Epic Games General Thread - Its time to talk about what the AAA gaming industry does not understand about the PC console.

[Tanner Glass]

Valve already takes a 30% cut and gives devs 70. What would an extra 88% do?
Not a whole lot really. At least for sales. What it would do however is affect Valve more. The reason that they have that cut is for server upkeep, for not only their games but the store, the community, the market, and the workshop, all which are on separate servers (and that's JUST for Steam's networking, not even including the actual Valve sites and office work or how downloads work.) Judging by the fact that there's a lot of nothing to do or get on EGS and why Valve has such a "steep cut" for the devs, I can see why they're able to give a bigger cut to devs.

It's more than just that, Epic has to give a deeper cut because they can't match the volume of sales that being on Steam can generate. They also have to pay cash on top of that because it likely isn't even close.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, you're selling an indie game at $30 each.

Steam (per month) has a approximately 90 million unique users
The Epic Games store claims to have 85 million users, total, all time. We don't have an active user count but let's, for the sake of argument, be really generous and suggest they're seeing 10 million monthly users.

Per sale, on Steam, you are making $21 (70% of $30); on EGS you are making $26.40 per sale.

Let's say, that the platforms have similar player bases with similar interests and will by the game at the same rate, and let's say that rate is 1 person buys it out of every 1,000.

For Steam - that becomes 90,000 sales turning into $1,890,000 dollars.
For EGS - that becomes 10,000 sales turning into $264,000 dollars.

There are a lot more theoretical factors here that push it further into Steam's favor (a much better store page, much better gifting, a much wider audience who likely already has SteamBux on the platform, EGS being heavily saturated with kids who will only ever want to play Fortnite) but there's a huge gulf of profit that Epic isn't going to be able to just keep throwing fortnite money at. If they have to pay indie devs nearly $1.5 million for exclusivity (in theory), what on earth are they going to have to pay Gearbox or Obsidian?

 

[The tired cat]

@Tanner Glass wasnt there info how Epic had to pay least 7 or 8 mln to Obsidian?

 

[Tanner Glass]

@Tanner Glass wasnt there info how Epic had to pay least 7 or 8 mln to Obsidian?

I don't think they announce any actual payments (although they clearly payed a ton to Randy Pitchford for how hard he's sucking their cock) but it's generally agreed upon that it's enough to cover the money that would be lost for the entire year's worth of sales on the Steam store (or 6 months, in Gearbox's case). Because the Developers are taking the money, we can assume that their financial team deiced it would be a good move.

If we were to look, using the same assumptions as before, we can get an idea as to what that might actually be.

Obsidian's last game (Pillars of Eternity 2) released nearly a year ago, SteamSpy seems to suggest there are 400,000 copies of it floating around. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that it's a $45 game (released for more, but was on sale, let's just call it an average).

On Steam - this would have been $31.50 per sale, or $12,600,000 dollars for the developer.

If EGS is would have made that an exclusive last year, it would have likely cost them around $10,000,000 (more or less).

The game they have (Outer Worlds) coming out isn't Pillars of Eternity, it's considered a spiritual successor to one of the more beloved video games of recent times (that being, Fallout New Vegas).

Let's make some assumptions. There are 4 million copies of Fallout : New Vegas owned on Steam alone. Let's take the user review score (95%) and make the suggestion that there are 3.8 million people who own it and enjoyied it and would be very interested in Obsidian releasing a new game in the same style. Let's break down how much the developer could potientally make on steam in a few assumption groups. The game will release at $60 and results in $42/sale for the developer.

If 1 out of every 100 Fallout : New Vegas PC players (1%) were to buy Outer Worlds - $1,960,000
If 1 out of every 10 Fallout : New Vegas PC players (10%) were to buy Outer Worlds - $15,960,000
If 1 out of every 5 Fallout : New Vegas PC players (20%) were to buy Outer Worlds - $31,920,000
If 1 out of every 2 Fallout : New Vegas PC players (50%) were to buy Outer Worlds - $79,800,000

I would not be surprised to learn that 10% of people who played New Vegas on PC would buy Outer Worlds, I would even suggest that it's on the low side (I would think 15% of people would check it out). This also does not factor in anyone who would be interested in Outer Worlds who have not played Fallout : New Vegas or people that in Bethesda's audience that aren't interested in Bethesda's current line up (Namely Fallout 4, Fallout 76).

I'm not in any of these meetings and they don't release numbers, but I would suggest that Obsidian likely got a much larger check (~$20,000,000+) for the EGS exclusivity and there's not a chance that Epic Games makes even anything close to that back, considering the much smaller install base and no workshop support.

I'm not going to do all the math, but SteamSpy suggests that ~7,000,000 people have Borderlands 2 on Steam; or nearly twice the install base as Fallout : New Vegas, suggesting that check was equally as huge.

 

[AnOminous]

There are a lot more theoretical factors here that push it further into Steam's favor (a much better store page, much better gifting, a much wider audience who likely already has SteamBux on the platform, EGS being heavily saturated with kids who will only ever want to play Fortnite) but there's a huge gulf of profit that Epic isn't going to be able to just keep throwing fortnite money at. If they have to pay indie devs nearly $1.5 million for exclusivity (in theory), what on earth are they going to have to pay Gearbox or Obsidian?

This is what I don't get. Steam has a much better store page than Epic but that's because Epic's looks like hammered shit and is barely even functional. Steam's is stunningly. . .adequate. And it's only been even that for a few years. It has an okay search feature, some semi-useful use of tags, and that's really it. You can find what you're looking for. Usually. With a little effort. And it's not exactly snappy.

How hard is the task of "just make a slightly better than average website that can access data and sell shit?"

Any credible competitor to Steam will be able to do that before even opening.

 

[Zeke Von Genbu]

I don't think they announce any actual payments (although they clearly payed a ton to Randy Pitchford for how hard he's sucking their cock) but it's generally agreed upon that it's enough to cover the money that would be lost for the entire year's worth of sales on the Steam store (or 6 months, in Gearbox's case). Because the Developers are taking the money, we can assume that their financial team deiced it would be a good move.

I found one payment number here for 2,250,000 USD: https://www.pcgamer.com/phoenix-poi...is-worth-dollar225-million-says-fig-investor/
Nice URL btw, makes the number look like 225 million at a glance.

So we'll use this as a benchmark for now, so $2,250,000 for a timed exclusive. So how much volume is needed to be sold on steam for the developer to get the same money?

So Phoenix Point's base game sells for 40 dollars on their website, which is what I'll use as I don't even want to begin trying to guess how many will buy the 60 or 80 dollar editions. We know the devs get a 88% cut which is $35.20 in revenue, on steam lets be conservative and assume the cut is 70% as I've heard it can vary between 70-80% which means on steam the revenue is 28 dollars.

Epic Store: We'll say 500,000 sales as I have no idea what to estimate here and it is a nice even number. So our total revenue formula from this deal is 2,250,000 + (35.20 x Sales Volume) = Revenue. So math aside how much is that with our X (sales volume) being 500,000? That would be $19,850,000

Steam: So what does steam need to sell to match this? Well our formula for steam is 0 (no initial investment) + (28 x Sales Volume). So under the same sales volume number estimate, Steam would generate $14,000,000, so what volume number is needed to match the estimate for Epic? Approximately 708,929 while rounding up. This number widens the more that is sold on epic as to break even at 1M units sold on epic, Steam needs to sell 1,337,500 units. Turns out higher revenue cuts are pretty good the more you sell.

Can you sell 208,929 more copies on steam? Probably, this is again ignoring the higher priced editions as trying to evaluate them is difficult. Alongside the fact that some people might still buy the game day 1 out of desperation on Epic, but now outright refuse to buy the higher priced editions due to this timed exclusive business. So we'll stick with the normal edition sales unless someone wants to try and guess the other editions. One last factor this article says, this money isn't just going into a bank account, this number is stated to be used to further develop the game so a good portion of this money isn't even pocketed.

 

[Secret Asshole]

That's allegedly going into the dev budget. All of Epic's promises with exclusivity (cheaper games, etc.) have failed to materialize while Steam has sales constantly. Also Pheonix Point was a indie game nobody really heard of except its hardcore audience which it basically shanked.

The 2.5 million was also the games entire development budget. If they're paying entire dev budgets for Indie games, you can only imagine how much they're paying AAA studios. There have been rumors that Epic has to pay theoretical lost profits that it would have made on Steam if they don't meet certain goals (which they almost certainly won't) for the bigger studios in addition to tens of millions. And they're only limited exclusives.

 

[Zeke Von Genbu]

That's allegedly going into the dev budget. All of Epic's promises with exclusivity (cheaper games, etc.) have failed to materialize while Steam has sales constantly. Also Pheonix Point was a indie game nobody really heard of except its hardcore audience which it basically shanked.

The 2.5 million was also the games entire development budget. If they're paying entire dev budgets for Indie games, you can only imagine how much they're paying AAA studios. There have been rumors that Epic has to pay theoretical lost profits that it would have made on Steam if they don't meet certain goals (which they almost certainly won't) for the bigger studios in addition to tens of millions. And they're only limited exclusives.

This deal happened within the last month or so at as far as I can tell, and this game was supposed to come out December of last year from a short google search I did and it is set to release in September of this year. So it is highly doubtful that this is the vast majority of the entire game's original budget and even if it were it is still revenue related to this project because without it you wouldn't have gotten the money.

That obligation to reimburse for lost sales is interesting, though how you get a figure for lost sales is tricky as there are too many factors at play here. Does the estimated amount change due to the public backlash, how do you even get an estimate to begin with, maybe the game just sucks anyway so it would have sold badly on Steam regardless, is this based on lost sales volume or revenue? I have way too many questions on this, but it is still interesting.

 

[Marissa Moira]

This deal happened within the last month or so at as far as I can tell, and this game was supposed to come out December of last year from a short google search I did and it is set to release in September of this year. So it is highly doubtful that this is the vast majority of the entire game's original budget and even if it were it is still revenue related to this project because without it you wouldn't have gotten the money.

That obligation to reimburse for lost sales is interesting, though how you get a figure for lost sales is tricky as there are too many factors at play here. Does the estimated amount change due to the public backlash, how do you even get an estimate to begin with, maybe the game just sucks anyway so it would have sold badly on Steam regardless, is this based on lost sales volume or revenue? I have way too many questions on this, but it is still interesting.

Lost sales tend to use previous games that the company sold as a baseline.

Like for Borderlands 3 they would be using Borderlands 1 and 2 and average the sales between them and that would be the number of lost sales to be eligible for a reimbursement.

 

[Secret Asshole]

This deal happened within the last month or so at as far as I can tell, and this game was supposed to come out December of last year from a short google search I did and it is set to release in September of this year. So it is highly doubtful that this is the vast majority of the entire game's original budget and even if it were it is still revenue related to this project because without it you wouldn't have gotten the money.

That obligation to reimburse for lost sales is interesting, though how you get a figure for lost sales is tricky as there are too many factors at play here. Does the estimated amount change due to the public backlash, how do you even get an estimate to begin with, maybe the game just sucks anyway so it would have sold badly on Steam regardless, is this based on lost sales volume or revenue? I have way too many questions on this, but it is still interesting.

The game was crowdfunded. One developer said if even everyone refunded the money they would still be able to develop the game from scratch. That game made 2.5 mil from crowdfunding which is the only reason we know that total that Epic paid for it. So yes, it was the game's entire budget that they paid to get it exclusive. How do you think there is any idea we know how much the deal was for? This was why. Epic rarely announces the money it pays, only through inference and observation that it's getting more and more expensive.

Epic keeps its exclusive deals close to its chest, which is why we can only infer through leaks. Indie studios who were exclusive to Epic were being propped up by them. These deals were likely for a lot less since it matched the crowdfunded budget of what was a small kickstarer/Fig game that relatively few people knew the existence of. BL 3 being 6 months instead of a year just shows how much more expensive these exclusives are getting.

That's why they bought Rocket League's developer and why Sweeny made that snarky comment to Steam to lower its percentages. What Epic is doing with exclusivity is simply not sustainable. They needed a way out and when Steam didn't even acknowledge Sweeny's existence, they bought Rocket League.

 

[Zeke Von Genbu]

Lost sales tend to use previous games that the company sold as a baseline.

Like for Borderlands 3 they would be using Borderlands 1 and 2 and average the sales between them and that would be the number of lost sales to be eligible for a reimbursement.

Seems reasonable enough for most studios, not quite in this case as the developer of Phoenix Point only has one game of an entirely different genre.

The game was crowdfunded. One developer said if even everyone refunded the money they would still be able to develop the game from scratch. That game made 2.5 mil from crowdfunding which is the only reason we know that total that Epic paid for it. So yes, it was the game's entire budget that they paid to get it exclusive. How do you think there is any idea we know how much the deal was for? This was why. Epic rarely announces the money it pays, only through inference and observation that it's getting more and more expensive.

Epic keeps its exclusive deals close to its chest, which is why we can only infer through leaks. Indie studios who were exclusive to Epic were being propped up by them. These deals were likely for a lot less since it matched the crowdfunded budget of what was a small kickstarer/Fig game that relatively few people knew the existence of. BL 3 being 6 months instead of a year just shows how much more expensive these exclusives are getting.

That's why they bought Rocket League's developer and why Sweeny made that snarky comment to Steam to lower its percentages. What Epic is doing with exclusivity is simply not sustainable. They needed a way out and when Steam didn't even acknowledge Sweeny's existence, they bought Rocket League.

Oh I misread your statement. I read it as if we're trying to imply that Epic gave them their budget, but you meant that they basically matched it. That makes way more sense and I just misunderstood what you meant, my bad.

That seems fair to say and it is a good question of just how long this exclusive charade will go on. It is a brute force way to get people to maybe use your platform, but based on what I've seen people say as I have no intention on touching this store literally ever, it doesn't seem to keep them anywhere because the store by itself sucks

I'm almost positive that this will end in failure ultimately, unless something very nefarious is at play here due to the spyware that has been reported to exist on this platform and if that has some value to it. That'd be something else, but that is very much a tin foil hat theory.

 

[Jaimas]

There's another thing that's also being missed: Steam doesn't give a fuck about platform exclusivity. As long as you don't undercut their storefront, you can sell your game on any other storefront you want. That means that you don't just have the capacity to sell on Steam, but on GOG, Green Man Gaming, your own fucking website, or whatever - all at the same time, all offering additional revenue streams. You're not shackled to one storefront alone that way, and you can get better market penetration.

This is something EGS just won't allow. If you go with them, it's not just hedging out out of the biggest marketplace for games on PC: It's hedging you out of all of them. That's less money in the bank for you for going with EGS, even if they're giving you a bigger cut.

The Rocket League acquisition reeks of desperation and fear. They went after a game that basically wouldn't exist without promotion, to try to indicate they could go after games years old and take them from Steam. All this is going to do is piss more people off, of course, and since pissing off Tim Sweeny has become a highly effective all-natural erectile dysfunction treatment, I suspect that it's not going to help Epic much in the long run.

 

[Takayuki Yagami]

There's another thing that's also being missed: Steam doesn't give a fuck about platform exclusivity. As long as you don't undercut their storefront, you can sell your game on any other storefront you want. That means that you don't just have the capacity to sell on Steam, but on GOG, Green Man Gaming, your own fucking website, or whatever - all at the same time, all offering additional revenue streams. You're not shackled to one storefront alone that way, and you can get better market penetration.

This is something EGS just won't allow. If you go with them, it's not just hedging out out of the biggest marketplace for games on PC: It's hedging you out of all of them. That's less money in the bank for you for going with EGS, even if they're giving you a bigger cut.

The Rocket League acquisition reeks of desperation and fear. They went after a game that basically wouldn't exist without promotion, to try to indicate they could go after games years old and take them from Steam. All this is going to do is piss more people off, of course, and since pissing off Tim Sweeny has become a highly effective all-natural erectile dysfunction treatment, I suspect that it's not going to help Epic much in the long run.

This shit has me wondering what would actually happen if they pissed of Valve to the point of them starting to play hardball back. Valve’s only vices are VR tech and Custom peripherals, and after so long as the main game in town, they have to be sitting on post-Wii Nintendo levels of liquid assests.

 

[Secret Asshole]

Seems reasonable enough for most studios, not quite in this case as the developer of Phoenix Point only has one game of an entirely different genre.




Oh I misread your statement. I read it as if we're trying to imply that Epic gave them their budget, but you meant that they basically matched it. That makes way more sense and I just misunderstood what you meant, my bad.

