6 ms·

Amazon has even more money to throw at studios than Epic, so they can just force themselves into it.

by meibo 5y ago

junon 5y ago
The problem isn't the product. I was going to compete with Steam at one point and we had objectively better systems and a better client. The problem was the critical mass issue - no users, no publishers, neither want to join without the other. Amazon will definitely get publishers but will users join? That's not a given.
- lbhdc 5y ago
  I would imagine they would attempt to secure exclusive rights to a popular title and only distribute it from their new platform. I believe that is what epic did when they launched their store.
  - baud147258 5y ago
    Epic did that, plus giving away loads of free games, like a new free game every two weeks.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
    Yeah, and a lot of people loathe them for it. I'm one of them.
    - trey-jones 5y ago
      And my axe.
  - junon 5y ago
    Yes and it backfired spectacularly.
- gizdan 5y ago
  Amazon already has customers. If their other products are to go by, they'll just give you an account if you have an Amazon account. Probably combined with free games if you have a prime account and you can imagine that it won't take much to compete, at least not for a company like Amazon.
  - isk517 5y ago
    That was my thought. They already give away free games over Prime, if they leverage that they have already given a large number of people stake in their new market place. Plus they own Twitch, I don't believe there is a publisher who isn't interested in the idea of people being able to impulse buy whatever there favorite streamer is playing without even leaving the stream. The strategy is pretty easy actually, give streamers a cut of each sale and encourage them to put up notifications when it happens like they do subs and cheers.
  - junon 5y ago
    The free games on prime accounts is probably exactly what will happen, and will probably be what needs to happen for it to be any amount of successful. Look at Epic which offers free games but sees pretty slow growth outside of their flagships. Further, look at Amazon's lumberyard engine, which gathers dust for the most part. I'm not convinced that their 'weight' will automatically guarantee wide adoption.
    - echelon 5y ago
      Amazon engineers are poorly compensated, overworked, abused, and write garbage code. That's not a formula for winning. Unfortunately, Amazon has all the money in the world to keep throwing at the problem. Eventually some of the spaghetti will stick to the wall.
  - tomjen3 5y ago
    I signed up for Steam because they gave away Portal.
- pc86 5y ago
  You just answered your own question. > no users, no publishers, neither want to join without the other > Amazon will definitely get publishers but will users join? Well, the publishers will be there. If users have a reason to go there over Steam, they will. Amazon will lock in a few exclusives, people will start to come over. Who knows, maybe there will be some way to verifiably move your Steam library over to an Amazon account? I don't think the bar to compete with Steam is as high as you're suggesting, but even if it is, if anybody was going to start listing companies that could conceivably do it, Amazon would probably be on the list.
  - junon 5y ago
    > Who knows, maybe there will be some way to verifiably move your Steam library over to an Amazon account? Given that steam has pretty strict terms with publishers over this, I highly, highly doubt they would do this unless they wanted to dump a huge ocean of money into free license comps for developers to make money from and for users to get free games. Competing with Steam isn't only just a money/size thing, though of course that helps.
  - ratww 5y ago
    > Who knows, maybe there will be some way to verifiably move your Steam library over to an Amazon account? The library is the #1 reason people stay in Steam. Lots of people just buy games in other places and just add it there. Amazon could, for example, offer different royalties (say, 10% instead of 30%) for publishers willing to have their old games "moveable" to Amazon's hypothetical new platform and I bet a lot of studios would take the deal. This is not unheard of: it's how Apple does iTunes Match.
- rawbot 5y ago
  By better systems, I hope you are also including, to name a few: Remote Play, Remote Play Together, Game Streaming, Screenshot capture, Controller API that also works in Desktop, a project to help Linux compatibility with zero effort from the game devs. I think people just consider Steam as a store, but it has become much more than that.
