The Epic Games store for PC and Mac [2018-12]
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
I can totally understand that. But right now it's not a fair fight. Steam's installed base is so big, nobody can compete with it.
So the Epic Store needs to grow its installed base and exclusivity is the weapon of choice here.
Offering games for a few € less will probably not be enough to drag people into Epic's court, especially with all the key sellers out there.
BTW, didn't Valve use more or less the same tactics? Half-Life 2 and Orange Box, anyone?
Of course it is, that's how competition sometimes works in a market economy. That doesn't give you the right to come in here and tell everyone to stop "whining" just because we don't like how they operate and how it affects us, the consumer.
The major difference being those games were Valve's own, not some other publisher. I'm not going to get into an argument about self-published titles and game stores. If you want to discuss that, simply read older threads when Origin came out.
That's what I'm saying. I collect launchers, unfortunately I already have the Epic launcher so I won't get to install a new one for this.
One thing that pisses me off is how Blizzard and Activision have both started using B.net. This denies me the opportunity to have a separate launcher and store for Activision games
It would be more interesting if people boycotted Windows games that are exclusive to Steam.
I am a holdout who has never bought games from Steam. I almost exclusively pay for DRM-free games on GOG and HB (less so the latter as they move more toward being mere Steam key resellers).
Many games are de facto exclusive to Steam because it has de facto monopoly power, and my gaming has suffered due to this for many years. Complaints from Steam users about temporary exclusives on an upstart service really are so much spoiled whining to me; installing a separate launcher isn't blocked by a matter of principle for them, just one of lazy convenience.
I will not be installing the Epic launcher as it is, but I do support their efforts to bring actual competition to videogame storefronts. Their mere presence already caused Steam to begin adjusting its pricing, and if Epic or another store can establish themselves as a valid alternative to the entrenched Steam behemoth, further competition along other vectors has a higher chance of providing real change and choice in the areas of importance to me (DRM, free expression, platform support, etc.) and benefits for all consumers.
Some visionaire should create a launcher store, where people can find the best deals on all the best launchers released every year.That's what I'm saying. I collect launchers, unfortunately I already have the Epic launcher so I won't get to install a new one for this.
One thing that pisses me off is how Blizzard and Activision have both started using B.net. This denies me the opportunity to have a separate launcher and store for Activision games
Silent_Buddha
Legend
If that's what they want to do then they should do that. I'm not here to sing Steams praises, nor do I care what storefront they use.
I do have a problem with Epic buying exclusivity in order to corner the market.
That's as opposed to some titles being on Steam because no other non-indie store wanted them. That's slowly changing but indies still have a much harder time getting onto other storefronts (like GoG) than Steam or virtually unknown indie platforms.
AFAIK, Steam aren't paying any publishers for exclusivity. Nor does Steam attempt to prevent developers or publishers selling their games on other storefronts. AFAIK neither does GoG, or Origin.
Unlike EPIC, which is currently in the business of buying exclusivity with the sole purpose of preventing those games from being sold on other storefronts. I really fail to see how this is defensible in any possible way when it comes to the consumer at large.
Limiting choice should be celebrated?
It's at least somewhat defensible when it's your own published title. Blizzard titles on battle.net, for example. I'm not personally buying games there anymore, but I have no problems with them wanting to do that. Up to them if they want to limit the exposure and reach of their own titles.
It seems to me no coincidence that as the PC market becomes more fragmented we see the growth of PC gaming slowing and possibly going into decline once again as people are turned off at the prospect of not being able to buy the games where they want to buy their games. Whether that be GoG, Steam, Origin, the Windows Store, whatever.
Steam was instrumental in making PC gaming convenient enough to gamers that piracy went into decline. The next logical step would have been a proliferation of storefronts offering different services where people could have the choice of where they wanted to buy their games and where they wanted to have their library held.
Instead, we see fragmentation of the market as each publisher wants to try to corner the market for themselves. And the end result is that we see people moving away from PC gaming as it is once again becoming more hassle than convenience to play games on PC.
Hell, I can't even access a game I bought on Uplay (FarCry 2) because I can't remember the password that was used and their password recovery system won't send me a password reset link, and when I finally contacted them, they said the account didn't exist. Yay?
And in the case of Metro: Exodus it gets even better. 4A games didn't want this. Deep Silver didn't want this. THQ didn't want it. Only the rights holder for the IP wanted it. Yay?
Regards,
SB
Last edited:
green.pixel
Veteran
Seems PC gaming can't catch a break, there is always someone and something willing to strangle it.
