Epic Games Store Exclusivity Was A Mistake For Borderlands 3

Following the Metro Exodus debacle, Borderlands 3 just had to go and make things worse with their own Epic Games Store exclusivity.

Read Full Story >>
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
TricksterArrow34d ago

Leaving aside any personal opinion I may have on Epic Store as a whole, I don't really think it was a mistake. The sales are good and I'm pretty sure the exclusivity deal granted Gearbox some cash on the side. Plus, they will most likely eventually release it on other platforms/launchers in the future. Unless it's first party or some random biased decision, exclusives are becoming a thing of the past.

SlagWolf34d ago

Can you give me factual numbers are are you just going by the word of a pathological liar Randy Pickford

Christopher34d ago

Well, I guess if you put up the metric of "ignore the person who has all the figures" there's not much we can say until monthly reports come out. I mean, if Randy gave you numbers and they were correct, would you still believe them?

rainslacker34d ago

So, your just going to say that it's a lie because you dont like gearbox's CEO?

Did he have any reason to lie? Did the metro developer have any reason to say the same thing? What exactly do they gain by lying? Do you think they hope by lying that all the EGS haters will forgive them? Do you think they care about that? I'd say they care more about their investors wanting to know the game did well despite the exclusivity, because I'm sure they may ask, and lying about it would eventually show up on investor reprorts.

C4rnos34d ago (Edited 34d ago )

Don't want to play into the farcical views too much here, but i'd imagine they'd only have good things to say about 'sales' considering what Epic will be paying them for the privilege of that exclusivity; if the cut difference was so important to the majority of developers you'd sooner see a mass exodus rather than a carefully curated library of timed exclusives from EGS.

The investors likely don't care about overall sales as much as overall profit- and that can be accounted for sooner with exclusivity and later again when it arrives on broader platforms that the general consumer is more likely to purchase from.

rainslacker34d ago


If the data is true, and it doesn't appear that EGS causes sales to lower, then it's possible that we will see more games go to the service, regardless of if epic pays an additional fee to make it happen. The extra money made from exclusivity can be had by anyone who follows the requirements, and epic isnt paying all these devs to make this happen.

That extra cut alone is pretty significant, and can make an initial loss from no steam release seem like it won't hurt, and potentially could actually be better in driving profits.

What it comes down to is that the publishers and devs are going to look at the numbers, not the controversy. Some may care more about the goodwill of the vocal minority, but money has this strange effect on business, and investors want a return on their profit before the publishers or devs start making money on a project.

Just the way it is, and EGS is still fairly new to the market. More publishers are testing the waters, and if they keep having success, they arent going to look back and say they should have just stuck with steam with them taking a higher cut.

C4rnos34d ago


I just don't currently see the correlation with the cut providing such a boost when so many games aren't going for that Epic exclusivity just yet- it seems especially odd in the manner all these exclusives work out, Epic don't require any game to go exclusive to gain the extra cut, they just have to use the platform and the Unreal engine.
So, it's clear to me at least that the cut is far less of a factor than the benefits of being financially compensated for being exclusive to begin with.

All in all, it will really depend on how Valve respond to the EGS, a library and legal update to Steam won't solve these ongoing exclusivity issues beyond devs not promising to release on Steam then going exclusive to Epic.

Atom66634d ago


I believe Gearbox is privately owned, so I think those Investor reports are staying on Randy's thumbdrive.

I don't doubt that the concurrent player count is higher than Borderlands 2 like he said, but I also fully expected he would go out of his way to make this EGS deal seem great no matter what after all of his "bitch and whine" comments.

In reality, we'll never know if it was a mistake because we don't know what a Steam launch would have been. I still think it's not a good look for EGS to have Pitchford as an outspoken supporter.

xTonyMontana34d ago

I'd like to hear the actual numbers too. To the best of my knowledge, the whole "sales are great" mentality comes from their double their previous concurrent users which could easily be misleading and just be a reflection of the series increased popularity and profile as opposed to meeting sales targets. Same with the new Metro "our best selling game on PC" was what I recall reading which once again for a lesser known series that is increasing in popularity was probably to be expected. If they don't release actual proper sales statistics, I guess only time will tell just how well they sold with what they do with the sequels.

rainslacker33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

We wouldn't see a sudden mass migration if the numbers supported that sales aren't significantly lessened.