  - junon 5y ago
    Never got as far as Remote Play or Game Streaming but would have been trivial for us to do so given the backend infrastructure we had already written. Game overlays and capture were working fine, and the controller API was designed to support any number of controllers (Steam's support is great but their interfaces are subpar, in our opinion). We were also able to pull from a well known database of controller configurations and device IDs, which really made this a non-issue. Linux compatibility was fine as far as the client went (all of our code was cross-platform and not webkit frames or the like). The client even ran on Android and iOS. If you're referring to Steam's Proton, we really didn't want to touch that area for a while. But we had much better systems for searching for new titles, including those that worked well on the system and also matched all of the criteria (tags and whatnot). Our social system was also designed to support "cross-talk" between different marketplaces (Steam, GoG Universe and Epic) but we never got as far as building out any client functionality - just the initial blackbox proof of concepts. The store aspect was indeed just a smaller part of it, though it was complicated in its own right. The project was a great idea and we were executing well on it. Lots of cool new tech was developed for it. But nobody we talked to wanted it - including publishers, users, investors, or even friends. It didn't matter how compatible we made it, the fact that we didn't push you to re-buy games, etc. We wanted to make an non-shitty experience for gaming and the market simply said "no".
    - lobocinza 5y ago
      Have you approached Valve?
      - junon 5y ago
        We definitely thought about it, but decided against it. We've re-used a lot of it in some other endeavors we're working on so we don't really want to share the IP.
o_m 5y ago
So does Microsoft, but Xbox has been in decline since after Xbox 360
- cableshaft 5y ago
  I think Microsoft is just less concerned about hardware now, so it looks like they're doing worse when they're not really. Like I haven't touched my Xbox One in years, but I'm still giving them $10/month for Xbox Game Pass for my PC. "In its latest financial results, Microsoft announced that the gaming division revenue was up 50% year-on-year, boasting huge $3.53 billion earnings over the past 12 months. The vast majority of that income stems from Xbox hardware (largely the launch of the Xbox Series X/S), which is up 232%." https://www.vg247.com/xbox-revenue-hardware-game-pass-boost-fiscal-year https://www.vg247.com/xbox-revenue-hardware-game-pass-boost-... Okay, I guess hardware is still big for them. Huh.
ryathal 5y ago
It's more than just throwing money at it. EA tried and failed to separate from Steam. Epic might succeed, but it's not going to be because of money, but because Fortnite let them capture young gamers before they got into Steam. Wherever a user gets a critical mass of a library built up first is going to be the winner.
- tyrfing 5y ago
  > Wherever a user gets a critical mass of a library built up first is going to be the winner. This is where they've been throwing money at the problem: giving away a ridiculous amount of games for free. https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/12/22380895/epic-games-store-afford-give-away-17-5-billion-free-games https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/12/22380895/epic-games-store...
  - Arrath 5y ago
    It is quite nice, I think I paid for 1 game of the 14 in my epic library.
    - trey-jones 5y ago
      I wonder how much I paid over the last 15 years for the 198 games in my Steam library. Not that much, I suspect between all the Humble Bundles and steam sales of yore. Nevertheless I was pissed when I had to get Origin in order to even play Mass Effect 3, and I never even considered the epic store, so I think the theory of library investment is sound. Steam has a good head start on a lot of us.
      - Arrath 5y ago
        It absolutely does. The singular reason I signed up for Epic was Borderlands 3, everything else is in my Steam library.
      - emodendroket 5y ago
        Everybody hated Steam when it was new too and with the frequent Epic game giveaways people will eventually have large catalogs of Epic games they grabbed on a lark. Between that and a number of highly desired sequels being exclusive to the platform I can't see why they wouldn't be able to eventually make inroads.

