SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the Microsoft's-store-cries-quietly-in-the-corner dept.
Following an announcement by Fortnite developer Epic Games that it would create its own PC games store, giving 88% of revenue to developers, Discord has announced that it will give 90% of revenue to developers who sell games on its own store:
Discord is looking to make its fledgling game store the most developer-friendly option around. Today, the company announced that it will offer developers a 90 percent share of revenue when its PC game store opens up to all creators starting next year. The store first launched in October with a heavily curated selection of indie games, including Into the Breach and Dead Cells as well as a handful of timed exclusives. Currently, it operates under a fairly standard 70 / 30 revenue split.
"Turns out, it does not cost 30 percent to distribute games in 2018," Discord CEO Jason Citron explained in a blog post. "After doing some research, we discovered that we can build amazing developer tools, run them, and give developers the majority of the revenue share."
Last week, Fortnite developer Epic launched its own PC games store, which similarly offered a more developer-friendly revenue split, taking just a 12 percent cut of all game sales. Both Epic and Discord are looking to make their digital shops more appealing to developers by offering better terms than the current dominant platform Steam.
Also at TechCrunch, Polygon, and Wccftech.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Murdoc on Monday December 17 2018, @01:50AM
Why does it have to be one or the other? Competition has both its upsides and its downsides. Yes it can provide more choice (in some ways) to the consumer and often (but not always) help keep prices down, but that doesn't mean that these people's complaints aren't legitimate. For an example look at video game consoles; keeping prices down doesn't really help when I have to buy all three expensive consoles just to get all the games I want. Competition is also inefficient, and wasteful of resources. So really while it may sometimes be better for the consumer in the short-term, it brings with it many disadvantages and is an expensive way to mitigate what is really a fundamental flaw in free-markets.