You think I'm going to talking about the Apple lawsuit, but then I talk about some Twitter drama from 2019. Welcome to the channel! Here's the IGN article I mentioned at the end: www.ign.com/ar...
Seeing as you're a gamedev, I'm astonished you hadn't mentioned one of the biggest benefits Valve's services provide developers: Their APIs and libraries. The Steam Input API alone is a lifesaver. And their efforts towards helping devs target multiple platforms (namely linux) is tremendous.
I like your funny words magic man. Altough i still agree on supporting Valve and steam. An underage kid like me would have no change of buying games, if it werent for those cards. Having no bank Account is a big roadstop.
This is something a lot of Epic-defenders don't get. The only thing Epic helps Devs with is with money. Which is huge... but Steam actually gives a lot of backend support to Devs (and players).
3 Year later, now, we also have the Steam Deck and Valve has a whole team working to get games verified. The developers are not being expected to make their game work on the Deck, but Valve *itself* is putting in the effort to make it work.
TIL way more about the shit that goes on behind steam to keep it running. Thanks for the info. Here in Korea the game cards are about the same as in Japan. Every convenience store has them and that seems to be where most the locals I know get their steam/google/apple/samsung/whatever purchases.
What most people don't understand is that those cash card cost 15% if valve have to reduce to 10% they will have to stop producing this cash card and push any tax to customers. Do people want that?.
@@Icarus2377 Easier to get than using a Korean credit/bank card on Steam? I will honestly have to ask some guys I know. I do know you can sometimes skirt taxes if you get a card from a place that deals cash only. I don't use these cards, but I also don't have to worry about using a local bank card since I am a foreigner and still have one from my home country.
@@Icarus2377 In Japan, debit/credit cards are harder to obtain. A lot of gamers in Japan are high schoolers or college students, so getting a game card is A LOT easier than getting a bank card.
10:19 This why I am saving popcorn . it will be funny seeing Tim sweeney backtrack on his words . " We increased the cut for the devs to 30% because we got shopping cart added to our store -Tim "
You didn't bring up the amazing and free work Valve has done to finally make gaming on Steam a reality. Which has helped make the open source operating system a real choice for people to use. This brings more eyes and participation to Linux. So that means more dollars goes into the Linux world. It can't be understated how huge they're support is and the scope that goes beyond gaming.
I spend - WAY too many hours on UA-cam on the average day. But I am REALLY choosy with subscriptions. I have 5-6 at any given time. You are one of them, because your logical, common sense, down to earth approach to industry topics is fantastic. You seem to have a really good grasp on the industry, and a level-headed, balanced approach to discussing any controversial subjects. Really enjoying your channel.
Valve will keep 30%... if game was sold on steam store. Otherwise developer still have option to generate keys for game and sell it on it own site with 100% profit (square enix store for example) or sell it on stores with lower cut then steam and steam will not take anything from selling that code.
I love it when a company that tried to become a monopoly by buying up as many exclusive games as possible accuses another company of being a monopoly. That's greeeeat.
Epic didn't try to become a monopoly... The only way they could is that tomorrow steam fails and they buy everything they have. Monopoly means having a unified power over a market that locks out any competition. Epic obviously cannot be because Steam already IS...
@@1r0zz Yeah, I didn't say the succeeded, nor did I say they could succeed, that's why they attempted to. It's why console exclusives exist, of course they won't grant any given console manufacturer a monopoly, but that's one less option for the consumer, and a couple more console sales for the company. Like, no company will ever have all the money in the world, but that doesn't mean they don't want it.
@@Peasham what epic did was create competition. that's good. Steam got away WITH SO MUCH already because nobody cared about their BS... console exclusives are also a very different thing. true console exclusive are partially or totally PAID by the console manufacturer or even developed by them, thus they have all the rights to keep what they developed in their console. "timed exclusives" are just marketing aimed at idiots and a idiotic marketing.
@@1r0zz ... no. Competition is when you present a better service. Epic didn't present a better service, it presented a worse service with games they paid to be exclusive on the platform. Epic isn't better than Steam, they just have a lot of money.
@@Peasham wrong. competition is just offering a service in the same category. "better" or "worse" are semantic definitions that changes depending who you ask. a developer can be very happy about that lowered cut and even that Epic is supporting their game development even with the paid exclusive thing, especially since it's just timed, so later can be sold in steam anyway. and if we want to play the snotty high route, Epic have a little thing called "Epic MegaGrants" that supports even Open Source stuff... you know, stuff Indie devs actually need to have and stuff that generate something we could call "hyper-competition" as paid stuff needs to have a reason why you have to paid for that price. and your whole "argument" is happily ignoring that Steam took a shit ton of time to become "decent", and still even fought against the consumer for refunds... and Steam is still very shit if you read some of their game forum with the most common reply being "I never met any bug/glitch, you do something wrong/not have the right hardware/are using cheats" or whatever BS it's trendy now. also I would like to remind you that Steam/Valve was on the fore front for stuff like game gambling, Loot boxes and microtransaction, so much you can happily say they are part of the reason they exist in gaming today...
@Bobik I'm not sure. But if you read the appendix of 1984, also called The Principles of Newspeak, it should tell you which is correct. You can find that here: orwell.ru/library/novels/1984/english/en_app (Warning! It's quite long) I say I'm not sure bcause of how long that section of the book is. Sorry. Edit: warning not waring.
@Bobik In the original english it was definitely ungood. "un-" is an existing prefix in english(roughly equivalent to "not" e.g. "uncool" == "not cool"), "minus-" isn't. I can kind of see why the translator went with "minus" because of the opposing prefixes (plus/doubleplus) although "double-plus-minus-good" doesn't sound as reasonable to me (as a native english speaker) than "double-plus-un-good" (n.b. i've hyphenated those for clarity, the original had them unhyphenated) possibly because the plus and minus "cancel each other out" in my head.
There is no hero in the Apple Vs Epic skirmish. Just two villains blowing money over trivial bullshit to fight each other while we watch on the sidelines.
What drives me fucking insane is that people think if a company makes some products they like, then they are obligated to whiteknight that company and downplay anything that makes the company look bad. Fortnite fans think Epic is some kind of fucking underdog fighting a Big Evil Corporation... despite Epic itself also being a Big Evil Corporation (who directly fund CCP through Tencent)
This is made especially obvious now with the release of Kingdom Hearts as EGS exclusives. All the games are sold separately at full 60$ while you can get the full collection on PS4 for just 30. It is all about greed, none of that "the cut trickle back to the consumers" that they try to present. And worse still, that extra they get from the cut still goes to the middle mans pockets instead of those who actually worked on the game. And we all know that the whole "abandoning their practice if steam changes" is just a heap of BS that he will never make good on.
GoG has still some learning to do. They still need a Linux client which is in the works for god knows how long and maybe Proton integration. When they'll have that they will be the undisputed best.
I love GoG, I love their philosophy, but they still have to offer region specific prices in my local currency, like Steam does. I hope they do someday. Until then, I'll get most of my games on Steam.
Here we are, 3 years later, and the Epic Store hasn't improved in the slightest. The other side of this that I've heard from a lot of fellow devs is discoverability. I've seen a lot of people say that their games are so buried and so impossible to find on EGS, due to its terrible algorithm and search tools, that it doesn't even matter that they get a bigger cut because they don't sell games.
@@ketrub see you liking them doesn't make them any less anticonsumer same way i see nothing wrong with epic store. doesn't mean i worship it they are not your friends they only want your money
@@tsartomato of course prefering a digital storefront makes me think gabe newell is my best friend can't wait to go to new zealand to meet my new best friend gabe newell while he's stuck there under covid 19 :)
I'm surprised Steam's 30% cut is considered fair considering that's what brick and mortar stores apply and those have much higher costs if I recall. Don't get me wrong, I think 12% is ludicrous and unfeasible, and I think Epic's "challenge" was never a serious one, but rather a stroke of evil genius, since whatever Steam does, it benefits Epic and hurts Steam (either financially or PR wise). In the end, Steam seems to be the clear winner though. Sweeney should have thought better before getting into the online game platform business.
