I really hope they can improve the store performance since it can be quite laggy other than that I really like their fair shares and tools! Very excited for the release
Yea it bugs out and you have to close the launcher completely and re-launch it to solve lag issues, then after a few minutes the lag will start again, but you have those few minutes without lag LOL. I try to use the browser as much as I can for the Unreal store
Wow, that's pretty great news. I'd say the $100 is well worth it for the increased percentage split alone. Definitely going to keep them in mind when the time comes. Thanks for the update!
They explained the restricted access in the deep dive stream when they announced this. If you make a new organization, it should opt you in to the program automatically. They are working on getting older organizations into the system. I suspect it was an older version and everyone that made moc organizations a little too early will have that issue. But all you have to do is go on the left side of the dev portal and create new organization and when you create a product (game) and hit Epic game store button, going forward from there should allow you to go through the product checks and pay for submission fee
100$ submission is definitely a good idea, that store would get *flooded* with *garbage* if it wasn't there. Does it need to be 100? Maybe, I don't know but honestly I think it costing almost anything (even like 25$) turns off a lot of people who would submit crap. 100$ is fine though, they do need to make money off of it as well, using their free engine, 88% etc. This is a good addition to Epic Games! As a developer myself I definitely think Epic is more dev friendly than Steam (and almost any company out there) but I do see some issues from just a normal users perspective. People don't like exclusives for an example, people do not like their performance on their store from desktop, stuff like this. But as a developer? Great stuff Epic you are doing great work. Hopefully more indie devs jump on UE because of this change, since UE is not nearly as bad for indie dev as people say it is.
Yeah, Nintendo had a good idea with adding fees to their games. Crazy high entry fee, sure, but it sure avoid "Most" low effort games from releasing unlike the Atari days. Still tho, 100-200 dollars fee sounds about doable for Indie to a degree. Now all they need to do is making the Service as functional as Steam... 5 years later.
Yeah this is pretty much my thoughts too. I go back and forth in my mind on whether $100 is too much or too little, but I feel like there's definitely less junk on Steam's New Releases feed than there was during the Greenlight days. Hopefully it works out for EGS too.
@@Koffiato While true and unfortunate, it is the risk they took once the Steam Greenlight exploits were found, for example. And soon enough the low level scammers and shovelware well filter out over the years (The bigger ones are there, but it's to be expected if you cough of money by scamming people on crowdfounding sites). We live with people that snatch us from having nice things, afterall. In a better world we could trust people to not ruin a good thing for us to use, but alas...
Now that we’ll have more devs on the platform I’m curious if we’ll be able to see some concrete sales numbers… would love a comparison to steam (and even itch!)
Epic Games are scammers as well because they are hosting sale of assets. Also USA is a scammer country because they allow people to buy and sell assets. I personally believe that Mandalorian should become illegal as it is an assetflip made out of Quixel Megascans. Disney are scammers. You are a scammer as well, because you used Unreal Engine which is a pre-made engine and not your own work
@@user-eb9dy1ij7q umm... Are you retarded? Cause, if using a premade engine is considered scamming then literally every single game would be a scam as not a single game is made from a non premade engine? Like I actually lost half my IQ from reading that comment... 💀 Farcry assassin Creed rainbow six world of Warcraft everquest wouldn't exist not a single MMO RPG or game that was made with aka "premade" engine such as, unreal engine or unity or cryengine or frostbite or hero engine or godot or lumberyard or snowdrop engine or would exist! Nothing from blizzard would exist not a single call of duty bedsides the first one and maybe mw2019 not a single Ubisoft game would exist except for maybe the division as it was made on the first version of the snowdrop engine. Nothing from any development studio would exist except for a game that had a entire new engine made just for that game!
I'm totally behind this change. The problem is localised payment methods. Steam support everything in my country (all domestic payment wallets even) but Epic has a stupid choice of just PayPal (which is restricted in our country) and credit card. Not even a debit card. So even if I have a 100$, I'll need a credit card for the same. This is the reason I don't purchase anything from Epic Store. It's either steam for me or nothing at all. Even while publishing my game this time, I'll be paying steam fees although epic offers a great deal but sadly their systems aren't good in every country.
