Epic Games CEO: Epic Would Retreat from Exclusives, if Steam Improved its Revenue Share

Key insights

6 takeaways

01
Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney stated that Epic would cease its PC exclusivity strategy if Steam adopted a more competitive revenue share model for developers.
02
The Epic Games Store currently offers developers an 88% revenue share, while Steam’s model ranges from 70% to 80% depending on a game's sales volume.
03
Epic Games utilizes high-profile, triple-A PC exclusives as a primary mechanism to capture market share and build its user base.
04
Public reception to the exclusivity strategy has been largely critical, with many users labeling the practice as anti-competitive and monopolistic.
05
Sergey Galyonkin, who leads Epic’s publishing strategy, has indicated that the reliance on PC exclusives is intended to be a temporary measure until the store is firmly established.
06
The strategy has faced significant backlash due to the removal of anticipated titles from Steam, with 'Metro Exodus' cited as a prominent example of a game moving to the Epic Games Store.

Summary

The central thesis of this discourse is that Epic Games utilizes platform exclusivity as a strategic tool to challenge the market dominance of Steam, with the potential to abandon this practice if Steam adopts a more favorable revenue-sharing model for developers. Epic Games currently offers developers an 88% revenue share, significantly higher than the standard 70% to 80% tiers provided by Steam. Epic leadership maintains that this competitive pricing is intended to benefit developers, though the strategy has faced substantial criticism from the gaming community, which views the pursuit of high-profile, timed exclusives as an anti-competitive and anti-consumer practice.

The industry landscape in 2019 was defined by this tension, particularly as high-profile titles like Metro Exodus transitioned from Steam to the Epic Games Store. While public sentiment on social media platforms remains largely skeptical, characterizing these moves as monopolistic, internal perspectives from Epic suggest that the current reliance on exclusivity is a temporary measure. The company views these deals as a necessary mechanism to capture market share and establish the Epic Games Store as a viable competitor in the PC digital distribution space.

Ultimately, the sustainability of the current exclusivity model remains contingent on broader market shifts. While Epic Games continues to defend its platform strategy as a means of fostering competition, company representatives have acknowledged that the necessity for such aggressive tactics may diminish once the store achieves a more established position in the industry. The ongoing debate highlights the friction between platform-level competition and consumer expectations regarding game accessibility.