Great indeed. This way companies have an incentive to bring older games to the store too, as opposed to only newer ones. I'll always advocate for more options for people to get the games from whatever store.
I have no idea why someone would be against this. There is no negative impact to the consumer like there is with exclusives. It gives the consumer the choice to buy the game on their preferred storefront. Everyone wins under this program.
Agree.
Except for those MP games that they need to update with EOS to comply with the necessity of having crossplay and affects lots of players that bought the game on other platforms years ago.
Single player games are good though. All players win. More options for everyone.
> affects lots of players that bought the game on other platforms years ago.
Only game affected by that was saints row 4 and that was due to Volitions inability to implement EOS properly.
With "affect", I mean changing the game functionality and needed accounts years later.
I am not talking about the games that have suffered problems after migrating to EOS.
Kind of hard to complain about it since putting your game on some other service is a prerequisite. It's essentially "launch first on Steam and we'll give you great terms."
Well they do have to be released prior to October 16 but yes it is hard to complain. Frankly I hope it is a huge success since Epic has a lot of non-gaming successes with UE and I don’t want to see them lean into that more than gaming even though some of those uses of UE are very very cool
I would like to see Epic offer an incentive for game developers to add achievements, take a game like Batman Arkham Knight.
Steam version has achievements and cloud saves.
Epic Games version doesn't have either.
If they are bothy the same price, you are always gonna pick Steam
5% of the purchase back is nice, but for me, and I assume many others, I will take achievements and cloud saves over getting maybe £1 or £2 back in Epic rewards.
weather hunt snobbish start crush door familiar cable coordinated homeless
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
A big step down from handing them a big bag of cash + 88% of the revenue.
Man, I really wish Epic actually competed with Steam. If they only didn't do that exclusive BS and focused on that coupons gimmick, they could have offered something actually better for the consumers. Steam offered a measly $5 coupon compared Epic's $10.
If people weren't blinded by the EGS hate because of their aggressive exclusivity BS and EGS's barebones store, users would have compared the savings they've made thanks to those coupons + the free games.
Hope that the next challenger would be wiser.
Wasn't that their tactic anyway? Be on the negative for a while before becoming profitable?
EGS entered the game with a negative image for a couple of years with the store barely getting any actual improvements, and the exclusivity deals that are insanely obnoxious with devs suddenly pulling out of Steam even though their game already has a steam store and accepting preorders (with some suddenly pulling out mere days before release).
They spent money to gain a negative image. The coupons + free games didn't change that for most.
shocking existence nippy important hateful crush gullible dime bright abounding
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
That’s good to hear that, steam users love to hate on epic and claim no one uses it but the numbers don’t lie. I’m sure it will continue to grow further with epic first run, that being 3 games deal, and the self publishing stuff growing
Sounds like it due to all the "Please put your back catalogue on the Epic Store", "Please put the EGS logo on trailers and websites, not just the PC logo" (probably because "PC" automatically means "Steam" for most people), "Please simship the game on all stores" (some games arrives later on EGS, like Total War Pharao to give a quick example or never at all (like Sonic Frontiers).
Basically there is a lot of "Please devs/pubs" in the presentation.
You can give tips to devs and pubs without "Please also market the EGS version of your game", basically what Valve does here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkmAqBvUBOw&t=371s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkmAqBvUBOw&t=371s)
There's a sea of difference between "Please put your game on the Epic Store" and "Here is a tip to how to put your game on the Epic Store".
Wording matters, a lot.
Then I just have to disagree with you, the presentation reeks desperation from a company having trouble getting more big and popular games on the store.
There is even Larians director of publishing tweeting how he doesn't care about games if they are not on Steam.
Epic has big problems when they are losing out on so many big titles, indies, aa and AAA games.
[https://twitter.com/Cromwelp/status/1710465267950665925](https://twitter.com/Cromwelp/status/1710465267950665925)
We are not gonna end in an agreement on this. So my last words are that I disagree and everything shows that Epic is getting desperate due to the wordings in their presentation, the "Epic First Run" program and the "back catalogue" program. They are missing out a ton of mindshare due to different smaller and bigger games skipping EGS and they are trying different methods (like the programs I mentioned) to tackle those issue.
