Epic is starting to worry me

[Quadsword]

Despite massive backlash from their practices, Epic hasn’t let up even slightly. They have financial backing from Disney and Tencent, two of the largest corporations in the world, and a massive cash flow from Fortnite and unreal engine, the former being the most popular game in the world and the latter being the most popular commercial game engine in the world.

I feel like no amount of consumer backlash will stop them getting the monopoly they obviously want. They can just keep throwing money around until they control the entire games industry. I miss the days before mega corporations entered this industry.

[Wiawyr]

Eisberg eredeti hozzászólása:

Ness_and_Sonic|Bye Reviews eredeti hozzászólása:

Your numbers are based off of assumptions and there's a saying about people who assume things. Anyway, let's pretend for a second that it isn't a big money maker. Epic should release the Unreal Engine into the public domain.

yes there is some great competition out there, and currently Epic has a great competitive business model

Just lol dude. Epic's business model is propping up the store with royalty fees, Fortnite income, and Chinese investor money, in the hopes of attracting enough customers to then make it viable when they hike that 12% up to an actual level.

THAT is your idea of a "great competitive business model"? I guess it's good you're in marketing and not management.

[McGillicutti]

No the math doesn't prove me wrong because your math isn't using the legal difference that is contractual and effects the math.

You've proven only one thing: You do not know the difference and do not want to know because you do not want to admit that 5% of all sales from all sources is greater than 12% sales through Epic Store only.

I'm sorry you don't know the difference and instead want to make claims on math that has no application because you're using matching sets when sales through Epic is a subset of Gross Revenues, a small fraction subset if you were using algebra math.

If it were statistics Epic's store sales is a plurality of Gross Revenues.

In fractions Epic Store Sales is a fraction of 100%. The 5% gross Revenues is 100% while the 12% Epic Store sales is a fraction of that total amount and a much smaller amount.

If you'e ever eaten pie, the pie is the Epic Unreal Engine Developer 5% Royalty fee while a pie slice would represent the Epic Store's sales, which is all things that go through the Epic store.

The Epic Unreal Engine Developer Royalty agreement is referenced on the chart here as an additional cost for an Unreal Engine game to be sold on Steam, the "5" in the blue box in the top bar, https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/blog/announcing-the-epic-games-store

Also this article as referenced here and before, you'll not, was written by Tim Sweeney.

The royalty fee's representation regarding a sale on Steam is the very charge usually levied wrongfully at Steam, as though every game that installs the Steam Launcher is a Steam sale, to help futher illustrate how this works according to that mistaken claim against Steam, while, in reality, Epic charges 5% on all sales of anything also sold by the Developer on Steam, or any other retailer for that matter but Epic and especially Tim Sweeney likes to point the finger at Steam alone, when their own representations as seen here show Epic the one getting a percentage on sales of products from other retailers, all of them, via the Unreal Engine 5% Gross Revenue based royalty. And with Sweeney admitting it right in the above link your denials are again calling Tim Sweeney a liar.

[McGillicutti]

Ness_and_Sonic|Bye Reviews eredeti hozzászólása:

Eisberg eredeti hozzászólása:

12% from selling on EGS +5% from everywhere else is mathmatically more money than just 5% from every where else.

Game makes $10 million in its life time:
If not on EGS, Epic makes $500k

If the game is on EGS and also sold on other places during its life time, and lets say it made $3 million on EGS. It would look like this:
12% of 3 million is $360k
5% of 7 million is $360k

$360k + 350k = $710k

$710k is more than $500k.

The mathmathical example absolutely proves you wrong.

Your numbers are based off of assumptions and there's a saying about people who assume things. Anyway, let's pretend for a second that it isn't a big money maker. Epic should release the Unreal Engine into the public domain.

Amen brother! Exactly :)

[WolfEisberg]

Erebus eredeti hozzászólása:

Eisberg eredeti hozzászólása:

12% from selling on EGS +5% from everywhere else is mathmatically more money than just 5% from every where else.

Game makes $10 million in its life time:
If not on EGS, Epic makes $500k

If the game is on EGS and also sold on other places during its life time, and lets say it made $3 million on EGS. It would look like this:
12% of 3 million is $360k
5% of 7 million is $360k

$360k + 350k = $710k

$710k is more than $500k.

The mathmathical example absolutely proves you wrong.

Eisberg eredeti hozzászólása:

You have to go on the assumption that games are not selling as expected on EGS to make any of that even true. Right now, we have no real reason to believe that sales of games on EGS are not being at least as expected.

You hinge everything on the assumption the games are making the same or better. But that is just an assumption. Since it's an exclusive available in very few to only one place depending if Epic doesn't sell nearly as much as the game might have with a full scale release everywhere. they make less money. Full stop.