It's great that epic is giving devs a bigger cut. but forcing devs to remove games from steam to let them use epic, or paying devs to take games off steam, that's when I have a problem
I know a lot of developers who have made deals with epic for limited time exclusivty but never heard of anyone being forced to publish on epic store exclusively. Do you have any examples? (not trying to attack you or anything I'm just genuinely curious)
@@BenanaBoy metro exodus. Literally used Steam as free ad site until they dropped the bomb and screwed steam over, Epic exclusivity forced them to take game off steam even after people pre-ordered it up to 2 weeks before release
@@0verWay I just looked this up. It was a deal between deep silver and epic for a timed exclusive on metro exodus. They weren't forced to move they were offered a deal.
@@BenanaBoy there's also countless games advertised on kickstarter as steam titles until epic not only paid those devs to exclusively launch epic but even give them money to refund anyone who canceled their donation because of epic announcement.
I wonder how the gift card situation works out for places like Costco where I can buy a $100 Xbox gift card for $90 (yay, free money!). I assume Costco is the one who's eating that $10, funded from their subscription income. Also, yes, Japanese convenience stores are awesome. :)
Also, I think it's important that the consumer base for Epic is very small compared to steam and does not have features like reviews and community stuff. You wouldn't want to release a game with a year exclusivity and then lament the fact that no one is buying you game a year after release because there is absolutely no hype for it on Steam or anywhere else. Happened to Metro, Outer Worlds. Steam best sellers sell decently even after 1+ years because there is already a year's worth of community that talk to each other and fill the lobbies.
Steam is revolutionizing Linux gaming too. Their Proton/Steam Play has made it sooo much easier to install and play games on Linux. Before that, you had to either tinker with every game to launch it in WINE or use Lutris, which is a community-curated database of scripts for installation, some of which might not work for some users, and some games are still absent there, as it is a community-curated system. Using Steam you can just one-click install and play a ton of Windows games on Linux. And this is something neither GOG nor Epic Store can provide.
"bring people to the platform with better pricing" you can't do that, steam publishing agreement doesn't allow to sell the game cheaper in other places.
So wait you're telling me that if I, a small independent game developer with very limited resources, make a game and get it onto Steam, with its many easy to use features, well maintained servers capable of handling the constant traffic of millions of users, and multi-million strong user base, so that my game might be easily found by those millions of loyal and active users who are now potential customers who might purchase my game through a quick, relatively safe, and hassle free online payment system, and Valve is ONLY charging me 30% of the earnings? hhhhhhhhhHHHHHELL yes!
Small independent games are not easy to find on Steam anymore. Since Valve opened the floodgate to small independent games, they get buried underneath thousands of other small independent games, most of which are horrible.
I feel like you should've done more to explain the "buying up exclusives" problem, because, based on the video alone, it didn't sound like much of a problem. Now, of course, I've seen (and am seeing) the problem first hand, I know exactly what the problem is, but a lot of people out there still seem to either wilfully misrepresent why people don't like EGS' exlusivity tactic, or are straight up ignorant about the subject. I've certainly had to explain this to people more than once. As a minor nitpick, it could also have been worth covering Tencent's stake in EGS and their ties to the Chinese government, as Tencent most certainly has the money to keep EGS afloat after Fortnite's death, though that ends up in conspiraty territory. And as for the video itself, while I personally hope that Apple get their comeuppance, this situation has done nothing to change my stance about EGS. I just wish more developers would be open about why they decide to take the EGS timed (or sometimes even full?) exclusivity, because I really don't think anyone can fault indie developers for taking a guaranteed cash prize right now over a "maybe more money if you also go on Steam" promise. I suppose they might be under NDA about the specifics though.
so how's one shitty store is different from another shitty store you are buying games, the product, not scientology tickets to non existing haven. (i hope) are you buying only in 1 store and never visit others to get your potatoes?
The developers take the exclusives because they get paid for the first X sales up front. Sure, they don't get any more money until epic sells that many units, but if they don't manage to sell that many, it's Epic that eats the loss instead of the developer. Basically they take it due to a lack of confidence in their product and/or marketing. A success on steam will bring in Much more money, but even a Failure on Epic will cover their expenses.
@@laurencefraser I'm well aware of that, I just figured that it was a topic that @Shamus Young might wanted to have covered in the video. My point was more that I've seen very few, if any, developers openly admit that. It's often announced under some weird pretence of "We feel that the EGS is the best store for our product to reach our fans" or some such. Not that I have any examples at hand, mind you.
@@tsartomato As consumers, we often only really have one way to voice our opinion towards corporations: Voting with our wallet. EGS had, at launch, an EULA that openly stated that they were going to gather data about you, and sell it to other companies, their store program accessed your Steam account without your permission, as well as many other things that I, and many others, do not want to "reward" Epic for. Since voting with my wallet is the only real way to make my opinion known, that's what I'm doing, and probably many others are too. And well, if that store sells the best damm potatoes in the world, I just might.
@@Rex133TV good now can you do so against steam, while it holds complete monopoly over the market without outright not paying developers since you pirate their games? can you do anything at all with fake online only garbage inaccessible anywhere but on steam? the only winning move is not to play the game any game at all because you are powerless against the monopoly with no even techsupport
If Valve were to lower the cut they get from each game that is sold on their platform, they wouldn't keep selling their cards to retailers for the same price. Here where I live, physical Steam cards you can buy at retailers don't exist, but things like the PSN gift cards cost higher than their value... You'll need to pay around 55 dollars in order to go home and charge 50 dollars to your account, and that's because the retailers don't get them for under 50 dollars and they have to get their cut from every card they sell. It's because of this that I already believe that Valve selling 10 U$ cards for 8.5 U$ is way too cheap, but I don't know how it is in other countries. Also... Do you really get to use their infrastructure "for free" when you have to buy a 100 U$ license fee for every game you publish already? That yes, you recoup, once your game has made at least 300 U$ to Valve. Not saying that Epic is exactly on the right here, but implying that they can only sustain the 12% deal because of that sweet sweet Fortnite money (just one MASSIVE money making game) while Steam, with their HUGE market domination (which might be even higher again if they do the 12% cut, making people who went to Epic come back to Steam) wouldn't be able to from the money the are still getting for every transaction (micro and macro) that goes through their storefront... I don't know... Really wish this whole ordeal was simpler and that we could all know what's best for everyone, but the truth is that the videogame industry itself is pretty complicated already when it comes to monetization... Just like AAA's constant lie about games needing to be over 60 bucks so that's why they make predatory microtransactions... I guess the moral of this story is never go all out defending one party? Also fuck Apple.
the best thing Epic can do is make steam as fair as possible to all parties before the EGS collapses under the weight of its deficit spending. I don't want a company that bribes developers for exclusive rights to stick around.
I had the displeasure of being friends with a guy who would have left a dislike on this video. He always took information at face value, And thus Whole hardly bought into the epic games store BS. Needles to say, We are not friends anymore. It just saddens me that some people can be so dam blind. Epic game store thrives on these kinds of people. Why there biggest audience is young children , But unfortunately theirs alot of child like adults out there two.
So you believe that the steam store front cut is worth it's money because they say so? And all payments involving valve-walmart are non-negotiable because this video says so?
> --Whole hardly-- _Wholeheartedly_ > --theirs-- _Hhh..._ _`: \_ the whole _there's_ vs _there're_ situation is a bit of a mess tbh > --alot-- _a lot_ > --two-- _too_ > _"We are not friends anymore."_ - Please try not to abandon your friends over political differences. Life's too short. The miserably under-supported systems and structures that govern us do so at a cost growing more terrible by the hour. I don't know if we'll ever get out of the multiple messes we're in right now but we sure as hell won't succeed by bickering with or shutting each other out. And yes before you or anyone suggests it - I'm more than a little guilty myself.
