• Cosmo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    I mean it’s a play as old as time; “we give great deals to the sellers and the buyers, until we own the market”

      • pivot_root@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        38
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Developers. UE5 is chalking up to be the defacto standard for modern titles that don’t have budgets large enough to make their own engine.

        EGS, on the other hand, is still an abysmal failure beyond the lure of free (and increasingly shittier) games and a yearly 25% off discount coupon that people fall for.

        • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          7 months ago

          I really wish they’d start by not making the EGS program a fucking UE5 app. Seriously, using the whole ass engine to render html is stupid beyond belief

            • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              Ever heard the saying “Everything looks like a nail when you have a hammer”? Basically, just because you have a tool, it doesn’t mean it’s the best tool for every job. UE5 is great for making games, cinematics and loads of other stuff. But why use it to effectively behave as a browser like Chrome or Firefox, but worse, when there are alternatives made specifically for that?

              • steakmeoutt@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                7 months ago

                That’s not really a valid response. Please accurately clarify why UE5 is inefficient at running a store. Benchmarks and other evidence is required.

                • pivot_root@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  I don’t think benchmarks are really needed to explain this. The whole game engine part is an unnecessary step.

                  To initialize a web browser component within UE5, you first need to initialize UE5 and then the web browser within it. Or, you could initialize a web browser directly, saving the memory and time needed to start up UE5.

                  They clearly have developers who know how to use CEF or whatever web view framework since they added it to Unreal Engine, so it’s not like they don’t know how to add it to a standalone application.

        • Gabu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Nope. Godot, a fully free Unity-like Engine is shaping up to be the defacto standard for good games (AAA garbage is being ignored purposefully)

          • UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            “ignoring the major players in the industry”

            UE5 had turned into the standard whether you like it or not. I personally don’t like the engine, but that doesn’t mean I’ll lie about its position in the market, and neither should you. You aren’t doing Godot any favours with it

            • Gabu@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              When said “major players” only pump out trash that’s not fun to play, yes, I will ignore them gladly. The last AAA game I bought was Fallen Order, which I promply refunded after finishing, since it was more of a walking and climbing simulator than anything else – and that was one of the better AAA games to come out in the past decade.

              Indie devs and studios are the ones actually carrying the industry forwards.

              • UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                Your preference doesn’t dictate what’s industry standard is my point. It would be like someone only playing exclusively Total War games claiming the Warscape Engine is industry standard, sounds pretty stupid doesn’t it.

                The last AAA game I bought was Fallen Order,

                A shame you missed out on Baldurs Gate 3 then. Alan Wake also got great criticism.

                • Gabu@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Fallacious reasoning. “Indie” isn’t a genre of games. I don’t claim AAA games are garbage because of a preference – they’re objectively slop made without passion as a cashgrab.

          • pivot_root@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            I know Godot exists, and it’s preferable to supporting Epic, but it isn’t up to feature parity with UE5. Particularly, when it comes to asset streaming and open world games, Unreal has better support out of the box.

            I would love for Godot to be the standard and first choice for every developer (including AAA), though.

      • ABCDE@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Rocket League and Fall Guys are also on there. Not sure how much paid games sell there though.

  • johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    I really wonder how the palworld devs feel about being gamepass day 1. I have no idea what the payouts look like for them. It probably got a lot more people to try their game, but would they have done better selling it only on steam? They probably weren’t in a position to negotiate a very favorable contract with Microsoft.

    • djsoren19@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      I think that’s looking at the deal in hindsight. Palworld had just as good a chance at flopping completely as hitting #1 worldwide, I imagine they were grateful for the opportunity to have some guaranteed income at the time.

    • sinceasdf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      7 months ago

      Because craftopia and palworld have a social aspect getting a big seed of players who only played it because it was free (for them) was I think a catalyst in making palworld blow up like it did. There are too many games out there for people to look through so it probably helps get word out effectively to sell out cheap for a big initial audience like gamepass when you’re a small dev. I only knew of craftopia or palworld because of gamepass at least

      The flip side is Microsoft is 100% giving the above as a sales pitch to devs why they should put their game on gamepass for peanuts (paid in exposure!). That’s probably some of what drives the shittier deal devs get now

    • sonovebitch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Their previous game Craftopia was also on GamePass and somewhat successful. They probably had some leverage for negotiations.

  • Suzune@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    7 months ago

    Maybe… just not make exclusive deals? Especially not on mediocre game distribution platforms.

    • MurrayL@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      “I talked to at least five small teams, like 35 [members] and under, during GDC, and they’re like: Cuts, cuts, cuts, funding canceled, talks that were going on for a year, canceled,” said Casey Yano, the co-founder of Slay the Spire studio Mega Crit. “It sounds like it’s shit. We’re definitely very privileged to be able to self-fund. [Otherwise] I’d be very, very, very scared right now.”

      If these deals didn’t exist, lots of games simply wouldn’t get made. You can hate on the platforms all you like but the deals are one of the only sources of funding for small & solo developers.

      • Halosheep@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        Oh no! Not the games I will never play because they’re exclusive to EGS!

    • rtxn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Remember DARQ? Taking a stance against third-party exclusivity pays off.

  • Donkter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Yeah, game publishers are in their “cash out” phase after realizing there’s no competing against steam.

  • Mon0@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    7 months ago

    I really don’t get what this journalist is trying to say. What is described here has little to do with epic and gamepass. The music momentarily stopped. There is no free cash anymore, not even from the gender crowd. That is the reason there are so many layoffs. You can be happy if you are not working in gaming atm.

    They way this piece is written makes you think the journalist believes epic and MS will give you x amount of their own money if you sign a deal. That is total nonsense, they obviously want to push their platform but they run into the same problem every publisher runs into. They are no longer able to refinance this projects consistently.

    For the people who think Paleworld devs and other would be sad about being on gamepass. That is mostly false. Most devs are happy to get this deals because it takes a huge burden of them. Getting the money to even start or finish their project. Making a game is risky and difficult. Even a really good product does not guarantee good sales numbers or any attention from the masses. Gamepass gives you some form of stability which ,especially for small studios, is really important and very difficult to archive.