Epic announces their Steam rival

[Craymen Edge]

Epic Store would end exclusives if Steam gave devs larger cut, CEO claims

 

Quote

Epic Games would halt their plan of paying for games to launch exclusively on their Store if Valve committed to taking a smaller cut of Steam sales, Epic CEO Tim Sweeney has claimed. That’s quite a remarkable claim – and one he can probably make feeling confident he won’t be called on it any time soon. I’d like the public record to show that if someone paid me £6 million, I would chop off one of my own fingers. CALL MY BLUFF, I DARE YOU.

 

Epic launched their shop in December with a lineup of mid-sized indie exclusives but since they have swayed several big publishers, paying for games including Borderlands 3, The Division 2, Metro Exodus, and Anno 1800 to skip Steam.

 

One of the main benefits of the Epic Games Store for developers and publishers is that Epic only take 12% of proceeds from each sale, versus Steam’s starting cut of 30% (scaling down to 20% for really big games). The other is that, y’know, Epic are apparently spaffing huge amounts of cash to buy up exclusives and keep games off Steam and other stores. That contentious practice, Sweeney seems to be claiming now, is altruistic – they simply want Valve to match their deal.

 

“If Steam committed to a permanent 88% revenue share for all developers and publishers without major strings attached, Epic would hastily organise a retreat from exclusives (while honouring our partner commitments) and consider putting our own games on Steam,” Sweeney said on Twitter overnight amidst a big long thread about the store.

 

Yeah, that's bullshit.

[Hendo]

Yeah, I read that the other day and thought that was the most blatant lie I've read in some time.

[DANGERMAN]

the way I see it, if publishers could get the same split, why would they turn down putting their games on the monolith dominant platform. It's not really Epic's choice if that happens. Still though, hopefully it does get Valve to sort themselves out a bit

[Sly Reflex]

I wonder how long steam will sit on their hands before doing anything. Do they even need to do anything? A lot of consumers (including myself) have already said they can just wait these exclusive periods out.

 

There's a lot of things to take into consideration on both sides of the table here.

[DisturbedSwan]

Personally don’t get the blind loyalty to Steam.

 

I understand folks have a lot of games in their Steam libraries and stuff but if games are free or available earlier elsewhere I’ll almost always take that option personally, you’re basically imposing a wait time on yourself just because you’re too stubborn to download another launcher on your PC. 

 

I’ve got about 5 launchers and they don’t take up resources at all, don’t really know what the fuss is about. Go where the free bi-monthly games are I say.

[DANGERMAN]

I don't like being strong armed in to supporting a company, nor do I think exclusives to a storefront are good for consumers. 

 

I know you're very pro capitalism, personally I think more choice is generally a good thing 

[Sly Reflex]

More choice is a good thing. But just because there's choice means you have to go for it. Some people are very habitual.

 

Stuff coming out earlier might be a selling point for those that just cannot wait, but I am not one of those people. I'll wait until the cows come home, no matter how many free games are waved under my nose I'm not going to pick up something that I don't really want.

 

In defence of Epic Launcher, a lot of people forget the very early days of Steam. Steam was fucking terrible for a long time when it came out. As bad as the Epic Launcher supposedly is? I don't know, time has glossed over that misery. It's taken Steam a good run up to get where they are now and for people to expect Epic to come out the gates and just be as good is a bit silly.

 

Exclusive storefronts are stupid. Imagine how many games Sea of Thieves or Gears would have done on PC if you could buy it elsewhere? Same for Ubi and EA games. The storefronts that own or develop the games should have the cheapest prices for their own games, but if you want a specific game on a specific launcher, then playing a smaller surcharge to do that would be fine in my eyes. I would have paid more for Sea of Thieves if it went through steam, and I think the game would have had a healthier community on PC as well because of that because of peoples general aversion to buying games on anything but Steam, Uplay and Origin.

