GameSpot may receive revenue from affiliate and advertising partnerships for sharing this content and from purchases through links.

Epic Games Store Is A Great Thing For The Whole Industry, Cities: Skylines Publisher Says

Fredrik Wester says it's a "matter of decency" to pay developers a bigger share of revenue.

108 Comments

Fortnite developer Epic Games shook up the video game industry when it launched its own PC store. The Epic Games Store pays developers/publishers 88 percent of revenue, with Epic itself taking 12 percent as the store owner. This is a far more developer-friendly percentage than the industry average of 70/30 that holds on Steam, as well as PS4, Xbox One, and Apple.

Fredrik Wester, the executive chairman of the board at Cities: Skylines publisher Paradox Interactive, said at an event this week that the 70/30 split is "outrageous." He made the comment at a Gamelab panel in Barcelona this week attended by GI.biz.

Please use a html5 video capable browser to watch videos.
This video has an invalid file format.
00:00:00
Sorry, but you can't access this content!
Please enter your date of birth to view this video

By clicking 'enter', you agree to GameSpot's
Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

Now Playing: E3 2019: Shenmue 3 Gameplay Trailer - PC Gaming Show 2019

"I think the 70/30 revenue split is outrageous," he said. "I think the platform holders are taking too much money. Everyone in the press here, just quote me on that."

Wester went on to say that the 70/30 revenue split is antiquated. It might have made sense in an entertainment world dominated by physical media, but now that games are increasingly digital--especially PC titles--the revenue split should change, he said.

"So Epic has done a great job for the whole industry, because you get 88%. Fantastic move. Thank you very much," he said.

Wester went on to say that Epic paying 88 percent of revenue is advantageous for new, less established studios because they get to keep a larger portion of revenue. Apart from business considerations, Wester said giving developers more money is the decent thing to do.

"I think it's also a matter of decency. I mean, how much does it actually cost to deliver a game" he said. "When the competition is low, the platform holder can get a big share of the pie; as competition increases, they need to lower their part of the pie, as well. That's how the market works, right?"

It is a complicated matter. Developers who take Epic's money are often criticized for doing so, especially in cases where a Steam version was previously promised. But at the same time, taking the money can offer a level of financial stability that is rare in the gaming industry, especially for smaller teams. Qube creator Dan da Rocha said on the panel that Epic's 88/12 revenue split is a "huge boon" for developers."

For what it's worth, Epic has said it will stop pursuing exclusives so aggressively if Steam changes its business policies to pay developers a bigger share. It remains to be seen if any change will happen on console, where store-owners like Microsoft and Sony keep 30 percent of revenue.

Epic Games CEO and founder Tim Sweeney recently defended the company's exclusivity strategy, saying it is the only way to spur change and encourage storefronts to pay developers a bigger share of revenue.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Join the conversation
There are 108 comments about this story
108 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for Pyrosa
Pyrosa

10650

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

A bunch of folks below are inaccurately making widespread statements that devs don't benefit / only publishers do.

This is NOT an accurate blanket-statement.

Devs' contracts with their pubs are highly specific to each dev and usually specific to each title. So if a Dev is paid a percentage of the gross based on a specific tiered number of copies, for example, then that Dev DOES get paid more.

There are too many scenarios here for any blanket statement.

Epic's competition is absolutely good for this increasingly competitive market.

2 • 
Avatar image for Xylymphydyte
Xylymphydyte

1731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Pyrosa: That all assumes that they sell a comparable amount of copies as they would have had they not gone with an EGS exclusivity deal.

I don't think anyone has a problem with games being on the Epic Store assuming they're available elsewhere too. The underhanded exclusivity deals trying to be justified with the supposed better revenues is the problem.

Thing is, if it's all about the split there's an option on Steam for developers to get 100% of the profits without giving Steam one red cent, Fredrik Wester outlined it in his twitter thread this very article is referring to: a developer can host their game on steam, get free CD keys from steam then sell them from their own website at whatever price they want completely cutting out the middle man.

If it's all about the money there are many many better ways to handle it that doesn't involve Epic's devil deals and that all of the arguments for them are essentially misleading our outright wrong. But we know the reality is that it's about the big wigs padding their bonuses with Fortnite and Tencent money in the form of paid exclusivity.

2 • 
Avatar image for nplbbs
nplbbs

6

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@Pyrosa:

IF the dev is paid a percentage, the keyword being IF

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Xylymphydyte
Xylymphydyte

1731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

You know, I just realized how rich this is.