Keep in mind, we're talking a difference between a 30% cut, and a 18% cut, or in some cases a 12% cut. That's a pretty significant difference in revenue when you're talking about a million or more copies. That's about $8 a copy, which is 8 million dollars per million copies sold That means they can take a loss of about 200K copies, and still make the same, but it also sets up a precedence of putting pressure on the competition to lower their rates, so maybe in the long term they can make out better.

It's purely a numbers game, and if the numbers support it, which Epic would be able to provide actual sales to entice publishers, so don't need to rely on random devs to make PR statements, then the move will be through attrition. It wouldn't be a mass exodus, and other things may happen in the mean time. Epic is offering incentive, and in some cases, extra monetary gain by paying an additional up front sum.

As far as not seeing the gamers being reluctant to not use the EGS, we don't know that that this is a significant enough number to make a difference. Millions already have the EGS just because of Fortnite, and the reality is, that despite all the forum complaints about it, most people just don't care. Just like most people don't really care about all the other stuff forum gamers bicker about every day. They just want to play the game, and the only thing preventing them from doing it on PC, would be if they decide not to support EGS.

nucky6433d ago

you really think someone else needs to look up the info for you. by now you should know games are selling just fine on the epic store. here's a story on metro: exodus selling 2 and a half times better than the last metro game did on steam. and no, randy pitchford did NOT write the article below.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 33d ago
TheRealTedCruz34d ago (Edited 34d ago )

Wasn't a mistake? It created a stigma within the PC gaming scene … for a developer already largely disliked due to the man running the show. They say sales are better than ever; but never factored in the fact it's the long awaited third title in a highly loved franchise; showing numbers for one store, in comparison to several.

All they did was add fuel to the fire for pirates. Many WILL go to EPIC store for the game. We're gamers; that's our s**t. I think you'll be surprised at how many will pirate; or hold out for a dirt cheap version on other stores. I'm rather confident this will only break even or, not even hit, Borderlands 2 sales specifically for this move. Talking PC sales, of course.

dumahim33d ago

You know they can get metrics from all the systems, not just PC, right?

Sirk7x33d ago

PC perhaps, but on consoles, damn near every person on my friend list on both Xbox and PS4 are all playing Borderlands 3 right now.

GottaBjimmyb33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

@Cruz "All they did was add fuel to the fire for pirates"

yea, because pirate certainly would stop if only games were on Steam...... And noone pirated games before EGS was available....

Honestly, I just really don't care what launcher is used for the games I want to play, as long as the games work well and the content of the game is not hindered. That said, the constant Steam fanboy whining almost has me rooting for EGS at this point.

EGS is an un-established platform that is relatively new and is adding features by the day, Steam has been around for years and was basically the only option around. Obviously this means Epic will have to incentivize people to use their platform as they would be taking a risk. As they become more established the platform becomes more feature-rich and they offer SUBSTANTIALLY lower fees to the devs, then they will probably take over the market, or Steam will have to reduce their fees in order to compete. It is called competition and the fact that you guys are so opposed to it, and want one big head to just rule the whole industry is pretty sad.

Wolffenblitz33d ago (Edited 33d ago )


It's funny. This argument has been going for a while, and it's tired. But it's evolved now. The prevalent argument now, the words I read the most are "Steam fanboys whining"

The EGS "supporters" are now going on and on about people whining than the people upset about exclusivity.

None of this was about "Just having games on Steam" as you say, considering most people will have Steam, UPlay,, Origin... possibly even the Rockstar Launcer for GTAV, Bethesda Launcher for their games... GOG? There's heaps already. You can't say "Steam fanboy" because that's not what this is about. We already use 4+ launchers.

This all began when a game that was about to be released on multiple launchers, or "platforms" was pulled from them all with money and hidden away on the Epic Game Store.

You say "only option around" when referring to Steam. You're not really adding anything to this argument, only that you seem to be blindly pointing a finger at Steam despite us all using many launchers to buy our games. Instead of giving us a choice, they took it away.

