Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact

A lengthy series of tweets from Tim Sweeney looks to address some of the concerns gamers have expressed over Epic Games Store exclusives and other issues:
This question gets to the core of Epic’s strategy for competing with dominant storefronts. We believe exclusives are the only strategy that will change the 70/30 status quo at a large enough scale to permanently affect the whole game industry.

For example, after years of great work by independent stores (excluding big publishers like EA-Activision-Ubi), none seem to have reached 5% of Steam’s scale. Nearly all have more features than Epic; and the ability to discount games is limited by various external pressures.

This leads to the strategy of exclusives which, though unpopular with dedicated Steam gamers, do work, as established by the major publisher storefronts and by the key Epic Games store releases compared to their former Steam revenue projections and their actual console sales.

In judging whether a disruptive move like this is reasonable in gaming, I suggest considering two questions: Is the solution proportionate to the problem it addresses, and are gamers likely benefit from the end goal if it’s ultimately achieved?

The 30% store tax usually exceeds the entire profits of the developer who built the game that’s sold. This is a disastrous situation for developers and publishers alike, so I believe the strategy of exclusives is proportionate to the problem.

If the Epic strategy either succeeds in building a second major storefront for PC games with an 88/12 revenue split, or even just leads other stores to significantly improve their terms, the result will be a major wave of reinvestment in game development and a lowering of costs.

Will the resulting 18% increase in developer and publisher revenue benefit gamers? Such gains are generally split among (1) reinvestment, (2) profit, and (3) price reduction. The more games are competing with each other, the more likely the proceeds are to go to (1) and (3).

So I believe this approach passes the test of ultimately benefitting gamers after game storefronts have rebalanced and developers have reinvested more of their fruits of their labor into creation rather than taxation.

Of course, there are LOTS of challenges along the way, and Epic is fully committed to solving all problems that arise for gamers are for our partners as the Epic Games store grows.
View : : :
184 Replies. 10 pages. Viewing page 6.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  ] Older
84.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 21:58
84.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 21:58
Jun 26, 2019, 21:58
 
Look, you're either part of the solution or you're part of the problem. I wanted a pick-up truck this time around - the new Ford Ranger. Then I sat down and really mulled over if I needed one, and I really don't. What I do need is to use less gas, save money, and help the planet. Which I did by purchasing a hybrid instead. EGS and companies like them are part of the problem. And if you support them, so are you.

I see so many Americans here complaining about how they wish they could use a different ISP but there's zero competition where they live. And there's a 100 other examples of this people complain about around here all the time. So why is it ok to reward Epic's anti-consumer behavior - especially when you don't have to. I think except for a handful of titles every year most of us probably wait 2-3 years on a title until a significant price drop and/or patches anyway. So it's not like you need it NOW!

Yeah, I know we're all hypocrites in the end but it's always best to try and limit that hypocrisy as much as possible, "Princples and ideals are of no use if the idealist cannot live up to his own standards." At least make an effort.

"You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life."
Avatar 25394
83.
 
Re: Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 21:43
83.
Re: Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 21:43
Jun 26, 2019, 21:43
 
Kxmode wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 21:09:
Beamer wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 18:19:
HorrorScope wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 18:09:
I give Tim this, he's up to date.

Take care of the supply side business, we as a corporation can control the paying public, we now have that down.

Went from customer is always right, to here's all we offer you and it's the same as the other guy... you have no choice in the matter other than not partake at all.

If you talk to anyone that's met Tim, he's not at all driven by money. He never was.

Was that before or after Fortnite?

What part of Fortnite is greedy? I've only played it a bit, but it never asked me for money, unless I wanted a dance or something, but why would I want a dance or something?

Regardless, do you think he's making the decisions on Fortnite?
82.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 21:41
82.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 21:41
Jun 26, 2019, 21:41
 
MyRealName wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 21:22:
Glad to see a few rational voices have stepped forward to balance this ongoing spectacle with a bit of sanity. I'll only add that anyone (and there have been several) who boldly states "I don't care what the dev gets!" or similar is, with respect, rather shortsighted and selfish. It's not about compassion, but you do at least love games, don't you? That is why you're here, right? Rethink your asserted stance on a developer's cut and I'm sure the problem will become clear--even for you.

Where has Sweeney or anyone at Epic confirmed that the savings from the 88/12 split were going directly to the developer rather than the publisher (excluding indie devs of course)?

Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishfull thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms.
-Robert Heinlein
Avatar 17580
81.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 21:33
81.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 21:33
Jun 26, 2019, 21:33
 
Slick wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 20:17:
No other community cares about what store they buy a product from more than the product itself. The discussion on the games is practically nil. The threads that blow up are faffing competition between which faceless multinational billion-dollar DRM software they want to click "buy" from.

Yes, community is the key word here. I don't know how many people care more about it than the games themselves, but plenty of people care a lot about the community they're a part of on Steam. It's not just a store like Epic is right now, it's forums and profiles and social feeds and reviews and guides and achievements and media sharing and workshop mods and streaming and fully-featured chat... Maybe you don't involve yourself with much of that, but there are millions who do and some have been at it for a decade or more. They want to buy their games there not because they're lazy or because they're corporate sheep or whatever other little insults people make. It's because the games on Steam are integrated into this huge ecosystem that people like living in, the closest thing PC has to Xbox Live or PlayStation Network.

So you're right in that it's not just about the games. But it's not just about the stores, either.
80.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 21:31
80.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 21:31
Jun 26, 2019, 21:31
 
Rilcon wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 17:50:
Now queue the cynic that's quick to state that the increased revenue will exclusively go to CEO bonuses.

Yes, you're right, because clearly that's never happened before in the games industry.
Avatar 15604
79.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 21:22
79.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 21:22
Jun 26, 2019, 21:22
 
Glad to see a few rational voices have stepped forward to balance this ongoing spectacle with a bit of sanity. I'll only add that anyone (and there have been several) who boldly states "I don't care what the dev gets!" or similar is, with respect, rather shortsighted and selfish. It's not about compassion, but you do at least love games, don't you? That is why you're here, right? Rethink your asserted stance on a developer's cut and I'm sure the problem will become clear--even for you.
78.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 21:09
Kxmode
 
78.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 21:09
Jun 26, 2019, 21:09
 Kxmode
 
Beamer wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 18:19:
HorrorScope wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 18:09:
I give Tim this, he's up to date.

Take care of the supply side business, we as a corporation can control the paying public, we now have that down.

Went from customer is always right, to here's all we offer you and it's the same as the other guy... you have no choice in the matter other than not partake at all.

If you talk to anyone that's met Tim, he's not at all driven by money. He never was.

Was that before or after Fortnite?
"Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times." - Those Who Remain by G. Michael Hopf
Avatar 18786
77.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 21:01
77.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 21:01
Jun 26, 2019, 21:01
 
Slick wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 20:17:
No other community cares about what store they buy a product from more than the product itself.

Well you're wrong about that. It's a pretty common thing really.
Avatar 17249
76.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 20:41
76.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 20:41
Jun 26, 2019, 20:41
 
Slick wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 18:35:

There's no benefit, there's also no loss to the consumer. You're buying the same game you'd otherwise buy just from a different store.

You saying you care more about the store than the game?

Pretty fucked up. You know, because you're also saying you care more about Walmart making more money than the studio that made the game. Which is doubly fucked up.

If you don't give a shit about the people who make the games you love, then you're a turd.

If you insist on only buying from Walmart, then you're a mafia wife to the biggest monopoly in PC gaming.

Lots of strawman in that argument, but thanks for clarifying that EGS exclusives have zero benefit for consumers.

Whether it is a loss or not is debatable. Depends on how much you want to keep your library centralized, enjoy reading reviews or forums before you purchase a game and such.
Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishfull thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms.
-Robert Heinlein
Avatar 17580
75.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 20:38
Kxmode
 
75.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 20:38
Jun 26, 2019, 20:38
 Kxmode
 
Nearly all have more features than Epic;

This line is a straight-up BS. There's no way big publisher platforms have more features than Steam. Without trying, I can count at least one they don't have, which is user reviews and ratings (I've not included GOG since it is not strictly speaking CDPR's platform. It was started to sell Good Old Games).

Is Tim that delusional?

none seem to have reached 5% of Steam's scale.

Because firstly they don't have the same numbers of registered and active monthly users as Steam. Second, most big publisher platforms have under 300 titles whereas Steam as around 30,000.

It's not gut feeling Tim. It's simple math. Steam is just BIGGER than they and BIGGER than you in every way possible.

This leads to the strategy of exclusives which, though unpopular with dedicated Steam gamers, do work, as established by the major publisher storefronts

Another delusional point. There's a considerable distinction between a publisher releasing THEIR products on THEIR storefront and third-party publishers effectively being bribed not to release on a competing platform. Steam has never engaged in bribery. Epic has and numerous times since the beginning of this year.

