- Games such as "Anno" among many others are using (Denuvo DRM) which slows your computer while the game is running due to requirement of more processing power especially bad for those who run multiple games or tasks.
- Epic has horrid customer service, they can't even provide a list of games on the store that use a form of third party DRM or Anti Cheat, instead they ask you to contact the publisher which often can't even answer either because they tell you to go to the developer and ask, and you get no response. When fact is it's easier just for Epic Games to require disclosures on the store / product page.
- Epic is Anti Consumer, in many ways by not informing people of third party DRM's like Steam, and Review Censorship.
- No Cloud Saves, or Controller support.
- No Genere listings like Steam.
- Friends List isn't that great.
- Download speeds are slower than Steams.
Over-All the quality of experience goes down when using Epic Store though they promised improvements but at them only taking like 8% I think it was you can't expect AAA Experience, or the company to list games that use 3rd party DRMs which are Anti Consumer.
Epic Maybe in violation of EU Laws by not clearly disclosing third party drm, and software usages for each game.
For now I am sticking with Steam.
really because steam sold Rage 2 on their store with no DRM listed then about 4 hours after the game was playable the steam page updated to "Denuvo" for DRM, mind you they took all the preorders etc.. without providing that information.
Now that being said like 4 days later bethesda patched it out of the steam version anyway.. but thats just as bad in my eyes.
You can't have double standards
- Cloud saves are coming in one of the next EGS Patches - Genre Searches are coming in one of the next EGS Patches - It's a friends list it shows your friends and works what more is there to it
seeing as features are so important to you, here is the tracking board for upcoming and recently released features along with target dates.
They are actually actively improving the platform.
Reminds me of Anthem, sure those things sound like good ideas, but in its present state its a mess of problems and severely lacking in basic features, but don't worry they will fix it 'soon' TM. hopefully they have a better 'roadmap' than Anthem did.
What amuses me is the fact that people think that $10 is such a great deal.
It is not a great deal but it is a big deal because it is the store giving the discount and not the developers/publishers. And to be fair a $10 discount on a $15 game is kind of a great deal as well.
Reminds me of Anthem, sure those things sound like good ideas, but in its present state its a mess of problems and severely lacking in basic features, but don't worry they will fix it 'soon' TM. hopefully they have a better 'roadmap' than Anthem did.
i don't mean to sound like a dick here.. but what basic features.
It's a store, i can buy a game, install it, play it.
thats all i need a digital storefront for, most of the time i have the games icons directly on my desktop anyway. I don't need baskets, i rarely buy 10 x $60 games at once, friends list is fine and works etc... i don't need discussion boards, forums etc... built into my store front
i'm sure for some people they consider them detrimental features....
but for a digital storefront all it needs to do is browse and purchase.. so in my eyes as far as basic features go, it's got what it needs
Edit - also the roadmap has been pretty on point so far i'm sure what they're developing in the store isnt as big of a scope as features for anthem, i'm also sure that they are more competently managed than anthem was after reading that big write up... "bioware magic"
I'm not a fan on paying 30% commission to google playstore, apple store, or steam.
The OP seemed like it though.
If the OP is not a developer, he's not paying a commission in either case.
You buy a game for 50$, 15$ goes to steam...
You buy 50$ pokicoin for pokemon go, 15$ go to google...
That is ridiculous how much we pay for "just a plateform".
As a customer you pay 50, regardless of where you bought it, as you said.
The 15% is definitely a better deal for a developer, assuming equal sales in both stores. However, unequal sales change the dynamic entirely. For example, 10.000 sales at 15% cut is still less money than 50.000 sales at 30% cut.
What amuses me is the fact that people think that $10 is such a great deal.
It is not a great deal but it is a big deal because it is the store giving the discount and not the developers/publishers. And to be fair a $10 discount on a $15 game is kind of a great deal as well.
Mine was an hyperbole. Of course it's good for a customer perspective, any discount is.
But it is not good enough for Epic Store overall commercial strategy. They are basically trying to bully Steam with what is basically a "toothpick" instead of a bazooka. They just look pathetic. Can Epic do that kind of deal every week? Hell no. But Steam can.
I think that going head on against Steam is a huge mistake. Like Rome, Steam wasn't built in one day.