GottaBjimmyb33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

@wolf "This all began when a game that was about to be released on multiple launchers"

Which game and which "multiple launchers?"

I can't wait to hear your answer.

"despite us all using many launchers to buy our games. Instead of giving us a choice, they took it away."

Can you name some steam games that have availability on multiple other launchers? I am sure they exist but are a massive minority, and suspect the titles you list probably aren't going to be very impressive.

You are basically arguing, against every business model in existence, especially within distribution/sales.

Walmart vs kmart vs BJs vs Amazon, etc, for example, all sell products other make, they frequently make deals with manufacturers of the products that only allow sale in that store, for the benefit of better shelf location, marketing, bigger buy-in from store, etc. Not hard to understand.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 33d ago
ndonnine33d ago

Get ready to make all of the turds on n4g angry.

NiteX33d ago

Gearbox saw none of that cash. Randy Pitchford saw some, but the developers sadly did not.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 33d ago
Profchaos34d ago

Sales are good so it wasn't leave emotions aside for a minute and look at it from a business decision

Soileh34d ago

What evidence is there that sales are because of Epic? None at all. If the game was released on Steam it would have sold AT LEAST the same amount as there is no barrier to entry for a PC user having both storefronts. Game sold well in general, not because of Epic.

Profchaos34d ago (Edited 34d ago )

Because of the tweets about the user base for 3 being double the maximum player base of 2 on PC.
So yeah it would have sold regardless that's exactly the point so leave emotions out of it and look at sales it has sold well if that's due to epic or steam it's irrelevant

xTonyMontana33d ago

^^^ the tweet was double the concurrent users logged in, not double the sales or at least the one I saw was. That is potentially misleading and doesn't necessarily reflect on the overall sales. If they came out and said something along the lines of "We've now sold over 1m copies on EGS" then there would be no doubt of how well it sold.

Gahl1k33d ago

The point is not whether games sell on Epic better than Steam. The point is, whatever Steam fanboys are fantasising (games selling a copy or two on Epic) is not true. It shows that many people don't really give a damn where a game is as long as they want to play it.

GottaBjimmyb33d ago

"What evidence is there that sales are because of Epic? None at all. If the game was released on Steam it would have sold AT LEAST the same amount as there is no barrier to entry for a PC user having both storefronts."

Right, so if the sales would be the same, except there is a 12% fee per sale vs 30%, I would say they made a perfectly fine choice no? They would have needed to sell more than double the units, not to mention any value they received by launching on EGS.

Not hard to understand.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 33d ago
ndonnine33d ago

These turds wiritng fake news opinions look like Trump out here lyijf their ass off for clicks.

awdevoftw34d ago

Lol. This article is full of contradictions.

ChrisW34d ago

No it's not!!! Wait... yes it is... UGH!!!

awdevoftw34d ago

Haha. It's a mistake, even though sales are great, and they will eventually be on other stores, but........ reasons.

porkChop34d ago

Borderlands 3 had the most successful PC launch in the franchise history. So no, the Epic exclusivity was not a mistake. I understand that people have issues with Epic. I get it. But so far games like Borderlands 3 and Metro Exodus have far exceeded expectations on PC. So if we're being honest, it's clearly worth the backlash.

Seafort34d ago

There's been no factual numbers released so it was only Randy Pitchford that said numbers were good. Epic pays a portion of the sales of any exclusive game on their store so it's going to be inaccurate no matter what numbers is plucked from thin air.

bamboozle34d ago

refuting an unknown with unknown is not a fact either!

porkChop34d ago

"it was only Randy Pitchford that said numbers were good"

Yes, and considering he's the head of Gearbox he would know better than anybody.

DaDrunkenJester34d ago

So, let me get this straight, you're telling me that if they DIDN'T launch exclusively on Epic Store that they wouldn't have received these record breaking sales? Because if it was on Steam and GOG as well the sales would have tanked and been poo?

It didnt sell super well because BL3 was a long time coming and people really want it?

rainslacker34d ago

I think its saying that the EGS exclusivity hasn't been detrimental to the sales of the game. It's very possible, and even likely it would have done better if it released on steam as well. Same if it also released on a y number of other store fronts. If it was exclusive to the windows store, maybe even people would have brought it there.