Paradox is responsible for Gamersgate, a key reseller site with a 70/30 split...

4 • 
Avatar image for mogan
mogan

19930

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

mogan  Moderator

@Xylymphydyte: Do we know Ganersgate is still using the 70/30 split?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Xylymphydyte
Xylymphydyte

1731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Mogan: https://www.gamersgate.com/info/gamenerve-publisher-terms

ctrl-F 70%

2 • 
Avatar image for nplbbs
nplbbs

6

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By nplbbs

@Xylymphydyte: If a well established company's CEO says something is good for the new comer in the industry, you bet there is fishy stuff in there

Upvote • 
Avatar image for tuxedocruise
TuxedoCruise

65

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By TuxedoCruise

Steam remains the best place for publishers to get the most amount of sales revenue from their games.

Publishers can generate Steam keys for their games at no cost.

Publishers can set up a payment system completely removed from Steam's storefront, sell those keys, and reap 100% of the revenue from those sales.

Valve only gets a 30% cut when those transactions occur on the Steam storefront. Otherwise, they take a 0% cut from generated keys.

This is a fact that Tim Sweeney has left out in his anti-Steam crusade. And it's sad to see that it's a tactic being copied by developers and people who want Steam to fail for arbitrary reasons.

Valve wants Steam to be successful on its on merits. Steam doesn't need to be successful at the failure of other storefronts.

But Tim Sweeney's strategy is that, in order for the Epic Games Store to succeed, Steam has to fail. And it's not just Steam that's getting hurt by third party paid exclusives - pro-consumer marketplaces such as GOG are also losing games because of the Epic Games Store exclusivity.

Yet there are people are praising these shady tactics from Epic Games?

6 • 
Avatar image for Royas
Royas

1448

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

While I agree that the 88/12 split is more advantageous to the publishers (not the developers, they'll get the same money from the publishers they always have), Epic just can't compete fairly yet. They don't even have a bloody shopping cart, one of the most basic elements of e-commerce! I get it that they might not have a fully developed social system, forums, etc, a community takes time to implement correctly. But things like a basic shopping cart, that's not a community feature, it's a basic requirement for running an online store. It's mature technology that has already had the (admittedly complicated) problems solved.

And don't get me started on the user review situation. Giving the publishers the right to opt out of user reviews? What? Makes the system useless and I, for one, won't be even considering Epic as a storefront until they allow user reviews without any developer or publisher interference beyond a response to individual reviews.

2 • 
Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4816

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

Fredrik Wester says it's a "matter of decency" to pay developers a bigger share of revenue.

100% agree.

The 70/30 split that Steam and the like offer is just ridiculous.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for nplbbs
nplbbs

6

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@amaneuvering: It would be decent, if he is not the CEO of the company who runs website offering 70/30 split

Upvote • 
Avatar image for nyran125tk
nyran125tk

787

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

if publishers get 70-80% then shouldnt publishers be paying their developers more?

2 • 
Avatar image for mogan
mogan

19930

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

mogan  Moderator

@nyran125tk: Probably, but if publishers start investing more into game development, because they know they’ll make more, that’ll be a good thing too.

And in the case of indie games, Epic’s better cut will very directly help the developers.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Bread_or_Decide
Bread_or_Decide

29761

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

EPIC has made games, they've been shafted by Steam and others, they know and it's dope of them to come in and change the game.

Time to go read the PComplainers below whine about competition and free markets.

3 • 
Avatar image for nplbbs
nplbbs

6

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@Bread_or_Decide: I mean if they have the cash and the tech, why don't they fix the launcher before they lauch it? People always talk about how Steam did not have all the things at the beginning as well, but at the time NO ONE runs digital distribution platform. Steam spend a decade to set up good standards for the industry, some of them have gone bad like the split, but majority of them are still good, so does epic want to change the game so bad that they want to change the good things as well? If they truly want to change, why don't they wait until their launcher is prepared? Given that the industry is not on the brink of total collapse (Maybe for some publishers like Activision it is, but not majority), there could only be two explanations. They either 1. want to break the system steam set up but don't care the consequences brought by their ill-prepared offensive, since Tim Sweeney hold grudge against steam for over an decade personally. 2. want to push steam down from the throne and grab the crown themselves, without considering if their 88% model is sustainable.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Bread_or_Decide
Bread_or_Decide

29761

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By Bread_or_Decide

@nplbbs: It's an industry trend to enter the market first and fix things up later. Every day they sit in their offices trying to "perfect" their website is money they're losing. Better to be in the market and fix things along the way. That's pretty much the trend for all tech right now. From apps, to games, to hardware, to software. Release first, fix later. Better to be in the sandbox playing with others then standing outside of it waiting for some perceived perfect moment to enter. That moment won't come and you've waited too long, the sandbox is full and you missed your moment.