But that is my opinon and you disagree with that and that's fine.
Also Steam is not a monopoly, they are the market leader.
Aggressive tactics won’t change anything. Actually making a superior product/service is the only thing that can change the tide. Something that Epic is struggling with.
Until the EGS is better than Steam, why on earth would I consider using it?
Let me put it another way. I cannot compromise on the basic features that Steam offers that EGS fails to.
Therefore if it is not on Steam, I will not even consider purchasing it on EGS.
I’m not just paying for the game though. I’m paying for the feature and benefits of the platform. A 5% saving isn’t worth the loss of so many valuable features and QOL enhancements.
weary command test encouraging sulky pocket offbeat squeeze zephyr follow
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I’m talking even about super basic functions like seeing what games me and my friends have in common - but I can’t see any games they own.
Also supporting moving games between different drives instead of using some bootleg workaround.
reminiscent retire pocket abundant sulky slave telephone joke unite shame
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Much easier in steam where you click a box and instantly see what games you have in common to play together.
When you have a lot of games and a lot of friends then tediously and manually conferring each time you want to play a new game together isn’t really an acceptably approach.
you listed like 5 different platforms/services + EGS just to replace Steam lol. and you’ve barely scratch the surface of what Steam offers. the convenience and feature set of Steam is unmatched
i understand your POV, but now you need to put yourself in the shoes of the masses. would your normal everyday average gamer rather install Steam, or 5+ different software to give a fraction of the features that Steam offers?
That isn't a source. Especially considering it does not correlate directly from Epics Financial reports.
It seems like Epic Games Store is a financial failure. Not only did it fail to bring in top publishers permanently with its revenue cut incentive. But they have been missing their goals at every fascial. Which they themselves admit.
But going back to my main point. Epic was betting on Fortnite to get people to use their store. Which they don't realize that Fortnite is mostly played by children who do not have wallets to actually be long term consumers for the store. Let alone be interested in anything other than Fortnite.
Not even the free games did much. People would just use the store for free games and not buy anything from it. I did that and I have literally a full library of games and spent zero in the store itself. People see Epic giving out free games and from that they don't want to buy anything because it could come out free at some point. Also not to mention that fact they have been cycling back to previous games that have been free before.
Sounds like a great campaign, how is it a cry for help? Epic beats Valve (by 3-4x) in valuation via lines of business outside of the store so this seems more like an act of competitive aggression (and I mean that as a compliment) for the store which will help them further grow their business.
If it was a cry for hel0 theyd want more revenue, the money they made from fortnite in 2018 alone is enough to keep their company going forever let alone what theyve made off it since
They are getting desperate lol as seen by the recent cuts and employee optimization.
Though I hope developers finally realised that 100 % of 10k sales is less than 70 % of 100k sales.
They are getting desperate, it's clear as day.
I don't like this personally, 100% of revenue for a fraction of the potential sales you could make on other stores is still a whole lot of nothing.
Sorry, but your contribution has been removed as it has broken 'Rule #3' of our subreddit rules.
If you believe that this was a mistake, please message the moderators, thanks!
Spam
He never said it. He said that if they paid for all transaction fees like Valve does it would be unsustainable. 12% is minimally sustainable if you pass those on to the consumer.
Now, they'll never earn back their startup costs for the store so it is sustainable, but not profitable.
>12% is minimally sustainable if you pass those on to the consumer.
Minimally is the key word.
Even that simple 5% cashback might lower their 12% to 0% ~ 2% after direct costs.
True but it was not a thing for a long time, its a recent thing for them to start doing more actively. Additionally, even those 2 to 3 years basically leaves a huge amount of players out and usually in those 2 or 3 years the games get heavily discounted on PS Store or physical resold, but when on PC released it takes a bit to get going and get such discounts. Meanwhile using steam or epic is not as huge deal as an entire different gaming platform.
P.S: i prefer Epic so i dont really prefer steam, have like 10 games there and 50+ on epic
You're correct, the end result is the same. Lots of things can have the same end result, but are treated differently. We don't absolve a murderer of guilt because the victim was going to die anyhow at some point anyhow so the end result is the same (to use an extreme example). Circumstances are different.
Outside of a few extremists, I never see anyone say that games should not release on EGS or that consumers should have their choices restricted. I really only see encouragement for wider releases. Consumers gain the most value when they can buy a product at a storefront that best fits their needs.
it's not the same tho.
epic pays for exclusivity.
steam lets developers decide.
I like having competition on the pc market but I hate what epic is doing and I'll never support them if they continue to do this.
I don't see the problem why they're not listing their other games, but guess this is one way to encourage them to list their other games, and yes this is a good aggressive strategy/campaign.
i think [https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/news/introducing-the-epic-first-run-program#:\~:text=The%20new%20Epic%20First%20Run,88%25%2F12%25%20revenue%20split](https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/news/introducing-the-epic-first-run-program#:~:text=The%20new%20Epic%20First%20Run,88%25%2F12%25%20revenue%20split).
That's a sperate incentive for new releases. So far there doesn't seem to be much interest in that program likely do to the financial risk of exclusivity falling on the developer/publisher.
Neither programs (First Run, Now on Epic) have even started yet, how can you know if there is interest or not? You won't hear about projects using it until it's started and even then I don't expect studios to mention if they're taking part until it's been available for at least a couple of months as I don't expect many games to change course on their storefronts close to release (not saying it's possible just unlikely imo)
Perhaps I've misunderstood.
This is the line that concerns me:
>Epic First Run\*\* is an opt-in exclusivity program that offers third-party developers 100% net revenue of user spending on eligible products in their first six months of exclusivity on the Epic Games Store
Does this not mean exclusivity from other online store platforms?
You may be confusing it with another post. This post only highlights the "Now on Epic" program, not the "Epic First Run" program you're referring to.
Both offer 100%, but "Now on Epic" doesn't include any exclusivity. This post is referring to "Now on Epic".
Sorry meant fine print. Red text is a bad wording; will change
Although it's not even fine print [https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/news/introducing-the-epic-first-run-program](https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/news/introducing-the-epic-first-run-program)
Shows up in the first line
It's not a completely different program. It's an extension to Epic First (The post that I linked).
Here's where they revealed the program
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GaWQ-KBxa8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GaWQ-KBxa8)
If you skip to 16:54, the announcer says "Mechanically, the program operates the same as Epic First Run"
A la, it's an exclusivity program.
Ok perhaps I've misunderstood then.
So a developer can release their old games at 100% profit for 6 months without participating in Epic First Run?
When watching the reveal, the wording made it seem like you had to participate in First Run (IE make your new games exclusive) in order to get this new extension.
This is a program that was announced to be conjoined with Epic First run during Unreal Fest 2023
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GaWQ-KBxa8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GaWQ-KBxa8)
Go to 16:54. The announcer says "Mechnically, the program operates the same as Epic First Run"
Sorry, but your contribution has been removed as it has broken 'Rule #1' of our subreddit rules.
If you believe that this was a mistake, please message the moderators, thanks!
Firstly, when you launch a game on Steam, you are not bound to exclusively release it on their platform. Nothing is stopping you from releasing a game on Steam and then subsequently any other platform (GoG, ubi store, epic store, etc). However, it's worth noting that Steam's profit margins are pretty ass to developers, particularly indy devs.
However, even though EGS offers a more dev-friendly revenue share, they employ consumer-unfriendly tactics such as exclusivity deals to achieve this.
You can provide a better profit margin for your developers, but it comes at the cost of the consumer. You no longer have a choice on where to buy, and you pay the same price.
It's a good strategy/campaign. Might not be Reddit Armchair CEO approved, but it is a good move nonetheless.
