It is ridiculous they haven't put more effort into it. I'm just a fan of more of the money going to game developers instead of middlemen and gatekeepers.
The industry split isn't anything unfair, to be perfectly honest. This "the devs deserve more money" thing is just more union agitating if you ask me, and what's more Epic's split mostly goes to the publishers anyway.
30% to Valve seems disproportionate and greedy though, which they get away with only because they have a near-monopoly.
This part is just not true. Every vendor storefront except Epic has the exact same split. It is the industry standard, has been for thirty years.
Epic is doing what is called a "loss leader", it's a tactic that Rockefeller used to buy up rival gas stations by operating at a loss in hopes that he could outlast them financially. It is a tactic that you use when you are bent on creating a monopoly. A tactic that Epic can only use because they are heavily backed with Red Chinese money.
They are very literally engaged in illegal, monopolistic trade practices and the only reason they haven't been legally confronted for it yet is because fully one half of the political spectrum is also in the pocket of the ChiComs.
The online game marketplace industry hasn't existed for 30 years. More like 15. Anyway, I just looked up revenue numbers, and found a 2017 quote about Valve earning $4.3 billion on operating Steam that year.
I bet Steam could be operated very profitably on, say, a 7% commision, which would have netted them a round 1 billion.dollars. Everyone deserve a bit of profit for their work, but a 30% cut for being a glorified CDN and credit-card processor, is exploitative rent-seeking, and I don't care if Apple and others are doing it too.
It is ridiculous they haven't put more effort into it. I'm just a fan of more of the money going to game developers instead of middlemen and gatekeepers.
The industry split isn't anything unfair, to be perfectly honest. This "the devs deserve more money" thing is just more union agitating if you ask me, and what's more Epic's split mostly goes to the publishers anyway.
12% to Epic is fair enough, no complaints there. And I love their advertisement strategy of paying developers in order to give away free games.
30% to Valve seems disproportionate and greedy though, which they get away with only because they have a near-monopoly.
This part is just not true. Every vendor storefront except Epic has the exact same split. It is the industry standard, has been for thirty years.
Epic is doing what is called a "loss leader", it's a tactic that Rockefeller used to buy up rival gas stations by operating at a loss in hopes that he could outlast them financially. It is a tactic that you use when you are bent on creating a monopoly. A tactic that Epic can only use because they are heavily backed with Red Chinese money.
They are very literally engaged in illegal, monopolistic trade practices and the only reason they haven't been legally confronted for it yet is because fully one half of the political spectrum is also in the pocket of the ChiComs.
The online game marketplace industry hasn't existed for 30 years. More like 15. Anyway, I just looked up revenue numbers, and found a 2017 quote about Valve earning $4.3 billion on operating Steam that year.
I bet Steam could be operated very profitably on, say, a 7% commision, which would have netted them a round 1 billion.dollars. Everyone deserve a bit of profit for their work, but a 30% cut for being a glorified CDN and credit-card processor, is exploitative rent-seeking, and I don't care if Apple and others are doing it too.