I'm showing a mathmatical example of life time sales of a game and the difference it would make between getting 5% from everywhere vs getting 12% from EGS and 5% from every where. Even if I lower the EGS sales down to $50k on EGS, it would still show that getting 12% from EGS and 5% from everywhere else is more than 5% from just everywhere else.

Sorry, but the math example I am giving absolutely debunks what that other guy is saying, what he is saying makes absolutely no sense at all.

[McGillicutti]

Xaelath eredeti hozzászólása:

Eisberg eredeti hozzászólása:

12% from selling on EGS +5% from everywhere else is mathmatically more money than just 5% from every where else.

Game makes $10 million in its life time:
If not on EGS, Epic makes $500k

If the game is on EGS and also sold on other places during its life time, and lets say it made $3 million on EGS. It would look like this:
12% of 3 million is $360k
5% of 7 million is $360k

$360k + 350k = $710k

$710k is more than $500k.

The mathmathical example absolutely proves you wrong.

Right.
It's the 12/88 again.
Don't forget to add 5% because I am sure every games use Unreal Engine.

I ask you take a look at this post and that helps understand how the non-Unreal Engine games are more of an opportunity for Epic than the Unreal Engine Developed products because Epic can gain an actual additional income stream from the non-Unreal Engine Developers while retaining the Unreal Engine 5% Gross Revenue Royalty from Unreal Engine Developers that's affording the money to solicit all Publishers and Developers to be exclusive on the Epic Store, whether Unreal Engine or not. It's the exact reason Epic MUST use curation and must reject Unreal Engine Devleoper's products from being sold on the Epic Store.

[WolfEisberg]

McGillicutti eredeti hozzászólása:

More pure nonsense

Still waiting for you to give a mathmatical example, like I did, to show your point. The fact that you have not is absolute proof that your point is not mathmatically possible at all. Give a mathmatical representation of your scenario to prove it, I know you won't because it would be impossible. You keep throwing stuff out there, and the only people that fools are people are not very smart in any of this, they seem to think "oh he says lots of words, he must be right", yeah, that doesn't work with me.

Until you can give a mathematical example of your point, you will forever remain proven wrong with my very simple math.

[Erebus]

If Epic sold 900K units for an exclusive that would have sold 1mil units on Steam and 200K
units across third party sites. They'd lose a sizable chunk of money.

This is being generous too assuming that Epic's store moves 75% as much as the every other store on the market combined.

Makes sense why Epic doesn't want any competition on the products they sell. If it's an Unreal game they have to move almost 70-80%+ as many units as the entire PC market would have were it not exclusive just to break even with the royalties.

[WolfEisberg]

McGillicutti eredeti hozzászólása:

Xaelath eredeti hozzászólása:

Right.
It's the 12/88 again.
Don't forget to add 5% because I am sure every games use Unreal Engine.

I ask you take a look at this post and that helps understand how the non-Unreal Engine games are more of an opportunity for Epic than the Unreal Engine Developed products because Epic can gain an actual additional income stream from the non-Unreal Engine Developers while retaining the Unreal Engine 5% Gross Revenue Royalty from Unreal Engine Developers that's affording the money to solicit all Publishers and Developers to be exclusive on the Epic Store, whether Unreal Engine or not. It's the exact reason Epic MUST use curation and must reject Unreal Engine Devleoper's products from being sold on the Epic Store.

And the fact there is a good mix of unreal and unreal games on EGS, honestly, given their market share for engines, they actually have a good representation of their engine on their store, which absolutely debunks, once again, your failed and flawed logic here. Gosh, reality sure does bite your points in the bum so easily.

[WolfEisberg]

Erebus eredeti hozzászólása:

If Epic sold 900K units for an exclusive that would have sold 1mil units on Steam and 200K
units across third party sites. They'd lose a sizable chunk of money.

This is being generous too assuming that Epic's store moves 75% as much as the every other store on the market combined.

Makes sense why Epic doesn't want any competition on the products they sell. If it's an Unreal game they have to move almost 70-80%+ as many units as the entire PC market would have were it not exclusive just to break even with the royalties.

If Epic sells 1.2 million units of a game that would have sold 1 million units on Steam and 200k at other places, they'd be making a sizable chunk of extra money.

There is no reason to believe what engine is being used is playing a part in their store at all, again, considering the good mixture there and their market share for engines, it all looks to be about as expected. Epic has about a 13% market share in the game engine market for games, so it stands to reason we would see ~13% of the games on EGS to be using the Unreal engine.

[Wiawyr]

Eisberg eredeti hozzászólása:

Erebus eredeti hozzászólása:

If Epic sold 900K units for an exclusive that would have sold 1mil units on Steam and 200K
units across third party sites. They'd lose a sizable chunk of money.

This is being generous too assuming that Epic's store moves 75% as much as the every other store on the market combined.

