Maybe they could specialize in online games with ingame payments. They have lots of experience with Fortnite in that area. Otherwise they could just aim becoming big as long as the Fortnite cash is supporting them.

I hate those types of games. Microtransactions always annoy me because while getting one thing is cheap, getting everything can costs thousands of dollars unlike older games where I just paid the initial asking price and that was it.

So if Epic decides that route as you suggest, I have even less use for them.

+1 there pal. He said it all. You said it all.

While they probably wouldn't have created to store without Fortnite, having given them a lot of users who use the launcher, the store probably would be sustainable if Fortnite falls thanks to the game engine itself. Epic has survived quite a long time with the engine being their primary source of income and that isn't going to change anytime soon.

That is true. Still, Epic is supposed to be a business so I doubt they'll perpetually operate at a loss throwing all this money around for developers to be exclusive to their platform forever. Once they stop doing that, I wonder how many companies will keep going exclusive and how many people will they actually have on their platform.

I just question how Epic Games plans to be sustainable in the long term with their store.

Yeah, that is the big question only time will answer. Since the store launched, I've been curious about how many freebies have actually turned into buying customers. Some exclusives propaböy have given them money, but how much they've spent on getting those is another question entirely (and considered something like the Phoenix Point, it is in the millions, if their statements are to be believed).

But, as the saying goes, you can't make an omelette without breaking the eggs.

I've taken advantage of their freebies but haven't spent a dime on their store yet. They definitely make money, as Metro Exodus and World War Z both sold fairly well, I'm just wondering if it's enough to be sustainable.

If only Epic would put as much emphasis on the consumer side of game stores as developers. Their revenue share is great for developers, but I don't see any benefit from that as a consumer. Give me a reason to want to use your store, rather than being forced to for a particular game I'm interested in, and I'll happily use your store. GOG has that. It guarantees no DRM, which is why GOG is my primary store over Steam. Epic just needs to have a selling point like GOG does.

The problem I see with Epic as it stands is that they don't have any draw for consumers besides exclusivity, which is, to not mince words, a monopoly. So long as this is their strategy, I don't see any improvements for the consumer or any incentive for Epic to improve their dismal features which lag behind almost every other storefront, so long as people are forced to there for their exclusive titles. Worse, if they actually manage grow enough to compel Steam into action and actively poach their own third-party exclusives, I would hate to see the what would become of the overall PC Market. Probably like video streaming where every service hoards their own exclusives and has little incentive to improve features above a minimal quality.

Oh I'm sure Epic will survive. I'm just wondering if the Epic Games Store will survive based on their business model, unless they plan to just keep using Fortnite and Unreal Engine to prop it up.

Yeah that's why I hate the way Epic is deciding to "compete". It's exactly as you said: Epic has nothing to offer to the consumer. There's no selling point, no unique differentiating factor. Steam obviously is the most mature platform with the most users and games, but it still has a lot of drawbacks that other services can capitalize on. GOG obviously has DRM free gaming, something I care deeply enough to rebuy games I already own on Steam on GOG, and even pay extra money over a cheaper Steam copy. No DRM for everything I purchase is a godsend. Origin, meanwhile, has the Origin Access subscription service where you can get a bunch of games for a small monthly fee. UPlay has those little unlockables you can mess around with. Shit, even the Microsoft Store, despite being a terrible program, has Play Anywhere, so if you have an Xbox One version of the game, you can play the PC version and vis versa. Epic offers nothing in comparison. The only "pro-consumer" thing they can claim they offer is free copies of games, which is definitely nice, but also no unique. I've gotten free games from GOG, Origin and UPlay before.

We'll see in less than a year how profitable these exclusives are after they are released on Steam and become non-exclusive. Should be interesting.

The question is "Why the store?"

They can operate the store at the loss if it helps in other areas. Maybe they believe other storefronts will drop their cut and as a developer, this will increase those revenues. Maybe they believe the mere existence of the store serves as advertising for their own games increasing sales as a developer. Maybe they have plans to gain revenue elsewhere. Will the storefront have paid ads? Maybe there is a way for them to profit off user data such as sending e-mail offers from their "partners"? Maybe they have every intention of raising their cut and 12% is their introductory offer. Once enough other developers sign on, maybe they acknowledge 12% really wasn't enough and raise it...

The big thing to remember is that their storefront is not going to be their major source of revenue. They can afford a loss on it if they think it will benefit them in other ways.

despit epic being scumbags alot of the time they do have unreal tournament here on GOG so they aint as heartless as some other developers who scorn gog users mere existance

Shame they cancelled Unreal Tournament 4 in favor of Fortnite.

The only "mainstream" arena shooter at the moment is Quake Champions, and that's also online only so as soon as the servers shut down, it'll be unplayable. No community servers, no LAN, no offline bot support.

Exactly.
They know GOG isn't a threat, so they see GOG as a way to earn some change. Probably enough to pay the janitor's salary.
The Valve bastards, on the other hand, never even bothered to sell their old games on GOG.
I understand that, when Steam started, keeping Half-life and Portal exclusives was a good way to grab new customers. Nowadays, since new gamers don't even remember these classics, they could at least sell them here and earn some cash with the DRM-free crowd.