Good to have you back, Shamus. I haven't installed Epic's launcher, and I'm not gonna. I never even installed EA's Origin, for many of the same reasons. Every publisher that insists on having their own piece of your real estate, their own bit of your bandwidth, their own TOS that they might change at any time (and bury that change in a twenty-page snarl of legalese) feels like another invitation to put your foot into a snare on the promise that the rope will never draw taut, taking the games you thought you "purchased"... or worse. Accepting Epic's development money for an exclusive feels like a deal with the devil.
The stupidest part of Epic bragging about their cut, is that they offer zero benefit to the customer. I don't care what the publishers and developers get as a customer, because that's not a problem for me. Why should I care if using the inferior platform pays a little better? I'm not paying for games to be a charity for every dippy indy developer with daydreams of being the next John Carmack or John Romero. The other issue is that an "EGS exclusive" logo may as well just say "this game is gonna suck". When was the last time EGS had an exclusivity deal for a really good game? Anymore it's just a vote of no confidence from the game's own publisher. Them admitting that they think the game isn't good enough to do well on its own merits, so they'd rather take the guaranteed money upfront and not waste any more time or money on making sure the game is actually good.
There's only one piece of the whole Epic vs Apple/Google (ob-nitpick, it's Epic vs Apple because Epic is the one who initially filed the lawsuit... anyway moving on) thing that made sense to me and it really only applies to Apple. If you look at the Apple complaint it's all about how Apple's App Store is a monopoly and there' s no way to provide apps to iOS users that don't go through Apple's App Store. Precedent says it'll go nowhere because courts don't tend to see a walled platform as a market but their entire class of device (which is kind of stupid, until you can tell me how to run iOS apps and Android apps on the same phone it doesn't seem reasonable that Android is an actual competitor in the same market but the US courts think i'm wrong here and this is about what is, not what should be) and that basically destroys the entire argument. The idea that Epic is flushing money down the toilet to get a better deal than 30% seems dumb to me. Like i don't see any way that they come out of this ahead even assuming they manage to find some kind of unicorn judge that's willing to buck what feels like decades of contract law and antitrust precedent. So putting together the idea that Tim Sweeney isn't always up front about his true goals (yeah sorry... i don't buy that exclusives was ever truly about the steam cut) and that Epic seems quite content to flush lots of money into gaining market share for the EGS, what does that suggest? My theory is Mobile gaming. If Epic can force Apple (either via settlement or court order) to allow Epic to bring the EGS to iOS users and they do the same thing with Android then they can brag about their HUGE tracts of market share, potentially billions of users. However putting together a full store only to find that the courts don't care is an expensive way to fail. Far better to roll the dice on Fortnight and if you win then great, if you lose then throw some legal fees around, make nice and everything goes back to the way it was. The problem with this is that they seemingly dumped the same lawsuit onto Android and that makes absolutely no sense because there's nothing stopping the EGS from being built on Android. In fact the smarter play may have been to use something like Flutter to build both an Android Store and an iOS store then that can get banned rather than pantsing your cash cow. So that leaves us with Sweeney rolling the dice on a popularity contest between Fortnight and Apple and that's, probably not smart.
Sounds about right, but there might be more to the matter. Epic already has a decent chunk of the industry by the hazelnuts owing to UE on the development side, and Tencent on the publishing/infrastructure side. Not quite sure what experiences have been shared so far by studios unwilling or unable to move away from UE, beyond a vague recollection involving Bluehole sobbing about ... copyright or plagiarism or something? I'm not claiming that silence or my ignorance on the matter constitutes cause for approval, but you never know. Epic might just turn out to be some sort of benevolent dictator if they ever become truly dominant on any platform, including mobile. Would be interesting to hear what devs think of Epic's businesses practices based on UE experience, and whether it changed any since EGS became a thing. In spite of what Sweeney might be tweeting, I doubt they pulled this kind of stunt without running it past the ~40% of Epic Tencent owns. Wouldn't really want to bring the big C into the whole mess here, but it's hard to ignore that particular elephant in the room, and their "delicate" relationship with the rest of the world's tech giants. Would be a really nice roundabout way to loose a few shots in Apple and Google's general direction - hands clean and all. This would again put your theory front and center, just with an additional interested party at the table. I find it somewhat odd that they decided to go up against Google first a while back, which lead to Google exposing security vulnerabilities of Epic's apps ahead of schedule, or something along those lines. "Dirty deeds" all over the place, and as with all corporate level stuff - mostly just money/power grabs for reasons beyond us mere non-billionaires. You are probably right about the legal back and forth going nowhere. Epic likely know this as well, which leaves me wondering why they are making the attempt to begin with. Maybe there's just that much of an overlap between the demographic willing to buy overpriced smartphones and the one willing to pay money for the privilege of grinding cosmetics.
I just can't see the Epic one-year exclusivity deals as a bad thing. They are incredibly helpful especially for smaller indie studios. It's only for one year and it's not unreasonable to just buy the game on Epic. Maybe these deals are anti consumer, but I'm not so sure about that, because it's generally good for the consumer when creative and talented people are able to continue making games. I'm mostly thinking about the smaller indie studios. (You mentioned some Asian regions not being able to use Epic store but I have jumped through some hoops when buying subscriptions for a Japanese online game that didn't accept any of the usual payment methods. Where there's a will, there's a way. Usually.)
Epic don't do regional pricing correctly - that's expensive (one of the reasons real platforms take 30%). There's also additional transaction fees on many non-US payment methods. I can assure you, if games were 40% more expensive in your region, you'd be fucking pissed when a game you wanted suddenly became 1 year more distant.
I know that might not be the case to everyone. But i'm from Brazil and the support that we have in terms of regional price, customer support and others stuff like gifts cards that you mentioned are incredibly good. I don't see any valid reason as a customer stand point to use the Epic Store. Some people are quick to dismiss others who are against the Epic Store, but when you do a simple comparison. There's no reason today to use that store front. P.S even GOG has more support to Brazil than Epic.
Welcome back! Came at just the right time. I wonder what your thoughts on the Google/ apple lawsuits/kerfuffles from Epic are as a comparison. I cl kind of feel that tiering of costs to the developer/ publisher (like tax brackets) would be fairer for all sizes of games -e.g. big (both storage and player base) successful games utilise more network features than smaller ones. However, as it stands, those big successful games get to keep more of their money and valve gets less... Am i crazy for thinking it's backwards?
I believe a very important fact was left out here, it has to do with what Valve does with it's steam money. It's no secret Valve has not been making money off selling their own games for a long time, and they don't seem to expect/care if HL:A breaks even. The thing is we can tell that 30% is way less than the actual cost of running Steam because it has kept them afloat while they dump money on R&D or failed games for the better part of a decade. Steam's cut has basically funded Valve since Portal 2 came out. You mention that 30M figure for keeping the network up, that is pocked change for Steam.
Damn, I've already set UA-cam to notify me for all your videos and it still managed to mess it up. I'll put a comment here in the hopes that UA-cam will stop forgetting to remind me of videos from here.
11:50 I was going to say that Valve doesn't sell any giftcards that are below $20, but you went further than me in explaining on why they don't (you can see it @10:57 that they only offer 3 amounts to choose from).
@Shamus Young, also consider the 10cents money from China, which allow Epic to conquer the game market. If epic is well established they will definitely raise their prices. It is basic rent-seeking economics. They are aiming to become a duopoly, with Steam; And just like Microsoft and Apple, Google and Facebook, Walmart and Amazon, Airbus and Boeing, become cash hording giants... or fail spectacularly. Exiting stuff.
Steam Workshop. Steamworks. Steam screenshot sharing. Should bring those up when talking about some of the stuff Valve offers in exchange for their cut. The Steam Workshop especially is HUGE.
