual content themselves like a sane person.
Some people enjoy getting game achievements. For those persons, their function is joy production. Some people don't care about getting them. For those persons, game achievements have no function. Their value, or lack of, is in the mind of the beholder.
Monopoly does not mean a single seller existing. It means the ability for a single entity to control the market and behavior aimed at keeping that ability. Valve have exhibited both with Steam.
Paid exclusivity is not a monopolistic behavior - it is competitive behavior. It is also mostly neutral for the customer with slight negative connotations but it is very good for the producers of products that the customer buys and in that way it can be indirectly beneficial to the customer as producers better better off means more products coming from those producers.
AIBQuirky, I honestly disagree with almost everything you described but of course that is your opinion and I am not really going to try to change it Here is mine, though. I think a store should be about the product, the ability to discover new products and the benefits the product producers get. I think a community should be completely separate from a store and should be able to endure the closing of a store or using a different store.
A monopoly by definition "control the market and behavior" by controlling all, or an overwhelming amount of the supply in a given market (ergo, you can't get it anywhere else). This is clearly not what Steam has been able to do, as me and many other gamer have existed and played any game we wanted, for me particularly I didn't even know what Steam was or why people were tied to it until about 1.5 years ago.
A company that overwhelmingly controls the market and behavior due to some other factor just plain has a competitive advantage, in this case being first to market, and being cheaper than existing retailers (and more convenient). Insisting that a company who does not control supply has a monopoly because of their result (success) is meaningless, and makes the word monopoly meaningless as well. Monopolies are kept under control by anti-trust laws...without accounting for supply, you might as well call any dominant company a monopoly and sanction them.
Along the same lines, doing actions that allow you to be in sole control of supply is monopolistic behavior. Is it also a competitive tactic? Obviously and very effective.
A monopoly by definition is when one company and its products dominate one sector of the industry. A monopoly doesn't need to control the supply of a product - it can also be created by controlling the customers of said product. In Steam's case they are a monopoly because they are basically the preferred storefront of about 90% of PC gamers and they are making sure that their competition is starved by leveraging that market share and preventing other companies from getting exclusives(they did that with the Oculus store) and giving incentives to companies that are creating the products that they are selling to remain exclusive to their store(fear of missing out on increased revenue sharing by making games available on multiple stores). The only reason Steam is not actually a monopoly is because there are large companies with enough brand recognition that choose not to distribute their games through Steam. Still Steam is basically a monopoly when it comes to indie games. Or rather - it was.
Monopoly does not mean a single seller existing. It means the ability for a single entity to control the market and behavior aimed at keeping that ability. Valve have exhibited both with Steam.
Paid exclusivity is not a monopolistic behavior - it is competitive behavior. It is also mostly neutral for the customer with slight negative connotations but it is very good for the producers of products that the customer buys and in that way it can be indirectly beneficial to the customer as producers better better off means more products coming from those producers.
AIBQuirky, I honestly disagree with almost everything you described but of course that is your opinion and I am not really going to try to change it Here is mine, though. I think a store should be about the product, the ability to discover new products and the benefits the product producers get. I think a community should be completely separate from a store and should be able to endure the closing of a store or using a different store.
1) Mono-poly: One. AT&T was a monopoly for telephones, thus why the US Government broke it up. It is also why the Government can't break up so many other businesses that are "popular" because they are not monopolies.
2) Exclusivity is the antithesis of competition. You are blocking ALL competition out. In other words, no competition is occurring, as in a lack of competition.
3) It's OK to disagree. The world would be boring if we all thought exactly the same
My curiosity was about why EGS did not release a more complete storefront. I've been enlightened quite a bit
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Comments
Perhaps the most telling QA is this one, made almost an year ago by the Rebel Galaxy Outlaw devs: https://rebel-galaxy.com/rebel-galaxy-outlaw-launching-on-epic-games-store-qa/
Unless we're talking launcher exclusivity like Steam had for years, but everyone is cool with. Then I guess that still stands...
I wish they could just sell the games cheaper on Epic. Some people say steam prohibited games to be sold cheaper else where... Not sure if that is true.
There are a few games that went down in price after they were launched on Epic as exclusives so there's that. As for Steam - they do seem to expect prices parity but the details are kept hidden as those contracts are confidential.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
A store is more than "just merchandise" and the all important credit card info and transactions. If you want to compete with someone, you should come close to, if not improving on what your competitor offers, yes? Steam is a community. EGS is not.
In truth, I don't know what EGS has as I don't use it. These are the lacking features I have read about from others. So if I am mistaken, I'm sure I'll be corrected
[edit]
I forgot that you asked specifically "for me."
Nothing they do will get into their store. I'm not their target audience. I enjoy "owning" the games I buy, not renting them. GOG.com is my online store of choice because I download the game installation files to my PC. That means I own them. I can install and play them no matter what ha[pens to GOG.
DRM free, baby
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Paid exclusivity is not a monopolistic behavior - it is competitive behavior. It is also mostly neutral for the customer with slight negative connotations but it is very good for the producers of products that the customer buys and in that way it can be indirectly beneficial to the customer as producers better better off means more products coming from those producers.
AIBQuirky, I honestly disagree with almost everything you described but of course that is your opinion and I am not really going to try to change it
2) Exclusivity is the antithesis of competition. You are blocking ALL competition out. In other words, no competition is occurring, as in a lack of competition.
3) It's OK to disagree. The world would be boring if we all thought exactly the same
My curiosity was about why EGS did not release a more complete storefront. I've been enlightened quite a bit
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR