THE Epic Games Store Thread

[theshadowcult]

you know. people see the 70/30 split from valve and think its ****... but you guys dont even. Because valve takes a 30 cut from the total price, the developer/publisher makes MORE from this deal than they ever did from retail stores. Yeah, 12/88 is definitely a better number than valves, but valve is NOT ripping anyone off...

[Eisberg]

Originally Posted by theshadowcult

you know. people see the 70/30 split from valve and think its ****... but you guys dont even. Because valve takes a 30 cut from the total price, the developer/publisher makes MORE from this deal than they ever did from retail stores. Yeah, 12/88 is definitely a better number than valves, but valve is NOT ripping anyone off...

See I disagree with that. 30% is way to high for the good indie developers that have to deal with getting their games buried by all the garbage that Valve lets on, it isn't a good deal. Valve has devalued their service for the good indie developers with them allowing something like 9,000+ new games a year now, and that growth has been increasing by ~2000 to 3000 more new games than the previous year.
The 1980s gaming crash happened because of the lack of quality control, and it feels like Steam is repeating that history.

[logical]

70/30 split with 10k sales is better than 88/12 with 1k sales. Theres a ton of people who just buy games to buy games and buy games for the badges on Steam and right now Epic cant compete with the sheer number of users Steam has.

If Epic did get anywhere near Steam user numbers they would probably up their cut at some point. The only reason the cut is better on Epic is because thats the only way they can coax devs to their launcher.

As for the steam game clutter issue... its really a non-issue. If your game is good then it will be known and make a name for itself. If its garbage then it will stay at the bottom barrel depths of Steam like all the other trash. That rings true anywhere. And as Epic launcher gets bigger with more games the same thing will happen there. The only reason you dont see it as an issue now is because Epic has what 20 games? They have to put something on the front page so everyone on Epic gets promo now.

[Eisberg]

Originally Posted by logical

70/30 split with 10k sales is better than 88/12 with 1k sales. Theres a ton of people who just buy games to buy games and buy games for the badges on Steam and right now Epic cant compete with the sheer number of users Steam has.

If Epic did get anywhere near Steam user numbers they would probably up their cut at some point. The only reason the cut is better on Epic is because thats the only way they can coax devs to their launcher.

As for the steam game clutter issue... its really a non-issue. If your game is good then it will be known and make a name for itself. If its garbage then it will stay at the bottom barrel depths of Steam like all the other trash. That rings true anywhere. And as Epic launcher gets bigger with more games the same thing will happen there. The only reason you dont see it as an issue now is because Epic has what 20 games? They have to put something on the front page so everyone on Epic gets promo now.

Epic has 200 million that use the store client, vs the last known number for Steam was 125 million in 2016. So it could very well be 10k sales at 70/30 split vs 10k sales at 88/12 split.

Epic store is going to be a curated store, so it won't run into the problem of customers having to sift through thousands upon thousands of new games every year to find something they want to buy and play.
And no, the gargabe doesn't get sifted through the bottom at all, every single time I want to look through games on Steam, I have to go through so many pages after pages of crap to hopefully find something I want to buy and play. The shopping experience I get on Steam is horrible and I hate it, I get a massively better experience shopping on places like GoG, or Fanatical or GMG.

[twonha]

Originally Posted by Eisberg

And no, the gargabe doesn't get sifted through the bottom at all, every single time I want to look through games on Steam, I have to go through so many pages after pages of crap to hopefully find something I want to buy and play.

At that point, do you ever still find something? Could be you'll have already hit that bottom 90%. Just like with Google Search, if it's not on the first page, trespassers beware.

[Nunz]

Originally Posted by Eisberg

Epic has 200 million that use the store client, vs the last known number for Steam was 125 million in 2016. So it could very well be 10k sales at 70/30 split vs 10k sales at 88/12 split.

Those 200 million are mostly fortnite players that will not have any interest in indie games or any other game on the Epic store. That's extremely disingenous to compare Steam's 125 million that use Steam as a digital store and communication app, and the 200 million that are forced to use the Epic store to play one single game. 200 million also sounds like an exaggeration. Last I saw, Fortnite was only running about 78 million players per month - Epic doesn't really offer any other games that would pull in another 122 million users. The 200 million sounds bogus, or at least a heavy exaggeration.