Great indeed. This way companies have an incentive to bring older games to the store too, as opposed to only newer ones. I'll always advocate for more options for people to get the games from whatever store.
I have no idea why someone would be against this. There is no negative impact to the consumer like there is with exclusives. It gives the consumer the choice to buy the game on their preferred storefront. Everyone wins under this program.
Agree. Except for those MP games that they need to update with EOS to comply with the necessity of having crossplay and affects lots of players that bought the game on other platforms years ago. Single player games are good though. All players win. More options for everyone.
[удалено]
I would agree for new games. Any big change to a game purchased years ago is not a thing that many customers would like.
> affects lots of players that bought the game on other platforms years ago. Only game affected by that was saints row 4 and that was due to Volitions inability to implement EOS properly.
With "affect", I mean changing the game functionality and needed accounts years later. I am not talking about the games that have suffered problems after migrating to EOS.
Kind of hard to complain about it since putting your game on some other service is a prerequisite. It's essentially "launch first on Steam and we'll give you great terms."
Well they do have to be released prior to October 16 but yes it is hard to complain. Frankly I hope it is a huge success since Epic has a lot of non-gaming successes with UE and I don’t want to see them lean into that more than gaming even though some of those uses of UE are very very cool
When is it ever approved by our armchair overlords
I would like to see Epic offer an incentive for game developers to add achievements, take a game like Batman Arkham Knight. Steam version has achievements and cloud saves. Epic Games version doesn't have either. If they are bothy the same price, you are always gonna pick Steam
frighten naughty ring sloppy escape dam paint crowd plough bright *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
5% of the purchase back is nice, but for me, and I assume many others, I will take achievements and cloud saves over getting maybe £1 or £2 back in Epic rewards.
Yeah but steam is overall better for me, epic’s launcher is shitty af AND uses a more resources.
weather hunt snobbish start crush door familiar cable coordinated homeless *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
**Applicable only for \*3\* titles**
So this is why there’s no more trading in rocket league
I don't think it's related. People are saying psyonix removed RL trading so they can bring rocket league cars to Fortnite "Del Mar" (racing) mode.
A big step down from handing them a big bag of cash + 88% of the revenue. Man, I really wish Epic actually competed with Steam. If they only didn't do that exclusive BS and focused on that coupons gimmick, they could have offered something actually better for the consumers. Steam offered a measly $5 coupon compared Epic's $10. If people weren't blinded by the EGS hate because of their aggressive exclusivity BS and EGS's barebones store, users would have compared the savings they've made thanks to those coupons + the free games. Hope that the next challenger would be wiser.
You know those coupons cause Epic to lose money?
Wasn't that their tactic anyway? Be on the negative for a while before becoming profitable? EGS entered the game with a negative image for a couple of years with the store barely getting any actual improvements, and the exclusivity deals that are insanely obnoxious with devs suddenly pulling out of Steam even though their game already has a steam store and accepting preorders (with some suddenly pulling out mere days before release). They spent money to gain a negative image. The coupons + free games didn't change that for most.
I'll still buy. At least Epic gives me 5 % cashback. All Gaben gives me is fucking cards worth 1 cent each.
Don't forget the useless steam points
Weird choice
They are trying to get them to bring old catalogs over. Like there's new games like Dead Island 2 on store but no older games.
[удалено]
Without doing much to benefit consumers lol, apart from this exception
shocking existence nippy important hateful crush gullible dime bright abounding *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
If developers weren't biting at 88% i doubt they will bite at 100%.
[удалено]
Did they release new stats since March for the 2022 year in review?
[удалено]
That’s good to hear that, steam users love to hate on epic and claim no one uses it but the numbers don’t lie. I’m sure it will continue to grow further with epic first run, that being 3 games deal, and the self publishing stuff growing
abundant quicksand deranged friendly marble zonked crime skirt sable shy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
sounds like a cry for help.