The hundred bucks ensures quality content and doesn't bug me so much. If you make enough they'll yield it back to you anyway on Steam. I actually appreciate it quite a bit.
Nothing wrong with Porn Games. The Porn Game sector actually makes BIG money - much bigger than allot of you realize. This is why Steam had to make an Adult category. They wanted a piece of that money-pie and it was a smart move to open that category.
I'm signed up to the Epic Game store so I can get those free games. They need to fix their download system though. If you are downloading a big game, and the internet goes down, you have to start over. Steam does not have that issue.
I hope there verity checks for content, licenses, fraud, reporting system to deal with good and bad people. As well some rogue publisher that steal content and money. Even the clone games or projects to place on the store. But it a lot of work plus staff need to manage those things. Lastly it required all app store to manage and commination.
68 million active monthly players? Don't think so, even Steam has 132m monthly in 2021 and is Epic at half of that while Steam has 20m+ daily active players? Don't think so Tim, don't think so.
"Kinda" lol. I think the $100 sub fee will be more effective on EGS than Steam because there are a *lot* of people who only buy games for the trading cards, no matter how horrible the game is. I don't get it, but
It makes good business sense if you want to make some money, potentially a lot, to place your game with a store front. Whether we're talking Epic or Steam or any other. However, it's kind of like selling your soul to the Devil. I know I won't convince anyone, but we should all collectively reject store fronts like this. They take far more of a cut of the profits than they deserve for continuing to do very little work. What we really need is a store front that only takes 1%, regardless of what game engine you use, and only allows submissions via a vetting process. The $100 price per game submitted may not sound like a lot to those of us with money, but to an indie dev who's barely making ends meet it can be prohibitive. If I were to run such a business, I'd definitely require all the games sold through the front to be open source. Might even need to come up with a custom license because a lot of people hate the GPL and some feel that BSD and MIT and Apache for that matter are too loose.
Making serious games costs serious money. I think if $100 is that big of a hurdle to a "developer", they are exactly the ones that this fee is supposed to keep away. I don't want to sound like a dick, but maybe earn your spurs on Gumroad or Itch first, then try it at a big boy storefront? Also, as much as I am all for lowering the standard revenue share of 30% down to something reasonable (like Epic's 12%), 1% is just not realistic (at all). Visa and Mastercard alone already can charge 1.5% to even 5% (if you include static fees. More, if the transaction price is very low). So yeah, no.
This is huge for indie devs and I'm glad Epic is still using manual review process so your game doesn't have to fight through the flood of asset flips For me I might consider Epic Game story when I'm finished with my game as long as I can keep it DRM free I'm fine with any game store really.
I'm working on a new sci fi rpg and I'm absolutely hyped about this. 100$ is totally fine. Keeps the store cleaner and my future game more visible and not drowning in random stuff.
I just feel that Epic doesn't make it easy to find new games. The way their market place is organized....sucks so bad. Aside from monthly free games....they offer...nothing better then Steam [88% is better then 70% but, the price you pay is....bad marketing]. I can't just browse unknown games based on category easily with Epic. I really have zero idea how fleshed out their marketplace is...because they seem hyper focus on showing you their top sellers and nothing else. Its not so much a market place as the most severe bottleneck for discoverability I've seen. I've found dozens of great games via organic searches on Steam, but I only find the exact same titles ever time with Epic. It's why I'd never sell with them. You'll need all your marketing outside of Epic...and since epic isn't a community in the same sense that Steam is with their community hub....it just makes organic gathering even less likely and forces all burden of exposure on the devs alone. Still not worth it. I tried to like them, but beyond free games I'd otherwise never buy or play....it offers very little.