I wonder what and when would happen if a large enough PC gaming audience said fuck this shit and moved to consoles permanently, so that hardware companies loose the people footing the subsidy bill for console' and other markets' R&D. I would love to see it just for the meltdowns.
The Division 2 has more PC preorders than the original, despite skipping Steam.: https://www.pcgamer.com/ubisoft-explains-why-the-division-2-is-an-epic-games-store-exclusive/
"preorders on the Ubisoft Store are six times higher. We believe this deal is a long-term positive for Ubisoft.
EDIT:
"Being on the Epic Store really helped to actually do more of our business on our own store, and to have a better revenue per unit sold via the Epic deal," he said. "So altogether it's really helped us to go smoothly from Steam."
"preorders on the Ubisoft Store are six times higher. We believe this deal is a long-term positive for Ubisoft.
EDIT:
"Being on the Epic Store really helped to actually do more of our business on our own store, and to have a better revenue per unit sold via the Epic deal," he said. "So altogether it's really helped us to go smoothly from Steam."
Last edited:
So it's not that Epic store provided them significantly more revenue, other than higher cut per sale from there, but that a vast majority of gamers didn't want to purchase via the Epic store so went directly to uPlay instead. Myself included and I'm not surprised by this outcome at all.
Not exactly a big selling point for Epic but rather just another kick in the ass for Valve that they need to do something significant soon or they'll quickly become the shovelware-only platform that gamers only load up to play an older game bought there.
Not exactly a big selling point for Epic but rather just another kick in the ass for Valve that they need to do something significant soon or they'll quickly become the shovelware-only platform that gamers only load up to play an older game bought there.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Oof, watching one of my favorite streamer's play Metro: Exodus. He's never complained about any online storefront other than occasionally Steam (GoG is his preferred storefront and he's now sponsored by them). Fine with battle.net and Origins. But boy did he rip into the Epic Store about what a piece of garbage it is. He doesn't play Fortnite so this is his first extended use of the Epic storefront.
I guess you get what you pay for. Although with how much money Epic is rolling in. You would have thought that instead of spending money to purchase exclusivity in order to win over consumers, they would have spent some of that money to actually make their Storefront competitive in features and robustness and usability.
But I guess buying exclusivity is a better use of money than actually providing a good storefront experience. Ugh. Make your storefront experience better than the others and people will flock to it.
Regards,
SB
I guess you get what you pay for. Although with how much money Epic is rolling in. You would have thought that instead of spending money to purchase exclusivity in order to win over consumers, they would have spent some of that money to actually make their Storefront competitive in features and robustness and usability.
But I guess buying exclusivity is a better use of money than actually providing a good storefront experience. Ugh. Make your storefront experience better than the others and people will flock to it.
Regards,
SB
So one person on the internet does not like Epic's store. Very interesting data point.
Eh, no. No, no, no, no, no.
Steam's main window is actually a chromium control. You can see that for yourself if use Spy++ and check Steam's main window. It just contains a CefBrowserWindow (which contains a Chrome_WidgetWin) and that is the Chromium main window class.
All the UI in the Steam main window is just HTML + Css + JavaScript (maybe some web assembly). When you click on STORE, COMMUNITY and your steam name menu point you can even see the URLs that are displayed. You can even right-click and reload the pages. So it is Client/Server. Everything under LIBRARY is just a client-side JavaScript app that gets its data from a Steam server. I'm mean how does the Steam client know what games you own? Of course it gets the data from their servers. So it's client/server as well. Friends and chats windows are chromium windows, too, in case you wondered.
When you use Spy++ and check the "Epic Games Launcher" main window it just contains a CefBrowserWindow (which contains a Chrome_WidgetWin), so everything you see is HTML + Css + JavaScript as well.
So Steam and the Epic Games Launcher are literally using the SAME technology for everything you see. Their are both probably 80% HTML, CSS and JavaScript and some native code for other things (like overlay, communicating with launched games, some networking, chat).
It can contact a server, but it works fine without one. Still you made your point, Steam also uses webmonkeys ... theirs were just more sophisticated than the ones which made the Epic launcher at first.
The way Sweeney told it they took their sweet time kinda sorta supporting offline play with the Epic launcher (it apparently still has a few niggles with save files) because the application was dynamic HTML (ie. client/server). Which was a very silly thing to do.
The way Sweeney told it they took their sweet time kinda sorta supporting offline play with the Epic launcher (it apparently still has a few niggles with save files) because the application was dynamic HTML (ie. client/server). Which was a very silly thing to do.
Last edited:
Similar threads
