Ah yeah my bad its the number of sales where indie games win. In terms of money its almost 50/50 tho. 

If it free, there is an incentive to release quantity and not quality, it could become a spam problem. I am all for having a lower percentage though, but 0 could be a problem.

Until it doesnt and your entire game library is done...

> People are sick and tired of expensive garbage games and that shows in the drastic changes in revenue from 2023-2024. Be careful not to make the data fit your conclusion. Anecdotally, I've observed a similar sentiment, but for one thing, AAA releases have slowed down due to long development times, so there just aren't that many of them in a given year. For another, we know that, by a wide margin, most time spent gaming is only on a handful of mainstay games that first debuted years ago, like Counter-Strike 2, Grand Theft Auto V, Fortnite, Minecraft, etc. Plenty of those aren't on Steam, but the same concept applies to the games that top the Steam charts.

This is great and it's not like they have shit revenue splits anyway as last I checked it was 88/12 which is by far the best around.

Eh, I've mostly moved over to Godot for actual game making

*"Bite my shiny metal ass, penguins!"* ~ Epic CEO ^(paraphrased)^

Cause that would probably get abused for things like money laundering, since Steam is open for everyone who wants to sell a game unlike Epic’s store. You can just set up a shell corp that releases shitty shovelware and buy the game from yourself with steam cards you bought from the store with your dirty cash. And then you’d get all your money back ready to be taxed and laundered.

It is hilarious. Epic tried getting users by giving them free games. But that didn't translate to increased sales. And now they are trying to woo developers to abandon Steam, hoping that way customers will be forced to buy from Epic. They don't understand that developers are on Steam _because_ customers are there. And what does a customer get when they use Epic over Steam?

Can epic stop the virtue signaling?

Screwed over is what they get

Games that need a third party app to run on Linux

They actually take the time to approve the games coming to their store, unlike Valve...

The desperation looks good on you Epic

So what does Steam's revenue share look like in comparison?

You have given money laundering via making terrible games a suspicious amount of thought. I mean, one could argue that this is on Steam to manage, and that the way to manage it shouldn't be "we'll just keep 30%". It was Steam who spent an inordinate amount of effort and terrible half-assed attempts automating game curation so they could have fewer people looking at approving games the way other first parties do. If Valve wants to Uberify game distribution they have an onus on moderation and on protecting the developers using their platform. But that's irrelevant because nobody needs them to lower their cut to 0%. 20% would be great. 10% would be fantastic. Flipping the current order of things to give more money back to smaller games and keep more money from bigger games would be more than good enough. Whatever arbitrary bar you think would stop this entirely imaginary scheme they could meet and it'd still be an improvement. Hell, I have never laundered money, but from what I hear out there 30% may not be enough to put a stop to that. That may be a decent return for some squeaky clean money out of Unreal asset flips. Should Valve set their cut to 50%? You know, in the interest of international security? That was a serious reach, friend.

This is for the store, not the engine.

I just deny the existence of any game that is an Epic Games exclusive title.

Here's a different take, as a game dev: Epic actual employs quite a few people who work with Linux. The Unreal engine (and even, to a certain degree, editor) has native support for Linux. The reasons they're not including Linux support in their store front are two fold: 1) There aren't enough pure Linux users to matter - 0.1% of an already small user base is negligible. 2) The only serious Linux user base in gaming relates to the Steam Deck, a product that pushes a rival (and the dominant) store front. While Valve's move to push Linux gaming is brilliant for us gamers, it also kind of cements us in their camp. There is absolutely no reason for Epic to support Linux in anyway, and it absolutely supports their bottom line to attack it. And, no, it isn't because of any David v. Goliath tale of a little guy standing up to a brute: it's because a fellow giant has decided to ally itself with Linux, and all of us have - invariably - been shuffled into their camp. I think the Epic Games Store has a place in this world as a niche storefront with limited visibility but higher access to sales profits as a result of that. They'll never grow to the size of Steam, and that's okay. The largest storefront in the world supports Linux not just on its platform, but by developing tools for everyone that makes Linux gaming viable. That is enough, IMO.

I have to give it to Valve, their marketing team is *really* good.