Subject: Epic's 'it's all for the developers' doesn't seem to be impressing the developers


According to Tim Sweeney and Epic's marketing, a big advantage to
using Epic is that they give more money 'to the developers' than Steam
does (or rather, they take less of a cut of each sale). This is great,
right? The more money the developers have, the better the games they
can afford to make! Hurrah! But Epic's storefront doesn't really seem
to impress the developers that much. Sure, the smaller cut of a sale
might seem nice... but if you're not actually SELLING any games on
Epic, then --even with Valve's bigger cut-- Steam looks a lot more
attractive.

But-but-but, Epic says, look at our numbers! We have so many users!
Users who have huge gaming libraries! They're obviously dedicated to
our platform.

But this doesn't sway some developers either. "Giving everyone
everything for free might bump numbers but doesn't create a viable storefront.'*

Because for all Epic's efforts, even after seven years, Epic /still/
isn't a destination for most gamers. Sure, we all grab games there,
and maybe on occasion even buy something (usually only if Epic gives
us free-money coupons first), but its actual market share remains
tiny. And it's all Epic's fault.

Despite all their whining, they still aren't actually trying to
compete with Steam. Their client doesn't offer half the features
Steam's does, their games aren't any less expensive, their storefront
is awful, and their arrogant attitude turned off a lot of potential
customers. They have the potential to be great (all those Fortnite
players are a huge resources if they could figure out how to convert
them to other games) but their best strategy is puffing out their
chest and telling us how awesome they are without, you know, doing
anything to prove it.

And developers are well aware of this. They'll happily take Epic's
money for exclusives... but only to get some quick cash and use the
Epic release to hammer out any bugs and problems before the 'real'
release on Steam, where they'll actually make money. Sticking with
Epic's storefont alone is just locking yourself away from potentially
hundreds of millions of dollars (just ask Remedy, which suffered
financial crisis because it took two years before they could make back
costs from "Alan Wake II's" development (a game both critically and
publicly adored) because they couldn't sell it on Steam). Nobody wants
to buy stuff on Epic.

It's been said before, and we'll say it again: Epic, if you actually
want to become a viable player, /earn it/. Give us feature equity
between your platform and Steam. Stop with the exclusives. Offer lower
prices. Actually fucking /compete/. Don't try and gaslight people
into thinking your the better product when you're not. People aren't
opposed to leaving Steam. A lot of people /want/ the competition;
Steam's monopoly /is/ worrisome. But we aren't going to jump to Epic
just because you exist and /say/ you're the better product (especially
when you're quite obviously not) just because of that.

Do that, and your store might actually start being profitable rather
than a drag on your resources, and you won't be so dependent on the
declining income of Fortnite players.





* Epic just can't win https://www.pcgamer.com/software/platforms/in-response-to-epic-ceo-tim-sweeney-waging-war-on-steam-larians-publishing-lead-says-giving-everyone-everything-for-free-might-bump-numbers-but-doesnt-create-a-viable-storefront/


--- PyGate Linux v1.5.5
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Subject: Re: Epic's 'it's all for the developers' doesn't seem to be impressing the developers

On Sat, 24 Jan 2026 13:11:28 -0500, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

It's been said before, and we'll say it again: Epic, if you actually
want to become a viable player, /earn it/. Give us feature equity
between your platform and Steam. Stop with the exclusives. Offer lower >prices. Actually fucking /compete/. Don't try and gaslight people
into thinking your the better product when you're not. People aren't
opposed to leaving Steam. A lot of people /want/ the competition;
Steam's monopoly /is/ worrisome. But we aren't going to jump to Epic
just because you exist and /say/ you're the better product (especially
when you're quite obviously not) just because of that.

Unlike Valve, which released Half-Life 2 to launch the Steam platform
with a killer app, Epic released Fortnite, and *then* decided to launch a distribution platform with all that cash they had lying around. And they
called it "Epic."

And it shows. There's no intent behind the Epic store, other than its
existence for its own sake. And with a poor user experience on top of
that. All these years, and they *still* won't let me open it to my
library page (and even if they did, that page is an unusable mess).

This is why a corporate vision statement that isn't a piece of fluff is
so important. It's very clear there's no plan here. The plan is "we exist
and therefore we deserve to make money."

--
Zag

Give me the liberty to know, to think, to believe,
and to utter freely according to conscience, above
all other liberties. ~John Milton

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.5
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Subject: Re: Epic's 'it's all for the developers' doesn't seem to be impressing the developers

And with a poor user experience on top of that.