If you're going to be talking about Epic games, and comparing Tim Sweeney to Handsome Jack... I understand you probably just took Risk of Rain 2 footage because you (either Shamus or Isaac) have been playing it recently and have spare footage lying around, but I think footage of either Fortnite or Borderlands (2 or The Pre-Sequel) would have been more fitting. Heck, even footage of Team Fortress 2, if you're gonna be talking about Valve.
Except you will sell MUCH more on Steam, and 30% cut is not that bad. While you will get more money on Epig with their mantra of 12% sure, but at the same time sell MUCH less. You choose. Not to mention that Epic is barebones as all hell. +Valve did make that thing with lowering the % if you sell a certain amount of your game. Competition is good, but Epig is certaintly ain't the one to make that worthwile competitor to Steam. And i hignly doubt that there will be for quite some time. Anyone with a brain will avoid Epig 100%
Khaffit That’s fair, and totally counts, even if I currently lack the hardware to enjoy it personally. More thinking about the sentiment that gamers have had for the prior decade or so.
And Valve took all the risk and invested all the time and capital in building a successful online distribution platform for PC games. They put a lot of work into building their user base. They are perfectly entitled to charge a reasonable fee for acting as a publisher. As I understand it, devs keep all the rights to their IP. That's a better deal than a lot of book publishers offer.
@@Wolfeisberg Alright. I'll concede Valve is not a publisher for games whose IP they do not own. I think the rest of my original comment still stands though.
I'd rather sell my game for 15% cut on steam without gift cards, but I cannot ;) And you are missing a point. The cut is the same, no matter the game. So, my 100MB a piece indie download gets the same cut as 160GB of Call of Duty. If my game is 10 times cheaper and 1600 times smaller, I pay more per GB. The front page is nice, but it's notoriously hard to get there. And all of it assumes that a smaller cut is not obtainable, which just isn't true. If we ignore the "perceived value" of being on Steam (which is a big ask, but bear with me), the cost of payment processing and digital distribution is significantly lower. Don't get me wrong, I am fine with valve taking a cut, but it is pretty much a monopoly at this point and if Epic forces any sort of change, I welcome it. Worst case scenario? Epic store gets great, Valve lovers and Epic increases the cut to the maintainable optimum and we all win.
also, in the end, you mention people's choice... well, will you be fine If I release my game on Epic store for $15 and on steam for $20? Because most people wouldn't and I wouldn't be surprised if it was actually prohibited in the contract by Valve ;)
There was a thread where a guy who spent hundreds of dollars on his epic account just got permabanned with no notice and was told to simply make a new account. Quality service they have there, huh.
To enter any given new market. One essentially needs to buy customers. This is why they're undercutting Steam in this case. In hopes of gaining a portion of the market, they buy titles and sign contracts at cost probably but the long game is seizing a portion of the market. The moment they gain enough foothold into the market will be the moment they'll start to gradually pull their margin up.
there's a pretty significant difference between undercutting and straight up bribing though, and what EGS is doing is the latter, because the price for the games without discount is still the same retail price with the added bonus of being the only platform on PC to sell said game
30% seems warranted. building and maintaining a steam store is not something that generates revenue on it's own, it requires games and 3rd parties to justify the expense of developing it. it seems reasonable that a developer who goes with steam is not only paying for access to steam's install base, but also the development time and risk that went into building and maintaining a store that people actually want to use and does not have it's own independent revenue stream.
GOG and Steam also put a lot into making compatibility, which is good for consumers and developers alike. And that ain't free. Also, I really like my Steam controller, okay?
There's a bunch of arbitrary remarks and false equivalencies, but it'd take more space than the comments allow to discuss it. If you're ever willing to make a debate about it, I'll whip up a video with a counter argument.
Epic are definitely not the hero here but I do think it’s weird that people keep acting like a store is a platform... As weird as framing Epic as the hero fighting against big bad Apple, it’s ALSO weird to frame Steam as the hero fighting against big bad Epic. It’s not like Half Life is selling on the Epic Store...
Epic may not be the Hero, but in the recent months they consistently have been made game devs and artists life easier by buying development tools and cutting the price or making it free. Some products are free even if you never use their store or their engine. So yeah, even if Epic has done many things for their on growth the past year has show that this also brings benefits to our industry and if they manage to win Apple's case it'll benefit all of the industry.
I hope you do realize that by doing that they are increasingly making it clear that they are trying to become a monopoly. Basically they are trying to make it so that if you want to develop games you have to go through them.
Sharing my point if you care. When Steam came to Russia it almost destroyed piracy and multiplayer issues. Earlier we need to dance like shamans around a pc for days so it can run a game. Now I can pay directly to dev and enjoy my game. Thats why I am pro-steam. EGS: heya bitch! Im filty rich, buy ma shit!
@@trevorc4413 This simply doesn't make sense: Google Play also sell gift cards but let user download games from other store. Next time try to think harder
Seeing as you're a gamedev, I'm astonished you hadn't mentioned one of the biggest benefits Valve's services provide developers: Their APIs and libraries. The Steam Input API alone is a lifesaver. And their efforts towards helping devs target multiple platforms (namely linux) is tremendous.
^
I like your funny words magic man.
Altough i still agree on supporting Valve and steam. An underage kid like me would have no change of buying games, if it werent for those cards. Having no bank Account is a big roadstop.
This is something a lot of Epic-defenders don't get. The only thing Epic helps Devs with is with money. Which is huge... but Steam actually gives a lot of backend support to Devs (and players).
3 Year later, now, we also have the Steam Deck and Valve has a whole team working to get games verified. The developers are not being expected to make their game work on the Deck, but Valve *itself* is putting in the effort to make it work.
Shamus : See Tim Sweeney, your actions are like Handsome Jack's in some ways...
Time Sweeney : Shamus thinks I'm handsome!
knowing how big "brain " he is on twitter . probably will believe it .
Well, uncle Timmy is handsome, in a Earthworm Jim sort of way.
TIL way more about the shit that goes on behind steam to keep it running. Thanks for the info. Here in Korea the game cards are about the same as in Japan. Every convenience store has them and that seems to be where most the locals I know get their steam/google/apple/samsung/whatever purchases.
What most people don't understand is that those cash card cost 15% if valve have to reduce to 10% they will have to stop producing this cash card and push any tax to customers. Do people want that?.
Why are these gift cards used so much? Are credit cards not easily obtained?
@@Icarus2377 Easier to get than using a Korean credit/bank card on Steam? I will honestly have to ask some guys I know. I do know you can sometimes skirt taxes if you get a card from a place that deals cash only.
I don't use these cards, but I also don't have to worry about using a local bank card since I am a foreigner and still have one from my home country.
I did not even know they used like that . the more we knows .
@@Icarus2377 In Japan, debit/credit cards are harder to obtain. A lot of gamers in Japan are high schoolers or college students, so getting a game card is A LOT easier than getting a bank card.
What they will do is sell currency "vbucks" that it value is not 10$ but 8$ so you paying the retail fee without knowing
10:19 This why I am saving popcorn . it will be funny seeing Tim sweeney backtrack on his words .
" We increased the cut for the devs to 30% because we got shopping cart added to our store -Tim "
You didn't bring up the amazing and free work Valve has done to finally make gaming on Steam a reality. Which has helped make the open source operating system a real choice for people to use. This brings more eyes and participation to Linux. So that means more dollars goes into the Linux world. It can't be understated how huge they're support is and the scope that goes beyond gaming.
I spend - WAY too many hours on UA-cam on the average day.
But I am REALLY choosy with subscriptions. I have 5-6 at any given time.
You are one of them, because your logical, common sense, down to earth approach to industry topics is fantastic.
You seem to have a really good grasp on the industry, and a level-headed, balanced approach to discussing any controversial subjects.
Really enjoying your channel.
Valve will keep 30%... if game was sold on steam store. Otherwise developer still have option to generate keys for game and sell it on it own site with 100% profit (square enix store for example) or sell it on stores with lower cut then steam and steam will not take anything from selling that code.
