477
Epic Games Store is offering developers 100% of revenue for six months of exclusivity
(www.videogameschronicle.com)
this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2023
477 points (94.7% liked)
PCGaming
6534 readers
234 users here now
Rule 0: Be civil
Rule #1: No spam, porn, or facilitating piracy
Rule #2: No advertisements
Rule #3: No memes, PCMR language, or low-effort posts/comments
Rule #4: No tech support or game help questions
Rule #5: No questions about building/buying computers, hardware, peripherals, furniture, etc.
Rule #6: No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
Rule #7: No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts
Rule #8: No off-topic posts/comments
Rule #9: Use the original source, no editorialized titles, no duplicates
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Take the free game and shut the fuck up
They would have been complaining about Steam killing distributors when it released and vowing to boycott it forever. I'm old enough to remember these guys back in the day, now they're basically sucking Gaben's dick and bowing in front of his virtual monopoly.
There is a core difference.
A better analogy, would be shut up and eat the cheese it's only a trap if you get caught.
It's still designed as a trap.
We know epic has demonstrated that their anti-consumer by their public, frequent, numerous exclusivity deals for their store.
Steam had de facto exclusivity for years and I didn't see anyone complain, weird how that goes, right?
Steam did not force any developer to make an exclusive. The developers had the choice of using every platform available to them. They thought steam was good enough.
And the reason nobody complained about steam being the de facto place to get games? It treated people fairly, it was easy, good enough. More convenient than piracy.
If the only choice is storefront A that's used by 100% of consumers and storefront B that's used by 0.1% of consumers then storefront A has a monopoly even if technically there's a competitor. They means storefront A doesn't need to sign exclusivity agreements because it knows no one will choose not to sell through them as it would mean not selling at all.
Epic doesn't force third party developers to sell exclusives with them either, they're free not to take their offer.
I think you're missing a big thing here.
Let's take your scenario where there's stores a with 99.9% and store b with 1%
A developer of a game can list their game on store a and store b. Store b will have to compete with higher revenue share. But that would make it enticing for developers to dual list.
-- Legally epic is not forcing anyone to take their exclusive at the offers, but I as a customer realize they're removing choice from me as a customer. I consider that a personal affront to my agency. And I will not do business with a company who I consider as a negative, removing my choices.
If epic just offered a better cut to developers, nobody would have an issue of them. It's the exclusivity trying to fragment the space that makes it annoying and to be avoided
Funny how no one blames the devs for adopting anti consumer tactics
If you pay a meth addict 50 bucks to break into my house and poop in my car. I'm upset with the meth addict sure. But I'm more upset with the guy who paid him 50 bucks to mess my life up