And yes, Steam did it because they knew this too back then and Epic knows it now.

This extends to many other industries as well. If you had a band and you could either never release an album until you think you're perfect, or make an album, deal with its flaws, and them make the next one better. Better to have your name out there. And since there's no such thing as bad press, it doesn't matter if you get a little criticized for your flaws, people love a good comeback story.

And really, as long as Epic sells you the game and you can play it, that's all most normal people want.

All this other obsessive crap is for nerds and they are a very small part of the market. Nobody cares what they think.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Xylymphydyte
Xylymphydyte

1731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

People act like the developers will actually get this money. It's going to be the publisher, you know, those sick bastards who keep shoving lootboxes harder and harder despite the looming legal axe over their head? Yeah, this is just giving them more money in almost all cases. They've decided that the bigass sign on bonus and a slight increase on what few further sales they'll be getting is worth pissing off their customer base, AND they get to get goodboy points for adding Steam as a platform after the contract ends AND they get to shove most of the blame off on Steam with the excuse that they had to take the money to make better games. They won't, they never do no matter how much money they get and from what source and that should be apparently by now.

In the case of Indies then yeah, they'll get that split, and the giant phat sign on bonus, but they won't get much beyond that being that they'll be seeing so much fewer sales.

People also forget the sheer volume of work Valve has put into making Steam an amazing platform. Epic has to do all that to compete. Everyone's happy to drop trou and unload opinion on Bethesda and EA for Fallout 76, Anthem and Mass Effect Andromeda's "roadmaps", all of which have largely failed to some extent or another, but they'll believe Epic's roadmap? It's not like they're trying to fix a broken game they're trying to produce basic features that some kid learning web development over the summer via youtube videos could manage.

Basically, Epic isn't offering the consumer any benefit whatsoever, and they're mostly only offering the publisher more money meaning that their execs get another summer house and the developers get... literally nothing but poor reputation. If Epic wants to compete in the market they need to offer the end user something better, not the developer or publisher, and they're nowhere near that.

The customer shouldn't give a single sun-dried old white dog turd what the revenue split is, but somehow Epic and their shills have convinced a lot of people to advocate for the people taking their money and not themselves. So far Epic hasn't given any reason to defend them with essentially all the worst practices in the industry. Shutting down games with active communities to focus on lootboxes BR, turning the lootbox and microtransaction with premium currency dial to 11, essentially being entirely responsible for the excessive explosion of battle royale games and modes taking over everything, paying for exclusivity after repeatedly saying how bad that is and how they won't do it again only to do it again and again, breaking contract with publishers forcing them to pull their content from the store, screwing up kickstarted products' promises and on and on.

When their platform is as good as Steam, when they have a similar library and when they can make sales based on being the better platform and not throwing Tencent's money at exclusives they'll be good for the industry. Currently they're fighting tooth and claw to take EA's 'worst company in the world' plaque from them.

Currently the only people readily defending them come in a very small subset. Paid shills astroturfing, indie developers and their friends defending/justifying their bigass payday at the expense of their customers, and people who just don't know any better and believe the 12/88 propaganda will make better games.

Imagine if Epic spent the money they spend stealing ONE exclusive on making their platform not garbage? They might be able to compete, but that's a bridge too far.

3 • 
Avatar image for Bread_or_Decide
Bread_or_Decide

29761

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@Xylymphydyte: lol, stealing, took only one post to reach Hyperbole land amongst the PComplainers.

3 • 
Avatar image for Xylymphydyte
Xylymphydyte

1731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Bread_or_Decide: What would you call the various preorders being denied by it? The Shenmue 3 situation is particularly egregious where people paid for a Steam copy and are now being told they have to get it somewhere else or refund? It's certainly not good business practice.

But ah well, you're one of those shills from the looks of it so do what you want, you're not here for good faith discussion.