Epic store is going to be a curated store, so it won't run into the problem of customers having to sift through thousands upon thousands of new games every year to find something they want to buy and play.
And no, the gargabe doesn't get sifted through the bottom at all, every single time I want to look through games on Steam, I have to go through so many pages after pages of crap to hopefully find something I want to buy and play. The shopping experience I get on Steam is horrible and I hate it, I get a massively better experience shopping on places like GoG, or Fanatical or GMG.

I have no problem with the "shopping experience" on Steam. I don't understand where the disconnect is, and how you're having this drastically awful experience. The discover pages work great, the search function works as it should, and I'm recommended titles quite often that I've never heard of but would fit the type of games I play. It just feels like you're complaining to complain.

[Nagorak]

Originally Posted by twonha

From 2008 forward:
* 2008: Steamworks (most notably, matchmaking and voice communication as well as developer tools)
* 2009: Steam Cloud
* 2010: Mac OS X client
* 2011: Steam Workshop
* 2012: Steam mobile app, Steam Greenlight, Big Picture Mode, Productivity software
* 2013: Steam Early Access, Linux client, Family Sharing
* 2014: In-home streaming, Steam Music
* 2015: Broadcast streaming, SteamOS, movies/tv/renting
* 2016: SteamVR
* 2017: SteamDirect

Not to mention reviews, curators, store improvements, the refund policy... Making a brash statement is easy, but I'm not sure you put any thought in it, especially seeing as no other store comes anywhere near being as complete an offer as Steam is. In fact, no-one's even trying to compete with Steam on features, except GOG with its DRM-free approach. Everyone else - uPlay, Battle.net, Origin, Epic - is using exclusives to force people into their ecosystems. That's their right, of course, but it's not exactly the kind of competition you'd hope for.

Considering how much money they bring in, I'm still not convinced that the stuff you listed is all that impressive. Most of those are very minor things, and if you stripped half those features out few would miss them. No one even uses things like Steam Voice communication, everyone uses Discord instead. Movie renting? Who asked for that? How did that improve the gaming experience? These are things they added to make more money for themselves, not to improve the user experience. Early access... not sure that's even been a positive to be honest. I'd almost say you could drop everything after Steam Cloud and it would hardly matter, although Steam VR users would be upset.

But we're talking about a company bringing in hundreds of millions per year with only a couple hundred employees. The stuff added is really the bare minimum of what should be expected, not something to crow about. To be fair, you can also make the argument that there isn't really that much more they can do to improve the service anyway. But either way, the truth is most of the money is just going into GabeN's pocket.

I won't disagree that Steam is currently the best store, but most of the reason people use them is because they were there first not because of Steam's features themselves. I don't hate Steam. I use it myself, but I don't see how more competition can't be a good thing. Hopefully the other stores will improve if they want to compete.

For the record, my primary issue with Valve is that they largely stopped making games, despite having plenty of excess cash to fund them. There's no excuse for why we didn't get HL3, for example.

[Eisberg]

Originally Posted by Nagorak

Considering how much money they bring in, I'm still not convinced that the stuff you listed is all that impressive. If you stripped half that stuff out no one would miss it. No one even uses things like Steam Voice communication, everyone uses Discord instead. Movie renting? Who asked for that? How did that improve the gaming experience?

We're talking about a company bringing in hundreds of millions per year with only a couple hundred employees. Most of the money is just going into GabeN's pocket.

It was estimated that Steam brought in 4.3 Billion in revenue in 2017, and going to be more than that for 2018. At 5 billion sales and Valve keeping 30% of that, that is $1.5 Billion in revenue for Valve.

[Nunz]

Originally Posted by Nagorak

I won't disagree that Steam is currently the best store, but most of the reason people use them is because they were there first not because of Steam's features themselves. I don't hate Steam. I use it myself, but I don't see how more competition can't be a good thing. Hopefully the other stores will improve if they want to compete.

That's not the argument being made, though. Eisberg makes it out that Valve is doing something wrong by taking a 30% cut, or that it somehow makes Valve greedy. No one is arguing against competition - the argument is that Valve can ask whatever it wants because it is far and away the best digital store, gaming platform, and community (in terms of size). Valve can demand the cut it does because at the end of the day, your game will get far more visibility on Steam that it will on any other store.

There are arguments being made here that Steam is somehow doing poorly in certain fields that it clearly does tremendously well in.

What features is Steam missing that you think it should have? Mac OSX support is a big deal and something Valve has pushed quite hard, and allowing Mac users to be able to game is a good thing, not some minor "oh we could do without it." The curator and community movements they've pushed forward have been massive successes in terms of bringing gamers together. They haven't just done minor stuff.

