3 ms·

For a monopolist they provide pretty compelling terms compared to Steam. If anything they are a healthy competitor to Steam, not only for developers but for co

by u10 6y ago

For a monopolist they provide pretty compelling terms compared to Steam. If anything they are a healthy competitor to Steam, not only for developers but for consumers as well.

chrismeller 6y ago
Isn’t that usually how monopolies start? They don’t lure you in with the slogan “you can only get it from us now”... The competition today is great, but they could easily become the next App Store tomorrow. I don’t personally have a problem with Apple taking a cut - they are doing work, after all, but I think it should be more along the lines of covering the transaction fees and less “we’re taking a third of your hard work”.
- u10 6y ago
  The competition is broken, Steam still has a large majority of the marketshare, and they abuse it just like Apple does. Taking a cut is fine, but 30% margin is unconscionable and I applaud anyone that tries to break that paradigm.
  - judge2020 6y ago
    Steam's monopoly is very different from Apple's since they only operate on already-open platforms. You can easily distribute your x86 game via any other store or your own launcher/website with little issue (only having to deal with the Oligopoly that is EV Code Signing, which you still might need to do while on Steam/Epic/etc). On Apple's platform, you have to go through them no matter what, making it impossible to put an app on iOS devices without their approval.
  - La1n 6y ago
    >they abuse it just like Apple does. But on my PC I can buy games at other places too, I just prefer Steam due to convenience. It's very different than having to buy your games on a platform from someone specific.
tadzik_ 6y ago
> a healthy competitor to Steam, not only for developers but for consumers as well I'm not sure I agree here. As a consumer, competition is good for me if I either get something I didn't already, or if I get the same but cheaper. EGS provides neither: it has less features than its competitors, and the prices are either the same, or the games are exclusives, making comparisons impossible. Exceptions, like Outer Worlds, cost exactly the same on Microsoft Store as it does on Epic Store. The consumer gets nothing. They just get another meaningless alternative, another scavenger for their attention, loyalty and wallets.
- GeneralTspoon 6y ago
  Well you could view it as a net win for the consumer in that developers are getting more of a cut from sales, thus funding future development and patches for their games.

by u10 6y ago

For a monopolist they provide pretty compelling terms compared to Steam. If anything they are a healthy competitor to Steam, not only for developers but for consumers as well.

chrismeller 6y ago

Isn’t that usually how monopolies start? They don’t lure you in with the slogan “you can only get it from us now”... The competition today is great, but they could easily become the next App Store tomorrow. I don’t personally have a problem with Apple taking a cut - they are doing work, after all, but I think it should be more along the lines of covering the transaction fees and less “we’re taking a third of your hard work”.

u10 6y ago
The competition is broken, Steam still has a large majority of the marketshare, and they abuse it just like Apple does. Taking a cut is fine, but 30% margin is unconscionable and I applaud anyone that tries to break that paradigm.
- judge2020 6y ago
  Steam's monopoly is very different from Apple's since they only operate on already-open platforms. You can easily distribute your x86 game via any other store or your own launcher/website with little issue (only having to deal with the Oligopoly that is EV Code Signing, which you still might need to do while on Steam/Epic/etc). On Apple's platform, you have to go through them no matter what, making it impossible to put an app on iOS devices without their approval.
- La1n 6y ago
  >they abuse it just like Apple does. But on my PC I can buy games at other places too, I just prefer Steam due to convenience. It's very different than having to buy your games on a platform from someone specific.

tadzik_ 6y ago

> a healthy competitor to Steam, not only for developers but for consumers as well I'm not sure I agree here. As a consumer, competition is good for me if I either get something I didn't already, or if I get the same but cheaper. EGS provides neither: it has less features than its competitors, and the prices are either the same, or the games are exclusives, making comparisons impossible. Exceptions, like Outer Worlds, cost exactly the same on Microsoft Store as it does on Epic Store. The consumer gets nothing. They just get another meaningless alternative, another scavenger for their attention, loyalty and wallets.

GeneralTspoon 6y ago
Well you could view it as a net win for the consumer in that developers are getting more of a cut from sales, thus funding future development and patches for their games.