News Epic Games Store

[Copons]

Yeah every time I talk about monopoly and competition, the discussion gets instantly murkier, and I wonder if it's just my own stance, as a left-wing person, clashing against the more, let's say, capitalist-inclined people.

Recently, I asked to a group of Italian devs on FB how were they feeling about Epic acqui-hiring many platforms and tools commonly used in the development pipeline.
I framed the question admitting that right now it's good, because the barrier of entry is lower (e.g. decreased prices), but in the long term, centralizing all the resources is a risk for both innovation and competition.

This is one of the replies (coming from a high level engineer with a great career in some of the most important vg companies in the world), translated by me:

It's great for everyone.
Users are getting big discounts (and tell me whenever else it happened with other acquisitions), and these companies, generally small, are created planning to be acquired.
The fact that there is a market [for these acquisitions] will push other companies to stand out.
We are very far from a monopolistic behaviour - if we look at the available choice of engines and tools, it's so much wider today than it was in the past, too wide even.

I chose to not engage with this, because of how wrong it is imho.
I mean, ok, there's choice, Epic is not a monopoly (neither I ever said anything about that, but anyway).

But... what kind of perverted horrible market is, where game developers should be happy because the companies that provide the tools they use in their daily jobs, are being created with the sole intention of selling out eventually?

 

[curi0usBystander]

My read on that is that unless they find a way of not losing money (good luck with that) there won't be gift cards. They could, in theory, make it work IF they charged a higher cut for those transactions but that would require a decent way to track it and it would kill their 12% argument (althought i belive that they said that their streamer cut would not come from epic after 2 years so they're already doing that).

the companies that provide the tools they use in their daily jobs, are being created with the sole intention of selling out eventually?

The silicon valley mentality, create a company to be bought .

 

[Copons]

The silicon valley mentality, create a company to be bought .

Right, but I don't see why customers of those companies should be happy about it, or how the market as a whole would be healthier as a consequence of it.

 

[Rockin' Ranger]

Apparently Epic is working on EGS gift cards. It'll be interesting if they pull it off considering Valve has said retail takes 10-15% on cards which means Epic would be running at a -3% to 2% margin. Maybe they'll sue retailers because of their gift card monopoly.

But just days ago the store cut was 100% pure profit, how could there possibly be any way their costs could be too high?

 

[kio]

But just days ago the store cut was 100% pure profit, how could there possibly be any way their costs could be too high?

It's almost as if he's full of shit

 

[lashman]

it's so much wider today than it was in the past, too wide even.

 

[Arc]

 

[fearthedawn]

But just days ago the store cut was 100% pure profit, how could there possibly be any way their costs could be too high?

This is the kind of argument i wouldn't be surprised by a lot of people eating it up because it's just simple logic and "makes sense" immediately. You need a little education in business or spend a bit of time thinking about the whole process to see that it is just bullshit.

 

[Yoshi]

Imagine Tim's Steam account

 

[beep boop]

I wish I could troll that hard. I need that Hades profile.

 

[gabbo]

Yeah every time I talk about monopoly and competition, the discussion gets instantly murkier, and I wonder if it's just my own stance, as a left-wing person, clashing against the more, let's say, capitalist-inclined people.

Recently, I asked to a group of Italian devs on FB how were they feeling about Epic acqui-hiring many platforms and tools commonly used in the development pipeline.
I framed the question admitting that right now it's good, because the barrier of entry is lower (e.g. decreased prices), but in the long term, centralizing all the resources is a risk for both innovation and competition.

This is one of the replies (coming from a high level engineer with a great career in some of the most important vg companies in the world), translated by me:



I chose to not engage with this, because of how wrong it is imho.
I mean, ok, there's choice, Epic is not a monopoly (neither I ever said anything about that, but anyway).

But... what kind of perverted horrible market is, where game developers should be happy because the companies that provide the tools they use in their daily jobs, are being created with the sole intention of selling out eventually?

Unless that engineer is paying the bills for that software he probably doesn't give a single solitary fuck who owns or develops the toolset he uses, so long as it works how it is suppose to and is documented/supported when it isn't. Which is kind of the point of separating those roles in a company. Lets the creatives worry about using the software, let accounting worry about pinching pennies for that software.

I do disagree with him over all, Epic buying up entire segments of the development pipeline is only viable if Epic can sustain their pricing and release model as it, with its low pricing for customers. The moment they claw something back or change an aspect to suit Epic' bottom line (those acquisitions gotta turn a profit eventually), people like that engineer will be out for blood because they have nowhere to turn but a completely different set of tools/workflows.

 

[Swenhir]

I have to agree. Any one company owning the whole toolchain without competition leads to insanity. Avid, Adobe, the CGI industry is filled with examples.