Epic should do their own stuff and see how it goes. How about they start building up their tiny library by incentivizing the Indie developers to use their platform, like Steam does?
One of Steam selling point is that they offer a great platform for small Indies. Believe it or not, there are Indie games which heavily relied on Steam platform which turned out to be much better than AAA games.
This is one of the strength that Steam detractors seems to underestimate. Epic hasn't got a vision, they got billions of dollars made from a single (lucky) game and they just don't know what to do with it. They are acting like headless chickens.
You buy 50$ pokicoin for pokemon go, 15$ go to google...
That is ridiculous how much we pay for "just a plateform".
Steam is a digital distributor, a digital shop. It works the same way as any other retail store like Gamestop or Neweggs or Walmart. 30% is more or less the same commission any other store gets from selling a game, it's not something out of the ordinary. That's why publishers keep selling their games through Steam. If it was an outrageous fee to pay, do you really think publishers like Bethesda would sell their games there, even though they have their own store?
If the commission was 15% instead of 30%, do you really think that the saving will be passed to the customer? If you think so, you are really naive.
The standard cost of a new game is £49.99 in UK, that's what the marked decided it's a fair a consumer should pay for it (whether we agree with it or not). If retailers (like Steam) decides to slash their commission fee, the only ones to gain out of it would be the publishers not the consumer, as the game will still be sold at £49.99 regardless.
Steam provides a service, and I am happy to spend my money there, if publishers get less money I could not care less.
Fallout 4 on Bethesda Store = $29,99 (always) Fallout 4 on Steam = $9.99 (at least 3 times a year)
Games sold on the developer proprietary shops are always sold full price (and they don't even have to pay the retailer commission). Still complaining about Steam 30% fee?
What amuses me is the fact that people think that $10 is such a great deal.
It is not a great deal but it is a big deal because it is the store giving the discount and not the developers/publishers. And to be fair a $10 discount on a $15 game is kind of a great deal as well.
Mine was an hyperbole. Of course it's good for a customer perspective, any discount is.
But it is not good enough for Epic Store overall commercial strategy. They are basically trying to bully Steam with what is basically a "toothpick" instead of a bazooka. They just look pathetic. Can Epic do that kind of deal every week? Hell no. But Steam can.
I think that going head on against Steam is a huge mistake. Like Rome, Steam wasn't built in one day.
Epic should do their own stuff and see how it goes. How about they start building up their tiny library by incentivizing the Indie developers to use their platform, like Steam does?
One of Steam selling point is that they offer a great platform for small Indies. Believe it or not, there are Indie games which heavily relied on Steam platform which turned out to be much better than AAA games.
This is one of the strength that Steam detractors seems to underestimate. Epic hasn't got a vision, they got billions of dollars made from a single (lucky) game and they just don't know what to do with it. They are acting like headless chickens.
Steam has literally never made that kind of sale - they just organize their big sales between lots of publishers but they are not the ones shelving the cost of the discounts. Most of Steam sales that are going one each week have nothing to do with Steam themselves, rather they are something publishers and developers do on their own and as such they can do the same thing on whatever storefront they desire. Moreover the better revenue split percentage from Epic is actually a catalyst for such sales.
The better revenue split percentage is also what incentivizes indies to use Epic as well as the absence of tons of indie junk on the storefront. Some of the first adopters of Epic are proven Indie developers like Supergiant Games, Coffee Stain Studios and Double Damage Games. Even now about half of all the games on the Epic Store are independent.
Epic are not running around like headless chicken. On the contrary - they are doing absolutely everything they can do to become a legitimate competition to Steam at once. They are offering free games, having an insane sale they are losing money from and are signing up timed exclusivity deals to drag people to their store. This is the visible part but additionally they are on a hiring spree for both game, engine and store developers, they have opened several new studios, bought several as well and not just game studios but also technology developers and have support programs for both content-creators and new game developers. If you look into it it is actually insane how much money they are spending in order to grow from an engine and game developer to something much much bigger.
Fallout 4 on Bethesda Store = $29,99 (always) Fallout 4 on Steam = $9.99 (at least 3 times a year)
Games sold on the developer proprietary shops are always sold full price (and they don't even have to pay the retailer commission). Still complaining about Steam 30% fee?