My biggest problem with the Epic store is there awful UI. Its really confusing as to how you check local files or even achievements which steam makes available with a right click. There is also a strange bug I experienced with Strangers of Paradise where when I tried to launch the game from the store it would bring up a black screen but if I launched it externally it would run fine. And browsing new games kinda sucks as well. They don't seem to have any kind of recommendation algorithm so I just see all the latest releases every time. These are just my personal experiences and YMMV.
@@patnor7354 that’s listed on their system requirements for every game page, you can just check in explorer your file storage amount. I really don’t see that as a big deal that needs prioritizing over more important features like profiles or library performance improvement which is both on their up next. You really shouldn’t be running off limited space for your hard drive all the time, it slows your computer down by a lot.
@@patnor7354 ARE YOU THAT FKING BLIND!!! IT LIETRLAY TELLS YOU HOW MUCH SPACE GAEM TAKES!! YOU WITH YOR OWN COMMENT DISCREDITED YORUSELF AND SHOWCASED TYHAT YOU DONT KNW WHAT YOU AR ETALKING ABOUT AND ARE JUST SOPREADING LIES AND FALSE NARRATIVES!!
Let the asset flipping begin! Also the $100 fee doesn't bother Steam "developers" to publish crap. Although with Steam, if you make $1000 in sales then they credit you back the $100 fee. I don't see that on Epic.
$1000 of sales on steam will cost you a $300 fee due to their 30% cut, don't forget. On Epic it's just 12%, so only $120. So comparatively that $100 is paid off much quicker on Epic.
@@DaDarkDragon Apparently they're already working on performance. On their Trello page in the up next section, they are going to begin working on performance.
Seems like Epic is inching towards an ideal alternative to Steam... I'm just not quite convinced that it's there yet. How about supporting other platforms?
There's a store for mobile in the works on their roadmap, not sure if it's like the stream app or an actual store for mobile games. Other than that I think Linux will make it eventually but there isn't a high priority since almost every PC player uses windows
YOU DO KNOW THAT COMPANIE ALSO NED DTO EARN MONEY.EPIC COSNATNTLY BLEED DOZENS OF MONEY VIA THEIR MEGA GRANTS AND MAY OETHR THINGS SUCH AS FREE WEEKLY GAMES ADN SO On..... GODOT ENGNE ALONGSIDE MANY OTEHR GREAT SYSTEMS TAHT WERE THEN BOUGT BY UNITY AND OTEHR RIVAL ENGINES WAS LITETRALY CREATD TAHNKS TO THSOE MEGAGRANST FORM EPIC. YOU LITTERLAY ASKING EPIC TO SPEND MILLIOSN AND GET NOTHING IN RETURN!! YOU DO FREKAING KNOW THAT FOR THOSE PLATFORMS EPIC NEEDS TO PAY HEFTY PRICE FOR LICENCE NAD TO HAVE RIGHT TO PUBLISH ON THSEO PLATFORMS!!!!!!! MONEY DOESET GROW ON FKING TREES!!!
@@maxmustsleep The problem is, a statistically significant portion of professional developers don't. It seems naive to say that build support should be based on client usage; they don't have to construct this stuff. I still can't find an easy way to get the Unreal Editor running on anything other than Windows. Moreover, Windows is sort-of POSIX-compliant as an afterthought; the vast majority of other operating systems, from Macintosh to BSD to Play Station and WiiOS, treat it as a foundation. Supporting Linux is about future-proofing.
@@micmacha Yes, lots of professional developers aren't on Windows, true. But these are not game developers. They're mostly web devs. If you're a game dev, Windows make a lot of sense since it has the best toolset, and if you're a small indie, chances are you'll also use that same PC to test your game. It's not naive to cater to the platform your clients use. It's in fact the exact opposite. There are games built for both Windows and Linux nowadays, I'll leave it to your imagination about which platform gives the devs more money. Supporting a platform costs time and money, so if you're gonna support a platform, better choose the ones that actually give you money.