[Exposed]

Originally Posted by Eisberg

It was estimated that Steam brought in 4.3 Billion in revenue in 2017, and going to be more than that for 2018. At 5 billion sales and Valve keeping 30% of that, that is $1.5 Billion in revenue for Valve.

You seem to have a problem with this. Why? Steam is a store.

Do you have a problem with Newegg making a billion dollars a year from taking a cut from each manufacturer?

Or your favorite retail store thriving by taking a cut of each sale?

That's how sales works. Steam just happens to be the biggest store front end for games/ online digital sales.

I could care less if some other platform offers a better cut to developers, because as a consumer I'm only looking at ease of purchasing software. Steam is very convenient, Discord and Epic's store is not. Even Uplay and Origin are miles ahead in terms of user experience. I could care even less when these better cuts aren't passed down to the consumer... so $59 on steam vs $59 on Epic, seems pretty clear which one I will be buying from.

[Nagorak]

It seems like I've helped take this discussion in a pointless direction.

twonha originally called me out for asking "has anything noteworthy been added to steam in the last decade?" I guess that his list was a reasonable response. Those are noteworthy additions, so it was a silly question, at least the way I phrased it.

It's a different question of how much actual effort was required to implement those features (ie: Big Picture Mode is basically just a reskin). I don't think the features added justified their 30% cut by any means. But, at the same time, they don't actually have to justify anything. The 30% cut is clearly what the market will bear, whether fair or unfair, deserved or not, so it's irrelevant. They could have added nothing since release and still got the 30% either way.

I do think that copying Steam's basic functionality would not be that hard. A lot of the additional features like in-home Streaming are used by such a small minority that it's not going to stop people from using other stores. Whether it's easy to get people to switch over to other stores, rather than sticking to the convenience of having only a single store is a separate issue. Valve certainly has the advantage there.

[theshadowcult]

Originally Posted by Nunz

I have no problem with the "shopping experience" on Steam. I don't understand where the disconnect is, and how you're having this drastically awful experience. The discover pages work great, the search function works as it should, and I'm recommended titles quite often that I've never heard of but would fit the type of games I play. It just feels like you're complaining to complain.

While he is clearly an outlier on his experience with the steam store. The store is definitely not that great for indie devs because of the vast ocean of titles to be found there. There are quite a lot of really goode games on steam that should be far more popular, but barely have any sales because they simply get lost.

Yes, it definitely works, but it still needs to work better. I am also not one of the those people who think steam has to many games, i actually think it's fantastic that there is a large store where people who have made their first game from their basement computer on rpg maker can display it. The store still needs large improvement though.

[Eisberg]

Here is an example of a great indie game that clearly did not get enough exposure and deserves to get better exposure and sales than what it got.

This game released earlier this year and I never even saw it on Steam, it got missed in the pile of garbage. The only reason I found out about this game is because I got it free with Twitch Prime.

I have been playing it for the last couple of days and it is a fantastic game, and if it wasn't for Twitch Prime I most likely would not have ever found out about this game.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/6...and_Sacrifice/

Ghost of a Tale was another game that I didn't know about from Steam, and never saw it on Steam in my search, or it was easily missed some how, I ended up finding about it on GoG.

Death Squared, fun game I play with my son, didn't know about it till I got it for free on Twitch Prime
Same with Steamworld Dig and Adventure Pals (another game I play with my son)

[theshadowcult]

It also doesnt help that the game tags are not regulated, and anyone can nominate any tag for any game, making the searches definitely not accurate. Number of times ive seen horror tags on kids games, or rpg tags on games with not a single rpg element in them at all is quite high.

[NIGELG]

Originally Posted by Progression

Hey... this might force valve to make games again.

Yes,make Half Life 3.Steam needs some good competition.

[Eisberg]

Originally Posted by NIGELG

Yes,make Half Life 3.Steam needs some good competition.

Valve doesn't know how to count to 3, I don't even think their keyboards have a #3 key at all.

[Jet Black]

Originally Posted by twonha

Steam's main issue from a developer's point of view is visibility, but even then it's easy to argue that 10% visibility among 50+ million gamers is better than 90% visibility among 1 million gamers.

