10 ms·

I've had a Steam account long enough to know how terrible and annoying Steam can be. I've also seen how much Steam has done for the PC gaming community over the

I've had a Steam account long enough to know how terrible and annoying Steam can be. I've also seen how much Steam has done for the PC gaming community over the years, and I originally hoped Epic would push them into accelerating some of their timelines. There is value in Steam having competition, but that value diminishes as soon as someone comes along and competes for games instead of users. It took Steam a long time to become both useful (Workshop, Sales, Forums), and generally good for the customer (Returns, Curation, Support), and Epic isn't even trying to compete in those areas. Epic isn't making a marketplace where I want to spend my money by being better than Steam, they're just trying to make a place where I have to spend money if I want to play certain games. Good luck with that one.

LanceH 8y ago
There customer service queue is literally months long before they probably ignore your request.
- AcerbicZero 8y ago
  Every return I've ever done has been approved and completed in under 2 days. Old Steam Support (Pre-2014ish) was a disaster though, so I can totally understand where you're coming from.
  - libraryatnight 8y ago
    Returns are the only thing they do well. Their support is absolute garbage in every other regard.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
philipov 8y ago
Yes, I would love some competition for Steam, but the strategy Epic is using is instead anti-competitive and anti-consumer.
libraryatnight 8y ago
Epic has plenty of time to work out making their market more compelling, and I'd bet money they're working on mirroring a lot of steam features. They basically already have a Workshop model in place via their Unreal Engine market which also serves to get people making more games in their engine. Gamers rage a lot, but they don't do much or stick to their guns often, so this strategy will be fine so long as Epic is working to address some issues. A few updates and patches, a few more games people simply must have, and nobody will remember why they raged. I'm not thrilled with this, but I'm not going to stop playing Rocket League. I'm going to buy Borderlands 3 (and so are all my friends that grumbled about it being a time exclusive, and they'll buy it from Epic because we all want to play right out the gate together). I still remember people raging against Origin - most of them use it for the EA games they swore they'd never play again.
- badlucklottery 8y ago
  >I'm going to buy Borderlands 3 (and so are all my friends that grumbled about it being a time exclusive, and they'll buy it from Epic because we all want to play right out the gate together) All my friends and I (30+ crowd) are like "fuck that, I got other shit to play" for Borderlands 3 but we all grudgingly used Steam back when CS:Source came out. I wonder if it's an age thing. I know my backlog is years long as this point so waiting 6 months to play it isn't making me lose sleep.
  - munchbunny 8y ago
    That happened to me too. When I had more time, I was also much more willing to just buy it wherever. Coming along with getting old is having more things to do instead of video games, like side projects, or board games, or hanging out in person. Personally, starting ~3 years ago much of my video game time started getting replaced with tabletop RPG's as a way to spend time with friends, even online ones. I hadn't ever played tabletop RPG's before that point. So when several of these games came announced as "not on Steam", my reaction was also "it's ok I can wait."
    - libraryatnight 8y ago
Jorge1o1 8y ago
Exactly, it’s the Netflix problem all over again. Rather than competing on the quality of the platform, they’re just divvying up monopolies and fracturing the customer experience. A different streaming platform for Netflix, Hulu, Disney, Universal, HBO, Amazon A different gaming platform for Steam, Epic, Origin, UPlay The real loser is the consumer
- nanokilo 8y ago
  Not quite the same though, since Epic and Steam don’t require paid subscriptions to access their content. The only difference now is that you’re buying some of your games from Epic instead of Steam.
  - parrellel 8y ago
    As that necessitates trusting Epic after years of shadiness and recently outright lies, it mostly means a bunch of games aren't going to get bought. For me anyway.
    - godzillabrennus 8y ago
      Pushes me to console releases. Can’t justify the PC ecosystem with all the nonsense going on.
      - ParkerHemingway 8y ago
        Same problem there though, they've just been at it longer. Which console do you pick, or do you get all of them?
      - elsonrodriguez 8y ago
        Console makers would like you to repurchase your game every 5 years for the new console, if they deem the game fit for re-release. Whereas I've basically been copying the same DooM 2 install from computer to computer for 20 years.
reissbaker 8y ago
