I would love for Steam to have **actual competition. Which is difficult, sure, but you could run a slightly less feature-rich store, take less of a cut, and pass the reduction fully on to consumers and you'd be an easy choice for many gamers.

But that's not what Epic is after. They tried to go hard after the sellers, figuring that if they can corner enough fo the market with exclusives the buyers will have to come. But they underestimated that even their nigh-infinite coffers struggle to keep up with the raw amount of games releasing, and also the unpredictability of the indie market where you can't really know what to buy as an exclusive.
Nevermind that buying one is a good way to make it forgotten.

So yeah, fully agreed. Compared to Epic, I vastly prefer Steam's 30% cut. As the consumer I pay the same anyways, and Steam offers lots of stuff for it like forums, a client that boots before the heat death of the universe, in-house streaming, library sharing, cloud sync that sometimes works.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Viper_NZ@lemmy.nz 18 points 1 year ago (4 children)

This and the paid exclusives mean I haven’t, and won’t use EGS out of pure spite.

[–] phx@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I've picked up a ton of their free games. I've yet to actually install their client and actually play one

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I could always get one of those games off the high seas and pay the same amount. I'm not going to give Epic the engagement numbers to get investors with.

[–] YeastInspection@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

I believe these Indy devs get paid when you boot a game you got for free, so I'm happy to install stuff and boot it once just to support gaming in general

load more comments (1 replies)