That seems fair to say and it is a good question of just how long this exclusive charade will go on. It is a brute force way to get people to maybe use your platform, but based on what I've seen people say as I have no intention on touching this store literally ever, it doesn't seem to keep them anywhere because the store by itself sucks

I'm almost positive that this will end in failure ultimately, unless something very nefarious is at play here due to the spyware that has been reported to exist on this platform and if that has some value to it. That'd be something else, but that is very much a tin foil hat theory.

No worries. I am too. It might just eventually end, because it simply will not be profitable to do so. They won't even be able to get indie games because the press alone crushes them. One game sold 9 fucking copies. Asset flip games sold more than that on Steam. Other companies are definitely exploiting Epic's desperation and trying to edge out bigger amounts of money.

I think it will end in failure because many people have translated 'Epic Exclusive' into 'I will pirate' nowadays. The exclusives are growing more expensive. Personally, I will never use that piece of shit mess of Chink spyware.

This shit has me wondering what would actually happen if they pissed of Valve to the point of them starting to play hardball back. Valve’s only vices are VR tech and Custom peripherals, and after so long as the main game in town, they have to be sitting on post-Wii Nintendo levels of liquid assests.

And yeah. Another reminder: Steam offers devs infinite Steam keys for free they can sell anywhere, not even on Steam. I have activated games years and years old on Steam for free.

Just look at what Valve has done to crush other competitors: Nothing. Sweeny's insane malice to spite Steam is starting looking like he's an insane person.

I mean, Valve probably had some sort of plan to deal with Epic. Then everyone lost their shit over exclusives and how terrible Epic was all on their own. What more can Valve do that the PC gaming community already hasn't? Exclusives have grown more expensive because 1) companies obviously need to compensate for lost sales 2) the terrible publicity of going exclusive on Epic which has angered even the most docile of consumer due to the way they've done it. 3) Companies going exclusive on Steam might be noticing sales numbers of older games suffering on Steam.

Imagine how frustrated Sweeny is with them because they've only released statements about individual games. They've never really directly acknowledged them outside of that.

Valve has been in the digital marketplace for over a decade and has dealt with both fierce competition in its youth and more passive competition. The thing is Valve wants to remain open. It doesn't WANT to do exclusives. It doesn't want restrictions. But that's why it takes a bigger cut. Financially they do a lot and that's what the extra money does.

Valve would NOT lower their cut because they've already done the math and realized exclusives are not hurting them. Its also a sound strategy. With each exclusive, the community grows angrier and angrier. They see spikes in piracy. They get hounded endlessly.

Think about the time every new PC game is announced. There's one person that's always going to be 'Is this an Epic exclusive or will you go exclusive with Epic?' And that is not a positive question.

Another thing to think about, the AAA games on Epic aren't really exclusive. Want 'The Division 2'? Buy it from UPlay. Want 'The Outer Worlds'? Buy it from the Microsoft. Even if Red Dead Redemption 2 goes exclusive, you can buy it directly from Rockstar. So if you hate the Epic store out of spite and want a Triple A release, you can go right around them if you want. And believe me, EVERYONE on Steam has a Uplay account. So you might be spending tens of millions to make people go to another storefront.

 

[TerribleIdeas™]

How are they forcing people to buy their games? Sounds pretty fucked up if that's happening. They seem to be offering a game people want and offering developers money for hosting their games. Downloading their client is really easy and you are gay if you care about what launcher you used when you actually play the game and that's why you are also gay if you are mad about this.

I care that I already have several launchers bogging down my rig, and exclusives pretty much force you to use the associated console/launcher.

 

[Marissa Moira]

Valve needs to offer a service where you can get them to mail you a hard copy of the games in your library, complete with official artwork and cases.

Like I have the DVD of Elder Scrolls Arena. I know it's overkill in terms of data storage since the game is so small. But there's just something about old ass games on modern storage media. I like having all those old Amiga games that were re-released on Blu-ray or hell the blu-ray of the Dragon's Lair Trilogy that comes in the replica Laser disc box.

 

[armoreddinnerjacket]

Just going to point out that Steam does have the revamped Masterchief Collection for PC coming down the pipe, and probably Halo: Infinite when that comes out. When the MCC gets going it's going to bring a major influx of Halo fans through.

 

[BillyGoat2]

Valve needs to offer a service where you can get them to mail you a hard copy of the games in your library, complete with official artwork and cases.

