Well Timmy that should make it pretty easy to make a platform that both users and content producers like more. If you actually try to compete you might accomplish something.
It’s not about the epic store being a success. It’s about getting fortnite on steam with little to no fees being paid to steam. Just like the lawsuit against apple.
If the majority of developers gave a shit about the difference between Valve’s 30% and EGS’s 10 or 15% cut, you’d think they’d actually be going over there. But they’re not. If anything, they put their game out everywhere. So clearly the 30% cut thing isn’t a problem. The only devs they are coaxing over to EGS over Steam are the ones they strike up exclusivity deals with, which is anti-competitive bullshit.
I think a majority of devs would jump ship if epic had the userbase, that 10-15% difference can be huge! But the store is bad and doesn’t have the consumers so it’s mostly a waste of resources
Prior to me switching to Linux, the main reason I preferred Steam over others was the Steam Workshop. Modding is typically so easy on Steam. As far as I’m aware, none of the other stores have that. I’d love to proven wrong though, because that just means more games can use mods.
But now, as far as I’m aware, Steam is the only major one that supports Linux.
Yup, and this kind of stuff is why I support the lawsuits against Valve - in the sense that I do want oversight and fair judgement on the issues being raised, especially since one included an email from a Valve employee saying a developer isn’t allowed to sell their game cheaper than on steam.
I imagine if Valve isn’t doing anything wrong, it’ll just waste some time - but it could also do good for game developers and players, by reducing the cut, but also potentially by opening up Steam’s tools for networking, input, workshop to not be locked into their platform (since that can definitely keep devs on steam in cases where they might want to diversify)
Using your dominance in one market to gain advantage in another market is anti-competitive. I don’t think it’s cut-and-dry but I think there’s a good argument that they’re using their dominance in games distribution to gain an advantage in microtransaction handling.
I think Google (and Apple) using their app-delivery dominance to force app-makers to pay them a fee for in-app purchases is definitely bullshit. Consumers’ options are more limited there, but that just means the market dominance is greater: the same argument applies in the case of Steam and the question is just how dominant something has to be for this to be a problem.
I’d argue selling games and selling content in those games is the same market though.
And the problem with Google/Apple wasn’t “dominance”, but more “absolute control”, Apple blocked third party stores completely on their hardware, and Google had secret deals with phone manufacturers where they had to include all the Google apps and couldn’t include alternate app stores, and made using third party stores difficult. As long as Valve aren’t blocking third party stores on their OS and not being pre-shipped on the OS of most of Steam’s customers, there’s probably not much of a case.
This is about micro-transactions specifically. Tim Fortnite is arguing that games sold on Steam should be able to offer in-game purchases with payment options outside of Steam.
It’s very similar to Epic Games v. Apple, where Apple had required in-app purchases for iOS apps, notably Fortnite, to be handled through their app-store so they get a cut.
One big difference that I see here: On PC, a developer isn’t required to use Steam to distribute software. Players often prefer Steam because Valve has made Steam a great option and has lots of good-will with players. Still, Steam does dominate a massive portion of the PC market.
And a 30% cut is high. Especially for smaller games with less financial resources. As a developer, that’s a trade-off you’d have to choose. I think it’d be best to offer the game on multiple platforms.
For Steam-bought games, I think having an option to pay off-platform would be fair, but I think the option needs to remain available through Steam too. For many games, I don’t want to give my payment details to yet another developer, company or third-party.
By what definition is the 30% cut high? It’s the same percentage for Apple, Google, and Steam. Brick and mortar is generally around 50%. Amazon is a large range, but 30% is roughly average or even low. eBay charges less, but doesn’t do anything other than facilitate the transaction. Epic charges less to small developers, but that’s also mostly marketing.
I think we’d be foolish to not. From what I can find Blizzard gets over 25 million monthly users really consistently and that’s not including the rest of the store. Toss in Minecraft and Microsoft Store and I honestly would be shocked if Microsoft doesn’t hold more monthly users than Epic Game Store.
If Steam was as monopolistic as it is claimed by Sweeny, having exclusivity away from Steam would be a death sentence for a game.
Tim Fortnite is arguing that games sold on Steam should be able to offer in-game purchases with payment options outside of Steam.
But they already can and already do. For example If I wanted to buy ARX for Elite Dangerous, you have to go through Frontier’s website to purchase it. Same for Daybreak cash for Planetside 2. And isn’t Maplestoy also on Steam? You most certainly have to kiss the Nexxon ring before purchasing NX.