 

When Halo comes out on Steam that will be the thing to watch. If it was cheaper on  the MS storefront, but you could pay a bit more to get it on Steam (or any other launcher) then where would you buy it? If it is the same price on both storefronts, then MS have dropped the ball.

[DANGERMAN]

I don't think anyone (that I've seen at least) expects Epic's launcher to be as fully featured as Steam from the off, it was never going to have the catalogue. The problem they have (and this happens all the time in all sorts of industries) is that doesn't matter, they're up against an incumbent, one that people have friends and huge libraries on, and that's the problem they've got. Free games are one thing, but why would anyone pick them over Steam when they have a choice, which is why Epic aren't giving people a choice where possible. It's what they probably have to do tbf

[radiofloyd]

I’m with you Dangerman, I used to be more “everything has to be on Steam” but now I don’t care. If it’s on the Nintendo eshop I’d rather buy it on that. And if it’s free on the Epic store I’ll definitely pick it up there. 

[Sly Reflex]

https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/1/18525842/epic-games-psyonix-acquisition-rocket-league-fortnite-unreal-deal

 

Well that's kind of scummy.

[DANGERMAN]

pulling stuff from store fronts is appalling. If they did a sequel and didn't put it on Steam, that's shitty but fair enough, Epic own them now, this is not a good look for Epic, particularly after they were painting themselves as the good guys the other day

[merman1974]

On 1 May 2019 at 22:17, DANGERMAN said:

pulling stuff from store fronts is appalling. If they did a sequel and didn't put it on Steam, that's shitty but fair enough, Epic own them now, this is not a good look for Epic, particularly after they were painting themselves as the good guys the other day

 

Epic are *not* the good guys and never were.

The fawning interview with Tim Sweeney in the last issue of EDGE really got my goat.

[Craymen Edge]

Epic has extended this support-a-creator thing from Fortnite to all games on their store.

 

https://www.epicgames.com/fortnite/en-US/news/support-a-creator-faq

 

You can't implement a shopping cart, but you can add a feature for me to nominate an "influencer" to get a portion of the money I spent on a game? Fuck off Epic.

[radiofloyd]

Another nice touch:

 

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2020-05-19-epic-games-store-offers-price-difference-refund-for-recent-purchases-which-go-on-sale

[Sly Reflex]

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2021-04-10-epic-is-burning-hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars-on-epic-games-store-exclusives-in-its-war-against-steam

 

Quote

In its bid to take on Steam with the Epic Games Store, the company behind Fortnite is burning through hundreds of millions of dollars on exclusives and free games.

 

The Epic Games Store releases free games every week, and has snapped up a number of eye-catching PC launch exclusives since it went live in December 2018.

 

Of course, it's expected that providing so many free games and timed exclusives would cost Epic cold hard cash - but the sheer numbers at play are eye-watering, and it's all spent at a loss.

 

Court documents published this week as part of Epic's high-profile legal battle against Apple reveal Epic committed $444m in minimum guarantees for 2020 alone.

A minimum guarantee is an advance paid to a publisher or developer whether or not the game itself makes enough money to claw the advance back. An example is the €9.49m 505 parent company Digital Bros received from Epic for PC exclusivity for Remedy's Control.

 

It's a huge amount of money to pay out to developers for minimum guarantees last year, but it's something moneybags Epic is willing to do in order to take on Steam and its 30 per cent cut of revenue.

 

As Epic boss Tim Sweeney said in June 2019: "We believe exclusives are the only strategy that will change the 70/30 status quo at a large enough scale to permanently affect the whole game industry."

 

According to Apple's summary of the arguments it's bringing to court next month, and citing depositions from Epic executives, the Epic Games Store is unprofitable. Apple contends it "will not be profitable for at least multiple years, if ever".