Is the solution proportionate to the problem it addresses, and are gamers likely benefit from the end goal if it's ultimately achieved?

Consumers aren't benefiting from Epic's exclusivity in several ways:

1. A least one long term preorder on Steam got yanked weeks before release to go EGS exclusive prompting Valve to call the move unfair to Steam customers.
2. Crowdfunded projects with Steam commitments pull a 180 and throw backers under the bus and to the point that a company won't give back the money so a person can buy the Steam copy at a later date.
3. Companies not in need of Epic's cash infusion yet have opted for EGS exclusivity have posted their AAA-titles for preorder at full price.
4. People forced to buy on an inferior platform and one that doesn't have a basic shopping cart. An e-commerce site without a working shopping cart isn't an online store.
5. Neither Epic nor the publishers manage consumer expectations thereby leaving them in a state to wonder or worry that a crowdfunded project they backed years ago nearing completion will get the EGS switch-a-roo even when the campaign promised or eluded to Steam access.
6. Exclusivity has so far brought nothing but anti-consumer choice and artificial delays.
7. Studios purchased by Epic have indicated their products will likely be removed from Steam

As I see it, consumers haven't benefited from EGS exclusivity yet.

If the Epic strategy either succeeds

If? Either? That is not where you should be gambling. If you want to gamble, do it with your platform's success based on its features and merits. Don't do it with consumer choice and artificial gates. Because here's the thing, when you deny people things they get angry and anger has a way of making enemies. The last thing EGS needs as a fledgling store is the ire of something like 90 million active Steam users and 1,000,000,000 registers accounts.

Will the resulting 18% increase in developer and publisher revenue benefit gamers? Such gains are generally split among (1) reinvestment, (2) profit, and (3) price reduction.

That last part is a total lie!

First, most of the games that went exclusive on EGS for preorder did not appear for less than what it would have costed on Steam. Case in point:

- Borderlands 3 - $60 preorder
- The Outer Worlds - $60 preorder
- Other Wilds - $25 preorder [crowdfunded indie title]
- Phoenix Point - $40 preorder [crowdfunded indie title]

Second, during EGS's $10 off everything promotion fiasco, publishers were either disabling the pre/purchase button or artificially raising the price by $10 to compensate clearly showing they have no desire to give consumers a benefit due to the higher revenue split and cash infusion.

As far as I'm concern "Price reduction" hasn't happened on EGS in the way Tim is alluding. So the line about a better 88/12 revenue split leading to better consumer pricing is a myth.

The rest of his post is meaningless BS.

This comment was edited on Jun 27, 2019, 13:44.
"Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times." - Those Who Remain by G. Michael Hopf
Avatar 18786
74.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 20:17
Slick
 
74.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 20:17
Jun 26, 2019, 20:17
 Slick
 
There's never been any point to buying a Ubisoft game on anything other than Uplay, as you still have to download and launch the game through Uplay. It's giving a 3rd party who had nothing to do with development a cut, and then you having to run 2x DRMs at the same time instead of 1. Literally lose-lose for the consumer.

"I prefer to go to Kroger over Walmart personally.
And if something I was expecting to buy at Kroger recently became exclusive to Walmart, I'd be kind of upset about that.
Seems like a normal reaction."
- Sepharo

But what we're seeing is not a normal reaction. A Normal reaction I could understand. This is chicken-little pitchforks who've learned to type staging boycotts.

I like Target more than WalMart. If they sell Half-Life 3 at Walmart, I'll buy it there. The game isn't going to be any different. I'll still double-click an icon on my desktop to play it. We're talking about different makes and models of automobiles and the whole conversation is about how much the car dealer smiled at me when I bought the car.

No other community cares about what store they buy a product from more than the product itself. The discussion on the games is practically nil. The threads that blow up are faffing competition between which faceless multinational billion-dollar DRM software they want to click "buy" from.

No sense of proportion.
For your transgressions you shall be labeled a shill, called an idiot and anytime you mention facts or disagree with a tribe member you will henceforth be known as a troll. The best you can hope for is that the labels won't haunt your offspring. -RedEye9
Avatar 57545
73.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 19:21
73.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 19:21
Jun 26, 2019, 19:21
 
"If you insist on only buying from Walmart, then you're a mafia wife to the biggest monopoly in PC gaming. "

Except I don't and yet I can't buy several single player games on GoG because they are Epic exclusives. No drm free for me or workshop support if it exists for a game. But yay competition or something. Epic's sale put Genesis Alpha Zero at $9.99 aka 66% off release price just a few months after release.