Like I have the DVD of Elder Scrolls Arena. I know it's overkill in terms of data storage since the game is so small. But there's just something about old ass games on modern storage media. I like having all those old Amiga games that were re-released on Blu-ray or hell the blu-ray of the Dragon's Lair Trilogy that comes in the replica Laser disc box.

some publishers arent even making disks anymore. and most of these disks (like ESO) just have the launcher on it, instead of the full 60gb+ game

 

[Marissa Moira]

some publishers arent even making disks anymore. and most of these disks (like ESO) just have the launcher on it, instead of the full 60gb+ game

I know and that's a fucking problem. Server side data is bullshit. Consoles are the only ones who release shit in physical form so I do not see myself switching to PC anytime soon.

I don't trust any of the large companies with data management or them double swearing they have an plan. But with physical you hold all the data in your hand.

 

[Secret Asshole]

Another interesting thing that's hilarious to me:

Epic gaming store deals:

https://isthereanydeal.com/#/filter:epic

Steam Store Deals:

https://isthereanydeal.com/#/filter:steam

These aren't third party websites, since obviously Epic doesn't do that to keep it fair I limited it to storefronts. Epic has three. Steam, I can't even count. The list keeps scrolling, and scrolling and scrolling and scrolling and scrolling and scrolling.

Yeah, so, get your free games. With 2 daily deals. While Steam has literally hundreds upon hundreds. Why in the fuck would you ever use that piece of shit chink spyware. In the simplest terms, value for consumer, Steam rapes Epic in the ass. It offers an easy, simple to use platform with hundreds of sales.

Oh wait, I'm sorry. Steam has 5,254 games on sale. Epic has 2, one being free. And don't go 'HURR, THEY'RE ALL SHIT.' Steam has every Star Wars game off for 70% right now. Divinity 2 Original Sin, one of the best PC RPGs, is 40% off. RE 2, 35% off. Dark Souls 3, regular and Deluxe, 75% off. Soul Calibur VI, 60% off. Valkyria Chronicles 4, 66% off. Epic will NEVER have any sales like this because it cannot afford to.

The only way it can possibly survive is through exclusives right this moment, because Sweeny somehow thinks developers are going to win this for him when people can get the entirety of Dark Souls 3 for 20 bucks or RE 2, the best survival horror game out right now for $40. Can he offer that to people? No. He can't. Because instead of putting capital into his store to make it, you know, a store and not a fucking webpage, he decided the PC community would just bend over and take it. Which, I don't know why he thought that, since the PC community is full of grognards, elitists and people who will spite fuck you for no reason. And that's the good side. The PC community obviously didn't because the costs of them offering exclusives is going up exponentially.

You know what else he can't offer that I don't see mentioned? Steam Family and Friend sharing. Lets say my friend is too poor or only wants a few games he can't afford. I can share my library with him. For free. And he can install and play whatever he wants. For nothing. The only limitation is one person can be sharing your library at a time, but it doesn't matter. Have CK2 and all the DLC and your friend wants to get into it but doesn't want to pay the 8 million dollars for all of the DLC? Share your library. And play with him. At the same time. At no cost. I think people are just brushing off the fact that someone with 3k worth of games collected over 10 years can just share all of them with a friend or family member and just play all of them without buying them with little to no restrictions (there are some restrictions, but those are out of Valve's hands).

Part of the reason I loathe Epic, beyond its exclusivity, is that Tim Sweeny is an arrogant cunt, autistic and really fucking stupid about business. He has no clue how his market operates. Opponents to Steam want DRM free games, an open platform, better user interfaces, less of a PC footprint. What does Sweeny do instead? Offers a closed platform, restrictive DRM that you can't even play your games if you are offline, a spyware filled shithole, and a 'store' that doesn't even have a fucking shopping cart. Instead he tries to force his way into the market, not by making something better or trying to improve, but basically holding games hostage. 'Oh, you wanted this on Steam? That's a real shame. You need us now. Fuck what you wanted.' And people are fucking shocked this isn't working?

Steam has come a long way. It is possible to beat. But you have to make better features. You have to look at people who are turned away from Steam and see what they want. You cannot barge into a market and grab people by the hair and try to physically pull them away from a platform they've been using for years by brute force. There's not enough Fortnite money in the world to do that.