Amazon has even more money to throw at studios than Epic, so they can just force themselves into it.

by meibo 5y ago

Amazon has even more money to throw at studios than Epic, so they can just force themselves into it.

The problem isn't the product. I was going to compete with Steam at one point and we had objectively better systems and a better client. The problem was the critical mass issue - no users, no publishers, neither want to join without the other. Amazon will definitely get publishers but will users join? That's not a given.

lbhdc 5y ago
I would imagine they would attempt to secure exclusive rights to a popular title and only distribute it from their new platform. I believe that is what epic did when they launched their store.
- baud147258 5y ago
  Epic did that, plus giving away loads of free games, like a new free game every two weeks.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
  Yeah, and a lot of people loathe them for it. I'm one of them.
  - trey-jones 5y ago
    And my axe.
- junon 5y ago
  Yes and it backfired spectacularly.
gizdan 5y ago
Amazon already has customers. If their other products are to go by, they'll just give you an account if you have an Amazon account. Probably combined with free games if you have a prime account and you can imagine that it won't take much to compete, at least not for a company like Amazon.
- isk517 5y ago
  That was my thought. They already give away free games over Prime, if they leverage that they have already given a large number of people stake in their new market place. Plus they own Twitch, I don't believe there is a publisher who isn't interested in the idea of people being able to impulse buy whatever there favorite streamer is playing without even leaving the stream. The strategy is pretty easy actually, give streamers a cut of each sale and encourage them to put up notifications when it happens like they do subs and cheers.
- junon 5y ago
  The free games on prime accounts is probably exactly what will happen, and will probably be what needs to happen for it to be any amount of successful. Look at Epic which offers free games but sees pretty slow growth outside of their flagships. Further, look at Amazon's lumberyard engine, which gathers dust for the most part. I'm not convinced that their 'weight' will automatically guarantee wide adoption.
  - echelon 5y ago
    Amazon engineers are poorly compensated, overworked, abused, and write garbage code. That's not a formula for winning. Unfortunately, Amazon has all the money in the world to keep throwing at the problem. Eventually some of the spaghetti will stick to the wall.
- tomjen3 5y ago
  I signed up for Steam because they gave away Portal.
pc86 5y ago
You just answered your own question. > no users, no publishers, neither want to join without the other > Amazon will definitely get publishers but will users join? Well, the publishers will be there. If users have a reason to go there over Steam, they will. Amazon will lock in a few exclusives, people will start to come over. Who knows, maybe there will be some way to verifiably move your Steam library over to an Amazon account? I don't think the bar to compete with Steam is as high as you're suggesting, but even if it is, if anybody was going to start listing companies that could conceivably do it, Amazon would probably be on the list.
- junon 5y ago
  > Who knows, maybe there will be some way to verifiably move your Steam library over to an Amazon account? Given that steam has pretty strict terms with publishers over this, I highly, highly doubt they would do this unless they wanted to dump a huge ocean of money into free license comps for developers to make money from and for users to get free games. Competing with Steam isn't only just a money/size thing, though of course that helps.
- ratww 5y ago
  > Who knows, maybe there will be some way to verifiably move your Steam library over to an Amazon account? The library is the #1 reason people stay in Steam. Lots of people just buy games in other places and just add it there. Amazon could, for example, offer different royalties (say, 10% instead of 30%) for publishers willing to have their old games "moveable" to Amazon's hypothetical new platform and I bet a lot of studios would take the deal. This is not unheard of: it's how Apple does iTunes Match.
rawbot 5y ago
By better systems, I hope you are also including, to name a few: Remote Play, Remote Play Together, Game Streaming, Screenshot capture, Controller API that also works in Desktop, a project to help Linux compatibility with zero effort from the game devs. I think people just consider Steam as a store, but it has become much more than that.
- junon 5y ago
  Never got as far as Remote Play or Game Streaming but would have been trivial for us to do so given the backend infrastructure we had already written. Game overlays and capture were working fine, and the controller API was designed to support any number of controllers (Steam's support is great but their interfaces are subpar, in our opinion). We were also able to pull from a well known database of controller configurations and device IDs, which really made this a non-issue. Linux compatibility was fine as far as the client went (all of our code was cross-platform and not webkit frames or the like). The client even ran on Android and iOS. If you're referring to Steam's Proton, we really didn't want to touch that area for a while. But we had much better systems for searching for new titles, including those that worked well on the system and also matched all of the criteria (tags and whatnot). Our social system was also designed to support "cross-talk" between different marketplaces (Steam, GoG Universe and Epic) but we never got as far as building out any client functionality - just the initial blackbox proof of concepts. The store aspect was indeed just a smaller part of it, though it was complicated in its own right. The project was a great idea and we were executing well on it. Lots of cool new tech was developed for it. But nobody we talked to wanted it - including publishers, users, investors, or even friends. It didn't matter how compatible we made it, the fact that we didn't push you to re-buy games, etc. We wanted to make an non-shitty experience for gaming and the market simply said "no".
  - lobocinza 5y ago
    Have you approached Valve?
    - junon 5y ago
      We definitely thought about it, but decided against it. We've re-used a lot of it in some other endeavors we're working on so we don't really want to share the IP.

o_m 5y ago

So does Microsoft, but Xbox has been in decline since after Xbox 360

cableshaft 5y ago
I think Microsoft is just less concerned about hardware now, so it looks like they're doing worse when they're not really. Like I haven't touched my Xbox One in years, but I'm still giving them $10/month for Xbox Game Pass for my PC. "In its latest financial results, Microsoft announced that the gaming division revenue was up 50% year-on-year, boasting huge $3.53 billion earnings over the past 12 months. The vast majority of that income stems from Xbox hardware (largely the launch of the Xbox Series X/S), which is up 232%." https://www.vg247.com/xbox-revenue-hardware-game-pass-boost-fiscal-year https://www.vg247.com/xbox-revenue-hardware-game-pass-boost-... Okay, I guess hardware is still big for them. Huh.

ryathal 5y ago

It's more than just throwing money at it. EA tried and failed to separate from Steam. Epic might succeed, but it's not going to be because of money, but because Fortnite let them capture young gamers before they got into Steam. Wherever a user gets a critical mass of a library built up first is going to be the winner.

tyrfing 5y ago
> Wherever a user gets a critical mass of a library built up first is going to be the winner. This is where they've been throwing money at the problem: giving away a ridiculous amount of games for free. https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/12/22380895/epic-games-store-afford-give-away-17-5-billion-free-games https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/12/22380895/epic-games-store...
- Arrath 5y ago
  It is quite nice, I think I paid for 1 game of the 14 in my epic library.
  - trey-jones 5y ago
    I wonder how much I paid over the last 15 years for the 198 games in my Steam library. Not that much, I suspect between all the Humble Bundles and steam sales of yore. Nevertheless I was pissed when I had to get Origin in order to even play Mass Effect 3, and I never even considered the epic store, so I think the theory of library investment is sound. Steam has a good head start on a lot of us.
    - Arrath 5y ago
      It absolutely does. The singular reason I signed up for Epic was Borderlands 3, everything else is in my Steam library.
    - emodendroket 5y ago
      Everybody hated Steam when it was new too and with the frequent Epic game giveaways people will eventually have large catalogs of Epic games they grabbed on a lark. Between that and a number of highly desired sequels being exclusive to the platform I can't see why they wouldn't be able to eventually make inroads.