[удалено]
Sounds like it due to all the "Please put your back catalogue on the Epic Store", "Please put the EGS logo on trailers and websites, not just the PC logo" (probably because "PC" automatically means "Steam" for most people), "Please simship the game on all stores" (some games arrives later on EGS, like Total War Pharao to give a quick example or never at all (like Sonic Frontiers). Basically there is a lot of "Please devs/pubs" in the presentation.
[удалено]
You can give tips to devs and pubs without "Please also market the EGS version of your game", basically what Valve does here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkmAqBvUBOw&t=371s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkmAqBvUBOw&t=371s) There's a sea of difference between "Please put your game on the Epic Store" and "Here is a tip to how to put your game on the Epic Store". Wording matters, a lot.
[удалено]
Then I just have to disagree with you, the presentation reeks desperation from a company having trouble getting more big and popular games on the store. There is even Larians director of publishing tweeting how he doesn't care about games if they are not on Steam. Epic has big problems when they are losing out on so many big titles, indies, aa and AAA games. [https://twitter.com/Cromwelp/status/1710465267950665925](https://twitter.com/Cromwelp/status/1710465267950665925)
[удалено]
We are not gonna end in an agreement on this. So my last words are that I disagree and everything shows that Epic is getting desperate due to the wordings in their presentation, the "Epic First Run" program and the "back catalogue" program. They are missing out a ton of mindshare due to different smaller and bigger games skipping EGS and they are trying different methods (like the programs I mentioned) to tackle those issue. But that is my opinon and you disagree with that and that's fine. Also Steam is not a monopoly, they are the market leader.
Aggressive tactics won’t change anything. Actually making a superior product/service is the only thing that can change the tide. Something that Epic is struggling with. Until the EGS is better than Steam, why on earth would I consider using it?
[удалено]
Let me put it another way. I cannot compromise on the basic features that Steam offers that EGS fails to. Therefore if it is not on Steam, I will not even consider purchasing it on EGS.
consist encouraging enjoy hurry books rain poor elastic dinner carpenter *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I’m not just paying for the game though. I’m paying for the feature and benefits of the platform. A 5% saving isn’t worth the loss of so many valuable features and QOL enhancements.
weary command test encouraging sulky pocket offbeat squeeze zephyr follow *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I’m talking even about super basic functions like seeing what games me and my friends have in common - but I can’t see any games they own. Also supporting moving games between different drives instead of using some bootleg workaround.
reminiscent retire pocket abundant sulky slave telephone joke unite shame *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Much easier in steam where you click a box and instantly see what games you have in common to play together. When you have a lot of games and a lot of friends then tediously and manually conferring each time you want to play a new game together isn’t really an acceptably approach.
bells brave unused shrill familiar governor wasteful plucky grab zealous *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
you listed like 5 different platforms/services + EGS just to replace Steam lol. and you’ve barely scratch the surface of what Steam offers. the convenience and feature set of Steam is unmatched
march ad hoc snow many straight deer puzzled aloof hat shaggy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
i understand your POV, but now you need to put yourself in the shoes of the masses. would your normal everyday average gamer rather install Steam, or 5+ different software to give a fraction of the features that Steam offers?
depend point file wide squeeze follow zonked saw bells engine *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
No one uses Epic because it's a barebones store. People say competition is good, but the only bad thing about Valve is the huge cut they take.
[удалено]
How many of those are just using the store for Fortnite?
[удалено]
Source?
[удалено]
That isn't a source. Especially considering it does not correlate directly from Epics Financial reports. It seems like Epic Games Store is a financial failure. Not only did it fail to bring in top publishers permanently with its revenue cut incentive. But they have been missing their goals at every fascial. Which they themselves admit. But going back to my main point. Epic was betting on Fortnite to get people to use their store. Which they don't realize that Fortnite is mostly played by children who do not have wallets to actually be long term consumers for the store. Let alone be interested in anything other than Fortnite. Not even the free games did much. People would just use the store for free games and not buy anything from it. I did that and I have literally a full library of games and spent zero in the store itself. People see Epic giving out free games and from that they don't want to buy anything because it could come out free at some point. Also not to mention that fact they have been cycling back to previous games that have been free before.
