A forum for discussing and organizing recreational softball and baseball games and leagues in the greater Halifax area.
Epic reduce their cut to 0% for the first $1 million in revenue for devs on the Epic Games Store
-
I dont think the curve would look like this without valves efforts to push linux, so i am a bit forgiving when it comes to them wanting money to do random research and development. So far they have always been making cool stuff with that money. 
-
EGS has reviews as far as I can tell. I still think Steam is better, but this is a welcome move out of them. Competition is a good thingI was talking about written reviews, not just a like/dislike (star) system
-
TBH I haven't seen evidence that layoffs generate capital. It just fudges cost to revenue ratios to emulate quarterly gains in hopes of appeasing shareholders.
-
In this thread a bunch of monopolists tell epic to fuck off so they can keep feeding a monopoly that licenses drm keys to them.I am against monopolistic competition practices and that includes exclusivity deals and predatory pricing. And as far as I know, Epic does this more than Valve or GOG. Granted, Valve doesn't need to, because they are already the main player, but they also mostly avoided enshittyfication for now. Granted it is hard to enter a market that is already dominated by another company, but instead of doing those business practices they could offer a better service.
-
Steam is a monopoly because it is the only one of these platforms to actually be good.
-
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.
-
Epic can even beat them if they just improved their store, but they would rather fight other stores so that it would be worse for everyone.It's more than the store they need to improve. They're not just playing catch-up either.
-
Couldn't you just like... sell those stolen gift cards on G2A, Kinguin and such instead? You wouldn't have the 100 euro posting game fee + needing to have it checked and such.Iām not talking about stolen gift cards. The goal of money laundering is to move dirty cash from the criminal underworld into lawful society. Selling stolen gift cards on G2A doesnāt help with that. You want to create proof for the tax man that the money you earn comes from a legitimate source. If you sell stolen gift card you donāt have a paper trail for where you have sourced those cards. Itās suspicious. If you buy gift cards with your dirty cash at a store and then pretend to be a customer by buying your own game you have created a money paper trail for the tax man since your earnings will come from Valve with receipts and all and you donāt have to proof where your ācustomersā have bought those gift cards. And then once that money is taxed that money is earned legitimately. You could buy stolen gift cards from another criminal but good chance stores report to their supplier if a batch of cards is stolen and then it gets reported to Valve. And Valve knows which numbers those are. If they see a game getting bought with cards from the same stolen batches and have almost no other sales there is a chance the game gets flagged automatically by their systems and they probably report it to the authorities.
-
It's not about how easy it is to compile, my first point was literally that they actively maintain an engine for Linux. The install base is too low right now. Hopefully as our numbers grow we'll have enough market impact to warrant pushing other store fronts. Fortnite is great for Epic, but their debacle with Apple kind of proved that one popular game isn't enough to push the public off one store front onto another.> Itās not about how easy it is to compile But it is. It is what defines the cost of supporting a platform. > The install base is too low right now. The installed base of Switch2 is 0% right now.
-
This post did not contain any content.It s a good start ngl. What about taking a different route altogether and not be greedy? what about charging a flat fee (your costs plus some profits to run the infrastructure like yearly or monthly). What about not being evil? There is a huge business opportunity IMO to do just that. Have a store, charge a flat fee, add whatever percentage wire transfers take (1-3%). You make money, you out-compete everyone and you are the good guy.
-
The hosting part is like the smallest portion of what valve does.
-
> Do you think GOG and Epic Games want Steam Nobody gives a shit what they want. Monopoly enforcement is about consumers.It's about consumers by making sure there's competition.
-
Sounds like it's time to play through the free games I got before epic folds like a card table and revoked my access to them. In a sane world, the library could host the people's digital store fronts with no cuts taken from the revenue. It is pur culture, we should preserve it.As long as Fortnite prints money, Tim gets to cosplay as a consumer crusader. I think both Steam and Epic will let you generate codes to sell your game yourself, but this will attract a shit load of fraudulent credit card sales, and it's pretty much not worth doing.
-
It s a good start ngl. What about taking a different route altogether and not be greedy? what about charging a flat fee (your costs plus some profits to run the infrastructure like yearly or monthly). What about not being evil? There is a huge business opportunity IMO to do just that. Have a store, charge a flat fee, add whatever percentage wire transfers take (1-3%). You make money, you out-compete everyone and you are the good guy.That would require having a platform worth something. Currently, they sank millions into the community - but in the wrong way. The client still lacks basic features and yet they spend money to buy exclusivity. Fuck them, they don't deserve shit - praise or money.
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
That would require having a platform worth something. Currently, they sank millions into the community - but in the wrong way. The client still lacks basic features and yet they spend money to buy exclusivity. Fuck them, they don't deserve shit - praise or money.
-
Steam is a monopoly because it is the only one of these platforms to actually be good.no, it's because they had about a decade head start. you think steam started the way it is now? it started as a launcher for steam games and it was worse than ubisoft's launcher.
-
But nobody is complaining about Steam OS having a monopoly on PC OSs, the issue is with Steam having control of the PC gaming market. I am exhausted by humanity's ongoing inability to hold more than one idea in their heads at once. The world isn't made of good guys that play for your team and bad guys that play for the other team. Can people be adults for one moment at some point this century? Holy crap. Steam can ABSOLUTELY have a dominant position in one market while attempting to erode a competitor's dominant position in another market. Microsoft has a dominant position in the OS market that *should* be eroded by both competitors and regulators. That dominant position includes having about 75% of the PC OS market. Steam has about 80% of the PC digital distribution market for new releases. One of those facts isn't tolerable just because you've decided to make supporting a specific alternative in the OS market your entire personality. That's not how that works. Microsoft should be held back from the areas where it has dominance (and that includes keeping them on a very tight leash when it comes to aggregating more studios under their gaming division) and Steam should be kept on a tight leash when it comes to their dominant position on the gaming digital distribution space. Ideally by having other competitors not only survive but thrive and grow to prevent regulators having to intervene in the first place. Those two ideas are, in fact, entirely consistent with each other with no contradiction. I am imploring social media dwellers to stop treating every issue as a football match or get off the Internet.> Steam has about 80% of the PC digital distribution market for new releases. So it is a bad thing now that Steam makes new releases more discoverable than the other storefronts that have a larger installed base than Steam? Microsoft's store has a close to 100% penetration of home installation of Windows 10 and newer. Opening Microsoft Store: Boom, top spots for Microsofts properties (Activision Blizzard sale, Minecraft, Candy Crush).  Switching to the Games tab: PC Game Pass, more Activision Blizzard sale, COD Black Ops 6 with a dedicated banner, more Minecraft, more Candy Crush.  Visiting one of Microsoft's other game stores, Battle.net: 100% Microsoft exclusive. Not just Blizzard games but Doom, Avowed, Sea of Thieves, PC GamePass. That's unregulated Microsoft on full display. Not a single 3rd party game even available but the rest of the Microsoft catalogue integrated after the takeover of Activision Blizzard.  Compare that to Steam: Huge banner advertising the sale promotion of EA.  Scrolling a bit further down, Microsoft games advertised, some convention for narrative games.  Nobody but Microsoft and Epic are to blame for their huge installed bases not converting to sales of 3rd party games. Mostly advertising their own properties and paid exclusives. All your emotional outbursts do not change facts.
-
no, it's because they had about a decade head start. you think steam started the way it is now? it started as a launcher for steam games and it was worse than ubisoft's launcher.
