Epic is doubling down on it's exclusivity initiative

[Chazore]

gtotheunit91 said:

True, but the ultimate problem many have is that Tim Sweeney is showing Epic as the "good guys" in this, about "breaking up the monopoly held by Steam" only to hypocritically pay for timed or permanent exclusivity just to not have games on Steam. Like, how anti-consumer and egotistical can you get? Being forced to go to a storefront no one asked for, and not even have anywhere near a complete system in place? Irks me the wrong way.  

Now if Epic bought exclusivity because they're publishing the game, that's a different story, but so few times has that been the case. 

What some on this forum aren't seeing here, is that Epic doesn't want to play underdog, it wants to become the top player in the industry. Just look at how they took on Apple, Google and Steam, yet allying themselves with the likes of Tencent, a mega holdings company, and Sony, a console company, while Epic seemingly ignores MS, their previous partner, but at the same time, wishing for all cuts to match theirs, even though they haven't stated they will hold that cut until the end of time (and we know all companies change their tactics, so that 12% cut will not last indefinitely, just like how EA's "on the house" deal ended after 4 years and we went from free games, to paying a sub fee).

Some here don't care what they do to an open platform, partly because I think some here believe the console motif somehow fits and should replace PC's current operation, which is wrong, because this is not how an open platform is supposed to work, you don't let someone grow in power, abuse the system, closing parts of it off and passive aggressively seeking to dismantle the competition via slander and court cases.