As I mentioned in another thread, I am mostly OK with this deal ONLY IF it's just a partnership for Unreal Engine. Epic has developed a decent game engine, and it makes sense for CDPR to utilize UE5 if they feel like REDengine is bogging down development. There is no sense in CDPR "reinventing the wheel" if they don't have to.

However, I will NOT be happy if this partnership somehow manages to affect GOG's business practices in any way. So if EGS somehow manages to get their "store in a store" on GOG/Galaxy, some EGS/GOG exclusivity deal surfaces, Epic starts trying to force their online/DRM services into GOG games, or it starts feeling like Epic is making an early move towards acquiring CDPR, then I'm going to be very disappointed.

You know GOG has already brokered a deal with Epic to sell DRM'd games direct from them through the Galaxy client?

The partnership has already affected them in a negative way...

:D

Hah! Love it.

I suspect there's more to this. US corporations appear to partner with countries and companies that line up with their state department visits, or are targets of their interest.

This ties in to my funding thread with 100s of new companies popping up that was never properly answered.

cdpr suddenly became a woke company with lots of interest and now epic on top of it, after the Trump visitations, along with sudden interest from investors.

Everyone should notice none of the clued in Americans ever pop up to reveal this. They'll sit here talking about ephemera to distract from the process when they know how it works.

Unless it becomes 100%Epic????

This is heartbreaking. It is one thing to pay the fee to use a game engine like Unreal but Epic makes you pay royalties on every game sold with Unreal. #parasites
Why couldn't CDPR have licensed the MT Framework or RE Engine from Capcom...other Japanese companies were able to do it with the former mentioned.
As far as Bandcamp acquitision goes on Epic's part that breaks my heart and I now will download and check any music I buy there for tacked on Mal or Adware from TenCent. Meant to add I won't download it on my home computer. Has the buy fully gone through?

Why are people worried about epic when large money fund organisations have lots of gog shares and influence already?

Wouldn't they need to pay fees on those other engines too?



12:40

Probably he never thought that far , but epic is evil for wanting money for their product , yeah...

If they use other people's engines, yes.

But in order to avoid all engine fees, they could always make their own engine themselves.

I heard a rumor about this a while ago, but I assumed that the EGS/Galaxy deal was never finalized. Specifically what effects have you seen? I don't use Galaxy anymore (partially because of that EGS rumor) so it's possible that I'm missing some change that was made to Galaxy.

If it's just the initial fee that's fine. I think the royalty part is bs. In my opinion it should be one or the other.

Honestly I don't understand why everyone but Epic can't create their own engine collectively to cut costs.

I think it's just a difference in business philosophy. Creating an in-house engine may not necessarily cut costs because the cost of creating/maintaining an in-house engine can be astronomical, and many game companies seem to feel like it's an annoyance that gets in the way of creating a game. Epic is more of a technology company than a game company so they don't view engine development this way. (If you look at Epic's list of game releases their "core" game releases tend to be showcase opportunities for their engines - ZZT was basically a UE0 showcase in search of a game, Unreal/Unreal Tournament showcased UE1, Unreal 2/UT2000 showcased UE2, UT3 showcased UE3, UT2018/Fortnite/Paragon showed off UE4, etc.) So the decision to buy an engine from an "engine expert" like Epic/Unity/Valve/etc, may end up saving money on development/debugging costs in the long-run since the engine development company has already put basically all of their development hours into developing/debugging that portion of the game.

Also, while would be possible for a company like Capcom to start licensing their engine, Capcom would need to provide tech support to RE Engine/MT Framework customers which would generate additional costs on Capcom's side. If Capcom wants to focus on making games, then they probably don't want to have to maintain entire tech support teams just to support external partners who licensed a Capcom engine. Again, it just comes down to the business philosophy of the company.

There's also the issue of constraints of external engines to developers, too. What if certain engines end up requiring DRM, for example, since some games might allow to omcuh modding or something like that thus game makers can pirate a game and sell a total conversion mod as a whole new game?

That's also something to consider. If the "costs" of the things that you mentioned outweigh the costs of developing and maintaining something custom in-house, then a company may choose to go with developing their own engine. It's just a matter of what makes the most sense to the game developer and what aspects of the game development process they want to prioritize from a business standpoint.