+21 votes
in Suggestion by (240 points)
closed by
by (940 points)
Steam was not a good marketplace when it first started. It was bad. And you were forced into it in order to play counterstrike apparently. But over time it got better. And now valve has every developer by the balls. Sell on steam or face the wrath of many upset players with a lot fewer units sold. And yet, the most noteworthy change steam has made in the last few years is a slightly improved friends interface. Is that really the kind of shady business practices you want? And no, coffee stain might not sell as many copies. In fact it's pretty much guaranteed. But investing in a platform that is willing to give a reasonable revenue cut might be a better path forward. In light of that, I'm down for Epic.

Do you remember Google fiber? Google's ultra high speed internet that they developed when every other ISP had shit speeds? It wasn't intended to be the next big thing, afaik. It was supposed to (and did) wake up all the ISPs that were providing shitty internet speeds and get them to up their game because they were knowingly stagnating since their customers didn't know any better. And here we are. Significant improvements. So if Epic only serves as a conduit to get valve to not take such a huge cut of sales, then fine. I welcome it with open arms.
That's up to you, aljo - and your argument would hold weight if Epic was the only alternative to Steam, or was really doing *anything* innovative, or original, or better than any of the myriad other launchers out there, but they are not.  Epic Games are not doing this as some brave fight against the 'monopoly' of Steam, and Coffee Stain are not 'investing in a platform willing to give a reasonable revenue cut', either.  If Coffee Stain were being honest, they wouldn't be talking about the fees, because the facts don't add up - nor do the figures they are using.  For example: Coffee Stain have mentioned Steam's 30% Vs Epic's 12% in a few places as a driver in this decision - but failed to mention that their fees on Steam would actually be 35% *because Epic would demand 5% for the Unreal engine* - I guess they don't want to point out that Epic is trying to drive devs to use their broken launcher by charging 5% of your income if you sell it anywhere else.  Also, if fees were the real reason (or even standing up to Steam), then why not go with Discord, given their 10% fees (oops, Epic would slap 5% on top!), and given that they are much better placed to challenge Steam?  Hell, if fees and challenging Steam were the real motive, why not itch.io?  They have 0% fees (except Epic's 5%, of course!).

You can crow about Epic all you like, and pretend that others are only complaining because they are ignorant fanbois - but the reality is that people are angry because Coffee Stain offered the game on Steam, then withdrew it and put it only on a known insecure platform, with ties to very shady businesses and potentially illegal business practices, and lied about the reasons.  People have as much right to that anger as you have to your faith in Epic's messianic promise.
Also, Steam are already reducing fees in reaction to market changes; not quickly enough for many people, and not by enough, and not yet for small devs - but they are moving, and it has nothing to do with Epic or Coffee Stain.  So, no, Epic will not be 'a better path forward', or 'serve as a conduit' to reduced fees on Steam - but it will reduce the income Coffee Stain gets out their hard work, and it will reduce the success of their game, and it will (and already has) engender bad feeling among their potential customers.  Coffee Stain have worked had to produce something worthwhile, and the actual programmers, designers, artists, and others who worked on the game deserve every chance for success - Epic Games is not going to give them that, and not for any of the reasons you pretend.

You have demonstrated, quite clearly, that you know little or nothing about how and why Steam started, Valve's business practices, what is happening in the wider market, or how any of this actually works - because almost everything you've claimed is factually incorrect.  Your claims about Google Fiber are also wrong.
by (940 points)
Re- Google fiber. I'm not wrong. Here's an article from time magazine (well, the online edition in any case). I'd summarize it, but I already did. http://business.time.com/2012/09/14/with-google-fiber-search-giant-issues-public-challenge-get-up-to-speed/

I was mistaken about counter strike. It was actually half life 2 https://www.google.com/amp/s/kotaku.com/steam-is-10-today-remember-when-it-sucked-1297594444/amp
That also included the disk installs, mind you.

As you mentioned, steam is improving their revenue split, but it doesn't really help indie devs who don't sell a lot of units (again, as you mentioned). The revenue change only kicks in after a certain number of units are sold, and works in tiers from there.

I didn't know, however, that discord has their own store. I know itch.io has one but wasn't aware of the lack of price splitting. And that's cool. That's good. But satisfactory isn't on those. It's on the epic games store, which isn't steam, and thus impacts steams profits. Not much, but some. So it isn't that I think Epic is a prophet sent to guide us to the holy land. They're a business. Their goal is to make money. But that doesn't mean that they can't be a conduit for change in steam. Faster, more significant change.

As for the 5% you keep mentioning. Yes. Epic is a business. They have to make money somehow. Granted, fortnite is making them wicked cash right now. But it would be a bad precedent to set by eliminating their fee only because they're set for the time being. Who knows, maybe they wouldn't be able to retroactively apply it, and if fortnite dies down sometime, that'd put their business in a bad position. The point is, I don't blame them for charging for use of the unreal engine. I don't blame steam for charging for selling games on their platform. But it could be better for the developers, and this one way way to help make that happen.

So to be clear, very very clear. Epic is not our savior. But they are a tool we can use. I brought up Google fiber as an example of one company affecting others for change, but in Google's case it was intentional. This? This is capitalism. And I'm speaking with my dollar.

