I’m going by what you said. In the post I quoted.
Nesrie
5151
That’s not really a standard. That’s just stating what they’re doing right now.
I forgot release date announcements were considered sacred covenants in the gaming space. My bad.
Well, some people do value their word even without it being a sacred covenant. Like the developer of Darq.
You cast aspersions on their methodology, and I quite literally did ask you what the alternative would be. Did you have an actual response or just more evasions?
Nesrie
5156
I’m telling you I don’t approve of what they’re doing right now. That does not mean I have stated a standard nor have I gone into depth of why I think this is a problem… you’re making assumptions as well as being rude. If you think i am splitting hairs over the terminology, points above, well welcome to the club of this topic.
I do think they can do more if they even want to than wait at the finish line to hand out checks, yes I do. How do we know that, others have either helped or at least provided a space for it… before it’s a sure thing. They can’t rely on their competitors to give them sure things… forever.
It depends on the game, because, as noted earlier, not all games are exclusive on Epic.
I personally liken Epic to a multi billion dollar boutique business. You can’t compete with the Walmart or Amazon down the street, but you need foot traffic. So, you need to be a it more selective and show as many unique items as possible. Having something they the big box store next door has won’t get you any sales and will take up valuable space that other items could fit. So, it does not seem like a good idea to have indie games floating around that aren’t exclusive to your store.
At least that’s how I see. Steam is the Walmart of video games. They have almost everything and make money in bulk. Epic is something else. As I mentioned early, hopefully by 2020, they will be able to keep up with steam without the exclusives, and they can focus on being the store that gives the developers the biggest cut.
And, considering that I am not super secure financial, I really really appreciate getting free games. I mean, there are some great games. A person of limited means, like me, that isn’t able to buy games day one, can really appreciate it.
I mean, that’s just my situation and my experience. Hopefully people can accept that, and won’t feel the need to attack me simple because I have limited means, and so really appreciate some of the other things that others can afford more easily.
It’s only so vicious because the stakes are so low.
Nesrie
5159
The video game industry is tens of billions of dollars large, has some of the largest followings on multiple social media sites, is a hobby shared across ages, across borders, and is often playing in some really interesting tech arena, is frequently hot in politics… A big player drops in with the intention of disrupting that and you think that’s… small?
Not to mention, art influences people, can be very powerful even. It is important to know who can control that and why.
I didn’t say that. Winning the argument in this hellscape of a thread, on the other hand, couldn’t possibly matter less.
Although, yes, if asked I would say that on the metaphorical ladder of problems the world is facing at the moment, issues affecting the video games industry are pretty close to the very bottom rung.
Nesrie
5161
Oh money matters, especially that kind of money, and it goes well beyond video games. We’re not talking small potatoes here, especially Epic and Valve size coffers. This is a Goliath vs Goliath fight here.
It’s so strange to see people say both it’s only video games and then at the same time turn around and say they care about the industry. There is nothing only about the size of this industry.
I’m pretty sure Epic is not going to change anything for developers one way or the other in the long run, but I’ve said a few reasons why it’s still a first world problem. Wait until you can play it elsewhere, forget about it, emulate it a decade later, …, who cares, there’s plenty of fish and not enough time for 10-year old fishes.
The fanbase, though, is about as worse at accepting of mild criticism than the Souls’ one.
Other than the end-run on gambling prohibitions ruining lives, sure. Although that kind of money will buy an enormous amount of political power at some point, if it doesn’t already.
Why do you say that? I mean, you already see some store fronts changing their percentages. Doesn’t the discord store offer a bigger percentage?
I think this is already having an impact. It’s real changed the overton window hasn’t it?
I mean, before Epic, was anyone talking about the percent break down between store and developer?
They already were, to some extent, but mostly because Epic has no interest in having enough games for it to matter. And I don’t pin Sweeney as the kind of person who gives a shit, at the end of the day.
I think the way I see it, they’re just part of a slow trend (to lower percentages, but not only) that will happen in one way or another. That makes me the sole arbiter of whether I’ll be correct or not, but I’m not really trying to argue it (it’s not like I understand the average game customer), and no one will remember the prediction by then. It was a sidepoint on how I really don’t think EGS represents the end of ______ (insert good thing) - even kickstarting will survive in the end, and Linux gaming has bigger problems.
It was a poorly held secret that every store charged 30% since the App Store, outside of special agreements. This is a temporary blip on openness (as far as sizeable deals are concerned), as middleman will be middleman.
Not all middlemen are the same. Steam offers far more and better services than EGS, or nearly anyone else, and thus earn a higher share in my opinion.
I think this won’t be a blip. I think this discussion has some staying power. I think the Overton Window has shifted in a real way and part of the discourse.
jsnell
5167
It’s because you’ve got a side and are reading everything through that perspective. Any slight from the other side gets amplified by a factor of 10 and won’t be forgotten, while when your boys are dishing out some insults it doesn’t even register. It’s not intentional, of course. It’s just how the human mind works.
It’s actually incredibly common. I have a six letter Gmail address that matches a “first letter of first name, common last name” format. There are hundreds of people who have mistakenly used that email address instead of their own at one time or another (no exaggeration; I used to keep a spreadsheet). As a result it gets signed up for services that don’t validate email addresses a couple of times a week.
Some of those services are quite major. Netflix was not validating email addresses as recently as 2018. Microsoft was not validating them as recently as 2015, Facebook as recently as 2013. I’m fairly sure Google still doesn’t.
The Netflix one is the most hilarious, since different people keep creating Netflix accounts on that address and then realizing their mistake a month or two later and fixing the address. Which frees the address up for some other moron to create a new account with. I could probably steal a significant amount of free Netflix with this.
From a engineer perspective, it’s an unforgivable sin to not validate email addresses. From a slimy growth hacker perspective validating email addresses at account creation time will just reduce the conversion rate by some 0.x%, so they’ll fight address verification to the death.
Yes. As has been noted in this thread a few times, Microsoft announced a move from a fixed 30% to a variable 5%/15%/30% take in the spring of last year. So half a year before EGS. The only thing was that the 5% and 15% options were only available for Windows apps, not for games nor for anything running on Xbox.
LockerK
5168
If this were about the percentages we’d be talking about the indie upstart itch.io taking on Humble, the genius company that’s leveraging Steam’s infrastructure for services and still offering a razor thin cut thanks to Steam’s policy of offering keys with no fee.
Discord store still would have flopped.
It does, but it’s not relevant for every game or every gamer. Some old thread replies helped me understand that better. On the other hand, Steam can probably dilute the costs, as changing it per game would be a mess.
You think contract transparency will be a thing in a multi-billion industry? I can get behind that businesses innovation, but I’m not an optimist. Special secret deals will still get made.
Although… Thinking about it, I think you’re actually right on the point you’re actually making, the general fees might not be a secret from now on. What caveats come with “general” may not be too discretionary. At least, with this many games coming out.
