this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2023
436 points (94.7% liked)

PC Gaming

7952 readers
3 users here now

Rule #1: Be civil

Rule #2: No spam, memes, off-topic, or low-effort posts/comments

Rule #3: No advertisements

Rule #4: No streams, random gameplay videos, highlights, or shorts

Rule #5: No erotic games or porn

Rule #6: No facilitating piracy

Rule #7: No duplicates

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The Epic First Run programme allows developers of any size to claim 100% of revenue if they agree to make their game exclusive on the Epic Games Store for six months.

After the six months are up, the game will revert to the standard Epic Games Store revenue split of 88% for the developer and 12% for Epic Games.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Jaded@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 2 years ago (8 children)

Ouf, crazy how many people are actually pushing for valve to have a complete monopoly. Ya it's a good product but so was chrome. Diversity is important for consumers.

[–] Nefyedardu@kbin.social 13 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"Monopoly", and yet when a game is on Steam I can buy it wherever I want. What stores can I buy Epic exclusives exactly?

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Just because the competition fucking sucks ass doesn't mean the best one has a monopoly. 🤦‍♂️ There is still competition... It's just weak as shit.

Maybe if the competition stepped up and offered similar services and functions, they wouldn't need to pull bullshit like Epic is with exclusivity deals, and actually take some market share.

GOG Galaxy is a decent one. It actually offers a lot of what makes Steam so strong. It's still not as good, but they also deal with a certain niche area of gaming, making even their store more relevant than EGS, Origin, etc.

[–] entropicshart@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 years ago

There is a lot more history to Epic than just a monopoly; that company and ceo dug their grave and they can sit in it.

[–] verysoft@kbin.social 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If an actual competitor arises sure, but why support scummy anti-consumer practices?

[–] Jaded@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Fair point, I guess I was ready to disregard it because of the money going to devs and epic already taking less of a cut then valve. Exclusives do suck.

[–] verysoft@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago

Valve do take a larger cut, but that money is going into some incredible services both for consumers and developers with Steamworks. Much larger audience too, which makes up for the larger cut anyway.
Epic just want a slice of the revenue while putting in minimal effort, so they just buy exclusives and free game promos, so as far as I am concerned they can fuck off.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 6 points 2 years ago

Reading the posts... everyone seems pretty cool with GoG... Value and GoG sitting in a tree, not being assholes yippeeee

[–] criticalimpact@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago

Epic have more than enough fortnite money to make a launcher that's not shit

[–] NightOwl@lemmy.one 3 points 2 years ago

That's like Walmart showing up to a town that didn't have any and claiming it's diversity because it isn't Costco. Options are good, but there needs to actually be a better reason for customers to use it than just use it even though it sucks for the sake of competition. Especially if this competitor is taking the approach of buying out the competition to remove availability, which doesn't give the impression they are a company with goals of being benevolent should they get bigger.