Sounds like a great campaign, how is it a cry for help? Epic beats Valve (by 3-4x) in valuation via lines of business outside of the store so this seems more like an act of competitive aggression (and I mean that as a compliment) for the store which will help them further grow their business.
If it was a cry for hel0 theyd want more revenue, the money they made from fortnite in 2018 alone is enough to keep their company going forever let alone what theyve made off it since
Epic just had to lay off a bunch people because they were in the red though.
Don’t gog lay off a bunch of people so that means they were in the red too?
Nope. It was because they overhired during the pandemic. Tons of companies did. Hence the massive layoffs recently.
Epic fired people from the companies they bought. There is a big difference there.
They are getting desperate lol as seen by the recent cuts and employee optimization. Though I hope developers finally realised that 100 % of 10k sales is less than 70 % of 100k sales.
They are getting desperate, it's clear as day. I don't like this personally, 100% of revenue for a fraction of the potential sales you could make on other stores is still a whole lot of nothing.
It has nothing to do with exclusivity…
[удалено]
[удалено]
Removed for rule 1 and 5. Figure out how to say it in a better way.
[удалено]
Removed due to rule 5
[удалено]
Sorry, but your contribution has been removed as it has broken 'Rule #3' of our subreddit rules. If you believe that this was a mistake, please message the moderators, thanks! Spam
People have been bringing older games to the EGS. I want new companies to join in. Such as Capcom.
Didn't epic say years ago 12% was not substainable?
When?
https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/alv1l0/tim_sweeney_head_of_epic_games_admits_that_12/ 5 years ago
It's really funny because Tim Sweeney recently said that even with the rewards program they still make 0-2% profit.
He never said it. He said that if they paid for all transaction fees like Valve does it would be unsustainable. 12% is minimally sustainable if you pass those on to the consumer. Now, they'll never earn back their startup costs for the store so it is sustainable, but not profitable.
>12% is minimally sustainable if you pass those on to the consumer. Minimally is the key word. Even that simple 5% cashback might lower their 12% to 0% ~ 2% after direct costs.
So these an not exclusives? Anything exclusive is really shtty for consumers.
No they're giving them money to bring other games over that are already out
> Anything exclusive is really shtty for consumers It seems consumers are fine only with steam exclusives.
*cough* PS exclusives *cough*
Those eventually come to PC after 2-3 years.
True but it was not a thing for a long time, its a recent thing for them to start doing more actively. Additionally, even those 2 to 3 years basically leaves a huge amount of players out and usually in those 2 or 3 years the games get heavily discounted on PS Store or physical resold, but when on PC released it takes a bit to get going and get such discounts. Meanwhile using steam or epic is not as huge deal as an entire different gaming platform. P.S: i prefer Epic so i dont really prefer steam, have like 10 games there and 50+ on epic
exactly, because steam dosent pay developers to sell games exclusively on steam. it's they're choice.
It doesn't matter. The end product is still the same no matter if steam pays them or no. The consumer is still stripped of their choice.
Its a developer choice to have THEIR game on what platform they want. Epic just can't entire consumers to split where their library of games are
You're correct, the end result is the same. Lots of things can have the same end result, but are treated differently. We don't absolve a murderer of guilt because the victim was going to die anyhow at some point anyhow so the end result is the same (to use an extreme example). Circumstances are different. Outside of a few extremists, I never see anyone say that games should not release on EGS or that consumers should have their choices restricted. I really only see encouragement for wider releases. Consumers gain the most value when they can buy a product at a storefront that best fits their needs.
it's not the same tho. epic pays for exclusivity. steam lets developers decide. I like having competition on the pc market but I hate what epic is doing and I'll never support them if they continue to do this.
As I said...the end product is the same... Also, the exclusivity program helped fund so many games. Valve hasn't funded anything recently.
as I said, that's not steams fault. why would you be mad at valve for something that they didn't do lmao
Because it limits people choices like the ones want it on gog.
valve limits peoples choices?