@Mario Prawirosudiro I have no idea what you're talking about. I've been working on multimedia software and developing cross platform games on Linux for now than a decade. There are zero advantages to using Windows.
Forgive me if I’m not understanding correctly but is this going to make it easier for us to host and test multiplayer content without having to go through steam?
Looking at the effect of Steam's $100 fee...I'd say it doesn't seem to have had much impact on filtering out shovelware. I don't think it will really help on the Epic Store either. That's not to say do away with it, but just that it's not a replacement for real curation of the platform. At the same time, none of these platform holders really want to deal with curation in any capacity, so the $100 fee is probably about the most you'll see from the largest platforms.
swapping UE royalty out for their payment processor fees? sure, works for me. All payment processors take a chunk anyway. and $100 barrier to entry? yes keep this.
It sounds good on the surface, but this doesn't really make it clear if they've improved how they treat developers. They screwed a lot of devs out of money via forced sales devaluing their titles and the free games aren't helping the picture there.
This is good news in my opinion. Realistically, I mostly tinker around with game development. Simply for the joy of creating something. But, I have been thinking of publishing exclusively on the epic games store. So this is good news for me.
More options is always nice The game that is in development now is not even close to release but it's good thing to have more options wean I get there The first public version for my game I will probably be itch io and after that steam but who knows maybe after that if the game succeed I will publish I epic version of my game
The fee is industry standard, but does that include Discoverability? Which is arguably the main reason to pony up the cash with Steam. I'm less concerned about low effort games, and more concerned about getting a product in front of people who want to buy. The cut percentage is meaningless if you don't make any sales. This move to self publish on a platform that regularly gives free games, when you need to sell one... seems less like a boon and more like a trap.
Unlikely it is a submission fee, you are paying for their time to review what you've submitted. NOT a publishing fee where you are paying for their publishing resources. Any time I have ever paid a submission fee to a bank, government, or other the fine print always says it is non-refundable and if rejected you'll have to pay the fee again to resubmit.
I think the submission fee for Steam and Epic, should be $1000, that you can earn back through 10x sales. Don't think your game will make 10 grand to earn you your 1 grand back? Release it on itch. But of course, it's their platform, and they can decide how they handle it.
Agree, higher (recuperable) fees would at least stand a chance to nip the flood of asset flips in the butt. Unless of course a platform comes up with a shitty idea like trading cards that raises an economy of pseudo games that are only there to be mined with bot farms.
I prefer to get games from Epic rather than steam. I also think this all sounds pretty good, if I ever actually finish a game, i probably wouldn't publish anywhere but Epic
Cool, now all Epic Games needs to do is finally allow the billing country/region to be different to the launcher's selected language (Belgium has two legal languages but can't both be selected in the store - Germany allows the uncensored Wolfenstein since 2019, nearly half a decade ago at this point, but Epic still forces the censored one if you set your location to Germany), add user reviews and forums so users can troubleshoot bugs/issues and provide advice/warnings, gifting, and so on... Even GOG has all these features. Epic claims they have some of these things planned, but they've had it planned for a long time now and with nothing to show for it. In fact, Steam reimburses the $100 USD upload fee after your game earns $1,000 USD. The Epic Games Store does not reimburse the upload fee. Is that really pro-consumer?
@@washynator If you want to fall for Epic's 88%/12% revenue split claims that ignores additional payment fees, sure. Valve taking 30% sucks (and a lot of stores have a 30% split so Valve isn't any worse), but that accounts for what Epic intentionally downplays. Also, never forget Epic's aggressively anti-consumer buyouts of Kickstarter campaigns such as Shenmue III and Phoenix Point. Valve has never made crowdfunded games Steam-exclusive.
Please don't be Epic exclusive, guys. It barely has a review system, no social features, no place for your games community to grow. That, and many users just choose not to buy anything from Epic.
Can you talk about their client and copyright protection DMCA whatever? Is it exactly the same as Steam? In Steam you have to integrate your game with their SDK to use that login validator thru the client.