Just going to point out that Steam does have the revamped Masterchief Collection for PC coming down the pipe, and probably Halo: Infinite when that comes out. When the MCC gets going it's going to bring a major influx of Halo fans through.

And Epic got Rocket League.

Fucking lol.

Valve needs to offer a service where you can get them to mail you a hard copy of the games in your library, complete with official artwork and cases.

Like I have the DVD of Elder Scrolls Arena. I know it's overkill in terms of data storage since the game is so small. But there's just something about old ass games on modern storage media. I like having all those old Amiga games that were re-released on Blu-ray or hell the blu-ray of the Dragon's Lair Trilogy that comes in the replica Laser disc box.

The thing is that might violate some Valve agreements with publishers, as they might only have the right for digital, not physical distribution. I can imagine maybe them starting to sell special editions or weird sort of stuff you can't normally get. And as @BillyGoat2 said, publishers aren't even printing discs anymore. So even if it wanted to, it'd basically be impossible. It'd be cool if Valve could send you a disc or a FOB with all your games on it.

Actually, that gave me a great idea. Being able to sell game merch on your store page in Steam. You get 100% of the profit, except Vavle only takes a cut from shipping and will ship and distribute for you. So even if Valve is taking a cut from your game sales, they'll distribute and ship your merch at cost where you keep all the profits. So you don't need to operate a separate website. When people go to your page you can just buy it and not even worry about shipping and handling because Valve takes that out automatically.

So instead of Sweeny 'match my cut', Valve goes, 'Nah, we'll allow our devs and publishers to sell merch with only our cut being shipping and distribution at cost. We won't take a dime of pure profit from them.' I think he would literally shit himself.

The only thing is that I think is that Valve is a bit gunshy about going into shipping physical merch as it wants to keep itself as small as possible.

I care that I already have several launchers bogging down my rig, and exclusives pretty much force you to use the associated console/launcher.

Same. I have Epic, Origin, Uplay, Steam, GoG, EFT for Tarkov. And I'm OCD about managing shit. I don't need another launcher, not to mention one owned by Chinks and made primarily for millions of children for one fucking game because Take 2 are a bunch of massive faggots and decided to screw Microsoft at the last second and throw the 'Outer Worlds' as an Epic Exclusive.

Also, let me get this straight out of the way. If you make a game, first party, and sell that game exclusively on your own platform with your own launcher, I can't complain about it. You made it, you want the profits from it, its your product. I get it. But when you start taking shit away because you have an inferior product, you aren't enticing consumers. You're forcing them over. Most PC gamers are PC gamers to get AWAY from the console wars. We dick measure over hardware sure, but at the end of the day, we all play the same games on whatever platform we want, how we want. Restrictions are the opposite to the way this market functions. We are forced because we can't play a third party game that can be anywhere (Uplay, GoG, Steam, Independent Launcher, etc.) but is only in one place because this industry is greedy as fuck and Epic didn't even bother and trying to compete. This is why piracy was rampant in the gaming space. Restrictive DRM, restrictive storefronts (Yes, they existed long before Steam did), managing dozens upon dozens of CD Keys. Now, we're being forced to do that again. Sweeny somehow thinks that the PC space will tolerate this all over again without just pirating shit. I will say, nope. Pirating is easier and less of a footprint than downloading another launcher. Also, most people who have the above launchers will just do an end-run around the Epic store and buy them from Uplay.

So fuck Epic. It doesn't know shit about PC gaming and bought a 4 year old franchise while Steam is getting a franchise people on PC have been begging for since Halo was released on the first XBox. I wonder whats going to make more money. Good job Sweeny, you massive faggot.

 

[mindlessobserver]

most PC gamers also have a console. When you are willing to shell out 150 bucks for a graphics card you will probably also be able to shell out 300 bucks once every few years for a console. I prefer gaming on the PC but I wont bend to blackmail either. Part of the appeal of PC gaming is the it's not a proprietary locked storefront portal. I will just get the Epic exclusives on my PS4. Admittedly it usually just sits in the corner gathering dust but fuck Epic. If you want to play exclusive shenanigans go full dosh or fuck off. But we all know they dont want to get into a dick measuring contest with Microsoft and Sony. So consoles it is.