I don't think you can even sell it cheaper on Bethesda Store if you want to sell on steam store.
You buy 50$ pokicoin for pokemon go, 15$ go to google...
That is ridiculous how much we pay for "just a plateform".
Steam is a digital distributor, a digital shop. It works the same way as any other retail store like Gamestop or Neweggs or Walmart. 30% is more or less the same commission any other store gets from selling a game, it's not something out of the ordinary. That's why publishers keep selling their games through Steam. If it was an outrageous fee to pay, do you really think publishers like Bethesda would sell their games there, even though they have their own store?
If the commission was 15% instead of 30%, do you really think that the saving will be passed to the customer? If you think so, you are really naive.
The standard cost of a new game is £49.99 in UK, that's what the marked decided it's a fair a consumer should pay for it (whether we agree with it or not). If retailers (like Steam) decides to slash their commission fee, the only ones to gain out of it would be the publishers not the consumer, as the game will still be sold at £49.99 regardless.
Steam provides a service, and I am happy to spend my money there, if publishers get less money I could not care less.
Fallout 4 on Bethesda Store = $29,99 (always) Fallout 4 on Steam = $9.99 (at least 3 times a year)
Games sold on the developer proprietary shops are always sold full price (and they don't even have to pay the retailer commission). Still complaining about Steam 30% fee?
It is not about prices being lower. It is about money going to the people who actually develop the products people enjoy instead of going to storefront owners who use them either to enrich their management or develop products that are unrelated to the whole game production cycle.
Fallout 4 on Bethesda Store = $29,99 (always) Fallout 4 on Steam = $9.99 (at least 3 times a year)
Games sold on the developer proprietary shops are always sold full price (and they don't even have to pay the retailer commission). Still complaining about Steam 30% fee?
I don't think you can even sell it cheaper on Bethesda Store if you want to sell on steam store.
If I'm wrong correct me.
I believe that EA delisted their games from Steam, because they wanted to offer exclusive discounts on Origin alone. This I think is one of the few pricing limitations developers have, if you offer a discount in another shop, Steam also reserves to right to match that offer at some point as well.
So I believe you're right that if Bethesda wants to sell on Steam as well, they can't make exclusive discounts on their own digital store.
There will be much better place than Steam or Epic Store soon, for sure. Both are so imperfect it drives me crazy. Well, it's 2k19, we deserve and will get smth good
The standard cost of a new game is £49.99 in UK, that's what the marked decided it's a fair price a consumer should pay for it (whether we agree with it or not). If retailers (like Steam) decides to slash their commission fee, the only ones to gain out of it would be the publishers not the consumer, as the game will still be sold at £49.99 regardless.
The standard cost of a new game is £49.99 in UK, that's what the marked decided it's a fair price a consumer should pay for it (whether we agree with it or not). If retailers (like Steam) decides to slash their commission fee, the only ones to gain out of it would be the publishers not the consumer, as the game will still be sold at £49.99 regardless.
You just seemed like a steam spokeman.
My point is if no one can sell cheaper than steam. Steam is the one decide what to sell game for, not the market.
I'm not sure what the point of the epic sale is. Can epic even have a sell consider they can't sell it cheaper than steam? Maybe developer decided to take their game down on epic because steam forced them to do it.
1) Steam's genre listing is meaningless if 95% of games are labelled as rpgs. Who does that help? If Steam got rid of genre listing I would see a couple more games than I do now.
2) People who use controllers to play PC games should be treated as lepers and shunned by civilized, healthy people.
My point is if no one can sell cheaper than steam. Steam is the one decide what to sell game for, not the market.
I'm not sure what the point of the epic sale is. Can epic even have a sell consider they can't sell it cheaper than steam? Maybe developer decided to take their game down on epic because steam forced them to do it.
I don't think Steam needs a spokesman, they are doing just fine without people arguing on their behalf on random forums.
I welcome an healthy competition against Steam (I wish GOG was doing better), however I don't like Epic attitude. Since they had that lucky roll (Fortnite) they behave like they own the gaming industry. Steam wasn't built in one day, their attempt to bully Steam to give up a slice of the market with their veiled threats is laughable at most.
That is as laughable as Steam making a game engine trying to bully Epic out of their market (Unreal Engine). That's because Unreal wasn't made in one day either.
