when you’re arguing that it’s impossible for a game to make a profit without Steam, yes
my post was in reply to you listing a single game that wasn’t profitable for a year and blaming that on it not being on Steam. If my example is not a valid argument then you shouldn’t have argued that way in the first place.
Strawman. It is demonstrably much harder for games to profit, when they’re not on Steam. Exceptions are rare viral hits. Alan Wake 2 was a popular and acclaimed game, and it did terribly on PC specifically, because it wasn’t on the one storefront that handles an overwhelming majority of PC sales. The difference between PC games not on Steam and iOS games not on the App Store is slim.
So yes, there are games exclusive to Epic that do just fine, but not many. Odds say, fucked. Being unavailable on Steam means most PC gamers will not consider buying it, and may never even be aware of it. We have a word for that.
If Steam not hosting your game causes your studio to shut down, it’s not because Steam is being some unreasonable gatekeeper. It’s because you’re making something that there isn’t any market for, or so little of a market that your only hope is to get it visible to as many people as possible so the tiny fraction of them that are interested can keep you afloat.
You know being on Steam means crucial access to more customers. To most customers, in fact.
The games that do well, despite being invisible to the supermajority of customers, are the exceptions. Nobody gets dropped from EGS or Itch and goes “oh no, we’re ruined, we’re only on Steam now.” But the opposite happens repeatedly. The reason is not complicated.
Satisfactory made $11 million in the first year when it was exclusive to Epic (and not available on “the one store everybody uses”).
Exceptions mean there’s no rule, yeah? Minecraft, therefore, 90% marketshare cannot matter.
when you’re arguing that it’s impossible for a game to make a profit without Steam, yes
my post was in reply to you listing a single game that wasn’t profitable for a year and blaming that on it not being on Steam. If my example is not a valid argument then you shouldn’t have argued that way in the first place.
Strawman. It is demonstrably much harder for games to profit, when they’re not on Steam. Exceptions are rare viral hits. Alan Wake 2 was a popular and acclaimed game, and it did terribly on PC specifically, because it wasn’t on the one storefront that handles an overwhelming majority of PC sales. The difference between PC games not on Steam and iOS games not on the App Store is slim.
So yes, there are games exclusive to Epic that do just fine, but not many. Odds say, fucked. Being unavailable on Steam means most PC gamers will not consider buying it, and may never even be aware of it. We have a word for that.
Exceptions mean there’s no rule, yeah?
Struggling is the rule, not the exception. Most games do much worse when they’re not on Steam. Most means more. Do you understand that?
One example does not mean most.
You know being on Steam means crucial access to more customers. To most customers, in fact.
The games that do well, despite being invisible to the supermajority of customers, are the exceptions. Nobody gets dropped from EGS or Itch and goes “oh no, we’re ruined, we’re only on Steam now.” But the opposite happens repeatedly. The reason is not complicated.
Right: there’s not a market for AAA torture porn / sexual abuse games.