War thunder I can pay either through steam (I prefer that personally) or you can just buy the stuff from their site and ignore the steam part entirely.
For the life of me I could not find this while I was playing. It always redirects me to a browser with the Frontier store when I try to buy ARX in game. Thanks for this lol I like using my steam wallet funds for this sort of thing over actual cards.
Timmy, if even charging a lower fee, devs prefer steam over your shithole, I’m gonna go ahead and say that maybe there is a reason: your store sucks. Big time.
I don’t know much about in-game purchases, but as long as i can remember, it was possible to register cd keys from other stores or even the keys from hard copys of games. To me this looks like a totally different thing than what was going on with ios and android.
Also a little wild for epic to complain about locking out competition when i am still waiting to purchase Allan wake 2 on any other store than epic…
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates.
(Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources.
If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
Well I suppose at least it’s subject matter related, unlike when he usually opens his mouth.
Tim’s opinion is clearly unbiased.
Well Timmy that should make it pretty easy to make a platform that both users and content producers like more. If you actually try to compete you might accomplish something.
It won’t change the fact that no one wants to use your product, Tim.
It’s not about the epic store being a success. It’s about getting fortnite on steam with little to no fees being paid to steam. Just like the lawsuit against apple.
Wait…
People still play Fortnite?
Like gangbusters.
How does he not know that this is obviously admitting defeat? It reeks of desperation.
This is like Drake being so humiliated by Kendrick Lamar that he sued his own record label.
Tim Sweeney supports a lawsuit against Valve?!?!
I’m shocked.
If the majority of developers gave a shit about the difference between Valve’s 30% and EGS’s 10 or 15% cut, you’d think they’d actually be going over there. But they’re not. If anything, they put their game out everywhere. So clearly the 30% cut thing isn’t a problem. The only devs they are coaxing over to EGS over Steam are the ones they strike up exclusivity deals with, which is anti-competitive bullshit.
I think a majority of devs would jump ship if epic had the userbase, that 10-15% difference can be huge! But the store is bad and doesn’t have the consumers so it’s mostly a waste of resources
Prior to me switching to Linux, the main reason I preferred Steam over others was the Steam Workshop. Modding is typically so easy on Steam. As far as I’m aware, none of the other stores have that. I’d love to proven wrong though, because that just means more games can use mods.
But now, as far as I’m aware, Steam is the only major one that supports Linux.
Yup, and this kind of stuff is why I support the lawsuits against Valve - in the sense that I do want oversight and fair judgement on the issues being raised, especially since one included an email from a Valve employee saying a developer isn’t allowed to sell their game cheaper than on steam.
I imagine if Valve isn’t doing anything wrong, it’ll just waste some time - but it could also do good for game developers and players, by reducing the cut, but also potentially by opening up Steam’s tools for networking, input, workshop to not be locked into their platform (since that can definitely keep devs on steam in cases where they might want to diversify)
If you don’t like it, you don’t have to use it. You got your own store, Timmy.
It isn’t fair that their store is vastly superior to mine and don’t pay developers to use it exclusively like we do! - little timmy wah wah boo hoo
Not how market dominance and unfair competition laws work though.
Name 2 anti-competitive actions steam has done.
Simply having a better product than your competiton does not make you anti-competitive.
Using your dominance in one market to gain advantage in another market is anti-competitive. I don’t think it’s cut-and-dry but I think there’s a good argument that they’re using their dominance in games distribution to gain an advantage in microtransaction handling.
I think Google (and Apple) using their app-delivery dominance to force app-makers to pay them a fee for in-app purchases is definitely bullshit. Consumers’ options are more limited there, but that just means the market dominance is greater: the same argument applies in the case of Steam and the question is just how dominant something has to be for this to be a problem.
I’d argue selling games and selling content in those games is the same market though.
And the problem with Google/Apple wasn’t “dominance”, but more “absolute control”, Apple blocked third party stores completely on their hardware, and Google had secret deals with phone manufacturers where they had to include all the Google apps and couldn’t include alternate app stores, and made using third party stores difficult. As long as Valve aren’t blocking third party stores on their OS and not being pre-shipped on the OS of most of Steam’s customers, there’s probably not much of a case.
Maybe Timmy could try making a store people wanna use instead of whatever epic is
Sure, they can do that. Doesn’t prevent abuse of market dominance ok.
Fair
But I wanna riff on Timmy!
Heh :p
Tim, something, something about preventing games from being released on other storefronts…
Of course he does 🙃
This is about micro-transactions specifically. Tim Fortnite is arguing that games sold on Steam should be able to offer in-game purchases with payment options outside of Steam.
