Steam taking a flat 30% cut hasn't been the case for years.
An unprecedented change to Valve’s financial agreement with game makers
www.theverge.com
Keep in mind that this was before Epic started making a big fucking deal over their flat 12% cut and having a guaranteed minimum payout for certain games. Steam probably updated their revenue structure since then.
That is disingenuous, Valve still takes 30% up until $10 million, then lower it to 25% for anything over 10 million and below 50 million dollars, then 20% of any sales over fifty million. I've pointed it out before but Valve made that change 3-4 days before Epic launched EGS and announced what their fees would be.
Way before that Epic still did the right thing, before UE4 they had UDK based on Unreal Engine 3. It was free to download and use, the agreement was that if you made and sold a game made with it you would only pay license fees for the engine if sales went above $50k or something. So Brianna Wu won't have to part with a penny, the only other successful game I know made with UDK was Hawken, the multiplayer mech game.
They're also doing an even better thing with UE4 and UE5, it's free to download, free to use, open source, you can publish wherever you want and get this: you won't have to pay shit to them for any sales under a million bucks(gross revenue). You only have to pay 30% to Steam until you reach $10,000,000. Steam has become what they set out to never be.
Hatred, that game that was controversial for a while, was using UE4 and Epic only asked them to remove the UE logo at the splash screen, a move usually costs money. So there's some integrity in their idea that anyone can use it instead of pursuing the path of screeching and trying to slam people with copyright and code of conducts.
It's still Sweeney's company(lol chinese I know) and he's always been the other John Carmack.