That's a good point and will likely be the thing that either makes Epic's store a success or a failure. The only developers that will be able to switch to Epic and have success either have a) A built-in user base willing to follow them, or b) expect pitiful sales on either platform, so want to maximize their return:

As a developer, having an 88% takeaway certainly sounds better than 70%, but if I only sell 1,000 copies at 88% and 1,000,000 copies at 70%, I'm better off with Valve. But if I expect to only sell a small number of copies either way, take the bigger cut. Most developers will probably take both and try not to alienate or split their fan base, though. Exclusives will only continue as long as Epic is willing to shell out cash to attract people to their platform which will either steal first place from Valve, and we'll all switch - or will fail to attract, and Epic will stop throwing money away.

[Exposed]

Originally Posted by Eisberg

Here is an example of a great indie game that clearly did not get enough exposure and deserves to get better exposure and sales than what it got.

This game released earlier this year and I never even saw it on Steam, it got missed in the pile of garbage. The only reason I found out about this game is because I got it free with Twitch Prime.

I have been playing it for the last couple of days and it is a fantastic game, and if it wasn't for Twitch Prime I most likely would not have ever found out about this game.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/6...and_Sacrifice/

Ghost of a Tale was another game that I didn't know about from Steam, and never saw it on Steam in my search, or it was easily missed some how, I ended up finding about it on GoG.

Death Squared, fun game I play with my son, didn't know about it till I got it for free on Twitch Prime
Same with Steamworld Dig and Adventure Pals (another game I play with my son)

I don't know man, game doesn't look all that special to me. RPGs like that are a dime a dozen. You can't just release a game into a crowded market and not do anything yourself to make it known. That's like writing a book and complaining you old only sold 50 copies, because you didn't want to do a book tour or book signing or any other marketing legwork.

Just look at Agony. An indie game that got attention because of its unique content and the fact the developers went out of their way to make it known. What did that RPG developer do to make his game known?

[Taturana]

I have seen both of "Smoke and Sacrifice" and "Ghost of a Tale" in Steam's discovery list (it is in my wishlist). I didn't like the visual design of the first and had some minor interest on the second. The system worked for me, I don't know.

[Nunz]

Those games are part of the “pile of garbage” he’s complaining about

[Crawdaddy79]

Originally Posted by Eisberg

This game released earlier this year and I never even saw it on Steam, it got missed in the pile of garbage. The only reason I found out about this game is because I got it free with Twitch Prime.

I have been playing it for the last couple of days and it is a fantastic game, and if it wasn't for Twitch Prime I most likely would not have ever found out about this game.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/6...and_Sacrifice/

Ghost of a Tale was another game that I didn't know about from Steam, and never saw it on Steam in my search, or it was easily missed some how, I ended up finding about it on GoG.

Ironically, I was exposed to both of those games using the "Queue" algorithm that Steam created to help developers get exposed to people who might enjoy their games based on that user's preferences. I do it for the trading cards that I can sell for pennies, but have ended up wishlisting (another good feature) and buying several games this way. Though I think I saw Ghost of a Tale in the screenshot thread here, as well.

To say Steam does "nothing" for their cut is not putting it accurately. Each game gets a discussion board, a community hub which collaborates user created content, guides, etc. There's an activity feed where you can see what your friends bought, what achievements they have, and any random web/interface screenshots with no description (Eisberg :tisk: ). This is all great stuff.

I agree the biggest issue with Steam is the amount of crap that you have to filter through from indie devs that look good but end up being crap. The user reviews (another feature lacking with Epic) is open to chaos, but is generally a good way to do this.

A game I recently played like this was Spirits of Xanadu. As enjoyable as it is, there are probably five hundred games equally enjoyable from indie devs that I haven't played, and can never play.

One of the things I'm having a hard time grappling with is the sheer amount of games to pick from. Signing up for the Humble Monthly was the worst good idea I've ever had.

[Eisberg]

Originally Posted by Nunz

Those games are part of the “pile of garbage” he’s complaining about

No they are not. They are excellent games, and are not a pile of garbage.

[Nunz]

Originally Posted by Eisberg

No they are not. They are excellent games, and are not a pile of garbage.

Because you believe so.

[NWR_Midnight]

Originally Posted by Nunz

Because you believe so.

Isn't that all that matters is his own opinion about what is fun and great to him?

Think about how boring this world would be if everyone had the same ideas, opinions, and theories on what is fun and what is not. We would all just be mindless drones if that was the case. (we already have enough people like that in this world).