3 • 
Avatar image for mogan
mogan

19930

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

mogan  Moderator

I hope things do go Epic's way, and the industry adopts the better revenue split, and that it leads into more investment into game development. Either way though, I'm fine with their being some more direct competition to Steam, and another place to look for big sales is always a good thing.

The exclusives don't really bother me; I've spent years having to use Steam because tons of games require it. And as far as features go, all I really need in a launcher is that it runs quietly in the background. Epic should improve their app, otherwise it'll just keep being a point of contention for them, but my main bases are already covered.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for nplbbs
nplbbs

6

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@Mogan: The difference is, the publisher can publish on many other stores as well, they don't have to publish on steam exclusively. But the Epic exclusive deals means that they can only publish on epic store (Metro Exodus on Microsoft store is a whole other story).

Upvote • 
Avatar image for mogan
mogan

19930

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

Edited By mogan  Moderator

@nplbbs: Epic’s got a list of stores they’ll work with too. Like, most of the Epic exclusives are also on Humble and Green Man. Metro and TOW are on MS’s store and Game Pass too. Ubi’s games are on Uplay.

It’s not really that different from Steam.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for naija
Naija

121

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Here's the problem. Sell out now and there's no guarantee of better games in the future. That publishers are getting more money upfront is great but those signing bonuses are what grates on consumers' minds. Plus, Epic's business practices leave so much to be desired that any company or publisher dealing with them becomes instantly tarnished as well. So publishers would do well to keep that in mind.

3 • 
Avatar image for Bread_or_Decide
Bread_or_Decide

29761

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@naija: "Epic's business practices leave so much to be desired that any company or publisher dealing with them becomes instantly tarnished as well."

Not even remotely true. This is why hanging out in echo chambers is a bad thing.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for everson_rm
everson_rm

1677

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Edited By everson_rm

Anyone know how much percentage sony, microsoft and nintendo charge for theyr online store?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for nplbbs
nplbbs

6

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@everson_rm: So is Fredrik Wester's own online store, which is particularly fishy.

2 • 
Avatar image for johnnyboy787
Johnnyboy787

414

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@everson_rm: 30% just like Steam

3 • 
Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

63551

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 86

User Lists: 2

Edited By uninspiredcup

Publishers and developers talking about decency.

Comedy gold.

Paradox especially where they raised the price of all their games immediately prior to the Steam Summer Sale.

OR have £3000 worth of DLC for games where they literally sell assets like character portraits and music separately.

They go as far as to have Day 1 DLC segmented, for DLC.

Yes, very outrageous, we are all behind you.

6 • 
Avatar image for burn6
burn6

299

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

Edited By burn6

Never liked Fortnite but yeah what Epic Game Store is doing is just, but they need to do more, way way more. They are nowhere near competitive as Steam. Steam have so many things, achievements, community hubs, forums, mods/creations, social gaming profile, chat and voice, streaming functionality, cloud sync, item auctions, screenshots, tools, custom music library, remote play, separate browser used in-game, custom controller setup, shader cache for faster loading, review pages, store currency, organized game library and much more. Epic Game is like a retail store with terrible service but Steam is city block of retail stores.

Gamers hate Epic for offering a shitty empty space full of disorganized squares of game library, you need to scroll down again and again to browse. Did you try search function? It does not work properly, even now. Let me give you an example, search for a popular AAA game, go do it. Now how about a developer/publisher like Ubisoft or EA, not found? That is right, they don't have developer profiles, their search and suggestions are missing, they still lack contents. Their store feels like it is still in alpha. You can find only a handful of popular games there. They don't have category or filters, that is basic listing functionality ffs. It is not the money split that is the problem, Epic Game Store doesn't do anything else for gamers or the community while Steam have hundreds. Steam is popular among gamers for lots of reasons. Epic game store is pro devs because they are just a digital store nothing else, they are not even as good as Greenman Gaming. Epic Game Store should invest more on their actual store rather than publicity.

Who among you use Epic game store? Who among you have Steam? Are you a developer? Are you a gamer? Before entering this debacle at least create an account in Epic, because it very likely that you already have Steam, now get the experience first hand.

3 • 
Avatar image for sbargovox3
SbargoVox3

420

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

I've said it a million times, and I'll say it a million times more: It's not the split that people are praising here. A bigger percentage of much, much less means nothing. What these people are slobbering all over is Epic's big, turgid check they give out for exclusivity.

