.thumb.gif.1b5395b31b6674b36f965263eca150b2.gif)
You know, every time a company leader makes a statement on why their decisions "make an industry better", be skeptical.
Companies are in it for the potential returns because, well, that's their main goal unless they're disruptors. Companies won't make a decision that results in financial hardship unless it is certain that their ROI can be achieved in a timely manner.
-
From what I've seen, all they achieved so far is make people upset and turn them away from buying a game they'd potentially enjoy.
Should devs get a better deal? Sure, but you could just be the "good guy" and not make the games exclusives.
I think many devs would eventually choose the EGS over Steam and you wouldn't have to spend millions just to make them be exclusive to your store.
I'd imagine it would take much longer that way but, people would've probably taken it way better than this.
-
.thumb.gif.1b5395b31b6674b36f965263eca150b2.gif)
From my PoV, Epic Games is taking the “bad PR is still PR” strategy, namely how they are willing to take controversial risks as it’s deemed that the controversy would create attention to the store, which could potentially mean word-of-mouth gets in and while it may not turn out well, it may get some curious chaps trying out the store.
My concern is that Epic Games doesn’t look to be trying to get everyone to shift to an 88-12 split as games bought for the Epic Store from a third-party reseller is still subject to the usual 70-30 split. It’s fair that they’re targeting mainly Steam since that’s the big gorilla, but I’m just not convinced that it is going to work out over a long period, especially once you factor in the potential cost increase when EGS inevitably expands and adds features alongside server capacity.
-