It’s very similar to Epic Games v. Apple, where Apple had required in-app purchases for iOS apps, notably Fortnite, to be handled through their app-store so they get a cut.
One big difference that I see here: On PC, a developer isn’t required to use Steam to distribute software. Players often prefer Steam because Valve has made Steam a great option and has lots of good-will with players. Still, Steam does dominate a massive portion of the PC market.
And a 30% cut is high. Especially for smaller games with less financial resources. As a developer, that’s a trade-off you’d have to choose. I think it’d be best to offer the game on multiple platforms.
For Steam-bought games, I think having an option to pay off-platform would be fair, but I think the option needs to remain available through Steam too. For many games, I don’t want to give my payment details to yet another developer, company or third-party.
Hmm, so is Tim Fortnite willing to let me purchase DLC from a third party store to go with that free game that I got on Epic?
By what definition is the 30% cut high? It’s the same percentage for Apple, Google, and Steam. Brick and mortar is generally around 50%. Amazon is a large range, but 30% is roughly average or even low. eBay charges less, but doesn’t do anything other than facilitate the transaction. Epic charges less to small developers, but that’s also mostly marketing.
It’s not about the “cut” you’re thinking; it refer to in-app purchases.
Once you bought a game, Valve keep demand a 30% cuts on anything you sell once the customer launch your executable (.exe, binary file/game engine).
hypothetical scenario to help visualize (it won’t go like that most of the time, but useful to understand the concept):
Steam revenue in 2023: USD 8.5 bn.
Overall PC gaming revenue that year: 45 bn.
Steam is big but the biggest cash cows are Fortnite, Roblox, and Minecraft. Neither is on Steam.
Also, Microsoft uses their Windows monopoly to ship the Xbox Games store to almost every PC user.
If Steam had a dominating market position, the EU would have classified it as a gate keeper under the Digital Markets Act.
Microsoft also owns Battlenet now
Do people actually consider that a competitor?
I think we’d be foolish to not. From what I can find Blizzard gets over 25 million monthly users really consistently and that’s not including the rest of the store. Toss in Minecraft and Microsoft Store and I honestly would be shocked if Microsoft doesn’t hold more monthly users than Epic Game Store.
If Steam was as monopolistic as it is claimed by Sweeny, having exclusivity away from Steam would be a death sentence for a game.
But they already can and already do. For example If I wanted to buy ARX for Elite Dangerous, you have to go through Frontier’s website to purchase it. Same for Daybreak cash for Planetside 2. And isn’t Maplestoy also on Steam? You most certainly have to kiss the Nexxon ring before purchasing NX.
War thunder I can pay either through steam (I prefer that personally) or you can just buy the stuff from their site and ignore the steam part entirely.
You can buy ARX on Steam now, but you don’t have to.
https://store.steampowered.com/itemstore/359320/browse/
For the life of me I could not find this while I was playing. It always redirects me to a browser with the Frontier store when I try to buy ARX in game. Thanks for this lol I like using my steam wallet funds for this sort of thing over actual cards.
I think one problem is that although ARX packs are pictured on the game’s Steam page, “ARX” doesn’t appear in the text, so you can’t control+f for it.
That’s a funny way of asking people to uninstall Epic’s game launcher & boycott their games.
Joke’s on you. EGS doesn’t support gaming on Linux and the Linux version of UnrealEngine is royally FUBAR so there is no reason to download it.
You don’t need to even have the launcher installed to claim the free EGS games. I usually claim them to support the developers.
Yeah being against Valve is just evil. I love giving money to Gaben. It gives me the sense of pride and accomplishment. I would never hurt him.
one day he will take me with him onto a yacht voyage
Oh this is the same guy who said it was censorship when people said that maybe Grok shouldn’t create pictures of children in bikinis?
Yes.
Timmy, if even charging a lower fee, devs prefer steam over your shithole, I’m gonna go ahead and say that maybe there is a reason: your store sucks. Big time.
I don’t know much about in-game purchases, but as long as i can remember, it was possible to register cd keys from other stores or even the keys from hard copys of games. To me this looks like a totally different thing than what was going on with ios and android. Also a little wild for epic to complain about locking out competition when i am still waiting to purchase Allan wake 2 on any other store than epic…
I really hope Remedy can buy the publishing rights for Alan Wake 2 one day and release it on Steam / GOG. Such a great game.
I’m waiting for Alan Wake 2 to be given away since free games is all epic is good for.
The price cut is the only thing Tim cares about.