Epic isn't trying to directly make players' lives better via competition; they're trying to make devs lives better via competition. Their main differentiator there is taking a significantly lower cut of revenue, as well as funding the devs in exchange for exclusivity or timed exclusivity. I understand the vitriol from many gamers: the Epic Store is a worse experience as a consumer than Steam. But I think that a more-viable funding model for game development is pretty significant: there are plenty of games that just barely eke out enough to keep studios alive/independent, or that almost do but then result in the studio closing or being sold to a megacorp like EA. A 30% cut for what was effectively a hosting and payments processing service was ridiculous, monopolistic behavior, and needed to be shaken up. As such I support Epic's move into the store space: more money for devs means more, and more interesting, games getting made. Realistically, exclusive deals were the only way Epic could've made that work. For most people, if they could buy a game on Steam, they would, rather than using yet another launcher, and that fact means that Steam would still have most of their monopoly intact. Multiple launchers (and fewer features) is annoying but IMO worth it to get Steam to give a bigger cut to devs (which they immediately started doing after the Epic Store launched, although the Epic Store is still often a better deal for devs).
- roganartu 8y ago
  > A 30% cut for what was effectively a hosting and payments processing service > Multiple launchers (and fewer features) is annoying You can't claim steam is just a glorified CDN and payment processor in one breath and then complain about the lack of features in other launchers/platforms in the next. I agree that 30% was steep, but steam provides both devs and consumers a lot of features that everyone now takes for granted (like cloud saves, household licensing, workshop mod frameworks, friends and chat, and much more). The games that move to epic are either going to have to implement these features themselves, depend on epic to provide a framework for it (sentiment seems to be "don't hold your breath", or release without them.
  - reissbaker 8y ago
    Steam took a 30% cut even when it was just a glorified CDN and payment processor. It's not charging for features, it's charging for its near-monopoly on digital PC game sales. FWIW, I agree with Epic's stance on chat: Discord is good, use Discord. Steam chat is awful; I effectively never use it, and all of my friends use Discord servers. Epic could build their own chat platform, but for what purpose? I do agree that there are some sorely-missing other features from the Epic Store, though. But I'm fine with them shipping an MVP to force Steam to offer more-competitive pricing sooner rather than later — which is what happened. > depend on epic to provide a framework for it (sentiment seems to be "don't hold your breath") Sentiment amongst whom? Angry gamers? Epic released their 2019 roadmap, it seems fairly reasonable; cloud saves apparently are coming in the next 1-3 months: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/epic-games-store-cloud-saves-finally-achievements-/1100-6465613/ https://www.gamespot.com/articles/epic-games-store-cloud-sav...
kibibu 8y ago
> Epic isn't making a marketplace where I want to spend my money by being better than Steam, they're just trying to make a place where I have to spend money if I want to play certain games. Good luck with that one. Seems to be working ok for EA's Origin store, Battle.net and Mojang though.
- ripdog 8y ago
  Everyone does it because it DOES work, and that's the awful part for consumers.
  - kibibu 8y ago
    People forget that Valve made Half-life 2 - at the time one of the most anticipated games ever - a Steam exclusive. It's basically the only way these things can get started.
    - ripdog 7y ago
      I don't think anyone has a problem with Epic making their own games exclusive - the problem is that Epic is bribing other publishers and now purchasing developers to create artifical little monopolies which force the consumer to use their product if they want the game.
      - throwawaywhynot 7y ago
        pretty shocking how little hn knows about this situation
      - jasonlotito 7y ago
        > I don't think anyone has a problem with Yes, yes they did. At the time HL2 forced Steam on everyone, it was hated and despised. People forget this. It's how I know Epic will win. Gamers are weak.
ukyrgf 8y ago
I just recently went down a nostalgia rabbit hole when the last of RockPaperShotgun's founders writers left the site. The writing on that site was always far and above any other gaming site, so it's a little bittersweet to read about its history at the end of an era: https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/tag/the-secret-history-of-rps/ https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/tag/the-secret-history-of-r... In one of those articles, they talk about Gabe and Valve employees giving encouraging words (and opportunities that no other indie site got), which also includes this interview with Gabe right before The Orange Box released: https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2007/11/21/rps-exclusive-gabe-newell-interview/ https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2007/11/21/rps-exclusive-ga... Valve has had a lot of issues since then. Steam went through horrible growing pains. Steam support is awful. Valve hasn't released a game in years. But, they are where they are because they had passion, and a cavalier DIY sensibility. Whatever Epic is doing, I want no part of. Every press release I've seen from them since opening their store has given me the willies. Gamers can get really passionate about this stuff, but for me it just boils down to my gut reaction. Epic and any company that signs exclusivity deals with them do not get my money. And I bought Rocket League on three different platforms.