Makes sense why Epic doesn't want any competition on the products they sell. If it's an Unreal game they have to move almost 70-80%+ as many units as the entire PC market would have were it not exclusive just to break even with the royalties.

If Epic sells 1.2 million units of a game that would have sold 1 million units on Steam and 200k at other places, they'd be making a sizable chunk of extra money.

There is no reason to believe what engine is being used is playing a part in their store at all, again, considering the good mixture there and their market share for engines, it all looks to be about as expected. Epic has about a 13% market share in the game engine market for games, so it stands to reason we would see ~13% of the games on EGS to be using the Unreal engine.

Prove that Epic would sell as many copies of a game as Steam and third party sites together would. Otherwise you're just dreaming with fantasy numbers, and the fact Epic is guaranteeing a minimum sold to publishers by buying keys themselves proves they're not selling anywhere near that level.

[Erebus]

Eisberg eredeti hozzászólása:

If Epic sells 1.2 million units of a game that would have sold 1 million units on Steam and 200k at other places, they'd be making a sizable chunk of extra money.

It is patently ridiculous to assume that one crappy store (like objectively crappy) will sell as many copies or more than releasing a game everywhere else.

Like that's not even a reasonable idea to consider.

[WolfEisberg]

Wiawyr eredeti hozzászólása:

Eisberg eredeti hozzászólása:

If Epic sells 1.2 million units of a game that would have sold 1 million units on Steam and 200k at other places, they'd be making a sizable chunk of extra money.

There is no reason to believe what engine is being used is playing a part in their store at all, again, considering the good mixture there and their market share for engines, it all looks to be about as expected. Epic has about a 13% market share in the game engine market for games, so it stands to reason we would see ~13% of the games on EGS to be using the Unreal engine.

Prove that Epic would sell as many copies of a game as Steam and third party sites together would. Otherwise you're just dreaming with fantasy numbers, and the fact Epic is guaranteeing a minimum sold to publishers by buying keys themselves proves they're not selling anywhere near that level.

Wrong, giving incentives to secure exclusivity is not proof they are not selling as expected. Exclusive agreements always come with some kind of incentive and that is what they are giving, which is peace of mind and security.

Funny how you want me to prove it yet don't ask Erebus to prove they are not selling as expected. Imagine that.

[Wiawyr]

Eisberg eredeti hozzászólása:

Wiawyr eredeti hozzászólása:

Prove that Epic would sell as many copies of a game as Steam and third party sites together would. Otherwise you're just dreaming with fantasy numbers, and the fact Epic is guaranteeing a minimum sold to publishers by buying keys themselves proves they're not selling anywhere near that level.

Wrong, giving incentives to secure exclusivity is not proof they are not selling as expected. Exclusive agreements always come with some kind of incentive and that is what they are giving, which is peace of mind and security.

Funny how you want me to prove it yet don't ask Erebus to prove they are not selling as expected. Imagine that.

So you can't prove it and are doing the usual deflection, got it. Keep using your fantasy numbers in dreamland then and posting bogus examples full of your usual lies.

[Erebus]

Eisberg eredeti hozzászólása:

Wiawyr eredeti hozzászólása:

Prove that Epic would sell as many copies of a game as Steam and third party sites together would. Otherwise you're just dreaming with fantasy numbers, and the fact Epic is guaranteeing a minimum sold to publishers by buying keys themselves proves they're not selling anywhere near that level.

Wrong, giving incentives to secure exclusivity is not proof they are not selling as expected. Exclusive agreements always come with some kind of incentive and that is what they are giving, which is peace of mind and security.

Funny how you want me to prove it yet don't ask Erebus to prove they are not selling as expected. Imagine that.

I never said ♥♥♥♥ about expectations would be why.

This is just another case of YOU talking about something and demanding PROOF about what YOU TALKED ABOUT.

All I said is an Unreal game has to do 70-80%+ of the sales a game would have made being sold everywhere else for the deal to break even for Epic. Nothing more nothing less. Sales expectations don't matter there, but I think you already know that and are just trying to put words in my mouth as is your M.O.

[WolfEisberg]

Erebus eredeti hozzászólása:

Eisberg eredeti hozzászólása:

If Epic sells 1.2 million units of a game that would have sold 1 million units on Steam and 200k at other places, they'd be making a sizable chunk of extra money.

It is patently ridiculous to assume that one crappy store (like objectively crappy) will sell as many copies or more than releasing a game everywhere else.

Like that's not even a reasonable idea to consider.

It is if in the end gamers really don't care about the fluff and if Epic is providing more exposure than what Valve does.

Look at Satisfactory and WWZ both selling above expectations, which means being on EGS did not decrease sales at all because expectations of sales are the only thing that can be reasonably considered and not some number above expectations.