4 • 
Avatar image for kp6ic
kp6ic

1

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

agreed. steam is a thief that robs developers blind and steals their future. thank god there's a competitor that understands it.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for nsa_protocol44
NSA_Protocol44

688

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 5

Edited By NSA_Protocol44

Epic can never even make Steam flinch. Let me tell you Epic Shills a secret. Valve has tons of Whales who pump a tremendous amount of cash into Steam. Only those whales will keep Steam afloat let alone the other hundreds of cash flows that Steam has. One of the super-users aka whales is St4ck.

EPIC would dream to even get Whale. let alone hundreds like Steam has.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for lonesamurai00
lonesamurai00

1610

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By lonesamurai00

Valve just needs to reignite the proverbial furnace. They need to start pumping out games that are exclusive to the store, and include every feature that Steam offers as an option. Hiring new developers and opening a couple of new studios might not be a bad idea either.

Funny thing though, Sweeney used to always complain about Microsoft creating some walled garden. I know that these are a different set of circumstances, but it almost seems that Epic is out to do the same thing by introducing exclusive games to a platform that never had them or needed in the first place. Keeping games for yourselves and off the shelves of other stores in an effort to force them to buy where you want them to is almost no different than the Microsoft store. They, like Microsoft want total control of the PC Gaming market.

The only positive in comparison to the two is that you get the games in a win32 format instead of the dreadful UWP format.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Elranzer
Elranzer

1422

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Elranzer

Another day, another paid Epic propaganda piece sponsored by the People’s Republic of China.

The Epic shills are here too. Sad.

The Summer of Steam sale is going on RIGHT NOW, and that’s what PC gamers care about. No gamers give a shit about Epic store, LOL.

9 • 
Avatar image for Bread_or_Decide
Bread_or_Decide

29761

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@Elranzer: I'm betting the huge amount of clicks the haters give these articles are paying the bills.

Like you, here, now.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for bigbluebustn
BigBlueBUSTN

157

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@Elranzer: even if it is paid for, can you deny they are the better platform for devs? why does valve get 30 percent to do nothing but host the files? 30 percent to be cloud storage???

2 • 
Avatar image for Thanatos2k
Thanatos2k

17660

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By Thanatos2k

@bigbluebustn: No, they're not the better platform for devs. The ONLY thing Epic can claim to do "better" is devs get a little more money from each sale.

Steam has features bursting from the seams that devs don't have to implement. And they have far better analytics. Residual revenue from trading cards.

Real devs know Epic is not the better platform, which is why the only way to get their games there is by bribing them with cash. If it was truly the better platform everyone would be releasing there.

3 • 
Avatar image for burn6
burn6

299

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

@bigbluebustn: clearly you don't have epic and steam accounts because you think only of the cloud storage? lmao

2 • 
Avatar image for spacemedafighterx
SpaceMedafighterX

59

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@Elranzer: Not trying to attack you. But have u ever developed a game? If u were a dev, wud u prefer a 30% cut or 88% cut? Of course, this is just a superficial inquiry to provoke thought. The whole situation is way more complicated than that.

2 • 
Avatar image for Lamesy
Lamesy

371

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@spacemedafighterx: The problem is that these two issues keep getting conflated. Better cut for devs on a per sale basis, okay great. Money they deserve. Pile of cash forked over in a hasty exclusivity deal? Dirty money.

2 • 
Avatar image for bigbluebustn
BigBlueBUSTN

157

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@Lamesy: i dont see the problem, people are free to do as they please with their products...if a dev wants to take a huge sum of money to be exclusive to a store why knock them for it? just buy it from that store if you want it. people whine because they want things their way instead of thinking maybe they dont want it the same as me. a deal like that means money up front and after, to me its a no brainer to go with epic

4 • 
Avatar image for brandonmacleodT
brandonmacleodT

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By brandonmacleodT

@bigbluebustn: Here's the problem. Why does Steam need competition? Is it so games can be more widely available? That makes sense but what is Epic doing? Making games only available on one storefront. This is opposite of what we want. Do you honestly think Epic Games is doing this because they want to help game devs? Don't be stupid. Epic Games are not the "good guys." They're not going to help anyone but themselves. It is 100% pure greed and people like yourself are blind to the truth. You're blinded by your hatred of Steam that you're actually willing to believe that a corporation can be your friend. You have to be beyond naive if you actually believe a corporation wants what is best for the people.

Upvote •