- baud147258 7y ago
  > Valve hasn't released a game in years They've recently (this year or the last) released Artifact, a card game, which apparently didn't do very well.
Wowfunhappy 8y ago
> There is value in Steam having competition, but that value diminishes as soon as someone comes along and competes for games instead of users. Content platforms always compete on availability of content. Steam did the exact same thing early on with Half Life. Look at what's happening in the streaming video space. Look at console gaming. Ultimately, people aren't making Steam accounts because of the Steam workshop or Steam forums or Steam chat or what have you—they're making Steam accounts because there's a game on Steam that they want to play. If Epic's store had better features but the same games, existing Steam users would still continue to use Steam, because that's where their existing game libraries are. The only way Epic could compete on features alone is if it were possible to migrate Steam purchases to the Epic Store. Since Valve will never let that happen, Epic has to entice users with exclusive games. And that could be great for everyone—if it caused games to be made that would otherwise never get developed. Consider how much great content the video streaming wars have produced. As annoying as it is to switch between subscriptions, I'd say TV viewers are winning right now. The problem, of course, is that Epic isn't developing original content—they're paying for existing content to be removed from Steam. My great hope is that this will change in time. Original games take several years to develop, so if any are under way, we wouldn't have heard about them yet. In the meantime, we're getting PC ports of Journey and Detroit, so that's pretty neat!
- cloakandswagger 7y ago
  >The problem, of course, is that Epic isn't developing original content And Valve is?
  - Wowfunhappy 7y ago
    Well, they were at one point. But I agree, Valve is no better here.
  - meruru 7y ago
    Didn't they just release a card game with Richard Garfield? I'm not into games myself, but Valve has done tremendous work for gaming on Linux. That alone is enough reason for me to support them.
kro92kfmrzz 7y ago
They’re known for products that service hardcore gamers. Limited appeal twitch shooters, and face melting new graphics. Not exactly known for their emotional thinking relative to Valve. Not hard to see similar limited appeal moves to amass popularity with a particular type of eyeball.
aeriklawson 7y ago
> Epic isn't making a marketplace where I want to spend my money by being better than Steam, they're just trying to make a place where I have to spend money if I want to play certain games. Good luck with that one. The irony in this statement is kind of ridiculous. You can't play many games without owning a Steam account right now. How is that any different in principle? Overall, I recognize the Epic Store has some large issues and it definitely deserves criticism, but I just don't see why this shift is such a big deal in the long run. It's a good thing that Valve is getting competition, whose customer support has been a complete joke since its inception and monopoly allowed them to take huge bites from studio profits for years. I don't believe anyone should be tied to one company's products like we have with Steam and there should never be a monopoly over this kind of stuff; Valve's dominance of the PC gaming marketplace is plain scary. I'm fine with Valve having to prove that people should use their product over the newcomers. Right now the most frustrating thing will definitely be the split among ecosystems (chat, etc) and feature parity for things like Steam Workshop. That will smooth out over time, but yeah for now that's definitely an annoyance. I think we'll see an intermediary app like Discord fill the social space, just like how XFire used to dominate in the 2000's.
- throwawaywhynot 7y ago
  wtf. epic "buys" exclusives. This is something steam has never done. If a developer has their game on steam, they're free to release it anywhere else. Epic has exclusivity contracts
  - aeriklawson 7y ago
    You're phrasing this as if Epic is going around making all these poor developers do their bidding - the developer is agreeing to list their game as an exclusive. Be mad at the dev for making the choice to host only on Epic Store if you're upset about it - they're aware of the consequences and could have easily gone with Steam instead.
    - baud147258 7y ago
      It's often a decision of the publishers, not the devs.