 

[madjoki]

First is probably wwz and second annp

I feel like throughout the past few years of the EGS I've heard a lot of competition is good -- like some phrase that has been ingrained into our minds from capitalism that we assume to be true.

It's the why that is missing from these blanket statements. Why is it good? Well, it can lead to innovation, competitive pricing, better features, and a number of other pro-consumer benefits. I think EGS has pretty clearly demonstrated that their success wouldn't lead to any of that. Steam on the other hand throughout their supposed monopoly has continued to push out incredible features, allowed for competitive pricing through third-party markets, and has a consistent history of supporting pro-consumer strategies (open-platform, modding, fully supporting hardware competitors, etc.).

This isn't to say Steam shouldn't have competitors, but not all competition is going to lead to a positive change. And Steam has arguably pushed these positive changes with or without this supposed strong competition.

Console manufacturers on the other hand flip flop between this is how you share your games -- we care about you to we're protecting the sanctity of your online experience arrogance depending on if they're leading the market or not.

Sony charging on ps5
save backup ability, is absolute bullocks

Apparently Epic is working on EGS gift cards. It'll be interesting if they pull it off considering Valve has said retail takes 10-15% on cards which means Epic would be running at a -3% to 2% margin. Maybe they'll sue retailers because of their gift card monopoly.

Wasn't epic paying something like 40% on fortnight gift cards? This was somewhere in epic vs apple papers.

 

[lashman]

Wasn't epic paying something like 40% on fortnight gift cards? This was somewhere in epic vs apple papers.

probably ... but they can do that - because they're selling literally nothing

that wouldn't be the case with games

 

[Copons]

Unless that engineer is paying the bills for that software he probably doesn't give a single solitary fuck who owns or develops the toolset he uses, so long as it works how it is suppose to and is documented/supported when it isn't. Which is kind of the point of separating those roles in a company. Lets the creatives worry about using the software, let accounting worry about pinching pennies for that software.

I do disagree with him over all, Epic buying up entire segments of the development pipeline is only viable if Epic can sustain their pricing and release model as it, with its low pricing for customers. The moment they claw something back or change an aspect to suit Epic' bottom line (those acquisitions gotta turn a profit eventually), people like that engineer will be out for blood because they have nowhere to turn but a completely different set of tools/workflows.

Indeed the issue (imho) is that acquisitions usually turn out to be a coinflip for the product.
The new owner is rarely aligned with the old one on the values of the product, and its expectations. Which is very reasonable, from a business standpoint.
Sometimes, the new owner moves resources over to the acquired product, and all works for the best.
Other times, the product gets stripped up for parts and developers.

The problem for the users of those product is that they can't be sure about it.
Of course they can't be sure of anything, even if the original owner remained independent, but generally speaking that gives slightly more guarantees.

The big difference is that an independent company, when its product stops growing, will try everything they can to get it right.
On the other hand, the "new owner" will stop at some point, and just kill or sell off the product.

And what of the users? They'll need to update, or convert, their pipeline to address those changes, which is always a major PITA.

 

[Wok]

Only one of Epic's 'first wave' of exclusives made money, and it wasn't Metro

New documents reveal more about how much Epic is spending—and losing—on EGS exclusives.

www.pcgamer.com

Epic advances, Steam reviews, oh my!

A cornucopia of subjects, this time out.

newsletter.gamediscover.co

 

[Deku]

Only one of Epic's 'first wave' of exclusives made money, and it wasn't Metro

New documents reveal more about how much Epic is spending—and losing—on EGS exclusives.

www.pcgamer.com

Epic advances, Steam reviews, oh my!

A cornucopia of subjects, this time out.

newsletter.gamediscover.co

The MG—"minimum guarantee," which is essentially the amount that Epic paid to get it onto EGS and keep it off of Steam—is $11.5 million, a hefty sum but also very mid-range on this particular chart. But in its first year of release—still in early access, mind—it earned $11.6 million, making it the only game on the chart to cover its costs.

The number is probably still increasing, but they made ~100k more in the first year on EGS. Oh, it was Satisfactory that actually earned money from EGS

 

[prudis]

went to read the "September 2020 presentation" doc more

This one weirded me out , its like they dont understand what SteamGuard is

 

[kio]

The number is probably still increasing, but they made ~100k more in the first year on EGS. Oh, it was Satisfactory that actually earned money from EGS

Is 100k the overall profit of the game, # copies sold x price - MG, or the profit epic made, # copies sold x price x 0.12 - MG?

 

[Copons]

 

[Wok]

Is 100k the overall profit of the game, # copies sold x price - MG, or the profit epic made, # copies sold x price x 0.12 - MG?

Good question.