DaDrunkenJester34d ago


Exactly, people just want the game so its silly to praise EGS like it was the reason it sold more than previous games. When in reality it would have sold more if it wasn't exclusive.

rainslacker34d ago

Yeah. I can certainly agree that its success wasnt due to EGS. Maybe I misread your comment for my first reply

C4rnos34d ago

Chances are BL3 could have done really well even if Gearbox made their own launcher (that isn't advice by the way, Randy) Metro exodus reports a sales increase and so does Gearbox on Borderlands, the main factor for these great figures is down to the rising popularity of gaming as a whole more than any specific platform.
so yeah, absolutely correct Jester.

porkChop34d ago

"you're telling me that if they DIDN'T launch exclusively on Epic Store that they wouldn't have received these record breaking sales?"

Nowhere did I say that. As rainslacker said, being exclusive to EGS hasn't resulted in lower sales. That was my point. We have at least two high profile games that launched exclusively on EGS that weren't negatively impacted by the exclusivity, despite heavy backlash.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 34d ago
amazingmax734d ago

You do know if it was launched on steam alongside the epic store, no one would of bought it on the epic store right? Only reason it's doing so well (on epic store) is because people want to play it now instead of waiting 6 months.

porkChop34d ago

Ok. Assuming you're correct, what's your point? Either way, being exclusive to EGS didn't result in low sales for the game. Whether it would have sold more on Steam is irrelevant to the point.

Rachel_Alucard34d ago (Edited 34d ago )

The launch of a game is irrelevant nowadays when you are trying to take peoples time and sell add on content to them. Many failures of a game have had amazing launch sales, but failed to keep people playing them after that. The people who were going to buy it regardless have already bought it off EGS and now we'll see how those sales keep up over the next 6 months till the Steam launch. I saw Dragon Age Origins week 1 was slow but as time went on, sales increased over time, whereas Dragon age 2 had an even better launch week then 1, but sales died instead following that.

hengst240433d ago

I believe in sticking to your guns, so it is in Epic's best interest to double down and keep the games and exclusives coming. Bringing the games people want to play consistently, will win out against people being upset in the long run. The question is whether they have the fortitude to outlast the bad press for what they have been doing.

DaDrunkenJester33d ago

But how do you know it hasn't resulted in lower sales? That's what's I'm saying. You're telling me that if it launched on Steam or GOG it wouldn't have sold MORE? You think the sales would be exactly the same regardless?

I'm willing to bet that it would have sold much more without exclusivity.

porkChop33d ago

Again, that's not what I'm saying. I didn't say it wouldn't sell more with more stores. I compared it to previous BL games. It's had the biggest launch. Being exclusive to EGS did not affect that, and did not result in low sales.

DaDrunkenJester33d ago

"Being exclusive to EGS did not affect that, and did not result in low sales."

You're saying it with this statement right here. I'm asking you, how do you know it didnt affect it getting more sales and setting an even higher bar? Yes it still sold more than BL2, but it certainly wasn't because of EGS exclusivity. The reality is being exclusive to EGS DID cause lower sales than it could have gotten.

N1GHT_W0LF_X33d ago

It obviously sold less by being exclusive to EGS but the hard truth is that it didn't completely bomb because of EGS which is what the Steam fanboys wanted to happen. Now the goalpost will move and they'll start saying "well initial numbers don't mean anything and it's all about concurrent players over a period of time" but they'll never admit that the average player doesn't care about exclusivity on a free game launcher no matter how much they cry about it.

Yes, EGS is crap compared to Steam but the effort is what counts because at a certain point Steam will be forced to compete and change its detrimental policies to benefit developers more which is good for all gamers.

porkChop33d ago

Again, I am *NOT* saying the game wouldn't have sold more. I'm saying EGS exclusivity did not result in low sales compared to previous BL games. Which it didn't, the game outsold all previous BL launches. The potential to sell more is irrelevant to the point. Everything I've said is in relation to previous BL games.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 33d ago
Vetalka8334d ago ShowReplies(3)