LanceH 8y ago

There customer service queue is literally months long before they probably ignore your request.

AcerbicZero 8y ago
Every return I've ever done has been approved and completed in under 2 days. Old Steam Support (Pre-2014ish) was a disaster though, so I can totally understand where you're coming from.
- libraryatnight 8y ago
  Returns are the only thing they do well. Their support is absolute garbage in every other regard.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]

philipov 8y ago

Yes, I would love some competition for Steam, but the strategy Epic is using is instead anti-competitive and anti-consumer.

libraryatnight 8y ago

Epic has plenty of time to work out making their market more compelling, and I'd bet money they're working on mirroring a lot of steam features. They basically already have a Workshop model in place via their Unreal Engine market which also serves to get people making more games in their engine. Gamers rage a lot, but they don't do much or stick to their guns often, so this strategy will be fine so long as Epic is working to address some issues. A few updates and patches, a few more games people simply must have, and nobody will remember why they raged. I'm not thrilled with this, but I'm not going to stop playing Rocket League. I'm going to buy Borderlands 3 (and so are all my friends that grumbled about it being a time exclusive, and they'll buy it from Epic because we all want to play right out the gate together). I still remember people raging against Origin - most of them use it for the EA games they swore they'd never play again.

badlucklottery 8y ago
>I'm going to buy Borderlands 3 (and so are all my friends that grumbled about it being a time exclusive, and they'll buy it from Epic because we all want to play right out the gate together) All my friends and I (30+ crowd) are like "fuck that, I got other shit to play" for Borderlands 3 but we all grudgingly used Steam back when CS:Source came out. I wonder if it's an age thing. I know my backlog is years long as this point so waiting 6 months to play it isn't making me lose sleep.
- munchbunny 8y ago
  That happened to me too. When I had more time, I was also much more willing to just buy it wherever. Coming along with getting old is having more things to do instead of video games, like side projects, or board games, or hanging out in person. Personally, starting ~3 years ago much of my video game time started getting replaced with tabletop RPG's as a way to spend time with friends, even online ones. I hadn't ever played tabletop RPG's before that point. So when several of these games came announced as "not on Steam", my reaction was also "it's ok I can wait."
  - libraryatnight 8y ago

Jorge1o1 8y ago

Exactly, it’s the Netflix problem all over again. Rather than competing on the quality of the platform, they’re just divvying up monopolies and fracturing the customer experience. A different streaming platform for Netflix, Hulu, Disney, Universal, HBO, Amazon A different gaming platform for Steam, Epic, Origin, UPlay The real loser is the consumer

nanokilo 8y ago
Not quite the same though, since Epic and Steam don’t require paid subscriptions to access their content. The only difference now is that you’re buying some of your games from Epic instead of Steam.
- parrellel 8y ago
  As that necessitates trusting Epic after years of shadiness and recently outright lies, it mostly means a bunch of games aren't going to get bought. For me anyway.
  - godzillabrennus 8y ago
    Pushes me to console releases. Can’t justify the PC ecosystem with all the nonsense going on.
    - ParkerHemingway 8y ago
      Same problem there though, they've just been at it longer. Which console do you pick, or do you get all of them?
    - elsonrodriguez 8y ago
      Console makers would like you to repurchase your game every 5 years for the new console, if they deem the game fit for re-release. Whereas I've basically been copying the same DooM 2 install from computer to computer for 20 years.

