It would be nice if you could follow the argument. The argument was that EGS would end up leading to more and better games because of them offering a better revenue split to developers. My point is that because they are limiting their selection of games, this is unlikely to have a large impact for PC gaming. It has nothing to do with what people should or shouldn’t be able to do. Understand now?
Okay, but for a handful of people, it will make life a little better. I think we can celebrate that, don’t you?
That’s subjective and highly unlikely. The amount of money you throw at a game’s dev doesn’t automagically translate to a better game. And regardless of the nonsense spouted by devs in support of this, the added revenue doesn’t also automagically translate to more investment in the game’s dev. That’s just pure and utter nonsense. Yes, a higher royalty split is always great, but that revenue comes after - not before - the fact.
Just to make sure it was clear, Grifman was rebutting that argument, not making it.
They’re not doing that. They’re offering exclusives to popular games that are either complete or very near completion. Literally limited risk.
Yes - thanks. I am aware. That’s why I highlighted the quote because I didn’t want to go to the original and thus lose the context of what Grifman was alluding to.
A new challenger appears…Derek S. Mart…
Just what the doctor order! -_-
I sorta enjoy when Derek arrives in a thread.
Everyone’s opinion provides some unique insight. :D
My thoughts exactly!
I will leave the poll open a few more days, probably close it this weekend, it can be seen as a snapshot of the summer and where everyone stands. I can make up another for the winter and see if there are any shifts.
Well if you want to entice the Fortnite kids to spend their parent’s money on the EGS beyond Vbucks you kinda have to go that route. ;-P
Of course it is. I didn’t know that was ever a question.
Epic is building a store of games that are popular. They are offering better revenue to the developers to do it.
On the other side the consumer loses access to some great steam features for at least a year (when it will be on Steam) but, you should have a less cluttered store with a greater percentage of popular games.
Is it worth it? Probably not for everyone but if you want the game, you need to go to Epic. And if you don’t, or are willing to wait a year, then you have other options.
On the upside, in one year, we will see games that are available on both steam and epic, and gamers will have a choice. Hopefully, by that time, the Epic Store will either be good enough, or the games will be cheap enough that the choice will matter. Hopefully, by that time, people won’t be worried that Epic will go bankrupt and the games will disappear, like Impulse did.
Hopefully by that time, Epic will have enough of your friends on it or you will have a library that is big enough on their that Steam isn’t a necessity, because that’s were all your stuff is.
Hopefully enough developers will have the option to go to Epic, and get a bigger slice of the pie, that steam will be forced to respond by offering more money back to developers themselves.
At least, that is the road map that I see.
Anyway, I say, vote with your wallets. It’s what you do when it comes to a product or a service.
I am hopeful, but in the mean time. Free GAMES!
It’s just kind of a techno beat thing… what’s the issue with the music?
I am Gen X, grew up in 70/80’s and from a very young age was constantly subjected to commercials. This helped lead me to the realization that every commercial and the companies behind them are searching for “something”. That something is not world peace, clean oceans, income equality, etc. That “something” is money. I feel like maybe that has been forgotten by some in this thread from time to time.
The deciders at Epic were probably not sitting around a table thinking,
“We have all this money, whats the worlds number one problem that we could help fix? You know Bill, I agree, it is obviously that small segment of Video Game Developers (not Ubi or EA, cause they will get their nut regardless and not the developers who make niche pixel stuff) who are not getting a big enough cut of their sales. Lets fix this problem and make a store! and only charge 12%.”
They may have instead been thinking,
“What are three business that do not make anything but money? Banking, Insurance and Video Game Electronic Store Fronts. We already know something about games, lets do that and make this pile of money bigger!”
The bigger cut to Devs and cash up front = draw Developers to sell in a less established store, with fewer shoppers. Exclusives = increased shoppers. Epic press releases talking about how they think Developers are getting a bad shake = PR.
The “slimeyness” some people in this thread have mentioned is the disconnect between the PR reason of “helping Devs” and the real reason, “to build market share.”
None of this is wrong or evil or new. I just feel like some people have forgotten that everything they read or see has an agenda behind it.
Taking Drug XYZ will not make your children visit more often in glorious backyard barbecues where everyone laughs at everyone’s jokes. The local news is not waiting until 11 to tell you which neighborhood could blow up because they need more time to research the story. Epic Games is not offering a better cut because they saw an injustice and needed to make it right.
And then Steam gets to take 30% off the top by default? No one gets to challenge that part? What a bizarre and baseless position.
So, if you personally doubt the possibility of a larger change happening, no one should try?
If Epic didn’t have the security issues, and offered a lower cut in exchange for curation and barebones services, I’d be fine with EGS.
The security issues combined with the grabbing of exclusives is what put me over the edge on EGS. I have no problem with alternative storefronts that are good, and if they stunk without exclusives I could ignore them without any problems. It’s the combination that’s bad.
You’re still having problems following a basic argument. Nowhere I have stated that no one should or should not try. I was instead pointing out that one of the justifications from a consumer perspective for EGS is unlikely to be valid for most games due to EGS’s narrow scope. You get one more try at this, then you strike out.
What security issues are you concerned with? Could you be more specific?
I’m sure you know that security concerns and risks are industry-wide, even Steam has wrestled with data breaches, hacks, vulnerabilities, etc.
Uh, maybe go back and read the thread from the beginning. He’s like the OG of EGS defenders.
There’s been issues with stolen passwords and attempts to steal accounts. Remember those from a couple months ago.