Things take time, you just don't go head on against the competition with small artillery, going about as if you had the Nuclear Bomb. Build the Nuclear Bomb first, then you can talk/threat the competition as much as you like.
PS: Also Steam do not decide the retail price of games, the market as a whole does, Steam just follow suit. A new game sold on Steam is sold at the same price whether is at Gamestop or Walmart (or insert your favorite retailer). But I am sure you've noticed that.
2) People who use controllers to play PC games should be treated as lepers and shunned by civilized, healthy people.
Actually it is kind of a different experience to play some games with a controller and it can be fun to do it for a change. That being said PC supports controllers by default and even with non-xinput controllers there are ways to play any game that supports controllers without much trouble.
My point is if no one can sell cheaper than steam. Steam is the one decide what to sell game for, not the market.
I'm not sure what the point of the epic sale is. Can epic even have a sell consider they can't sell it cheaper than steam? Maybe developer decided to take their game down on epic because steam forced them to do it.
I don't think Steam needs a spokesman, they are doing just fine without people arguing on their behalf on random forums.
I welcome an healthy competition against Steam (I wish GOG was doing better), however I don't like Epic attitude. Since they had that lucky roll (Fortnite) they behave like they own the gaming industry. Steam wasn't built in one day, their attempt to bully Steam to give up a slice of the market with their veiled threats is laughable at most.
That is as laughable as Steam making a game engine trying to bully Epic out of their market (Unreal Engine). That's because Unreal wasn't made in one day either.
Things take time, you just don't go head on against the competition with small artillery, going about as if you had the Nuclear Bomb. Build the Nuclear Bomb first, then you can talk/threat the competition as much as you like.
PS: Also Steam do not decide the retail price of games, the market as a whole does, Steam just follow suit. A new game sold on Steam is sold at the same price whether is at Gamestop or Walmart (or insert your favorite retailer). But I am sure you've noticed that.
He's referring to Steam's policy that titles sold on Steam can't be sold cheaper elsewhere. It's exactly what prevents devs from forwarding any of their savings onto us even if they wanted to (unless they piss off the virtue signallers by agreeing to go exclusive to Epic. Funny how nobody seems to give Steam grief for that).
My point is if no one can sell cheaper than steam. Steam is the one decide what to sell game for, not the market.
I'm not sure what the point of the epic sale is. Can epic even have a sell consider they can't sell it cheaper than steam? Maybe developer decided to take their game down on epic because steam forced them to do it.
I don't think Steam needs a spokesman, they are doing just fine without people arguing on their behalf on random forums.
I welcome an healthy competition against Steam (I wish GOG was doing better), however I don't like Epic attitude. Since they had that lucky roll (Fortnite) they behave like they own the gaming industry. Steam wasn't built in one day, their attempt to bully Steam to give up a slice of the market with their veiled threats is laughable at most.
That is as laughable as Steam making a game engine trying to bully Epic out of their market (Unreal Engine). That's because Unreal wasn't made in one day either.
Things take time, you just don't go head on against the competition with small artillery, going about as if you had the Nuclear Bomb. Build the Nuclear Bomb first, then you can talk/threat the competition as much as you like.
PS: Also Steam do not decide the retail price of games, the market as a whole does, Steam just follow suit. A new game sold on Steam is sold at the same price whether is at Gamestop or Walmart (or insert your favorite retailer). But I am sure you've noticed that.
He's referring to Steam's policy that titles sold on Steam can't be sold cheaper elsewhere. It's exactly what prevents devs from forwarding any of their savings onto us even if they wanted to (unless they piss off the virtue signallers by agreeing to go exclusive to Epic. Funny how nobody seems to give Steam grief for that).
There is a subtle yet important difference between not allowed to do something and grand permission to do something. In the case of Steam, they request that the publishers grand permission to match any discount offered elsewhere with a similar discount on Steam store.
EA was among the first companies that decided to sell their DLC exclusively on their own store, which led to EA pulling all their games from everywhere but Origin. In theory, all those companies that decided to go publisher store exclusives could potentially sell at a permanent discount. After all, they sell and retain the 30% (or whatever number) digital store cut. In practice, I don't recall a single instance that that happened.