reissbaker 8y ago

Epic isn't trying to directly make players' lives better via competition; they're trying to make devs lives better via competition. Their main differentiator there is taking a significantly lower cut of revenue, as well as funding the devs in exchange for exclusivity or timed exclusivity. I understand the vitriol from many gamers: the Epic Store is a worse experience as a consumer than Steam. But I think that a more-viable funding model for game development is pretty significant: there are plenty of games that just barely eke out enough to keep studios alive/independent, or that almost do but then result in the studio closing or being sold to a megacorp like EA. A 30% cut for what was effectively a hosting and payments processing service was ridiculous, monopolistic behavior, and needed to be shaken up. As such I support Epic's move into the store space: more money for devs means more, and more interesting, games getting made. Realistically, exclusive deals were the only way Epic could've made that work. For most people, if they could buy a game on Steam, they would, rather than using yet another launcher, and that fact means that Steam would still have most of their monopoly intact. Multiple launchers (and fewer features) is annoying but IMO worth it to get Steam to give a bigger cut to devs (which they immediately started doing after the Epic Store launched, although the Epic Store is still often a better deal for devs).

roganartu 8y ago
> A 30% cut for what was effectively a hosting and payments processing service > Multiple launchers (and fewer features) is annoying You can't claim steam is just a glorified CDN and payment processor in one breath and then complain about the lack of features in other launchers/platforms in the next. I agree that 30% was steep, but steam provides both devs and consumers a lot of features that everyone now takes for granted (like cloud saves, household licensing, workshop mod frameworks, friends and chat, and much more). The games that move to epic are either going to have to implement these features themselves, depend on epic to provide a framework for it (sentiment seems to be "don't hold your breath", or release without them.
- reissbaker 8y ago
  Steam took a 30% cut even when it was just a glorified CDN and payment processor. It's not charging for features, it's charging for its near-monopoly on digital PC game sales. FWIW, I agree with Epic's stance on chat: Discord is good, use Discord. Steam chat is awful; I effectively never use it, and all of my friends use Discord servers. Epic could build their own chat platform, but for what purpose? I do agree that there are some sorely-missing other features from the Epic Store, though. But I'm fine with them shipping an MVP to force Steam to offer more-competitive pricing sooner rather than later — which is what happened. > depend on epic to provide a framework for it (sentiment seems to be "don't hold your breath") Sentiment amongst whom? Angry gamers? Epic released their 2019 roadmap, it seems fairly reasonable; cloud saves apparently are coming in the next 1-3 months: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/epic-games-store-cloud-saves-finally-achievements-/1100-6465613/ https://www.gamespot.com/articles/epic-games-store-cloud-sav...

kibibu 8y ago

ripdog 8y ago
Everyone does it because it DOES work, and that's the awful part for consumers.
- kibibu 8y ago
  People forget that Valve made Half-life 2 - at the time one of the most anticipated games ever - a Steam exclusive. It's basically the only way these things can get started.
  - ripdog 7y ago
    I don't think anyone has a problem with Epic making their own games exclusive - the problem is that Epic is bribing other publishers and now purchasing developers to create artifical little monopolies which force the consumer to use their product if they want the game.
    - throwawaywhynot 7y ago
      pretty shocking how little hn knows about this situation
    - jasonlotito 7y ago
      > I don't think anyone has a problem with Yes, yes they did. At the time HL2 forced Steam on everyone, it was hated and despised. People forget this. It's how I know Epic will win. Gamers are weak.

ukyrgf 8y ago

I just recently went down a nostalgia rabbit hole when the last of RockPaperShotgun's founders writers left the site. The writing on that site was always far and above any other gaming site, so it's a little bittersweet to read about its history at the end of an era: https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/tag/the-secret-history-of-rps/ https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/tag/the-secret-history-of-r... In one of those articles, they talk about Gabe and Valve employees giving encouraging words (and opportunities that no other indie site got), which also includes this interview with Gabe right before The Orange Box released: https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2007/11/21/rps-exclusive-gabe-newell-interview/ https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2007/11/21/rps-exclusive-ga... Valve has had a lot of issues since then. Steam went through horrible growing pains. Steam support is awful. Valve hasn't released a game in years. But, they are where they are because they had passion, and a cavalier DIY sensibility. Whatever Epic is doing, I want no part of. Every press release I've seen from them since opening their store has given me the willies. Gamers can get really passionate about this stuff, but for me it just boils down to my gut reaction. Epic and any company that signs exclusivity deals with them do not get my money. And I bought Rocket League on three different platforms.

baud147258 7y ago
> Valve hasn't released a game in years They've recently (this year or the last) released Artifact, a card game, which apparently didn't do very well.