Edit: they're -> their. I'm so ashamed.
You've linked an article about Google where Time are, in fact, quoting *themselves* on Google's motives.  They are explicitly saying that Google intends to 'shame' telecoms companies in to providing better service - but they link their own, earlier, article in which they state that Google's move "*could* embarrass" other ISPs, not that it intended to.  In that article they link to a Google staffer blog, which contains the actual reality: that Google was experimenting with a gap in the market (one which is now a successful part of their business) - nothing more.  In fact, the blog explicitly states that they DON'T expect their move to change ISP's practices.
So, yeah, you're wrong - and linking articles which bend the truth to make a point opposite to reality won't change that.

Half-life 2 was the first game to require installation of Steam to install the game at launch, even to play offline - but Counter Strike already required Steam for online play by that point.  Regardless, the point I was making was that you had demonstrated a lack of knowledge about the industry, and the history of Steam, not that you were wrong about the first game to need it (which you were not).  Your attempt to disprove that with a quick google search has not made you look smarter.

Now you are focusing on Epic being a business, which has to make money, as if anyone said it wasn't.  Are you deliberately missing the point I was making, so that you don't have to accept it, or are you just too wrapped up in praising Epic to realise that what you're talking about is irrelevant?
The 5% was mentioned not to say "oh, how terrible that Epic charges for it's product", but to point out that, despite talking about fees, Coffee Stain, Epic, and various news outlets have all avoided mentioning the 5% at all, in case people think that only enforcing the fee on other platforms is a bit underhanded, or that avoiding such fees might be a factor in the decision.  The decision to lock in to Epic is being paraded as a bold move to support indie devs, and 'stick it to the man', when it clearly isn't.  In fact, this whole excercise is aimed ONLY at marketing the Epic platform to other devs.  For some reason, Coffee Stain are willing to potentially sacrifice the success of their game, and definitely sacrifice their profits, to market Epic to other devs - but they are pretending that their reasons are other than that.  I'm sure that THQ Nordic already being in bed with tencent and Epic Games has nothing to do with it at all...

So, to be clear, very very clear: Coffee Stain have betrayed their own fans, and then lied about their reasons for doing so; they have taken an unnecessary step, to limit their own sales and profits, and irritate and upset eager customers, while pretending it's all for a noble cause - when anyone with half a brain can see otherwise; they have made a decision which puts their customers financial and personal information at risk, for the benefit of no-one but Tencent.
This?  This is reality, and everyone else has the right to speak with their dollars too, by refusing to buy on Epic - and has the right to speak up on here (especially when invited) to point out their dissatisfaction, without being attacked, called lazy, and sworn at by people like you who have nothing to add to the conversation but wade in anyway to flaunt their ignorance and repeat fanboi mantras.  Do you work for Epic, or directly for Tencent?  Or did Steam kick your puppy?  Seriously, why are you so angry at people not wanting to have their information sold or stolen, and deciding that is more important than a game?  If you don't stand to gain, why does it matter to you?
by (940 points)
My bad on the Google fiber then. My understanding was that it was intentional, but even if it wasn't, that was the result. Which in a sense brings it closer to this situation. As far as having a knowledge of the industry, I'll totally admit to not having a knowledge of it. But as you said, the example I gave was accurate. So what was the point in saying I lack a vast knowledge of the industry?  Personally I don't think only enforcing the fees on other platforms is underhanded, which is why I didn't understand what you were getting at. The default was already to charge a fee on all platforms. It's apparently underhanded (according to you) to not charge that fee on your own platform. I'm not just saying that for the sake of argument either, I seriously don't see that as even remotely underhanded.

You're still taking what's actually a very basic idea and turning it into a lot more, so I'll level it down for you. I would rather buy the game on the epic store than steam. In terms of speaking with my dollar, I'd prefer to tell valve to give a better cut for smaller devs. Valve isn't an evil corporation, but they're not taking enough steps in the right direction either. So if I have to buy a game on a different store whenever possible as a way to indicate my disappointment to them, so be it. It doesn't mean I hate steam, I like steam a lot, and I use it every day. But given the choice for where to buy a game, I'd go with epic, just to nudge steam in the right direction.

Feel free to keep talking about kicking puppies though, nothing wrong with getting side-tracked. Also, when did I swear at you? I've been pretty civil this whole time. I haven't even made any assumptions about the kind of person you are, or made any personal attacks, something you've done relentlessly. I don't mind, but it's really not pushing the discussion forward in a meaningful way.

1 Answer

+8 votes
by (870 points)
y the launcher is real pain and due to lacks of security i get spammend by the 2-factor-auth that someone is trying to use my account and i need to change password - i changed it like 10 times (i dont take my usual one because i know about their so called security) but i recieve every couple days a new email, poking me to change my password - i'll never gonna use epic launcher if its that insecure - better spend money on crack and bi***es - gonna be more fun

a friends of mine tries to download the game since an hour now - nothing happend

if its on steam - i gonna buy it - but on epic - nope
Welcome to Satisfactory Q&A, where you can ask questions and receive answers from other members of the community.
In order to keep this site accessible for everybody, please write your post in english :)
August 28th update: We've removed downvotes! One major reason is because we don't want to discourage folks from posting legitimate suggestions / reports / questions with fear of being mass downvoted (which has been happening a LOT). So we now allow you to upvote what you like, or ignore what you don't. Points have also been adjusted to account for this change.
Please use the search function before posting a new question and upvote existing ones to bring more attention to them, It will help us a lot. <3
Remember to mark resolved questions as answered by clicking on the check mark located under the upvotes of each answer.