 

Apple's filing reveals Epic lost around $181m on the Epic Games Store in 2019, and it projected to lose around $273m on the store in 2020. Even with "significant" growth, revenue for last year was projected at $401m. Epic has confirmed $700m was spent by PC players on the Epic Games Store in 2020, although only $265m of that was spent by players on third-party PC games in the Epic Games Store. So its $444m in minimum guarantees for 2020 alone is a big loss-leader.

 

Apparently Epic has admitted this trend will continue in the immediate future, and Epic projects to lose around $139m on the Epic Games Store in 2021. These are all "unrecouped costs" resulting from Epic's attempt to grow the Epic Games Store. That includes at least $330m in unrecouped costs from minimum guarantees alone. Ouch. That's a lot of games that missed their minimum sales target.

 

Here's the bombshell: "at best, Epic does not expect EGS to have a cumulative gross profit before 2027." Then: "As a result, Epic has funded, and must continue to fund, EGS through funding and capital raised by other parts of its business, which have been 'incredibly profitable' for 'several years'." That'll be Fortnite, then.

 

Epic has had its say on these points, of course. In its response, the company said it expects the Epic Games Store to become profitable by 2023 - four years earlier than Apple's claim.

 

"EGS is not yet profitable at its current scale and stage of development because it has front-loaded its marketing and user-acquisition costs to gain market share," the filing reads.

 

"EGS's 12 per cent transaction fee is sufficient to cover the variable costs of running EGS, including payment processing, customer service and bandwidth."

Ultimately, the points about the Epic Games Store's profitability are a minor part of a sweeping court case that has broader strokes. Epic is after Apple because it claims the company monopolises the iOS app distribution market and the iOS in-app payment solutions market within its iOS ecosystem.

 

Apple is putting all it can into protecting the way it operates the App Store - and of course its cut of revenue. But it's also framing Epic's legal battle as a nefarious attempt to revive interest in Fortnite.

 

In its filing, Apple claims that between 2018 and 2019, Fortnite's average monthly active users and revenues declined. There's a lot of redacted information here, so we don't know the exact numbers. But, according to Apple, Epic launched a "pre-planned media strategy" called "Project Liberty", retaining a public relations firm in 2019 to execute its plan.

 

"These trends were consistent with Epic's observations that gamers were growing dissatisfied with Fortnite," reads the filing.

 

"The company understood that Fortnite was late in the video-game life cycle. And it took note internally when "#RIPFornite" was trending on Twitter. Epic knew these trends were not a blip; the company expected the declining interest and revenue to continue.

 

"As a later board presentation revealed, Epic coalesced around a goal: to revive and reinvigorate Fortnite by turning it out to developers to create new content. This would make Fortnite a platform and Epic the middleman. But in order for this new business model to succeed, Epic needed to find a way to cut the commissions charged by platform providers so Epic could 'share a majority of profit with creators'. According to Epic, 'Platform Fees' posed 'an Existential Issue' to the company's plans for Fortnite."

 

The result of all this: Project Liberty.

 

Epic denies all this, of course, which you can read about in its response. Epic vs Apple goes to trial in May.

 

Love to see big companies tussle, go on, make those lawyers rich(er)!

 

I really can't blame Remedy for taking the cash, but it does make me wonder how much it cost them in the long run if they just opened on all store fronts.

 

I am looking at EGS and wondering what's in it for me as a consumer. I barely take the free games, I've taken one in the whole time I've had the account, I only got he account because I was strong armed to play Rocket League (again, terrible manipulation on EPIC's behalf) and then I had to install the client to allow crossplay between the steam and Epic versions of Mudrunner.

 

There's games I've actively just stopped caring about playing because they're there only. World War Z I would have love to have given a shot, and I don't think the exclusiveness did that game any good. It doesn't look like it'll ever break free from EGS either. I really want to play Snowrunner too, but since it's exclusive, that's a no go too. It's coming up on the 1 year release of it so it might get released to other platforms too, but it's owned by the guys that did World War Z so I'm not going to hold my breath. I think the new Pinball FX game is going EGS as well, so that's a big load of cash they lost from me. I hope the Fortnite cash keeps them going because I don't mean them any ill will, but if you're parting directions with the place we've always been, then I guess that's the way it's going to be. I think PAYDAY3 will go that way too, given the money issues they have had. Again, can't blame them, but I think it's possibly damaging them in the long run for goodwill to those opposed to EGS.