Not having a comment forum for games is a big problem. But having to immediately look elsewhere for tips/bugfixes is a huge turnoff. I'm fine
with buying on the platform, but most discounts are tied to steam anyway.

rms


--- PyGate Linux v1.5.5
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Subject: Re: Epic's 'it's all for the developers' doesn't seem to be impressing the developers

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> writes:

It's been said before, and we'll say it again: Epic, if you actually
want to become a viable player, /earn it/. Give us feature equity
between your platform and Steam. Stop with the exclusives. Offer lower prices. Actually fucking /compete/.

Sounds good to me but then, I don't really care whose launcher (or
store) it is, I'd be fine without.

Price and availability are what matters and that usually means a Steam
code via some discounter. I'll support an underdog if it makes sense so
I have Ghog and Flepic in addition to Whatsit big name.

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.6
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Subject: Re: Epic's 'it's all for the developers' doesn't seem to be impressing the developers

On 1/26/2026 1:42 AM, Anssi Saari wrote:

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> writes:

It's been said before, and we'll say it again: Epic, if you actually
want to become a viable player, /earn it/. Give us feature equity
between your platform and Steam. Stop with the exclusives. Offer lower
prices. Actually fucking /compete/.

Sounds good to me but then, I don't really care whose launcher (or
store) it is, I'd be fine without.

Price and availability are what matters and that usually means a Steam
code via some discounter. I'll support an underdog if it makes sense so
I have Ghog and Flepic in addition to Whatsit big name.

You may actually be supporting the dev/publisher as my understanding is
the keys avoid some or all of the 'steam tax' for them, which means they
may get as much as 30% more of the sale.

--
-Justisaur

?-?
(\_/)\
`-'\ `--.___,
?ª'\( ,_.-'
\\
^'

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.6
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Subject: Re: Epic's 'it's all for the developers' doesn't seem to be impressing the developers

On Sat, 24 Jan 2026 13:11:28 -0500, Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

According to Tim Sweeney and Epic's marketing, a big advantage to
using Epic is that they give more money 'to the developers' than Steam
does (or rather, they take less of a cut of each sale). This is great,
right? The more money the developers have, the better the games they
can afford to make! Hurrah! But Epic's storefront doesn't really seem
to impress the developers that much. Sure, the smaller cut of a sale
might seem nice... but if you're not actually SELLING any games on
Epic, then --even with Valve's bigger cut-- Steam looks a lot more >attractive.

But-but-but, Epic says, look at our numbers! We have so many users!
Users who have huge gaming libraries! They're obviously dedicated to
our platform.

Despite having a large number of games on Epic's store I have only
played one game on there, Fortnite. And that game was only played for
a few hours early on after it's release. I just don't feel the
need/desire to play games under another launcher. Same happens with
GOG, EA and Ubisoft. I've got games on all the platforms but still
tend to stick to Steam.

But this doesn't sway some developers either. "Giving everyone
everything for free might bump numbers but doesn't create a viable >storefront.'*

Agreed. I only have one purchased game on Epic Games store.

Because for all Epic's efforts, even after seven years, Epic /still/
isn't a destination for most gamers. Sure, we all grab games there,
and maybe on occasion even buy something (usually only if Epic gives
us free-money coupons first), but its actual market share remains
tiny. And it's all Epic's fault.

Despite all their whining, they still aren't actually trying to
compete with Steam. Their client doesn't offer half the features
Steam's does, their games aren't any less expensive, their storefront
is awful, and their arrogant attitude turned off a lot of potential >customers. They have the potential to be great (all those Fortnite
players are a huge resources if they could figure out how to convert
them to other games) but their best strategy is puffing out their
chest and telling us how awesome they are without, you know, doing
anything to prove it.

And developers are well aware of this. They'll happily take Epic's
money for exclusives... but only to get some quick cash and use the
Epic release to hammer out any bugs and problems before the 'real'
release on Steam, where they'll actually make money. Sticking with
Epic's storefont alone is just locking yourself away from potentially >hundreds of millions of dollars (just ask Remedy, which suffered
financial crisis because it took two years before they could make back
costs from "Alan Wake II's" development (a game both critically and
publicly adored) because they couldn't sell it on Steam). Nobody wants
to buy stuff on Epic.

It's been said before, and we'll say it again: Epic, if you actually
want to become a viable player, /earn it/. Give us feature equity
between your platform and Steam. Stop with the exclusives. Offer lower >prices. Actually fucking /compete/. Don't try and gaslight people
into thinking your the better product when you're not. People aren't
opposed to leaving Steam. A lot of people /want/ the competition;
Steam's monopoly /is/ worrisome. But we aren't going to jump to Epic
just because you exist and /say/ you're the better product (especially
when you're quite obviously not) just because of that.

