Epic Games have announced their new Epic First Run program, to entice more developers to release on their store exclusively and give developers a boost. With this we can expect to see many more developers opt to go Epic exclusive.
The Epic First Run program will give developers 100% of the revenue, so Epic Games will not take a cut from sales on the Epic Games Store for the first 6 exclusive months. It's opt-in for developers and does not prevent them from selling it directly and selling it using keys via the likes of Green Man Gaming, Humble Store and other stores that sell keys. Naturally, this rules out Steam and GOG, which is largely the point of it to get more people to shop on the Epic Store and not Steam.
After the 6 month exclusive period is up, developers can then release elsewhere and the revenue split goes back to 88% for developers and 12% to Epic Games.
Epic also mention that they now have over 68 million monthly active users with over 230 million players. To help get word out, developers who opt into the Epic First Run program will get "new exclusive badging, homepage placements, and dedicated collections" along with features in "elevant store campaigns including sales, events, and editorial as applicable".
See Epic's announcement here.
What do you think to this news?
On Linux and Steam Deck, you can use the likes of the Heroic Games Launcher to really simplify getting games from Epic since they still do not officially support either with the Epic Store.
In related news Denuvo are rolling out some special protection for Unreal Engine games.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
benstor214 Aug 28, 2023
Quoting: KlaasOr pay them to not participate.Nah, in my crappy analogy the athletes are the stores. Epic isn't bribing Valve to not sell a game, it's bribing the developers or publishers to not sell their game on Steam.
Maybe in my analogy the EGS would bribe the athlete's trainers or the Olympic's national committees to not send their athletes to compete? I guess? Which, yes, would be less violent than shooting athletes from the sideline... I guess?
Last edited by benstor214 on 29 August 2023 at 12:18 am UTC
Quoting: 14Quoting: tuubiI get that. But I also get that some content creators may want Steam to have less grip on the market so that Epic's terms are more attractive in the short-term as well as strategically.Quoting: 14If I was developing a game, I would think about it honestly. No cut for early launch period, and then smaller cut than Steam takes after that.Yes, but a smaller cut of what? How much visibility and how many sales would you give up on by limiting yourself to a single storefront? Would you sell >30% more copies on Steam in the first year?
Hard to say, but we can't simplify the problem by assuming that all the stores are equal and interchangeable. You might just end up with a bigger piece of a significantly smaller pie.
I will again point out Audible. I buy audio books on Libro.fm for DRM-free but also for matter of principle against Audible's author profits terms. What if zero authors were willing to sell on Libro.fm? There would be no threat to Audible. I would be a hypocrite to say game developers should only go for maximum profits (Steam) but authors should avoid Audible.
Even though Steam treats me better than Epic store, I understand how difficult it is for other companies to take bites out of the monopoly. That is my main point, and it applies to any company that has an iron market grip, whether I like them (Valve) or not (Audible).
Sure. I'm no fan of monopolies either. That's part of the reason I buy games on GOG and Itch as well. But EGS with their anti-consumer exclusivity deals and complete lack of Linux support isn't gaining my custom any time soon. In general, you don't fix a less-than-perfect status quo by supporting a blatantly worse outsider.
benstor214 Aug 28, 2023
Quoting: 14I interpret your statement to actually mean: EGS can't win due to their poor tactics, maybe so poorly that it's laughable to you. But that's still competing. Are they in their own market? No. It's the same one, and they specifically compare themselves to Steam terms. They are very much competing. You can't say they aren't just because they're so far behind.Can you say they are competing if they aren’t actually trying?
It’s like saying that I’m staying civil in the GOL comment section, even if I’m not even trying to stay civil.
edit: missing 'the'
Last edited by benstor214 on 29 August 2023 at 12:16 am UTC
Gamers just don't like how they're going about competing. Devs are a bit more supportive though - that guaranteed money is extremely helpful to a start up, or small indie.
Me? I didn't even make an account on Epic - I didn't want to contribute a single statistic to their shitty marketing engine. And although I know it's not fair, I view negatively any game that made an exclusivity deal with Epic, even when it lands on Steam - I might still pick such games up, but usually only on sale, or in a bundle, such as the Outer Wilds. I'm petty that way, but I just can't help it. It's literally how much I despise Epic as an entity, and Sweeney as a person.
benstor214 Aug 29, 2023
Quoting: scaineMe? I didn't even make an account on Epic - I didn't want to contribute a single statistic to their shitty marketing engine. And although I know it's not fair, I view negatively any game that made an exclusivity deal with Epic, even when it lands on Steam - I might still pick such games up, but usually only on sale, or in a bundle, such as the Outer Wilds. I'm petty that way, but I just can't help it. It's literally how much I despise Epic as an entity, and Sweeney as a person.In the end our opinions don't seem to diverge that much.
Dribbleondo Aug 29, 2023
Quoting: scaineIt's literally how much I despise Epic as an entity, and Sweeney as a person.
Yikes.
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me