5 ms·
For $210 million (that's only Epic's contribution), they could've created a first-class marketplace ecosystem. In reality, it's neither first-class nor worth wh
by emsy 5y ago
For $210 million (that's only Epic's contribution), they could've created a first-class marketplace ecosystem. In reality, it's neither first-class nor worth whatever they're paying to actually run that department.
- naikrovek 5y agopeople forget how terrible steam was for its first 5 years, when compared to today. now, people are comparing the epic games store of today with the steam we have today, and convincing themselves that it's a fair comparison.
- throwaways885 5y agoI think the big difference between is how Epic treats its customers and how Valve treats its customers. Epic could've gone the GOG Galaxy route ("use it, or not, your choice"), but they decided to force people into their watered down launcher before it was ready. Even Xbox is being more open lately. You can't just match your competition, you have to exceed it in some special way before people will switch.
- ramy_d 5y agohow are they forcing anyone?
- croon 5y agoAFAIK Fortnite is not available on Steam (or elsewhere).
- naikrovek 5y agoTeam Fortress 2 isn't available on the Epic Games Store (or elsewhere). Epic aren't doing anything shady, here.
- croon 5y agoYou're not making the counter-argument you think. GGGP: > I think the big difference between is how Epic treats its customers and how Valve treats its customers. Epic could've gone the GOG Galaxy route ("use it, or not, your choice"), but they decided to force people into their watered down launcher before it was ready. Even Xbox is being more open lately. > You can't just match your competition, you have to exceed it in some special way before people will switch. GGP: > how are they forcing anyone? I answered that question. That Steam is also doing it is whataboutism, but also entirely besides the point. Steam however is a much more full-featured client, which also factored into GGGP's argument. But a more pointed answer to GGP would've been that Epic has paid external developers for (timed) exclusives.
- ThatMedicIsASpy 5y agothey are trying by buying out publishers to only release it on epic or only release it on epic for the first year. their client is super garbage. like battlenet if you leave it open it hogs your cpu. the fact that a game can turn the store color into a white client is insane to me.
- naikrovek 5y agothey're free to pay for exclusives, just like Valve is free to pay for exclusives.
- throwaways885 5y agoBut Valve doesn't pay for exclusives. They just compete on their overall service. Epic is not making something that is actually better for customers.
- rcxdude 5y agowith exclusives, including making games exclusive which were previously available on other platforms.
- naikrovek 5y agoEpic can't do that alone... it requires cooperation from and agreement with the game publisher. Don't blame Epic for spending money to bring customers to their product. Epic aren't using shady tactics to do this, and Valve is free to do everything Epic is doing. Also, as a game buyer, you DEFINITELY want a multi-source purchasing ecosystem; you definitely want to avoid a monopoly if the price you pay for games is important to you.
- rcxdude 5y agoExclusives are explicitly not multi-source. I want to be able to buy the games I want to play on the platform I want to play them on. This isn't always feasible, and that's OK, but it really grates when it's deliberately pushed in that direction.
- cdirkx 5y agoThere have been multiple instances of games being anounced to release on Steam/others and then some time later Epic signed an exclusive contract with them. This even happens with crowdfunded indie games [1] or games that had already started pre-orders. Even though moves like that are unpopular, Epic said they will remain a core part of their strategy [2]. (True the developers themselves agree to that exclusive contract, so they share some of the blame of disappointing people, but if you're an indie developer it is hard to say no to that much money) [1] https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2019-07-03-epic-games-will-fund-the-cost-of-kickstarter-refunds-for-epic-exclusives https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2019-07-03-epic-games-wil... [2] https://www.pcgamer.com/epic-games-boss-defends-exclusivity-strategy/ https://www.pcgamer.com/epic-games-boss-defends-exclusivity-...
- throwaways885 5y agoI own Rocket League on Steam. They bought the game, took it off the Steam store and eventually my operating system entirely, to push their launcher. Not chuffed.
- emsy 5y agoI‘m talking about the AppStore!
- Xplune13 5y agoIt is a fair comparison in my opinion. Steam came into the market when it was one of the first ones to establish digital gaming scene. Now the situation is different, we have many launchers and with that knowledge of what things worked in older launchers (eg. steam, origin etc.) they could've easily pulled a better launcher. The amount of basic things missing from EGS is ridiculous (compared to other launchers that are available right now). At this point, it is a free game generator. Now that doesn't mean EGS can't fail or anything but they aren't even showing any interest in upgrading their platform whatsoever and for that they don't deserve anyone's attention in my opinion.
- FearlessNebula 5y agoDoes EGS even have a shopping cart yet lol
- Xplune13 5y agoNo it doesn't AFAIK. Last checked - don't even know when I logged in.
- paulmd 5y ago"apple bad" counterpoint: no, it's fine, and it's actually better than the google play store, far less random trash and far less malicious apps/rootkits being distributed.
- emsy 5y agoI don‘t even disagree it’s better. But the AppStore is still an embarrassment for the money it brings in. I guess comfort does make complacent.