1:08 that is bad, that means their store will get flooded with games with iAP, and many people who dont like this kind of monetization will leave, making it even more of an app store for iAP
Depends on your game. If you see it rather fit on Itch than Steam, for example, it likely isn't a match for EGS either. If however, you are merely considering the revenue share aspect and have a title that could get through curation, EGS would most likely provide much better discoverability and sense of a serious buisness.
Even though 100usd sounds much... You can see it as a goal. If you want to make your first game free you can ask for 100usd in total to publish your game. This way you can also learn some stuff about publishing and marketing your game as a solo indie game dev. Epic games as a game store is getting better and better. I know it's not too important rn but I also hope they make improve their Epic launch so it looks better and less laggy.
Now devs can pay epic to put their games on a barely functional anti-consumer platform instead of epic paying them to allow them to do so. Thanks, Tim Sweeney 💙
Steam also charges 100 bucks to publish, but, I'm pretty sure you are garrenteed entry on Steam (based on some low quality titles they release, doesnt seem like they have a filter). But with this, if you fail reveiw... are you out the 100 dollars? Or do they refund you? Also, Steam allows 100% adult content, I'm pretty sure the only exclusion being "make sure it's legal". But Steam has a lot of safety features to ensure that nastiness isn't popping up where it shouldn't be. Regardless, I still don't see Epic competing with Steam, even now. Steam allows for everything, but has such superior search features and clear cut reviews, the cream always flows to the top, even if their market place is flooded with bad assets flips. It almost has zero effect on the easy of finding good games because of how fine tuned you can search for new games. Epic has...zero such ability and it seems they are more interested in making a tiny monopoly. Exclusive titles, made in Unreal, for the Epic game store...seems to be the highest insensitive for devs with this new model. They probably wanted this all along, 12% of game revenue is way more than 5% if they made the game in epic and published it elsewhere. They clearly know how to passively direct people toward their marketing funnel. It's still better priced then Steam and if it was half as quality as Steam, it would be the game changer they want it to be. But not yet.
Steam doesn't have guaranteed entry, and they don't refund the $100 if you get denied either. They only refund you if you get accepted and make $1000 in sales (I'm not 100% sure about the number but it's something on those lines) It's just that they don't refuse games based on quality, that's why you see the asset flips.
@@honaleri Anything that violates their terms, or that they think that violates their terms. I'm more in the NSFW sphere, and here games get rejected so often that folks even compiled a huge spreadsheet with thousands of rejected games: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1aAbrEDNa2NmgntrKtij0RuxKneiFcTJisGyfMUv2nnM/edit?usp=drivesdk The most common reason for adult games getting rejected is young looking characters, school uniforms or school settings, etc. But it happens randomly too, sometimes Steam will just say you're not a good fit for the store, give no explanation and just stop replying to your emails. Happened to a friend, and his game did not have children nor anything even slightly close. Even if they tell you the reason, they do not allow you to remove the offending content since you can't resubmit the game, once it is rejected it's rejected forever. You can try changing the name, paying the $100 fee again and resubmit the same game, it has worked sometimes, but if they find out it's a resubmission they will reject the game again. I assume SFW games are harder to get rejected. However you probably still can't do anything against their terms. For example, they banned NFT games, if you try submitting a NFT game I assume that they would reject you and keep the money as well.
I would upload my games to Epic Store. But I won't because achievements requirements. I'm not much of a programmer, I use playmaker to write my games. To add steam achievements to my game I had to use third party solution and third party integration with playmaker and even then it was a challenge to get those achievements working and find workarounds for some bugs. Considering that I don't expect decent sales from Epic Store, I don't think it's worth hiring a programmer to add Epic Store achievements.
@@anoNymouse365 Reuse what? They don't support any other platform, beside Windows. Store in the browser is not an excuse, because it doesn't work as a launcher. "Close to native performance" is a marketing statement, nothing else. React Native is magnitude times slower than native program.
