Jerykk wrote on Apr 7, 2019, 19:10:
Anyone with a few brain cells would be well aware that Epic pays large amounts of money for their timed exclusives. That's literally the only reason why any developer/publisher would agree to that deal. Without that bribe, they would just make their games available on both EGS and Steam.
Really? You have a source and figures as to these obvious large amounts of money? Epic has been around a long time. They also have the hottest thing going with Fortnite, so many gamers have already downloaded their software already. If they're then willing to offer 12% instead of 30%, why wouldn't
a developer consider going with them if they get to keep that revenue? Why would they want to compete with themselves because a customer decides to go to Steam to buy their product instead? "Literally the only reason". LOL
Also, calling 30% "Mafia-style" is absurd. 30% is the standard cut for digital storefronts. It's the same cut that Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, GOG, Apple and Google take. Steam offers more features than all of those platforms. EGS offers 12% because it literally has no features and a tiny selection. It also passes overhead costs on to the customer.
As a customer, it makes sense to either buy a game or not based on the overall value you get for the money you pay.
This whole faux indignation thing has nothing to do with that. 30% is ridiculous, no matter who does it. Tim Sweeney knows that. If Epic turns around and charges 30% once they have those "valuable" features available, then a developer would
be silly to sign up for an exclusive.
Obviously gamers who have bought an exclusive from Epic feel that the money they spend for the features they get is worth it. If Valve feels they have to charge 30% to provide the features they have, then that's fine too. It's called competition.
Competition in any industry is healthy. Valve is the king, and will remain so as long as it, you know, competes