Maybe I don't care to be the beta tester for Epic's new software and crappy friends list with Satisfactory. There sure as hell is no benefit to buying any Ubisoft game on Epic apart from an occasional "we have it cheaper than anybody for a weekend" sale.
72.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 19:07
72.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 19:07
Jun 26, 2019, 19:07
 
Slick wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 18:35:
grudgebearer wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 18:23:
Slick wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 18:10:
Think of how many games we've all played that have run on the Unreal Engine. Epic has contributed to the ecosystem. That and their engine licencing deals are quite generous to studios, I think it's like 5% only after you've made X amount of profit, and nothing before that. Pretty good to developers.

And then they undercut the ludicrous store tax so that studios can hope to make more money from THEIR FUCKING PRODUCT than the goddamn payment processor does.

There's an easy rubric to remember:

A) Epic has been directly responsible for thousands of games actually being made by indy to AAA studios.

B) Steam has middleman profited from the hard work of thousands of games by indy to AAA studios.

Now tell me which you're mad at again sheep?

BTW, I should have an RSS feed notification for whenever a member in this forum starts getting called a shill, as it probably means they actually have something intelligent to say in light of the ignorant reception this board usually provides.

What does any of that tirade have to do with consumers benefiting from EGS exclusivity?

There's no benefit, there's also no loss to the consumer. You're buying the same game you'd otherwise buy just from a different store.

You saying you care more about the store than the game?

Pretty fucked up. You know, because you're also saying you care more about Walmart making more money than the studio that made the game. Which is doubly fucked up.

If you don't give a shit about the people who make the games you love, then you're a turd.

If you insist on only buying from Walmart, then you're a mafia wife to the biggest monopoly in PC gaming.

I prefer to go to Kroger over Walmart personally.
And if something I was expecting to buy at Kroger recently became exclusive to Walmart, I'd be kind of upset about that.
Seems like a normal reaction.
Avatar 17249
71.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 19:06
71.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 19:06
Jun 26, 2019, 19:06
 
Slick wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 18:35:
grudgebearer wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 18:23:
Slick wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 18:10:
Think of how many games we've all played that have run on the Unreal Engine. Epic has contributed to the ecosystem. That and their engine licencing deals are quite generous to studios, I think it's like 5% only after you've made X amount of profit, and nothing before that. Pretty good to developers.

And then they undercut the ludicrous store tax so that studios can hope to make more money from THEIR FUCKING PRODUCT than the goddamn payment processor does.

There's an easy rubric to remember:

A) Epic has been directly responsible for thousands of games actually being made by indy to AAA studios.

B) Steam has middleman profited from the hard work of thousands of games by indy to AAA studios.

Now tell me which you're mad at again sheep?

BTW, I should have an RSS feed notification for whenever a member in this forum starts getting called a shill, as it probably means they actually have something intelligent to say in light of the ignorant reception this board usually provides.

What does any of that tirade have to do with consumers benefiting from EGS exclusivity?

There's no benefit, there's also no loss to the consumer. You're buying the same game you'd otherwise buy just from a different store.

You saying you care more about the store than the game?

Pretty fucked up. You know, because you're also saying you care more about Walmart making more money than the studio that made the game. Which is doubly fucked up.

If you don't give a shit about the people who make the games you love, then you're a turd.

If you insist on only buying from Walmart, then you're a mafia wife to the biggest monopoly in PC gaming.
shill
shill
shill
shill

sorry Grin
Avatar 58135
70.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 19:00
70.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 19:00
Jun 26, 2019, 19:00
 
EPIC store is the devil mkay
Avatar 15164
69.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 18:35
Slick
 
69.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 18:35
Jun 26, 2019, 18:35
 Slick
 
grudgebearer wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 18:23:
Slick wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 18:10:
Think of how many games we've all played that have run on the Unreal Engine. Epic has contributed to the ecosystem. That and their engine licencing deals are quite generous to studios, I think it's like 5% only after you've made X amount of profit, and nothing before that. Pretty good to developers.

And then they undercut the ludicrous store tax so that studios can hope to make more money from THEIR FUCKING PRODUCT than the goddamn payment processor does.