Wowfunhappy 8y ago

> There is value in Steam having competition, but that value diminishes as soon as someone comes along and competes for games instead of users. Content platforms always compete on availability of content. Steam did the exact same thing early on with Half Life. Look at what's happening in the streaming video space. Look at console gaming. Ultimately, people aren't making Steam accounts because of the Steam workshop or Steam forums or Steam chat or what have you—they're making Steam accounts because there's a game on Steam that they want to play. If Epic's store had better features but the same games, existing Steam users would still continue to use Steam, because that's where their existing game libraries are. The only way Epic could compete on features alone is if it were possible to migrate Steam purchases to the Epic Store. Since Valve will never let that happen, Epic has to entice users with exclusive games. And that could be great for everyone—if it caused games to be made that would otherwise never get developed. Consider how much great content the video streaming wars have produced. As annoying as it is to switch between subscriptions, I'd say TV viewers are winning right now. The problem, of course, is that Epic isn't developing original content—they're paying for existing content to be removed from Steam. My great hope is that this will change in time. Original games take several years to develop, so if any are under way, we wouldn't have heard about them yet. In the meantime, we're getting PC ports of Journey and Detroit, so that's pretty neat!

cloakandswagger 7y ago
>The problem, of course, is that Epic isn't developing original content And Valve is?
- Wowfunhappy 7y ago
  Well, they were at one point. But I agree, Valve is no better here.
- meruru 7y ago
  Didn't they just release a card game with Richard Garfield? I'm not into games myself, but Valve has done tremendous work for gaming on Linux. That alone is enough reason for me to support them.

kro92kfmrzz 7y ago

They’re known for products that service hardcore gamers. Limited appeal twitch shooters, and face melting new graphics. Not exactly known for their emotional thinking relative to Valve. Not hard to see similar limited appeal moves to amass popularity with a particular type of eyeball.

aeriklawson 7y ago

> Epic isn't making a marketplace where I want to spend my money by being better than Steam, they're just trying to make a place where I have to spend money if I want to play certain games. Good luck with that one. The irony in this statement is kind of ridiculous. You can't play many games without owning a Steam account right now. How is that any different in principle? Overall, I recognize the Epic Store has some large issues and it definitely deserves criticism, but I just don't see why this shift is such a big deal in the long run. It's a good thing that Valve is getting competition, whose customer support has been a complete joke since its inception and monopoly allowed them to take huge bites from studio profits for years. I don't believe anyone should be tied to one company's products like we have with Steam and there should never be a monopoly over this kind of stuff; Valve's dominance of the PC gaming marketplace is plain scary. I'm fine with Valve having to prove that people should use their product over the newcomers. Right now the most frustrating thing will definitely be the split among ecosystems (chat, etc) and feature parity for things like Steam Workshop. That will smooth out over time, but yeah for now that's definitely an annoyance. I think we'll see an intermediary app like Discord fill the social space, just like how XFire used to dominate in the 2000's.

throwawaywhynot 7y ago
wtf. epic "buys" exclusives. This is something steam has never done. If a developer has their game on steam, they're free to release it anywhere else. Epic has exclusivity contracts
- aeriklawson 7y ago
  You're phrasing this as if Epic is going around making all these poor developers do their bidding - the developer is agreeing to list their game as an exclusive. Be mad at the dev for making the choice to host only on Epic Store if you're upset about it - they're aware of the consequences and could have easily gone with Steam instead.
  - baud147258 7y ago
    It's often a decision of the publishers, not the devs.