Do that, and your store might actually start being profitable rather
than a drag on your resources, and you won't be so dependent on the
declining income of Fortnite players.

* Epic just can't win >https://www.pcgamer.com/software/platforms/in-response-to-epic-ceo-tim-sweeney-waging-war-on-steam-larians-publishing-lead-says-giving-everyone-everything-for-free-might-bump-numbers-but-doesnt-create-a-viable-storefront/

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.6
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Subject: Re: Epic's 'it's all for the developers' doesn't seem to be impressing the developers

On Thu, 29 Jan 2026 19:43:16 -0500, shawn
<nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:

On Sat, 24 Jan 2026 13:11:28 -0500, Spalls Hurgenson ><spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

But-but-but, Epic says, look at our numbers! We have so many users!
Users who have huge gaming libraries! They're obviously dedicated to
our platform.

Despite having a large number of games on Epic's store I have only
played one game on there, Fortnite. And that game was only played for
a few hours early on after it's release. I just don't feel the
need/desire to play games under another launcher. Same happens with
GOG, EA and Ubisoft. I've got games on all the platforms but still
tend to stick to Steam.

On a technical front, I don't really have any issues with EGS as a
launcher. I open it, it installs the games, I double-click the games,
I play, I quit the launcher. Sure, Steam has more features --some of
them I like and use-- none of those bonuses are anything I consider
essential. As a launcher, EGS works well enough. It's fine. It's even
got a feature no other launcher has!*

But it's everything else about the company that keeps me from engaging
with their storefront and -thus- their client. The exclusives. The way
they mistreated PC gamers for a decade. Their litigiousness. Just the
simple fact they've had nearly a decade to improve their client and
haven't bothered to do anything significant. This seemingly isn't a
company that sees me as anything but a source of income. God knows
Valve probably isn't much better in that regard (especially when it
comes to esport gambling) but at least they bother to maintain the
pretense and throw some bones our way.

I desperately wish there was more competition in the PC gaming Market
space. I was hoping Epic might be that. But everything they've done
has done nothing but push me more into the arms of Valve. Epic says
they are 'all in for the developers' but their customers? They don't
seem to care about them. Thus, Epic is not anyone I want to give any
of my time or money. And I'm not the only one who feels that way.

And until Epic fixes this, developers won't take their store
seriously... because for all Epic is there to 'benefit the developers'
more than Valve does, if they can't give them the one thing they
really need --paying customers-- none of it means a damn.




* You can /still/ hide your game library in the Epic client. That's
right. You can use the client to buy the game and then make it so
there's no way to actually install or play them! Meaning that the only
thing then to do with EGS is buy more games (No, there's no way to
hide the store)! Truly, genius is at work at Epic! It's a wonder this
single option hasn't driven Valve out of business ;-)




--- PyGate Linux v1.5.8
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Subject: Re: Epic's 'it's all for the developers' doesn't seem to be impressing the developers


On a related note:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXqJejlFp6k

The gist of this video is that despite Epic's mammoth growth in user
count, it isn't helping them to actually, you know _sell games_. Even
as user count has gone up by 173% (largely by bribing users with lots
of free games into creating an account), actual sales for games
remained relatively flat (1.6% for non-Epic games). And, in fact, all
those free games Epic is giving away? It actually encourages people to
buy those games on Steam.

In fact, a recent freebie for "Blood West" on Epic sold 200% more
copies on Steam /on the very day it was free on Epic/. As the
developer wrote later, "Epic could give devs 100% of sales and it
doesn't mean shit if there's no sales". The video rightly points out
that all these freebies on Epic do is make customers curious about the
game, but it's the convenience of Steam that actually /sells/ the
game. All these free games on Epic are great marketing... but for the
game, and not for the Epic platform. People see the freebie, and think
the game looks interesting... then decide to play (and buy) elsewhere.

[A personal, related anecdote: Epic gave away "Skald: The
Dark Priory" a few weeks ago. I claimed the game, but
later turned around and bought the same game on Steam when
it was on sale. Then I played the game on Steam, not Epic.
And I'm not the only one. People just don't want to use
the Epic client.]

The video also comments on how Steam works to make sure various
anti-cheat (like Epic's own EasyAntiCheat) and DRM work on Linux and
Mac, while Epic itself puts no such effort into this. Or that Valve is
working to make games run on ARM, or work with any controller. Epic's
strategy seems to be to litigate and whine.