There's an easy rubric to remember:

A) Epic has been directly responsible for thousands of games actually being made by indy to AAA studios.

B) Steam has middleman profited from the hard work of thousands of games by indy to AAA studios.

Now tell me which you're mad at again sheep?

BTW, I should have an RSS feed notification for whenever a member in this forum starts getting called a shill, as it probably means they actually have something intelligent to say in light of the ignorant reception this board usually provides.

What does any of that tirade have to do with consumers benefiting from EGS exclusivity?

There's no benefit, there's also no loss to the consumer. You're buying the same game you'd otherwise buy just from a different store.

You saying you care more about the store than the game?

Pretty fucked up. You know, because you're also saying you care more about Walmart making more money than the studio that made the game. Which is doubly fucked up.

If you don't give a shit about the people who make the games you love, then you're a turd.

If you insist on only buying from Walmart, then you're a mafia wife to the biggest monopoly in PC gaming.
For your transgressions you shall be labeled a shill, called an idiot and anytime you mention facts or disagree with a tribe member you will henceforth be known as a troll. The best you can hope for is that the labels won't haunt your offspring. -RedEye9
Avatar 57545
68.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 18:23
68.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 18:23
Jun 26, 2019, 18:23
 
Slick wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 18:10:
Think of how many games we've all played that have run on the Unreal Engine. Epic has contributed to the ecosystem. That and their engine licencing deals are quite generous to studios, I think it's like 5% only after you've made X amount of profit, and nothing before that. Pretty good to developers.

And then they undercut the ludicrous store tax so that studios can hope to make more money from THEIR FUCKING PRODUCT than the goddamn payment processor does.

There's an easy rubric to remember:

A) Epic has been directly responsible for thousands of games actually being made by indy to AAA studios.

B) Steam has middleman profited from the hard work of thousands of games by indy to AAA studios.

Now tell me which you're mad at again sheep?

BTW, I should have an RSS feed notification for whenever a member in this forum starts getting called a shill, as it probably means they actually have something intelligent to say in light of the ignorant reception this board usually provides.

What does any of that tirade have to do with consumers benefiting from EGS exclusivity?
Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishfull thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms.
-Robert Heinlein
Avatar 17580
67.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 18:19
67.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 18:19
Jun 26, 2019, 18:19
 
HorrorScope wrote on Jun 26, 2019, 18:09:
I give Tim this, he's up to date.

Take care of the supply side business, we as a corporation can control the paying public, we now have that down.

Went from customer is always right, to here's all we offer you and it's the same as the other guy... you have no choice in the matter other than not partake at all.

If you talk to anyone that's met Tim, he's not at all driven by money. He never was. I'm certain he believes all of this. At this point, he has more than enough money, and he's the type to feel there is a such thing as enough money.

You haven't, though, heard from Mark Rein at all. In truth, he really stepped back from the public this decade.
66.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 18:10
Slick
 
66.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 18:10
Jun 26, 2019, 18:10
 Slick
 
Think of how many games we've all played that have run on the Unreal Engine. Epic has contributed to the ecosystem. That and their engine licencing deals are quite generous to studios, I think it's like 5% only after you've made X amount of profit, and nothing before that. Pretty good to developers.

And then they undercut the ludicrous store tax so that studios can hope to make more money from THEIR FUCKING PRODUCT than the goddamn payment processor does.

There's an easy rubric to remember:

A) Epic has been directly responsible for thousands of games actually being made by indy to AAA studios.

B) Steam has middleman profited from the hard work of thousands of games by indy to AAA studios.

Now tell me which you're mad at again sheep?

BTW, I should have an RSS feed notification for whenever a member in this forum starts getting called a shill, as it probably means they actually have something intelligent to say in light of the ignorant reception this board usually provides.
For your transgressions you shall be labeled a shill, called an idiot and anytime you mention facts or disagree with a tribe member you will henceforth be known as a troll. The best you can hope for is that the labels won't haunt your offspring. -RedEye9
Avatar 57545
65.
 
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact
Jun 26, 2019, 18:09
65.
Re: Tim Sweeney on EGS' Impact Jun 26, 2019, 18:09
Jun 26, 2019, 18:09
 
I give Tim this, he's up to date.

Take care of the supply side business, we as a corporation can control the paying public, we now have that down.

Went from customer is always right, to here's all we offer you and it's the same as the other guy... you have no choice in the matter other than not partake at all.
Avatar 17232
184 Replies. 10 pages. Viewing page 6.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  ] Older