4 ms·

>Epic employs behavioural specialists tasked in making their games addictive and coerce user into spending with micro-transactions. Epic also has their own gam

>Epic employs behavioural specialists tasked in making their games addictive and coerce user into spending with micro-transactions. Epic also has their own game store that they will happily charge 30% once they have more marketshare. They also want to be able to put their own game store on iOS.

johnnyanmac 3y ago
>that they will happily charge 30% once they have more marketshare. I don't know. They haven't done as much with UE or any other tools, outside of actually charging for non-games (I'm honestly surprised that the Mandelorian was able to be made with no kick back to Epic at all). Historically Epic has been relatively lenient for how it taxes developers. Say what you want about Sweeny and Fortnite and the Games Store, but I can definitely tell he still takes pride and empathizes with being in the gamedev trenches once upon a time. Can't say that about too many other gaming execs of today.
- aurareturn 3y ago
  They're developer friendly because they're trying to get marketshare. They're competing with market leader in Steam which charges 30%. Don't think for a second that they wouldn't charge 30% once they get enough market power. In fact, in the Apple lawsuit, it was revealed that the Epic Game Store was operating on a $300-$400m loss in order to acquire marketshare. Epic has to increase commission fees in order to break even and make a profit eventually. Epic isn't a non-profit. Here's a preview how they might treat customers of their own app store if they have market power: Epic Games, the company responsible for Fortnite, agreed to pay $245 million to settle FTC allegations related to in-game purchases. According to the FTC, the company charged parents and gamers of all ages for unwanted items and locked the accounts of customers who disputed wrongful charges with their credit card companies. https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/refunds/fortnite-refunds https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/refunds/fortnite-refunds
  - Jyaif 3y ago
    > Epic has to increase commission fees in order to break even and make a profit eventually. That's not true. I'd say it's virtually impossible to lose money if you are charging 10% of the price of games. Their store is losing money because they are giving out a ton of free games, in the hope of attracting clients.
  - i_love_cookies 3y ago
    [dead]
  - spywaregorilla 3y ago
    Their presence as a game store is irrelevant to their developer friendliness as an engine vendor
  - nirvdrum 3y ago
    Isn’t that how competition works? Ideally, no company becomes so large that they don’t feel the pressure to remain competitive. Of course there’s countless examples of big players stagnating and becoming rent collectors with a captive market. But, I see that as all the more reason to have competition. I think it’s rather optimistic to believe the Epic Games Store going to overtake Steam. If that’s the criteria for raising their cut, I wouldn’t expect it to happen anytime soon. Outside of annoying exclusive distribution rights on some games, having another store has given game developers another way to sell and players a way to purchase games cheaper. With that said, I’d guess their real gambit is to create enough pressure to drive the standard 30% down. Maybe 30% made sense at one point. Maybe it does now. It strikes me that there have been efficiencies that haven’t been passed along to the consumer. Having a competitive market would let us find out.
    - tekknik 3y ago
      > way to sell and players a way to purchase games cheaper. If you believe because the cut is less on epic store (assuming a developer uses all the methods available to a game developer to reduce it) that they then charge less on the epic store you are mistaken. Prices are the same between the two stores.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

johnnyanmac 3y ago

>that they will happily charge 30% once they have more marketshare. I don't know. They haven't done as much with UE or any other tools, outside of actually charging for non-games (I'm honestly surprised that the Mandelorian was able to be made with no kick back to Epic at all). Historically Epic has been relatively lenient for how it taxes developers. Say what you want about Sweeny and Fortnite and the Games Store, but I can definitely tell he still takes pride and empathizes with being in the gamedev trenches once upon a time. Can't say that about too many other gaming execs of today.

aurareturn 3y ago
They're developer friendly because they're trying to get marketshare. They're competing with market leader in Steam which charges 30%. Don't think for a second that they wouldn't charge 30% once they get enough market power. In fact, in the Apple lawsuit, it was revealed that the Epic Game Store was operating on a $300-$400m loss in order to acquire marketshare. Epic has to increase commission fees in order to break even and make a profit eventually. Epic isn't a non-profit. Here's a preview how they might treat customers of their own app store if they have market power: Epic Games, the company responsible for Fortnite, agreed to pay $245 million to settle FTC allegations related to in-game purchases. According to the FTC, the company charged parents and gamers of all ages for unwanted items and locked the accounts of customers who disputed wrongful charges with their credit card companies. https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/refunds/fortnite-refunds https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/refunds/fortnite-refunds
- Jyaif 3y ago
  > Epic has to increase commission fees in order to break even and make a profit eventually. That's not true. I'd say it's virtually impossible to lose money if you are charging 10% of the price of games. Their store is losing money because they are giving out a ton of free games, in the hope of attracting clients.
- i_love_cookies 3y ago
  [dead]
- spywaregorilla 3y ago
  Their presence as a game store is irrelevant to their developer friendliness as an engine vendor
- nirvdrum 3y ago
  Isn’t that how competition works? Ideally, no company becomes so large that they don’t feel the pressure to remain competitive. Of course there’s countless examples of big players stagnating and becoming rent collectors with a captive market. But, I see that as all the more reason to have competition. I think it’s rather optimistic to believe the Epic Games Store going to overtake Steam. If that’s the criteria for raising their cut, I wouldn’t expect it to happen anytime soon. Outside of annoying exclusive distribution rights on some games, having another store has given game developers another way to sell and players a way to purchase games cheaper. With that said, I’d guess their real gambit is to create enough pressure to drive the standard 30% down. Maybe 30% made sense at one point. Maybe it does now. It strikes me that there have been efficiencies that haven’t been passed along to the consumer. Having a competitive market would let us find out.
  - tekknik 3y ago
    > way to sell and players a way to purchase games cheaper. If you believe because the cut is less on epic store (assuming a developer uses all the methods available to a game developer to reduce it) that they then charge less on the epic store you are mistaken. Prices are the same between the two stores.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]