$11.5M are the "Minimum Guarantee (MG)". $11.6M are the "actual Life-To-Date (LTD) recoup".

MG would be paid in advance, and Epic would try to recoup the cost with:

• your first formula until the MG is recouped (100% store cut), or maybe until MG/0.88 ~ $13M is recouped,
• then your second formula for the additional sales (12% store cut).

That is how I would understand it.

 

[gabbo]

Indeed the issue (imho) is that acquisitions usually turn out to be a coinflip for the product.
The new owner is rarely aligned with the old one on the values of the product, and its expectations. Which is very reasonable, from a business standpoint.
Sometimes, the new owner moves resources over to the acquired product, and all works for the best.
Other times, the product gets stripped up for parts and developers.

The problem for the users of those product is that they can't be sure about it.
Of course they can't be sure of anything, even if the original owner remained independent, but generally speaking that gives slightly more guarantees.

The big difference is that an independent company, when its product stops growing, will try everything they can to get it right.
On the other hand, the "new owner" will stop at some point, and just kill or sell off the product.

And what of the users? They'll need to update, or convert, their pipeline to address those changes, which is always a major PITA.

We're in complete agreement on why it's bad, I was just stating that I can see and understand why a dev might not actively care in general, but should.
Epic isn't out to make friends, it's out to make paying customers.

 

[Paul]

This one weirded me out , its like they dont understand what SteamGuard is

Not only did they mistake SteamGuard for CEG but afaik they are also mistaken about CEG being in any way required by anyone in any form.

 

[Yoshi]

PCGamer: Epic has sunk $500M into the Epic Games Store, doesn't expect to make a profit until 2027

"Epic Games Store is unprofitable and not comparable to the App Store" the lawyers began, rather bluntly, "and will not be profitable for at least multiple years, if ever." Ouch!

But what's interesting is that Apple's legal eagles go on to break down just how unprofitable the Epic Games Store is. "Epic lost around $181 million on EGS in 2019. Epic projected to lose around $273 million on EGS in 2020. Indeed, Epic committed $444 million in minimum guarantees for 2020 alone, while projecting, even with 'significant' growth, only $401 million in revenue for that year. Epic acknowledges that trend will continue in the immediate future: Epic projects to lose around $139 million in 2021."

If we take the lower figures, that adds up to an investment on Epic's part of $493 million since 2019, and Epic itself has acknowledged that "unrecouped costs" will amount to at least $330 million. "At best, Epic does not expect EGS to have a cumulative gross profit before 2027."

"While Epic’s commission is lower than Apple’s, it does not offer all the services that Apple provides. EGS is essentially a storefront—it lacks the integrated features that make the App Store a desirable platform for consumers and developers."

 

[Lashley]

 

[Digoman]

Given how off all their projections have been so far, I don't think they are going to hit this one by 2027....

And I was going to say "what's up with PCGamer writing bad things about Epic" but than saw the last paragraph:

The Epic Games Store does seem to inspire venom from some, sure, but it's actually not bad these days: and it's hard to argue with the constant free games, which are undoubtedly a huge element of that sunk cost (only one of them made a profit, apparently). Either way, you can say one thing about that half-a-billion: Epic can afford it.

Sounds like an editor (or maybe the writer himself) didn't like the tone of the rest of the article

 

[beep boop]

“Not bad these days.” Remind me when they had anything negative to say about it to begin with…

 

[TioChuck]

PC Gamer is a disgrace.

 

[Wok]

Google Games Store:

The internal messages discussing that possibility remain secret, and the complaint doesn’t indicate that Google ever reached out to Epic with these plans. It also doesn’t give a timeframe for the discussion — although it presumably happened after Epic started its plans to launch Fortnite on Android in 2018.

Google considered buying “some or all” of Epic during Fortnite clash, court documents say

Epic linked its case to a state antitrust suit against Google.

www.theverge.com

 

[Digoman]

A Google Games Store would be just as terrible as EGS for exclusives and anti-competitive tactics, but it would probably have two major advantages for us consumers:

1) No stupid tweets from CEOs with egos the size of their wallets.
2) After 3 years... Google would have already given up and closed it.

 

[C-Dub]

Google buying the EGS would’ve been a good thing, what with the rate they kill products and all.

 

[Deku]

If Google buy EGS wouldn't the story have pretty much infinite money to money hat even more games?

 

[Ge0force]

went to read the "September 2020 presentation" doc more

This one weirded me out , its like they dont understand what SteamGuard is

Epic lowers prices on EGS when a game is cheaper on Steam without the devs permission? Was anyone aware of this? Isn't this what Sweeney accused Valve for?