Steam is amazingly profitable... but it's for good reason. Valve rakes
in close to $1 billion USD in revenue /per month/; Epic Games Store
stuggles to make that much in an entire year (and that is mostly from
Fortnite anyway. Third-party game sales are miniscule compared to
that). Developers have already commented how Epic makes no real effort
to market their games (except through freebies) and the only real
purpose of the platform is as a soft-release to work out bugs and
start to generate hype for when it gets it 'real' release on Steam
(where the game will actually start earning money). And this is all
because Valve actually provides services its customers want. Customers
flock to spend on Steam, and all the crowing does about how their
deals with developers means squat when Epic can't get any customers to
actually buy games on their platform.

As the video points out, Epic makes loud claims about how Steam is a
monopoly. But Epic has close to 300 million users (a significant
portion of the PC gaming market) and almost none of them choose to
spend their money on EGS. Despite what Epic CEO Tim Sweeny says, there
/is/ a lot of choice in the PC gaming market-space: Steam, GOG, Epic,
XBox Gamepass, EA, UPlay, etc. Steam gets all the sales because they
put the time, the money and the effort into giving customers what they
want. If Steam dominates the market, it's not because it is an
unassailable monopoly but because they are the better choice for
gamers--- and, because of that, for developers too.






--- PyGate Linux v1.5.8
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Subject: Re: Epic's 'it's all for the developers' doesn't seem to be impressing the developers

On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 12:41:21 -0500, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

On a related note:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXqJejlFp6k

Dude is very into Linux. I guess because of Steam Deck.

I don't really care about Proton/SteamOS right now. It's a backup plan. I
do my portable gaming on Switch. I'm fine with Windoze. I've always used
my productivity machine to play games, not the other way around.

So, no Rocket League or Fortnite on Steam? Also don't care. I mean, if I
did I would just launch Epic anyway. It's good enough for their *two
games* worth playing. It just sucks for an *entire library*, which their freebies have unfortunately pointed out. Before you give away hundreds of games, make sure your client can handle that well. Ope. Backfire.

Also, "YouTube voice" is very annoying. I wouldn't be surprised if this narrator voice was AI generated, in fact. If not, it will be soon.

--
Zag

Give me the liberty to know, to think, to believe,
and to utter freely according to conscience, above
all other liberties. ~John Milton

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.8
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Subject: Re: Epic's 'it's all for the developers' doesn't seem to be impressing the developers

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
say:

On a related note:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXqJejlFp6k

<snip>

As the video points out, Epic makes loud claims about how Steam is a >monopoly. But Epic has close to 300 million users (a significant
portion of the PC gaming market) and almost none of them choose to
spend their money on EGS. Despite what Epic CEO Tim Sweeny says, there
/is/ a lot of choice in the PC gaming market-space: Steam, GOG, Epic,
XBox Gamepass, EA, UPlay, etc. Steam gets all the sales because they
put the time, the money and the effort into giving customers what they
want. If Steam dominates the market, it's not because it is an
unassailable monopoly but because they are the better choice for
gamers--- and, because of that, for developers too.

I'm reminded of the release of that Kanye album where he "broke the
internet", when the truth was that he went with a new rival to iTunes,
who, trying to deal with the FOMO-Fans rushing to get the album
immediately, promptly crashed under the load.

They charged less, and they delivered less.

Steam vs Epic, is like say Uber picking you up in a Ferrari, and some
nameless Rival charging half as much and picking you up in a Tata Nano.

The price is half as much, but the drive experience is 1/100th as much,
so there's no value for money despite the cheapness.

Almost no one is going to go for that, no matter how much you advertise
your cheapness.

70% of 100,000 sales is still a lot more than 85% of 1,000.

Basic economics. Methinks Tim does not understand that at all.


Oh and having listened to the video, I don't think it's AI reading it,
the reader actually pronounces words properly for the context, and
follows punctuation pauses and stops and says sentences in a normal way
with normal cadence.

I've listened to a bunch of HOA horror stories, HFY and revenge tales on Youtube and the AI is hilariously bad at words with multiple
pronunciations depending on context - always gets it wrong.

Like the job interviewee with his res-ume, or the man with his
rhymes-with-cow, bow tie and the weird pauses mid sentence and sudden
reading of the second half and part of the next sentence run together,
or the pronouncing punctuation - one of those AIs always does ". As"
the end of one sentence and start of the next, as "dot a s", has a T, E,
D, talk and so on.

This was just someone with a boring, droning voice reading the script,
just as we'd have heard 10 or 20 years ago.

I've heard similar droning voices in people who do STO videos, just in
love with the sound of their own voices with no observable reason why so
you get 8 minutes of info spread over an hour and a half.

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.10
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)