Honestly, I took a look at the game lettuce mentioned, and It looks like a game I would enjoy, but even on sale for $7.49, it is not in the budget right now.

[twonha]

Originally Posted by Eisberg

Here is an example of a great indie game that clearly did not get enough exposure and deserves to get better exposure and sales than what it got.

This game released earlier this year and I never even saw it on Steam, it got missed in the pile of garbage. The only reason I found out about this game is because I got it free with Twitch Prime.

I have been playing it for the last couple of days and it is a fantastic game, and if it wasn't for Twitch Prime I most likely would not have ever found out about this game.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/6...and_Sacrifice/

Ghost of a Tale was another game that I didn't know about from Steam, and never saw it on Steam in my search, or it was easily missed some how, I ended up finding about it on GoG.

Death Squared, fun game I play with my son, didn't know about it till I got it for free on Twitch Prime
Same with Steamworld Dig and Adventure Pals (another game I play with my son)

Even without the 9000 shitty games on Steam, the games you mention could easily drown in the 1000 good games on Steam, and that'd just be from this year's release calendar. There is enormous competition among small 2D indie games, even just among the good ones. Complaining your (excuse the harshness) dime a dozen game is being drowned out, is essentially a lesson in supply & demand. I'll play a bunch of indie games a year, but I'm not going to play a dozen or more. The gaming market is enormous, so it takes more than just making a decent game to get noticed.

Lastly, since Steam has been going in pretty much the same direction for a decade now, so you know what you get. Complaining about the competition and blaming that on Steam, feels deluded to me. If you want your exclusive attention, use a store that allows for that - there are plenty of them out there by now.

[Lithurge]

What seems to be misunderstood is that the 200 million figure is registered users which is not the same as people with the Epic launcher/store installed on their PC. As far as I'm aware Epic has not published any data about splits of either installs, registrations or concurrent players per platform.

It should also be borne in mind that a curated experience doesn't necessarily mean the games you like will or might become available on the platform. So yes it may be easier to spot a game you like, but you might well miss many more because they aren't ever available.

[Nunz]

Originally Posted by NWR_Midnight

Isn't that all that matters is his own opinion about what is fun and great to him?

sure, but that loses standing when you start bashing something because you deem some things garbage and other things as "great games" ..

[Eisberg]

Originally Posted by twonha

Even without the 9000 shitty games on Steam, the games you mention could easily drown in the 1000 good games on Steam, and that'd just be from this year's release calendar. There is enormous competition among small 2D indie games, even just among the good ones. Complaining your (excuse the harshness) dime a dozen game is being drowned out, is essentially a lesson in supply & demand. I'll play a bunch of indie games a year, but I'm not going to play a dozen or more. The gaming market is enormous, so it takes more than just making a decent game to get noticed.

Lastly, since Steam has been going in pretty much the same direction for a decade now, so you know what you get. Complaining about the competition and blaming that on Steam, feels deluded to me. If you want your exclusive attention, use a store that allows for that - there are plenty of them out there by now.

With So many games coming in daily every new game gets significantly less time on Steams front page. With 8500 less games a year on the store front the other 500 can get more exposure and for longer on Steams store

And it is a steam problem, and it will only get worse. No doubt theyll get 11000 to 12000 new games this year, then 13000 to 15000 new games the year after that, and15000 to 18000 new games year after that... How can you not see that as a problem? How can you not see how Steam is becoming a bad place and a bad deal for the good indie developers?

It is going to be an even bigger problem for Steam if the AAA developers don't come back, and the good indie developers leave Steam.

[Eisberg]

Originally Posted by Lithurge

What seems to be misunderstood is that the 200 million figure is registered users which is not the same as people with the Epic launcher/store installed on their PC. As far as I'm aware Epic has not published any data about splits of either installs, registrations or concurrent players per platform.

It should also be borne in mind that a curated experience doesn't necessarily mean the games you like will or might become available on the platform. So yes it may be easier to spot a game you like, but you might well miss many more because they aren't ever available.

The same can be said about Steams 125 million accounts.

A curated store with all of its faults is still far better then a Store that lets 9000+ games on ( and growing that number by 2000 to 3000 per year) where the vast majority are objectively garbage.

[Eisberg]

Originally Posted by Nunz

sure, but that loses standing when you start bashing something because you deem some things garbage and other things as "great games" ..

What you said makes no sense at all. There is nothing wrong with saying some games are garbage while others are great games.