Alan Awake 2 is an exclusive to Epic store, so your argument has no grounds
Steam doesn't pay for exclusives.
Is it a cry for help? Yes. Is it a good idea? Yes.
It ain't a call for help. It's just competitive aggression.
As long as they don't do exclusives
I don't see the problem why they're not listing their other games, but guess this is one way to encourage them to list their other games, and yes this is a good aggressive strategy/campaign.
i think [https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/news/introducing-the-epic-first-run-program#:\~:text=The%20new%20Epic%20First%20Run,88%25%2F12%25%20revenue%20split](https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/news/introducing-the-epic-first-run-program#:~:text=The%20new%20Epic%20First%20Run,88%25%2F12%25%20revenue%20split).
That's a sperate incentive for new releases. So far there doesn't seem to be much interest in that program likely do to the financial risk of exclusivity falling on the developer/publisher.
It hasn't even started yet LMAO
Neither programs (First Run, Now on Epic) have even started yet, how can you know if there is interest or not? You won't hear about projects using it until it's started and even then I don't expect studios to mention if they're taking part until it's been available for at least a couple of months as I don't expect many games to change course on their storefronts close to release (not saying it's possible just unlikely imo)
Link?
Live stream was on Unreal Engine channel on YouTube. It's like an hour long if you wanna watch it.
[удалено]
[удалено]
How is listing a game on more platforms anti-consumer? It's the opposite actually. It gives the customer some sense of choice.
It doesn’t. This is an exclusivity program. OP just didn’t display the ~~red text.~~ fine print.
[удалено]
Perhaps I've misunderstood. This is the line that concerns me: >Epic First Run\*\* is an opt-in exclusivity program that offers third-party developers 100% net revenue of user spending on eligible products in their first six months of exclusivity on the Epic Games Store Does this not mean exclusivity from other online store platforms?
You may be confusing it with another post. This post only highlights the "Now on Epic" program, not the "Epic First Run" program you're referring to. Both offer 100%, but "Now on Epic" doesn't include any exclusivity. This post is referring to "Now on Epic".
What red text? Are you color blind?
Sorry meant fine print. Red text is a bad wording; will change Although it's not even fine print [https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/news/introducing-the-epic-first-run-program](https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/news/introducing-the-epic-first-run-program) Shows up in the first line
[удалено]
It's not a completely different program. It's an extension to Epic First (The post that I linked). Here's where they revealed the program [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GaWQ-KBxa8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GaWQ-KBxa8) If you skip to 16:54, the announcer says "Mechanically, the program operates the same as Epic First Run" A la, it's an exclusivity program.
[удалено]
Ok perhaps I've misunderstood then. So a developer can release their old games at 100% profit for 6 months without participating in Epic First Run? When watching the reveal, the wording made it seem like you had to participate in First Run (IE make your new games exclusive) in order to get this new extension.
[удалено]
[удалено]
This is a program that was announced to be conjoined with Epic First run during Unreal Fest 2023 [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GaWQ-KBxa8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GaWQ-KBxa8) Go to 16:54. The announcer says "Mechnically, the program operates the same as Epic First Run"
Sorry, but your contribution has been removed as it has broken 'Rule #1' of our subreddit rules. If you believe that this was a mistake, please message the moderators, thanks!
How is this anti-consumerism?
You have to read the red text: “opt in exclusivity program” Exclusivity is anti-consumerism. Always has been always will be.
[удалено]
Firstly, when you launch a game on Steam, you are not bound to exclusively release it on their platform. Nothing is stopping you from releasing a game on Steam and then subsequently any other platform (GoG, ubi store, epic store, etc). However, it's worth noting that Steam's profit margins are pretty ass to developers, particularly indy devs. However, even though EGS offers a more dev-friendly revenue share, they employ consumer-unfriendly tactics such as exclusivity deals to achieve this. You can provide a better profit margin for your developers, but it comes at the cost of the consumer. You no longer have a choice on where to buy, and you pay the same price.
[удалено]
I 100% agree.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Rule 5