Only if Valve allows you to generate those keys. Garry Newman has complained about Valve not granting key generations to him in the past.
@@microgamestation I think that is just part of deal.
@@Qa_mook I know, I'm just saying it's not something you can do willy-nilly.
@@microgamestation Iam sure that they are restriction, to not be abuse.
I love it when a company that tried to become a monopoly by buying up as many exclusive games as possible accuses another company of being a monopoly.
That's greeeeat.
Epic didn't try to become a monopoly... The only way they could is that tomorrow steam fails and they buy everything they have.
Monopoly means having a unified power over a market that locks out any competition. Epic obviously cannot be because Steam already IS...
@@1r0zz Yeah, I didn't say the succeeded, nor did I say they could succeed, that's why they attempted to. It's why console exclusives exist, of course they won't grant any given console manufacturer a monopoly, but that's one less option for the consumer, and a couple more console sales for the company.
Like, no company will ever have all the money in the world, but that doesn't mean they don't want it.
@@Peasham
what epic did was create competition. that's good. Steam got away WITH SO MUCH already because nobody cared about their BS...
console exclusives are also a very different thing.
true console exclusive are partially or totally PAID by the console manufacturer or even developed by them, thus they have all the rights to keep what they developed in their console.
"timed exclusives" are just marketing aimed at idiots and a idiotic marketing.
@@1r0zz ... no. Competition is when you present a better service. Epic didn't present a better service, it presented a worse service with games they paid to be exclusive on the platform. Epic isn't better than Steam, they just have a lot of money.
@@Peasham
wrong. competition is just offering a service in the same category. "better" or "worse" are semantic definitions that changes depending who you ask.
a developer can be very happy about that lowered cut and even that Epic is supporting their game development even with the paid exclusive thing, especially since it's just timed, so later can be sold in steam anyway.
and if we want to play the snotty high route, Epic have a little thing called "Epic MegaGrants" that supports even Open Source stuff... you know, stuff Indie devs actually need to have and stuff that generate something we could call "hyper-competition" as paid stuff needs to have a reason why you have to paid for that price.
and your whole "argument" is happily ignoring that Steam took a shit ton of time to become "decent", and still even fought against the consumer for refunds...
and Steam is still very shit if you read some of their game forum with the most common reply being "I never met any bug/glitch, you do something wrong/not have the right hardware/are using cheats" or whatever BS it's trendy now.
also I would like to remind you that Steam/Valve was on the fore front for stuff like game gambling, Loot boxes and microtransaction, so much you can happily say they are part of the reason they exist in gaming today...
This is double ungood.
Did they read 1984 at all?
@Bobik I'm not sure. But if you read the appendix of 1984, also called The Principles of Newspeak, it should tell you which is correct. You can find that here: orwell.ru/library/novels/1984/english/en_app (Warning! It's quite long)
I say I'm not sure bcause of how long that section of the book is.
Sorry.
Edit: warning not waring.
@Bobik In the original english it was definitely ungood. "un-" is an existing prefix in english(roughly equivalent to "not" e.g. "uncool" == "not cool"), "minus-" isn't. I can kind of see why the translator went with "minus" because of the opposing prefixes (plus/doubleplus) although "double-plus-minus-good" doesn't sound as reasonable to me (as a native english speaker) than "double-plus-un-good" (n.b. i've hyphenated those for clarity, the original had them unhyphenated) possibly because the plus and minus "cancel each other out" in my head.
Its ungood. Double-plus ungood.
Epic even today feels like its going to fail. if they can get past that idea with us then I would be more inclined to buy games on Epic.
There is no hero in the Apple Vs Epic skirmish. Just two villains blowing money over trivial bullshit to fight each other while we watch on the sidelines.
just companies doing businesses. we don't have to care about this too much
Let them fight.
What drives me fucking insane is that people think if a company makes some products they like, then they are obligated to whiteknight that company and downplay anything that makes the company look bad. Fortnite fans think Epic is some kind of fucking underdog fighting a Big Evil Corporation... despite Epic itself also being a Big Evil Corporation (who directly fund CCP through Tencent)
Good old "whoever wins, we lose".
@@fyrentenimar Basically this. At least (from a non-Apple user), Apple has more effort put into their stuff
The fun fact is TF2 is still on the top10 most played games on steam charts😄😂👍
Also fun fact, the last non-cosmetic update was Jungle Inferno... back in like 2017....
God Howard himself
I am leaving a comment here so the algorithm know that this content I engage with.
I am responding to a comment here so the algorithm know that this content I engage with.
@@RvieiraBrCa I TOO shall respond to this comment. With content. Behold my content. OUR content, together.
yes
I, for one, welcome our algorithm overlords!
I solemnly agree, fellow commenter.
This is made especially obvious now with the release of Kingdom Hearts as EGS exclusives. All the games are sold separately at full 60$ while you can get the full collection on PS4 for just 30. It is all about greed, none of that "the cut trickle back to the consumers" that they try to present. And worse still, that extra they get from the cut still goes to the middle mans pockets instead of those who actually worked on the game.
And we all know that the whole "abandoning their practice if steam changes" is just a heap of BS that he will never make good on.
All hail the algorithm!
Also GOG is the best.
Definitely! I love their anti DRM policies. They seem like they genuinely care and constantly have sales going as high as 90% off.
GoG has still some learning to do. They still need a Linux client which is in the works for god knows how long and maybe Proton integration. When they'll have that they will be the undisputed best.
I love GoG, I love their philosophy, but they still have to offer region specific prices in my local currency, like Steam does. I hope they do someday. Until then, I'll get most of my games on Steam.
Hail!
@@azminek7154 Yup, a Linux Client would be so nice.
Here we are, 3 years later, and the Epic Store hasn't improved in the slightest. The other side of this that I've heard from a lot of fellow devs is discoverability. I've seen a lot of people say that their games are so buried and so impossible to find on EGS, due to its terrible algorithm and search tools, that it doesn't even matter that they get a bigger cut because they don't sell games.
Sweeney knows what he's doing. These people are all conmen.
I agree with Shamus, it feels like he fancies himself a super cool disruptor and hero.
including valve and gog and everyone who only wants to sell you stuff
@@tsartomato yeah but at least valve and gog offer me services that i think are worthwhile
@@ketrub see
you liking them doesn't make them any less anticonsumer
same way i see nothing wrong with epic store. doesn't mean i worship it
they are not your friends they only want your money
@@tsartomato of course prefering a digital storefront makes me think gabe newell is my best friend
can't wait to go to new zealand to meet my new best friend gabe newell while he's stuck there under covid 19 :)
This popped up on my feed and I have never clicked so damn fast!!
Praying the algorithm to recognize this content as highly enjoyable
I'm surprised Steam's 30% cut is considered fair considering that's what brick and mortar stores apply and those have much higher costs if I recall.
Don't get me wrong, I think 12% is ludicrous and unfeasible, and I think Epic's "challenge" was never a serious one, but rather a stroke of evil genius, since whatever Steam does, it benefits Epic and hurts Steam (either financially or PR wise).
In the end, Steam seems to be the clear winner though. Sweeney should have thought better before getting into the online game platform business.
It's great that epic is giving devs a bigger cut. but forcing devs to remove games from steam to let them use epic, or paying devs to take games off steam, that's when I have a problem
Giving a better cut my ass. They are straight up bribing exclusivity deals for upfront money, using a vastly inferior "store"/launcher.
I know a lot of developers who have made deals with epic for limited time exclusivty but never heard of anyone being forced to publish on epic store exclusively. Do you have any examples? (not trying to attack you or anything I'm just genuinely curious)
@@BenanaBoy metro exodus. Literally used Steam as free ad site until they dropped the bomb and screwed steam over, Epic exclusivity forced them to take game off steam even after people pre-ordered it up to 2 weeks before release
@@0verWay I just looked this up. It was a deal between deep silver and epic for a timed exclusive on metro exodus. They weren't forced to move they were offered a deal.