 

There's no reason for me to buy anything that is across clients as they're not cheaper at RRP. I get that the devs get a larger cut, but in return I get a worse service and have my game collection fragmented into the deal. Why would I sign up for this?

 

And if the arse falls out of Fortnite, which it eventually will, what will happen to EGS? They stated that giving away games isn't really turning people into customers fast enough. Anecdotal, but in my discord server the new games are put up, people rush to get them, maybe play for a moment then stop and go back to playing what they got elsewhere. I know some people have bought in, but the majority of people are just there for the free meal. There's a brief feeding frenzy before people lose interest.

 

I hope one day EGS does get its act together, stop acting like a cunt and start being a service that can provide some competition without shithousing. I feel that the clock is running down though, and it'll be hard to feel sympathy for them if it does eventually shutter.

[DisturbedSwan]

I don’t get this at all, Steam is great but I’ve no loyalty to it.
 

I’ll take all the free games EGS want to give me. 

[Sly Reflex]

This is hilarious coming from Mr Playstation.

[DisturbedSwan]

10 minutes ago, Sly Reflex said:

This is hilarious coming from Mr Playstation.

If I had an Xbox and they gave away free games I’d play them on that system instead of paying for them on PS. Consoles are a little different to PC launchers/storefronts as well.
 

I’ve no loyalty to anyone, I go where the games are. I loved Xbox stuff 2004-2013, PC and PS 2013-2019 and PS right now as I don’t use my PC anymore and don’t own a Series X (yet).

[one-armed dwarf]

Well it would not be good if EGS shutters, I don't like the service but I have bought some stuff on it. Most recently some incredibly expensive Kingdom Hearts games. I will also get FFVII Remake on it when they eventually announce that as epic exclusive, lol. In the case of Hitman III that exclusivity was really annoying cause of the fragmentation it caused to the game itself, remember how Hitman was supposed to just be one game which would receive expansions. I think they fixed it eventually but it turned an arcane procedure into something even more weird to work your way through. That might not have been down to any maliciousness on anybody's part but it definitely didn't serve to benefit the consumer. 

 

The big issue for me with it is it offers no real advantage over its competition. GoG is DRM free, Steam has a heck of a bunch of features (every kind of controller support without weird third party add-ons, Linux emulation layer, cloud saves but I think epic might have that now or soon enough). EGS is like a worse steam where its principal incentive is the FOMO of not having stuff at release (like Control).

 

The lesson I've learned from the PS3 store shutdown though is loyalty really is a mug's game no matter the storefront cause they're likely to all get shut down at some point. So I prefer to stick to the ecosystem that has shown good longevity cause maybe I'll be too old and/or dead to care when they take away my games. If I have any bee in my bonnet of any store at this point it's the Oculus one and how they keep banning people's facebooks for inactivity and thus taking away all their oculus purchases, so I basically just don't buy anything on that store at all. They'll probably google stadia the shit out of it anyway at some point.

[Sly Reflex]

How much have you spent in EGS @DisturbedSwan? I feel it might be the same amount I have.

 

Hitman is another one I'll wait on. In fact whenever they say PC version coming I just automatically add a year on since there's no way currently I am spending any cash there. Either become a place I want to invest time and money in, or I'm not bothering with it.

 

I really though that EGS could have been great for competition, but so far it's been shite. Cool for the devs receiving handouts. Not so cool for the consumer.

 

Also pretty hypocritical that they're going after apple when they're sort of doing the same thing. It's not 1:1, but the coin is in the same shit infested lake.