Expecting the developers to forego any price cut difference in the digital store front is just wishful thinking. The games will be sold to customers at 100% the price they can get away with (which currently sits at 60€ and then garnish will be added on top in form of season passes, DLC, cosmetics, gambling boxes etc.)
He's referring to Steam's policy that titles sold on Steam can't be sold cheaper elsewhere. It's exactly what prevents devs from forwarding any of their savings onto us even if they wanted to (unless they piss off the virtue signallers by agreeing to go exclusive to Epic. Funny how nobody seems to give Steam grief for that).
Yes I understand what he is referring to. But if you read my previous posts, you will realize I already addressed this point.
Steam, like any other distributor, do not decide the recommended retail prize (RRP), the publishers do (the industry to be more precise). They also decide when to cut the RRP, and when they do, it happens across the board, which means all distributors and retailers are affected.
All Steam and the other retailers can do is discount the RRP cutting their own margins at will, something that Steam does pretty often.
If Steam was getting 15% instead of 30% of commission, you will still pay £49.99 (or $59.99 if in US) for a new game or £29.99 for a two years old game, not because Steam decided so, but because the developer decided so.
Steam can only discount the RRP, they don't decide the RRP.
The gaming industry sort of decides the RRP which is standard across the board; £49.99 for a new game, £39.99 for one years old game, £29.99 for a two years old game and so on (gaming, music, movies behave like a cartel).
The customer is not going to get any benefit from retailers getting a smaller commission fee, whatsoever.
My point is if no one can sell cheaper than steam. Steam is the one decide what to sell game for, not the market.
I'm not sure what the point of the epic sale is. Can epic even have a sell consider they can't sell it cheaper than steam? Maybe developer decided to take their game down on epic because steam forced them to do it.
I don't think Steam needs a spokesman, they are doing just fine without people arguing on their behalf on random forums.
I welcome an healthy competition against Steam (I wish GOG was doing better), however I don't like Epic attitude. Since they had that lucky roll (Fortnite) they behave like they own the gaming industry. Steam wasn't built in one day, their attempt to bully Steam to give up a slice of the market with their veiled threats is laughable at most.
That is as laughable as Steam making a game engine trying to bully Epic out of their market (Unreal Engine). That's because Unreal wasn't made in one day either.
Things take time, you just don't go head on against the competition with small artillery, going about as if you had the Nuclear Bomb. Build the Nuclear Bomb first, then you can talk/threat the competition as much as you like.
PS: Also Steam do not decide the retail price of games, the market as a whole does, Steam just follow suit. A new game sold on Steam is sold at the same price whether is at Gamestop or Walmart (or insert your favorite retailer). But I am sure you've noticed that.
He's referring to Steam's policy that titles sold on Steam can't be sold cheaper elsewhere. It's exactly what prevents devs from forwarding any of their savings onto us even if they wanted to (unless they piss off the virtue signallers by agreeing to go exclusive to Epic. Funny how nobody seems to give Steam grief for that).
There is a subtle yet important difference between not allowed to do something and grand permission to do something. In the case of Steam, they request that the publishers grand permission to match any discount offered elsewhere with a similar discount on Steam store.
EA was among the first companies that decided to sell their DLC exclusively on their own store, which led to EA pulling all their games from everywhere but Origin. In theory, all those companies that decided to go publisher store exclusives could potentially sell at a permanent discount. After all, they sell and retain the 30% (or whatever number) digital store cut. In practice, I don't recall a single instance that that happened.
Expecting the developers to forego any price cut difference in the digital store front is just wishful thinking. The games will be sold to customers at 100% the price they can get away with (which currently sits at 60€ and then garnish will be added on top in form of season passes, DLC, cosmetics, gambling boxes etc.)
Again, it's the very reason devs can't pass along savings. In the case of Steam, they have to forfeit any savings passed along on Epic by paying for it on Steam outta their own pockets.
It's obvious why Steam did it. Doesn't make it any less an anti-competitive practice than, say, Epic inking temporary exclusives.
Again, it's the very reason devs can't pass along savings. In the case of Steam, they have to forfeit any savings passed along on Epic by paying for it on Steam outta their own pockets.
It's obvious why Steam did it. Doesn't make it any less an anti-competitive practice than, say, Epic inking temporary exclusives.