@@BenanaBoy there's also countless games advertised on kickstarter as steam titles until epic not only paid those devs to exclusively launch epic but even give them money to refund anyone who canceled their donation because of epic announcement.
And now it has been revealed to no ones big surprise that Epic's model is unsustainable in the long term.
I wonder how the gift card situation works out for places like Costco where I can buy a $100 Xbox gift card for $90 (yay, free money!). I assume Costco is the one who's eating that $10, funded from their subscription income.
Also, yes, Japanese convenience stores are awesome. :)
Also, I think it's important that the consumer base for Epic is very small compared to steam and does not have features like reviews and community stuff. You wouldn't want to release a game with a year exclusivity and then lament the fact that no one is buying you game a year after release because there is absolutely no hype for it on Steam or anywhere else. Happened to Metro, Outer Worlds. Steam best sellers sell decently even after 1+ years because there is already a year's worth of community that talk to each other and fill the lobbies.
Seriously this bullshit is why corporations need some level of change.
Steam is revolutionizing Linux gaming too. Their Proton/Steam Play has made it sooo much easier to install and play games on Linux. Before that, you had to either tinker with every game to launch it in WINE or use Lutris, which is a community-curated database of scripts for installation, some of which might not work for some users, and some games are still absent there, as it is a community-curated system. Using Steam you can just one-click install and play a ton of Windows games on Linux. And this is something neither GOG nor Epic Store can provide.
"bring people to the platform with better pricing"
you can't do that, steam publishing agreement doesn't allow to sell the game cheaper in other places.
Thanks for explaining this in a digestible manner.
So wait you're telling me that if I, a small independent game developer with very limited resources, make a game and get it onto Steam, with its many easy to use features, well maintained servers capable of handling the constant traffic of millions of users, and multi-million strong user base, so that my game might be easily found by those millions of loyal and active users who are now potential customers who might purchase my game through a quick, relatively safe, and hassle free online payment system, and Valve is ONLY charging me 30% of the earnings?
hhhhhhhhhHHHHHELL yes!
Small independent games are not easy to find on Steam anymore. Since Valve opened the floodgate to small independent games, they get buried underneath thousands of other small independent games, most of which are horrible.
I feel like you should've done more to explain the "buying up exclusives" problem, because, based on the video alone, it didn't sound like much of a problem. Now, of course, I've seen (and am seeing) the problem first hand, I know exactly what the problem is, but a lot of people out there still seem to either wilfully misrepresent why people don't like EGS' exlusivity tactic, or are straight up ignorant about the subject. I've certainly had to explain this to people more than once.
As a minor nitpick, it could also have been worth covering Tencent's stake in EGS and their ties to the Chinese government, as Tencent most certainly has the money to keep EGS afloat after Fortnite's death, though that ends up in conspiraty territory.
And as for the video itself, while I personally hope that Apple get their comeuppance, this situation has done nothing to change my stance about EGS. I just wish more developers would be open about why they decide to take the EGS timed (or sometimes even full?) exclusivity, because I really don't think anyone can fault indie developers for taking a guaranteed cash prize right now over a "maybe more money if you also go on Steam" promise. I suppose they might be under NDA about the specifics though.
so how's one shitty store is different from another shitty store
you are buying games, the product, not scientology tickets to non existing haven. (i hope)
are you buying only in 1 store and never visit others to get your potatoes?
The developers take the exclusives because they get paid for the first X sales up front. Sure, they don't get any more money until epic sells that many units, but if they don't manage to sell that many, it's Epic that eats the loss instead of the developer.
Basically they take it due to a lack of confidence in their product and/or marketing. A success on steam will bring in Much more money, but even a Failure on Epic will cover their expenses.
@@laurencefraser I'm well aware of that, I just figured that it was a topic that @Shamus Young might wanted to have covered in the video. My point was more that I've seen very few, if any, developers openly admit that. It's often announced under some weird pretence of "We feel that the EGS is the best store for our product to reach our fans" or some such. Not that I have any examples at hand, mind you.
@@tsartomato As consumers, we often only really have one way to voice our opinion towards corporations: Voting with our wallet. EGS had, at launch, an EULA that openly stated that they were going to gather data about you, and sell it to other companies, their store program accessed your Steam account without your permission, as well as many other things that I, and many others, do not want to "reward" Epic for. Since voting with my wallet is the only real way to make my opinion known, that's what I'm doing, and probably many others are too. And well, if that store sells the best damm potatoes in the world, I just might.
@@Rex133TV
good
now can you do so against steam, while it holds complete monopoly over the market without outright not paying developers since you pirate their games?
can you do anything at all with fake online only garbage inaccessible anywhere but on steam?
the only winning move is not to play the game
any game
at all
because you are powerless against the monopoly with no even techsupport
As an Indian, my only grip with EGS is regional pricing (and lack of local payment methods)
This was a really well made and informative video. Some of this I didn't even know beforehand
If Valve were to lower the cut they get from each game that is sold on their platform, they wouldn't keep selling their cards to retailers for the same price.
Here where I live, physical Steam cards you can buy at retailers don't exist, but things like the PSN gift cards cost higher than their value... You'll need to pay around 55 dollars in order to go home and charge 50 dollars to your account, and that's because the retailers don't get them for under 50 dollars and they have to get their cut from every card they sell. It's because of this that I already believe that Valve selling 10 U$ cards for 8.5 U$ is way too cheap, but I don't know how it is in other countries.
Also... Do you really get to use their infrastructure "for free" when you have to buy a 100 U$ license fee for every game you publish already? That yes, you recoup, once your game has made at least 300 U$ to Valve.
Not saying that Epic is exactly on the right here, but implying that they can only sustain the 12% deal because of that sweet sweet Fortnite money (just one MASSIVE money making game) while Steam, with their HUGE market domination (which might be even higher again if they do the 12% cut, making people who went to Epic come back to Steam) wouldn't be able to from the money the are still getting for every transaction (micro and macro) that goes through their storefront... I don't know...
Really wish this whole ordeal was simpler and that we could all know what's best for everyone, but the truth is that the videogame industry itself is pretty complicated already when it comes to monetization... Just like AAA's constant lie about games needing to be over 60 bucks so that's why they make predatory microtransactions... I guess the moral of this story is never go all out defending one party? Also fuck Apple.
the best thing Epic can do is make steam as fair as possible to all parties before the EGS collapses under the weight of its deficit spending. I don't want a company that bribes developers for exclusive rights to stick around.
I had the displeasure of being friends with a guy who would have left a dislike on this video. He always took information at face value, And thus Whole hardly bought into the epic games store BS. Needles to say, We are not friends anymore.
It just saddens me that some people can be so dam blind. Epic game store thrives on these kinds of people. Why there biggest audience is young children , But unfortunately theirs alot of child like adults out there two.
So you believe that the steam store front cut is worth it's money because they say so? And all payments involving valve-walmart are non-negotiable because this video says so?
> --Whole hardly-- _Wholeheartedly_
> --theirs-- _Hhh..._ _`: \_ the whole _there's_ vs _there're_ situation is a bit of a mess tbh
> --alot-- _a lot_
> --two-- _too_
> _"We are not friends anymore."_ - Please try not to abandon your friends over political differences. Life's too short. The miserably under-supported systems and structures that govern us do so at a cost growing more terrible by the hour. I don't know if we'll ever get out of the multiple messes we're in right now but we sure as hell won't succeed by bickering with or shutting each other out. And yes before you or anyone suggests it - I'm more than a little guilty myself.
a shame we have lost a voice like yours.
Epic is like that one big rich kid in the playground who complains about nothing going his way despite his wealthy status. It's petty
Epic is like the rich kid at a playground giving other kids free candy and trying to improve the wages of their parents.
@@icebearcriminal1265
Get real.
Good to have you back, Shamus.