 

[Arc]

I have no clue why PC Gamer just now wrote that article considering that information has been public record for months. FWIW, Epic expects EGS to start earning a profit in 2024 with a cumulative profit in 2027 (i.e. the total profit finally exceeds what they lost in prior years). I've not seen any new information one way or the other about the store's profitability.

PC Gamer is a disgrace.

Whatever gave you that idea?

Epic lowers prices on EGS when a game is cheaper on Steam without the devs permission? Was anyone aware of this? Isn't this what Sweeney accused Valve for?

He made a tweet that Valve has a Most Favored Nations clause for games on Steam that prevents other retailers from lowering their games. Wolfire cited it as part of their antitrust lawsuit and Valve's lawyers denied the claim saying it only affects Steam keys. Whether or not it's true, I have no clue.

 

[prudis]

I love how he has his head so deep inside his own butt, that he sees absolutely everything the competing corporations do as something about him and him only

 

[ISee]

Whatever gave you that idea?

It's either meant to be click-bait or it's an article written by an angry Nintendo fan, still mentally trapped in the SEGA v Nintendo wars of the 90s.

Either way, maybe PCGamer should start thinking about changing its name to ANTI-PCGamer.

 

[RionaaM]

I feel like EGS is a store made not for customers or for developers but for one company - Epic. They aren't 'for the devs' as they don't let 99% of devs games on there and they also are quite happy to strike deals with publishers without the devs even knowing. The dev cut is bollocks too, It'd be insulting if they took more than a 12% cut as they offer a bare bones very limited service.

They also discount prices without the devs' or pubs' approval. It was hilarious how Ubi ended up temporarily removing their games during one of the big sales because Epic single-handedly decided they should be sold cheaper than Ubi wanted.

 

[C-Dub]

They also discount prices without the devs' or pubs' approval. It was hilarious how Ubi ended up temporarily removing their games during one of the big sales because Epic single-handedly decided they should be sold cheaper than Ubi wanted.

I actually think that was more to do with people using EGS to fraudulently purchase Uplay games which they linked to Ubisoft accounts and sold, because apparently Epic didn’t have a mechanism to cancel those games on Uplay.

Sweeney had to write a grovelling apology to Yves about it.

 

[inky]

People keep talking about coupons as an EGS advantage (which I guess they have been, even Valve had a blanket $5 that one time as a response)... but, from what I understand the summer sale just happened (is still happening?) and no coupon this time.

Seems to me they are done with coupons already and barely anyone gives a shit about sales otherwise...

 

[Digoman]

People keep talking about coupons as an EGS advantage (which I guess they have been, even Valve had a blanket $5 that one time as a response)... but, from what I understand the summer sale just happened (is still happening?) and no coupon this time.

Seems to me they are done with coupons already and barely anyone gives a shit about sales otherwise...

I think they actually had two sales recently. The "MEGA" sale had coupons. It generated some interest, but a lot less than in previous years (from what I saw). Then after that there was the "Summer Sale" without coupons. I don't think anyone notice that second sale was happening.

Now... don't ask me why they had two "event" sales so close to each other. Guess it was another "brilliant" Epic strategy that I can't understand

 

[inky]

Testing the waters for a permanent "on Sale" mode maybe.

But thanks for the clarification. So maybe a winter sale could see coupons back yet.

 

[madjoki]

Epic lowers prices on EGS when a game is cheaper on Steam without the devs permission? Was anyone aware of this? Isn't this what Sweeney accused Valve for?

Yeah, we talked about this back when it was first posted in May.

We've seen it in action too, with Epic matching price mistakes from Steam (example with HZD), so once Steam was fixed, they had to ask EGS to fix price too

 

[ISee]

Tim complains about government spyware, while Tencent is holding 40% of his companies stock.
Let that sink in.

 

[Le Pertti]

Hmh since Tim is against it, maybe it is actually good?

 

[Deku]

Is there no possibility that Unreal Engine also has spyware built in?

 

[bobnowhere]

Epic lowers prices on EGS when a game is cheaper on Steam without the devs permission? Was anyone aware of this? Isn't this what Sweeney accused Valve for?

I believe epic have control over pricing of games that received an upfront exclusivity payment until they pay it back. They never do outside of 1 one 2 exceptions.

 

[Wok]

 

[thekeats1999]

Problem is epic has to comply with those laws for their store to exist in China. Otherwise they would be locked out.

But he always comes across as a hypocrite.

 

[Le Pertti]

It's incredibly that Tim can continue to be such huge hypocrite all the fucking time, one just wants to punch him because he is breaking my brain!

 

[Swenhir]

Tim can just be ignored in general. His voice no longer has any value after contradicting himself and his own arguments so many times. What Apple is doing is wrong, and Tim decrying it is just noise.