Are you getting games at 30% discounted price in Origin digital store that I'm not aware of?
Or Blizzard? Or anybody else?
The answer is no. No matter how much is the digital store cut, the customers always paid and will always pay full price.
1) Steam's genre listing is meaningless if 95% of games are labelled as rpgs. Who does that help? If Steam got rid of genre listing I would see a couple more games than I do now.
2) People who use controllers to play PC games should be treated as lepers and shunned by civilized, healthy people.
Grumble, grumble, grumble.
Cloud Saves are due to be implemented in May; search by Genre and Tag are due to be implemented in June.
Other stuff has already been implemented e.g. Regional Pricing; other stuff is due to be implemented.
For starter, 2 game got took down on epic store and you call it mega fail.
Not to mention why are you blaming epic store when other plateform (steam, amazon etc) forced the developer to take down the games on epic store.
I didn't call it a mega fail, I called it the 'first sign' of a fail of Epic proportions (my personal prediction), based on the assumption (debatable) that if the publishers which sell games trough Epic do not see the revenues coming in soon, they will pull the games out the store all together.
Steam didn't force games to withdraw from Epic Big Sales. Developers did, because they never agree with it and Epic didn't bother to tell them. Developers are free to ditch Steam and enjoy the 12% commission fee the Epic Store offer....but I don't see any exodus taking place, do you?
Maybe the 30% commission is actually a good deal for them, considering all the money they save in advertising by publishing a game in a platform that reach Millions of gamers around the world. They also save money by not making hard copies of the game.
Maybe the Epic store will get there eventually, but they need to chill the hell out. They need to keep their e-peen under control. Rome wasn't built in a day.
Comments
hopefully they have a better 'roadmap' than Anthem did.
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
The 15% is definitely a better deal for a developer, assuming equal sales in both stores. However, unequal sales change the dynamic entirely. For example, 10.000 sales at 15% cut is still less money than 50.000 sales at 30% cut.
Of course it's good for a customer perspective, any discount is.
But it is not good enough for Epic Store overall commercial strategy.
They are basically trying to bully Steam with what is basically a "toothpick" instead of a bazooka.
They just look pathetic.
Can Epic do that kind of deal every week? Hell no.
But Steam can.
I think that going head on against Steam is a huge mistake.
Like Rome, Steam wasn't built in one day.
Epic should do their own stuff and see how it goes.
How about they start building up their tiny library by incentivizing the Indie developers to use their platform, like Steam does?
One of Steam selling point is that they offer a great platform for small Indies.
Believe it or not, there are Indie games which heavily relied on Steam platform which turned out to be much better than AAA games.
This is one of the strength that Steam detractors seems to underestimate.
Epic hasn't got a vision, they got billions of dollars made from a single (lucky) game and they just don't know what to do with it.
They are acting like headless chickens.
Steam is a digital distributor, a digital shop. It works the same way as any other retail store like Gamestop or Neweggs or Walmart.
30% is more or less the same commission any other store gets from selling a game, it's not something out of the ordinary.
That's why publishers keep selling their games through Steam.
If it was an outrageous fee to pay, do you really think publishers like Bethesda would sell their games there, even though they have their own store?
If the commission was 15% instead of 30%, do you really think that the saving will be passed to the customer?
If you think so, you are really naive.
The standard cost of a new game is £49.99 in UK, that's what the marked decided it's a fair a consumer should pay for it (whether we agree with it or not).
If retailers (like Steam) decides to slash their commission fee, the only ones to gain out of it would be the publishers not the consumer, as the game will still be sold at £49.99 regardless.
Steam provides a service, and I am happy to spend my money there, if publishers get less money I could not care less.
Fallout 4 on Bethesda Store = $29,99 (always)
Fallout 4 on Steam = $9.99 (at least 3 times a year)
Games sold on the developer proprietary shops are always sold full price (and they don't even have to pay the retailer commission).
Still complaining about Steam 30% fee?
The better revenue split percentage is also what incentivizes indies to use Epic as well as the absence of tons of indie junk on the storefront. Some of the first adopters of Epic are proven Indie developers like Supergiant Games, Coffee Stain Studios and Double Damage Games. Even now about half of all the games on the Epic Store are independent.