I haven't installed Epic's launcher, and I'm not gonna. I never even installed EA's Origin, for many of the same reasons. Every publisher that insists on having their own piece of your real estate, their own bit of your bandwidth, their own TOS that they might change at any time (and bury that change in a twenty-page snarl of legalese) feels like another invitation to put your foot into a snare on the promise that the rope will never draw taut, taking the games you thought you "purchased"... or worse. Accepting Epic's development money for an exclusive feels like a deal with the devil.
Weird, the usual blue dot besides the channel didn't show up for this video. Good thing I check the page for the articles...
The stupidest part of Epic bragging about their cut, is that they offer zero benefit to the customer. I don't care what the publishers and developers get as a customer, because that's not a problem for me. Why should I care if using the inferior platform pays a little better? I'm not paying for games to be a charity for every dippy indy developer with daydreams of being the next John Carmack or John Romero.
The other issue is that an "EGS exclusive" logo may as well just say "this game is gonna suck". When was the last time EGS had an exclusivity deal for a really good game? Anymore it's just a vote of no confidence from the game's own publisher. Them admitting that they think the game isn't good enough to do well on its own merits, so they'd rather take the guaranteed money upfront and not waste any more time or money on making sure the game is actually good.
There's only one piece of the whole Epic vs Apple/Google (ob-nitpick, it's Epic vs Apple because Epic is the one who initially filed the lawsuit... anyway moving on) thing that made sense to me and it really only applies to Apple. If you look at the Apple complaint it's all about how Apple's App Store is a monopoly and there' s no way to provide apps to iOS users that don't go through Apple's App Store. Precedent says it'll go nowhere because courts don't tend to see a walled platform as a market but their entire class of device (which is kind of stupid, until you can tell me how to run iOS apps and Android apps on the same phone it doesn't seem reasonable that Android is an actual competitor in the same market but the US courts think i'm wrong here and this is about what is, not what should be) and that basically destroys the entire argument.
The idea that Epic is flushing money down the toilet to get a better deal than 30% seems dumb to me. Like i don't see any way that they come out of this ahead even assuming they manage to find some kind of unicorn judge that's willing to buck what feels like decades of contract law and antitrust precedent. So putting together the idea that Tim Sweeney isn't always up front about his true goals (yeah sorry... i don't buy that exclusives was ever truly about the steam cut) and that Epic seems quite content to flush lots of money into gaining market share for the EGS, what does that suggest?
My theory is Mobile gaming.
If Epic can force Apple (either via settlement or court order) to allow Epic to bring the EGS to iOS users and they do the same thing with Android then they can brag about their HUGE tracts of market share, potentially billions of users. However putting together a full store only to find that the courts don't care is an expensive way to fail. Far better to roll the dice on Fortnight and if you win then great, if you lose then throw some legal fees around, make nice and everything goes back to the way it was.
The problem with this is that they seemingly dumped the same lawsuit onto Android and that makes absolutely no sense because there's nothing stopping the EGS from being built on Android. In fact the smarter play may have been to use something like Flutter to build both an Android Store and an iOS store then that can get banned rather than pantsing your cash cow. So that leaves us with Sweeney rolling the dice on a popularity contest between Fortnight and Apple and that's, probably not smart.
Sounds about right, but there might be more to the matter.
Epic already has a decent chunk of the industry by the hazelnuts owing to UE on the development side, and Tencent on the publishing/infrastructure side.
Not quite sure what experiences have been shared so far by studios unwilling or unable to move away from UE, beyond a vague recollection involving Bluehole sobbing about ... copyright or plagiarism or something? I'm not claiming that silence or my ignorance on the matter constitutes cause for approval, but you never know. Epic might just turn out to be some sort of benevolent dictator if they ever become truly dominant on any platform, including mobile. Would be interesting to hear what devs think of Epic's businesses practices based on UE experience, and whether it changed any since EGS became a thing.
In spite of what Sweeney might be tweeting, I doubt they pulled this kind of stunt without running it past the ~40% of Epic Tencent owns. Wouldn't really want to bring the big C into the whole mess here, but it's hard to ignore that particular elephant in the room, and their "delicate" relationship with the rest of the world's tech giants. Would be a really nice roundabout way to loose a few shots in Apple and Google's general direction - hands clean and all. This would again put your theory front and center, just with an additional interested party at the table.
I find it somewhat odd that they decided to go up against Google first a while back, which lead to Google exposing security vulnerabilities of Epic's apps ahead of schedule, or something along those lines. "Dirty deeds" all over the place, and as with all corporate level stuff - mostly just money/power grabs for reasons beyond us mere non-billionaires.
You are probably right about the legal back and forth going nowhere. Epic likely know this as well, which leaves me wondering why they are making the attempt to begin with. Maybe there's just that much of an overlap between the demographic willing to buy overpriced smartphones and the one willing to pay money for the privilege of grinding cosmetics.
@@evtikarina Interesting, i hadn't considered the Tencent angle.
I just can't see the Epic one-year exclusivity deals as a bad thing. They are incredibly helpful especially for smaller indie studios. It's only for one year and it's not unreasonable to just buy the game on Epic. Maybe these deals are anti consumer, but I'm not so sure about that, because it's generally good for the consumer when creative and talented people are able to continue making games. I'm mostly thinking about the smaller indie studios.
(You mentioned some Asian regions not being able to use Epic store but I have jumped through some hoops when buying subscriptions for a Japanese online game that didn't accept any of the usual payment methods. Where there's a will, there's a way. Usually.)
Epic don't do regional pricing correctly - that's expensive (one of the reasons real platforms take 30%). There's also additional transaction fees on many non-US payment methods. I can assure you, if games were 40% more expensive in your region, you'd be fucking pissed when a game you wanted suddenly became 1 year more distant.
This why I consider you as real journalist . I may know about subject but I end up knowing more after watching .
I think Epic is less interested in listing Fortnight on IOS without giving Apple a cut, and more interested in creating the Epic Game Store for Apple.
Algorithm pacification comment.
Algorithm pacification reply
Algorithm excitation outrage!
Algorithms Algorithms ALGORITHMS
I know that might not be the case to everyone. But i'm from Brazil and the support that we have in terms of regional price, customer support and others stuff like gifts cards that you mentioned are incredibly good. I don't see any valid reason as a customer stand point to use the Epic Store. Some people are quick to dismiss others who are against the Epic Store, but when you do a simple comparison. There's no reason today to use that store front.
P.S even GOG has more support to Brazil than Epic.
Welcome back! Came at just the right time. I wonder what your thoughts on the Google/ apple lawsuits/kerfuffles from Epic are as a comparison.
I cl kind of feel that tiering of costs to the developer/ publisher (like tax brackets) would be fairer for all sizes of games -e.g. big (both storage and player base) successful games utilise more network features than smaller ones.
However, as it stands, those big successful games get to keep more of their money and valve gets less... Am i crazy for thinking it's backwards?
I believe a very important fact was left out here, it has to do with what Valve does with it's steam money. It's no secret Valve has not been making money off selling their own games for a long time, and they don't seem to expect/care if HL:A breaks even. The thing is we can tell that 30% is way less than the actual cost of running Steam because it has kept them afloat while they dump money on R&D or failed games for the better part of a decade. Steam's cut has basically funded Valve since Portal 2 came out. You mention that 30M figure for keeping the network up, that is pocked change for Steam.
3:03
30% of $60 is $18, not $20.
Who ever thought Epic was the hero?
Screw the algorithm: youtube keeps hiding these videos from me. (great video, by the way)
To sum up:
More competition is good.
Epic is not competing.
Damn, I've already set UA-cam to notify me for all your videos and it still managed to mess it up. I'll put a comment here in the hopes that UA-cam will stop forgetting to remind me of videos from here.
The fact that this needs to be said is genuinely intolerable.
11:50 I was going to say that Valve doesn't sell any giftcards that are below $20, but you went further than me in explaining on why they don't (you can see it @10:57 that they only offer 3 amounts to choose from).
I've supported and continue to support GoG for ages and I'm generally angry that there is less recognition payed to it as a distributor.
