The following page lists some high level features but there's a lot more if you dig in: https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features
Worth noting that Epic's store does not provide most of this. You get what you pay for.
The following page lists some high level features but there's a lot more if you dig in: https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features
Worth noting that Epic's store does not provide most of this. You get what you pay for.
> Worth noting that Epic's store does not provide most of this. You get what you pay for.
Epic has EOS: https://dev.epicgames.com/docs/epic-online-services
And unlike Steam's solution, they're cross-platform aren't tied to being on EGS, meaning it's actually free, not costing you 30%.
> Anyone making games for Steam should make use of those to get the most out of their 30% in fees.
Not necessarily, because that will lock them into Steam. They should be using something like EGS or a 3rd party solution, because currently they end up needing to roll multiple versions of the game.
-
I'm very well aware of Steamworks, but Steamwork's time has passed except for integrating directly with Steam. The features it offered have been completely and utterly commoditized. You've got stuff like PlayFab, Rivet, Photon, Normcore, etc, all taking a hell of a lot less than 30% of your revenue, even at massive scale.
Yes, making games depend on Steam-specific APIs will obviously make it more difficult to publish on other stores. But many games only publish to one store anyway.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think the 30% cut Steam takes is justified, but they take it because the competition isn't there yet.
- A Steam Networking equivalent is part of EOS: https://dev.epicgames.com/docs/game-services/p-2-p
- Epic offers a Steam Inventory equivalent: https://dev.epicgames.com/docs/epic-games-store/services/eco...
> But many games only publish to one store anyway.
Exactly the problem. Why exacerbate it?
> Don't get me wrong, I don't think the 30% cut Steam takes is justified
So then your original comment was just you being contrarian as you said "You get what you pay for." implying Steam is in fact offering what the game creators are paying for :/
Steam Networking is not P2P. It's client-server. Steam also has P2P networking but using P2P networking is a big risk these days when it exposes your players' IP addresses to others. Steam Networking has a sub-feature called Steam Datagram Relay which deals with routing issues and hides player IP addresses.
Steam's inventory service takes this to another level. It's not just microtransactions. Items can be traded with others, can be bought/sold on the marketplace for store credit, etc. The marketplace alone is a significant additional source of revenue for some Steam games because the game gets a cut out of each sale.
I simply meant that you get more out of Steam with it's bigger cut.
And it does this by integrating with XInput and DirectInput. So players who have Steam can use it, and players who don't have Steam can't use it anyways so it's not a loss.
> Peer connections will only ever use relay servers. This will add latency to all connections, but will hide IP Addresses from peers.
https://dev.epicgames.com/docs/en-US/api-ref/enums/eos-e-rel...
You can't have modern P2P without relay servers of some kind for NAT reasons anyways
It feels like you don't really know the tech you're talking about tbh. Steam's inventory system is not something that I'd call a net positive. An unregulated black market that's been tied to gambling and theft is not something most game developers are clamoring for (and that's reflected in how many games actually use the inventory system for anything of note)
The reason Steam gets my money is because the 10ft UX is by far better. It's not just a CDN, it's an experience to play games.