@@SylvanFeanturi I prefer native frameworks like Qt too but for some reason they're reusing their web store UI for the desktop app, in this case React Native is better than Electron.
this will probably have an effect on the market...they have been trying for years to compete with steam, and to some degree, they have. I think this is a good move though and there is enough room in the market for both...the only issue is the flood of mediocre games(like mine :) ) that might flood the store.
this worry about a supposed flood of bad games doesn't make a lot of sense to me. are people seriously having trouble finding good games? there are so many out there; way more than you'll ever be able to play in your lifetime.
I have no problem with the $100 dollar submission fee but I do have a problem with Epic as a company. No chance I would want to get into business with a company like them.
You probably should look beyond the clickbait gamer gate outrage propaganda. For everybody that is actually working with Epic, they always have been more than decent.
@@urbantwilight I have literally no idea what you are talking about there. My limited understanding of "gamergate" doesnt suggest it had anything to do with epic? The fact however that you have made assumptions re my post suggests to me that it is you falling for someones propoganda. In any case they have started doing many anti consumer activities including pushing for exclusives which is driving the PC industry towards the same anti-cross compatibility that console owners are only just starting to pull away from. They are buying up many dev tools which is the sign of a company trying to get a monopoly and when they do I guarantee it will not be good for devs and lastly they have been caught using spyware on computers of their customers. You should be very careful what kind of company you choose to do business with, it may reflect on you down the line.
@@paulosullivan3472 whatever I might or might not have assumed about your post, your reply more than establishes that you are regurgitating the laziest white-knuckle talking points out there. Exclusives to a launcher/storefront is nowhere comparable to exclusivity on hardware platforms, if you don't understand that, you shouldn't engage in that discourse. "driving the PC industry towards anti-cross compatibility" - Right now, it's Epic that is offering cross-platform compatibility, both between consoles/PC as well as between storefront APIs (engine and storefront independent). So what's exactly your "anti-cross compatibility" argument? It's easy to have no compatibility concerns if most games on the PC run through one company's ecosystem, mods are housed within that ecosystem and even discussion boards are hosted within that ecosystem. Not much room for anything else though without disturbing that monolithic state, is there? Epic have attempted to dissrupt that status quo of Steam being synonymous with the whole of the PC platform, and in the long run that's a good thing (even if it may cause some hickups along the way as most games were/are oriented towards Steam as the default provider). "sign of a company trying to get a monopoly" - Not really. Buying a few tools hardly constitutes a threat of monopoly. It simply is what companies do when they have massive piles of cash. Blame capitalism, and add Apple, Sony, Microsoft and Unity to your list of companies you wouldn't want to do business with. So far Epic has maintained the development of their purchased assets and advanced them to the benefit of both, the existing user base as well as their engine users. It has been a win-win for everybody. Thus, all you can muster, is a slippery slope fallacy. Also ironic to try to paint a company into being an evil monopolist while simultaneously condemning it for disrupting the hold of a single corporation on the majority share of PC's digital sales (which that corporation continuously uses to build its own controlled ecosystem within the free PC platform). "they have been caught using spyware on computers of their customers" - That's quite the sensationalized way of putting it. Stop for a second and onsider what about those claims has actually been confirmed and put it into rational perspective, before clutching your pearls over edgelord antics. No malintent has ever been evidenced in this regard. What's next? Tencent and CCP? One thing you actually are right about, is that so much sh!t has been flung that no matter how ill constued, irrational or exaggerated, as a small developer one indeed needs to be vary of becoming a casualty of this hysteria.
@@paulosullivan3472 Friendly advice, if your cognitive dissonance prevents you from being able to even acknowledge an opinion that challenges your convictions, it might be time to take a hard look at the information bubble you got caught up in.
I wish they had optional promo-support service. So you can pay e.g. $10 and your game will be prioritized in search results, advertised in other areas of EPIC Store, etc. Maybe, even advertised on EPIC's social media somehow. Nowadays it's not enough to create the great product(e.g. game). You need to have proper promo compaign for your product at least for one month to get clients and attention to your product. And that's where 99.99% of indie devs s*ck.