Yeah! An upload 😁🍻😃
Very good video as always Shamus! Keep it up man!
Man your stuff is always so on point, never disappointing.
Glad to see you back!
i will never infect my machine with the cancer that is epic period
@Shamus Young, also consider the 10cents money from China, which allow Epic to conquer the game market. If epic is well established they will definitely raise their prices. It is basic rent-seeking economics. They are aiming to become a duopoly, with Steam; And just like Microsoft and Apple, Google and Facebook, Walmart and Amazon, Airbus and Boeing, become cash hording giants... or fail spectacularly. Exiting stuff.
I feel the sweet spot for the Steam tax should be 15% instead of 30%.
You sweet spot is a crap spot. Without 30% they won't be any cash cards and they have to push any kind of tax to customers which EGS does.
Steam Workshop. Steamworks. Steam screenshot sharing. Should bring those up when talking about some of the stuff Valve offers in exchange for their cut. The Steam Workshop especially is HUGE.
Can't we just sit back and enjoy the corporate slapfight? It's like watching two scorpions go at each other.
If you're going to be talking about Epic games, and comparing Tim Sweeney to Handsome Jack...
I understand you probably just took Risk of Rain 2 footage because you (either Shamus or Isaac) have been playing it recently and have spare footage lying around, but I think footage of either Fortnite or Borderlands (2 or The Pre-Sequel) would have been more fitting. Heck, even footage of Team Fortress 2, if you're gonna be talking about Valve.
this was VERY interesting. I had no idea that Steam's infrastructure was so colossal.
Except you will sell MUCH more on Steam, and 30% cut is not that bad.
While you will get more money on Epig with their mantra of 12% sure, but at the same time sell MUCH less. You choose. Not to mention that Epic is barebones as all hell.
+Valve did make that thing with lowering the % if you sell a certain amount of your game. Competition is good, but Epig is certaintly ain't the one to make that worthwile competitor to Steam. And i hignly doubt that there will be for quite some time.
Anyone with a brain will avoid Epig 100%
I mean, I wish Valve still made games themselves, but you can't say they didn't build something that PC gamers genuinely love.
Khaffit That’s fair, and totally counts, even if I currently lack the hardware to enjoy it personally. More thinking about the sentiment that gamers have had for the prior decade or so.
good work!
And Valve took all the risk and invested all the time and capital in building a successful online distribution platform for PC games. They put a lot of work into building their user base. They are perfectly entitled to charge a reasonable fee for acting as a publisher. As I understand it, devs keep all the rights to their IP. That's a better deal than a lot of book publishers offer.
@@Wolfeisberg You do realize that two things can be true at once right?
Steam acts directly as a publisher for a lot of games particularly indies.
@@Wolfeisberg You do realize that Steam does act as the sole publisher and distributor of lots of indie and early access titles right?
@@Wolfeisberg Enlighten me then. Define both.
@@Wolfeisberg What about the indie dev?
Would you qualify that as self-publishing?
@@Wolfeisberg Alright. I'll concede Valve is not a publisher for games whose IP they do not own. I think the rest of my original comment still stands though.
There is also the fee the credit cards charge to use their card.
I'd rather sell my game for 15% cut on steam without gift cards, but I cannot ;)
And you are missing a point. The cut is the same, no matter the game. So, my 100MB a piece indie download gets the same cut as 160GB of Call of Duty. If my game is 10 times cheaper and 1600 times smaller, I pay more per GB. The front page is nice, but it's notoriously hard to get there. And all of it assumes that a smaller cut is not obtainable, which just isn't true. If we ignore the "perceived value" of being on Steam (which is a big ask, but bear with me), the cost of payment processing and digital distribution is significantly lower.
Don't get me wrong, I am fine with valve taking a cut, but it is pretty much a monopoly at this point and if Epic forces any sort of change, I welcome it.
Worst case scenario? Epic store gets great, Valve lovers and Epic increases the cut to the maintainable optimum and we all win.
also, in the end, you mention people's choice... well, will you be fine If I release my game on Epic store for $15 and on steam for $20? Because most people wouldn't and I wouldn't be surprised if it was actually prohibited in the contract by Valve ;)
Engagement is good.
OH yeah .. like # 1000 ... that was me baby!! Also like the video man.
The always online to play games thing is the biggest problem with EGS imo. If they added an offline mode then EGS would be a good launcher.
There was a thread where a guy who spent hundreds of dollars on his epic account just got permabanned with no notice and was told to simply make a new account.
Quality service they have there, huh.
To enter any given new market. One essentially needs to buy customers. This is why they're undercutting Steam in this case. In hopes of gaining a portion of the market, they buy titles and sign contracts at cost probably but the long game is seizing a portion of the market. The moment they gain enough foothold into the market will be the moment they'll start to gradually pull their margin up.
there's a pretty significant difference between undercutting and straight up bribing though, and what EGS is doing is the latter, because the price for the games without discount is still the same retail price with the added bonus of being the only platform on PC to sell said game
30% seems warranted. building and maintaining a steam store is not something that generates revenue on it's own, it requires games and 3rd parties to justify the expense of developing it.
it seems reasonable that a developer who goes with steam is not only paying for access to steam's install base, but also the development time and risk that went into building and maintaining a store that people actually want to use and does not have it's own independent revenue stream.
11:15 to be honest didn't expect this, changed my mind. +1
Free market at work there. All good for the consumer. Steam needs to be challenged one way or another.
GOG and Steam also put a lot into making compatibility, which is good for consumers and developers alike. And that ain't free.
Also, I really like my Steam controller, okay?
There's a bunch of arbitrary remarks and false equivalencies, but it'd take more space than the comments allow to discuss it. If you're ever willing to make a debate about it, I'll whip up a video with a counter argument.
Great content - and interesting information - so this is to aid with the algorithm.
Epic are definitely not the hero here but I do think it’s weird that people keep acting like a store is a platform... As weird as framing Epic as the hero fighting against big bad Apple, it’s ALSO weird to frame Steam as the hero fighting against big bad Epic.
It’s not like Half Life is selling on the Epic Store...
Josh Even games that Valve only publishes are Steam exclusive. That’s kind of the point.
Meanwhile Fortnite, a game made by Epic, is on Steam...
Engagment!!1!!1!!!eleven!!!!!!
Very engaging and informative content.
8:16 after 5 years of using steam . I never even know this was a thing .
It's a very interesting topic, thanks for the informative video.
Epic may not be the Hero, but in the recent months they consistently have been made game devs and artists life easier by buying development tools and cutting the price or making it free. Some products are free even if you never use their store or their engine. So yeah, even if Epic has done many things for their on growth the past year has show that this also brings benefits to our industry and if they manage to win Apple's case it'll benefit all of the industry.
I hope you do realize that by doing that they are increasingly making it clear that they are trying to become a monopoly. Basically they are trying to make it so that if you want to develop games you have to go through them.
So, epic cannot be what steam is.
Because steam really needs the money );
I thought it was a trope about Epics and Heroism
Here to appease the algorithm
hi youtube algorithm i enjoyed this video please promote it
Sharing my point if you care.
When Steam came to Russia it almost destroyed piracy and multiplayer issues. Earlier we need to dance like shamans around a pc for days so it can run a game. Now I can pay directly to dev and enjoy my game. Thats why I am pro-steam.
EGS: heya bitch! Im filty rich, buy ma shit!
Neither are Apple, Google or Microsoft.
valve has done a lot for the foss commuity we are at a point where i can play fallout 4 with 500 mods on linux
i would think more people would talk about YAGMRPAPP (hi algorithm)
Shamus Young But this video doesn't address the topic: Does apple store need 30% tax revenue while making 100 times more than Steam?
The Apple Store also sells gift cards, so the same math applies.
@@trevorc4413 This simply doesn't make sense: Google Play also sell gift cards but let user download games from other store. Next time try to think harder
neither is apple, this is not a black and white situation...