There are open-source drop-in replacements for parts of it now, at least. That should cut down on dev time (although devs might have to get creative if they want to avoid sharing their changes code, due to the license).
Well said.
I could be totally wrong, but I have seen some attempts (not in the recent comments today) to frame this debate as a binary Steam vs. Epic where everyone picks a side then draws a line in the sand. I think that oversimplification is not helpful and not supported by evidence, but that framing is put forth to serve a certain perspective…or to allow glib convenient dismissal.
I think it also happens since Epic seems to be laser focused on Valve/Steam and doesn’t really care about the other platforms at this juncture despite them still being impacted. The criticisms in this thread are heterogeneous.
If you say “we can’t compete with the market leader unless we offer big bags of cash to developers to incentivize them to be exclusive with us”, you might as well stop at “we can’t compete”.
That’s the major problem I have with their strategy…they’re really not capable of competing with Steam on features or audience…anything other than buying exclusives with their Fortnite cash. They haven’t put in the last decade-and-a-half remaking the PC games industry. They’ve come in with some fat stacks and are making it rain on some poor developers who are going “yeah, why shouldn’t I get to have all my sales!” despite the fact that Epic doesn’t offer anything to the end-users other than a bare-bones game store and a friends list.
They’re years behind, and they don’t show any signs of catching up anytime soon. Epic should have starting tossing their weight around when they actually had something to show.
Well, except maybe their engine. Or their games. Or other things that you casually ignored because it doesn’t fit your overall point.
Seriously, this has been discussed to death, why drag it up now?
And as has been said, it’s not good to have the market so shaped by a single store. Developers, as much as consumers, need competition to get the best prices for themselves.
“Game store”. It’s right in the title.
OK. But I’m not sure why consumers are supposed to care.
jsnell
5218
Well, that’s kind of the question. Are they capable of competing on audience?
Six months ago it seemed implausible that the Fortnite audience would be plopping down money on indie games, so there should be no new audience for them to tap into. And then on the other hand they should have a lot of trouble attracting people over from Steam. The store was garbage to start with, their progress on improving it is glacial, and a lot of that existing audience for indie games really dislikes Epic.
But every indication we have is that the games are selling very well.
So there’s a disconnect somewhere.
Because better developer deals means more developer, which means more games.
Grifman
5220
Except it’s only a very limited and select number of developers that are getting those deals.
Sure, but you have to start with those developers that can deliver.
It’s a business, and I want more games, but I don’t want more crappy games. That how we ended up with the mess that is Steam. A lot of those indie games just aren’t good enough.
LeeAbe
5222
So don’t buy them. Steam, unlike EGS, has a ton of info and forums so you can decide what is right for you. Most games on EGS have some screen shots and a promotional blurb. Steam needs competition, but it needs it from a decent service, not someone just throwing money at the problem.
But why should EGS want to waste space on crappy indie games either? I mean, that tmwas the critique leveled. Why is EGS only offering the deal to a hand full of developers. And its to keep the ratio of crap low.
When it comes to search ability real estate is a premium. Every game should count for something on a platform as small as EGS is. When they have matured, I am sure we will see a much wider selection of games, but that still doesn’t mean the flood gates need to be opened to every Tom, Dick and Harry.
This is such an outrageous assertion, based on nothing but your wishful thinking of where EGS will benignly take the market. There is no guarantee that either more money for developers or a larger cut of given revenue will ensure more games or a better overall customer experience. This is like Republicans trickle down economics applied to the games industry.
I feel like EGS is more like Google+ vs Facebook. EGS having disruption at the start using funny money, but after a couple years the charm spell will wear off. The store will land firmly into the second tier a la Origin, Uplay, GOG, etc. while Steam continues to rule supreme.
Outrageous assertion eh? The Ooblets team provides testimony that supports @legowarrior’s claim.
“Now we can just focus on making the game without worrying about keeping the lights on. The upfront money they’re providing means we’ll be able to afford more help and resources to start ramping up production and doing some cooler things.”
Grifman
5227
The problem is how do you define “crappy indie game”? Any selective curation is going to miss potentially good games. Look at how many very good and successful games are coming out of independent studios that aren’t EA, Ubisoft, Activision, etc… Most of the time you won’t even know until after they become successful.
The point is that you have asserted that EGS will result in more games because developers will make more money. That may or may not be true, but I can assure you it won’t be true for the many successful indies that can’t get on their platform It very much limits your argument to a relative select handful of developers.
LeeAbe
5228
They were making the game anyway. They just found a different way to fund it.
A much less taxing and time consuming one. It gives them less to be stressed about, and stress kills creativity.
I mean, unless one of those Epic Haters on Twitters decides to follow through on their threats and actually kill the developers. I mean, nothing kills creativity like actually being murdered.
And it won’t be true of Steam at all if people have to wad through all the trash that is put up every day.
There is no one perfect solution, but having multiple stores compete allows us to try out different solutions. And it gives some developers more options as well.
Maybe having just Steam is good enough for a lot of people, but I want to see what other stores can come up.
LeeAbe
5232
Sure, but let’s not act like Epic is causing some great upsurge of new developers. Epic is just a publisher with their own store. They might help a few developers they deem worthy, meanwhile Steam is giving indies of all levels access to a store and a chance to make money.
When rational points are exhausted. Bring out the old beaten strawman.