I disagree. People with access to more money would instantly abuse that to have their game trump other people's games. A good store should focus on promoting quality (internal reviews), not the crap put out by those who are lucky enough to already have a healthy bank account.
@@BListed2k24 Internal reviews & comments for products are fakes submitted by bot farms or poor people from developing countries( they have few cents per 1 fake review). All of them are purchased by dirty vendors/sellers or marketing agencies. When you see tons of negative comments/reviews -- it's the same case, the only difference is they were purchased by rivals or haters. I personally have 0 trust to internal users reviews. That's why I want Epic employees to be responsible for reviews and do actual marketing for my products. And I'm ready to pay for this. If other developers can't afford 10-50 dollars for such service -- they can still rely on "reviews" for promotions/advertisements.
Epic doing what they do best. But I think Epic should at least x5 the amount they charge per game that's self-published, to strongly discourage rubbish being uploaded. Then for every £100 you make in sales an additional £100 could be given back to the developer, right down to the original £100 Epic is currently asking devs to self-publish. Then maybe the more successful games someone releases, the lower the initial self-publishing fees could be over time.
There will be curation, so they will have to deal with shovelware. If the onslaught is too much they still can raise that figure. Charging much more than Steam right out the gate would immediately yield critique - just look through the comments here, people are already dragging their knuckles at $100.
The problem with $1000 is it kicks out those of us who make a free game that isn't shovel-ware garbage. As someone who has a completely free game that some friends and I made (one that only takes about 20-30 minutes to complete), we knew we couldn't charge for it. Obviously, that also meant we wouldn't get the $100 back but we looked at that as an investment for having the game on Steam. Had it been $1000 to even have the store page, our game would have been on itch and few would have seen it. Keep the $100 fee and allow for refunds and you solve many of the issues of people being tricked into buying shovel-ware.
@@l.3626 For a game we are literally giving away for free? Not sure how rich you are, but that's a pretty steep price for some of us. They could make a distinction between a free game and one for sale/with DLC and have two prices, but yeah, $1000 just to get access to the store is going to limit a lot of us who have games that aren't predatory to players but weren't designed to make money. I'm glad Steam only charged $100; we got some great feedback for our short little game and seemed like folks enjoyed it. I doubt any of them would have played it if we were stuck on itch because of a too high barrier to entry just to get on Steam. Just seems like a losing proposition for both us and players and what problem does it solve that the $100 fee doesn't?
@@l.3626 Maybe 1k is not much for you, but it's for many people, also that would be a stupid move since everyone will publish on steam instead for a 100$
100 dollars is way too low. I would rather have it raised to 1000$ or even 5000$ to make sure only quality games will be in the store, maybe even more if the store would refund you once you make that money back in sales.
Waiving the royalty fees for in-store purchases for UE games is blatantly anti-competitive, it is film studios owning the cinema stuff. Need more scrutiny on Epic's monopolistic practices from EU et al. Honestly the only reason I would put a game on the EGS is if it was free, it's uncertain enough that a small/hobby dev will make back their $100 on steam, let alone on a dead storefront. There's also no point taking a better cut of the revenue if cannabalizing steam reviews hurts your game's visibility and reviews. Props to the people positioned early enough to get in while this still new and take advantage of relative boost to visibility though.
PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD! WE DO NOT NEED TO BE ADDICTED TO AMERICAN INVADERS! WE MUST UNITE AND CREATE OWN NON-AMERICAN GAMES ENGINE AND GAME SERVICE! WE MUST CREATE OWN PAYMENT SYSTEM! STOP USING VISA, MASTERCARD AND SO ON! WE MUST BUILD OWN INTERNET WITHOUT PROVIDERS AND AMERICAN ROOT DNS!
Too bad Epic launcher is terrible, and does anyone actually buy anything on their store or just devalue games by getting free stuff? Microsoft Store is also generous to devs yet no one uses it.