Epic are not running around like headless chicken. On the contrary - they are doing absolutely everything they can do to become a legitimate competition to Steam at once. They are offering free games, having an insane sale they are losing money from and are signing up timed exclusivity deals to drag people to their store. This is the visible part but additionally they are on a hiring spree for both game, engine and store developers, they have opened several new studios, bought several as well and not just game studios but also technology developers and have support programs for both content-creators and new game developers. If you look into it it is actually insane how much money they are spending in order to grow from an engine and game developer to something much much bigger.
So I believe you're right that if Bethesda wants to sell on Steam as well, they can't make exclusive discounts on their own digital store.
My point is if no one can sell cheaper than steam. Steam is the one decide what to sell game for, not the market.
I'm not sure what the point of the epic sale is. Can epic even have a sell consider they can't sell it cheaper than steam? Maybe developer decided to take their game down on epic because steam forced them to do it.
1) Steam's genre listing is meaningless if 95% of games are labelled as rpgs. Who does that help? If Steam got rid of genre listing I would see a couple more games than I do now.
2) People who use controllers to play PC games should be treated as lepers and shunned by civilized, healthy people.
I welcome an healthy competition against Steam (I wish GOG was doing better), however I don't like Epic attitude.
Since they had that lucky roll (Fortnite) they behave like they own the gaming industry.
Steam wasn't built in one day, their attempt to bully Steam to give up a slice of the market with their veiled threats is laughable at most.
That is as laughable as Steam making a game engine trying to bully Epic out of their market (Unreal Engine).
That's because Unreal wasn't made in one day either.
Things take time, you just don't go head on against the competition with small artillery, going about as if you had the Nuclear Bomb.
Build the Nuclear Bomb first, then you can talk/threat the competition as much as you like.
PS: Also Steam do not decide the retail price of games, the market as a whole does, Steam just follow suit.
A new game sold on Steam is sold at the same price whether is at Gamestop or Walmart (or insert your favorite retailer).
But I am sure you've noticed that.
EA was among the first companies that decided to sell their DLC exclusively on their own store, which led to EA pulling all their games from everywhere but Origin. In theory, all those companies that decided to go publisher store exclusives could potentially sell at a permanent discount. After all, they sell and retain the 30% (or whatever number) digital store cut. In practice, I don't recall a single instance that that happened.
Expecting the developers to forego any price cut difference in the digital store front is just wishful thinking. The games will be sold to customers at 100% the price they can get away with (which currently sits at 60€ and then garnish will be added on top in form of season passes, DLC, cosmetics, gambling boxes etc.)
But if you read my previous posts, you will realize I already addressed this point.
Steam, like any other distributor, do not decide the recommended retail prize (RRP), the publishers do (the industry to be more precise). They also decide when to cut the RRP, and when they do, it happens across the board, which means all distributors and retailers are affected.
All Steam and the other retailers can do is discount the RRP cutting their own margins at will, something that Steam does pretty often.
The customer is not going to get any benefit from retailers getting a smaller commission fee, whatsoever.
It's obvious why Steam did it. Doesn't make it any less an anti-competitive practice than, say, Epic inking temporary exclusives.
Or Blizzard? Or anybody else?
The answer is no. No matter how much is the digital store cut, the customers always paid and will always pay full price.
Not to mention why are you blaming epic store when other plateform (steam, amazon etc) forced the developer to take down the games on epic store.
Cloud Saves are due to be implemented in May;
search by Genre and Tag are due to be implemented in June.
Other stuff has already been implemented e.g. Regional Pricing; other stuff is due to be implemented.
As per the reasons I explained in my previous posts.
Developers cannot sell for less than any of the retailers they made deals with (Steam, Walmart, Gamestop).
Steam didn't force games to withdraw from Epic Big Sales. Developers did, because they never agree with it and Epic didn't bother to tell them.
Developers are free to ditch Steam and enjoy the 12% commission fee the Epic Store offer....but I don't see any exodus taking place, do you?
Maybe the 30% commission is actually a good deal for them, considering all the money they save in advertising by publishing a game in a platform that reach Millions of gamers around the world.
They also save money by not making hard copies of the game.
Maybe the Epic store will get there eventually, but they need to chill the hell out.
They need to keep their e-peen under control.
Rome wasn't built in a day.