Also, did you (or Epic) consider the approach of just offering the better split (88/12%) and let the consumers have the ability to sacrifice (if short term) certain features that they may not be considered essential to enjoy certain games? 2/2
-
-
Replying to @SweeneyThoughts
Yes, we considered a very wide range of alternatives, and weighed the issues of exclusivity very carefully, as we knew from our Robo Recall funding partnership with Oculus that Steam customers are upset by games that aren’t available on Steam.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @TimSweeneyEpic @SweeneyThoughts
All of the data and analysis foreshadowed that a store without a large exclusive lineup would struggle to gain a few percent of market share, as Humble and GOG have. Steam has around 94% market share among broadly multi-publisher stores.
4 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @TimSweeneyEpic
If I may add, across various comments sections of articles and reddit posts there is also people which consider GoG as their prefered platform to buy games and are also discontent with this approach, not only Steam users. 1/2
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @SweeneyThoughts @TimSweeneyEpic
More so, considering that if the problem to tackle is to better spread Steam's market share, wouldn't an association with say, GoG, be a viable alternative to offer games on both platforms?. In this case Steam would not be getting the games but GoG and EGS will.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @SweeneyThoughts
Agreed. The partnership we announced with Humble (first for key selling and now direct purchasing) was a first step in this direction, and we’re working on more partnerships with reputable key sellers and stores.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @TimSweeneyEpic @SweeneyThoughts
GOG’s approach is especially exciting because of the aim of connecting ecosystems together. The ideal outcome of all of this is lots of stores and lots of healthy competition, without having to deal with a Balkanized mess of numerous launchers.
4 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @TimSweeneyEpic @SweeneyThoughts
This is where the “Epic wants to be a monopoly” theme misses the mark. We want to be a part of connecting all ecosystems, as Fortnite has done. Doing this first requires upending the status quo of a 94% market share PC store and its single-platform store-locked social features.
1 reply 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @TimSweeneyEpic
Yes, the possibility of multiple stores competing is good. In that case, what is the plan going forward to achieve that goal considering that exclusives may not be the main strategy? Also is there prerequisites another store needs to have in order to simshimp epic exclusives?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @SweeneyThoughts
Free games, cross platform features, and more. The PC store is only a part of all this. Connecting games through the friends service and other systems we built for Fortnite across all platforms is another part. And engine. Devs are free to mix and match.
3 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
On integrating with other stores, we’re open to working with any reputable key sellers and stores to support direct purchasing integration. Epic’s role in these partnerships is only on tech integration; the biz deals for each game is between those stores and devs/pubs.
-
-
Replying to @TimSweeneyEpic
Alright i think this covers a few of my questions for now. I may not agree with everything discussed but regardless I appreciate that you took a part of your time to engage on it besides the nature of this account. Hopefully down the line we might be able to do so again. Cheers.
0 replies 1 retweet 3 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.