Epic Games aims to redefine publishing with best-in-class terms.
Epic games are onto something here. "Full creative freedom and ownership. Developers retain 100% of all intellectual property and full creative control of their work. Fully-funded projects. Epic Games Publishing will cover up to 100% of development costs, from developer salaries to go-to-market expenses such as QA, localization, marketing, and all publishing costs. 50/50 profit sharing. Developers earn a fair share for their work -- once costs are recouped, developers earn at least 50% of all profits." They are ramping up the ammunition against steam. gen DESIGN: The last guardian Playdead: Inside/Limbo Remedy Entertainment: Alan Wake
So if a developer has a big budget and the game flops then the studio is just in the red?
Their costs for developing the game are covered. Epic stands to lose more money in that scenario than the developer.
That still means they owe money to Epic
"That still means they owe money to Epic" "Fully-funded projects." I don't read "funded" as meaning a loan.
The answer can be one! Game like the last guardian coming to pc 💪🏻👍 27995;
"The Last Guardian[a] is an action-adventure game developed by SIE Japan Studio and GenDesign. and published by Sony Interactive Entertainment for the PlayStation 4." Sounds like that might be up to Sony instead of Epic Games. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/... Also this appears to be just a publishing partnership and not an aquisition.
It would be interesting to know whether it is full funding no matter how long it takes or if it is funding to a fixed date and fixed number of dollars.
This is kind of.. well, epic. I'm intrigued to see how this develops.
Epic has some deep pockets. Very cool. Funding new games is always a good thing.
Tencent has deep pockets. You know, the largest game company in the world owned by the PRC.
Tencent is publicly traded and they don't even have a majority stake in Epic. What is your point?
Tencent owns Epic, and yes they have deep pockets. They seem to be China’s push to break into gaming.
"Tencent owns Epic" Actually, Tencent owns 40% of Epic. Tim Sweeney still owns majority of the company.
You actually believe that a company with $494 Billion in market capitalization and a 40% stake isn't controlling Epic games. Okay. https://www.engadget.com/20... "Back in June, Chinese company Tencent Holdings purchased a minority stake in Epic Games, but it turns out that stake is substantial. Tencent snatched up 48.4% of Epic Games shares last year – that comes to around $330 million invested – and even has the right to nominate individuals to Epic Games' board of directors. "Since the Group has the right to nominate directors to the board of Epic Games, Epic Games is accounted for as an associate of the Group." This is all laid out in Tencent Holdings' 2012 financial report, available as a pdf document through the source link below. Epic Games was the second US gaming investment from the Chinese outfit following its acquisition of Riot Games in 2011. Following Tencent's purchase of Epic shares, Epic Games announced it had founded a new studio in Baltimore, saving some Big Huge Games folks from the collapse of 38 Studios to work on Infinity Blade: Dungeons – only for Epic to eventually shutter the studio in February of this year." As fortnite money continues to dwindle you can be sure that the anti-consumer company Epic is going to do exactly what they are told to do. You also think that Tencent is not operating under the control of the PRC. Good luck with that thought process. I guess you think its normal that people from China can become billionaires with out being controlled by the PRC. You think that being publicly traded means not under control of the PRC. Okay ha ha. A free game also does not make you a consumer friendly store. I am not in this for the devs. I am in this as a gamer. Devs that have gone to the Epic store exclusively have benefited players how? Gog and Steam both say, "Sell your game here. If you want to sell it somewhere else that's okay. We do not care." Epic says, "No choice. Sell your game here and only here." No competition for the consumer. No consumer choice. Even developers willing to give revenue to charity are banned from the Epic store unless they go exclusive. So that doesn't say much for Epic being developer friendly either. https://www.pcgamesn.com/da...
@RazzerRedux ^ what Morganfell said about who controls Epic.
"You actually believe that a company with $494 Billion in market capitalization and a 40% stake isn't controlling Epic games. Okay." Wow....somehow 40% is a controlling interest? And somehow market capitalization figures into that equation? lol....okay indeed. None of the information you've provided demonstrates how Tencent has control over Epic at all. "You also think that Tencent is not operating under the control of the PRC." Probably are. I don't care. If I did care about such things then I wouldn't buy consumer electronics products made in China. In other words, I wouldn't buy consumer electronics products. I guess you don't own any at all then. But....what are you typing on again? "You think that being publicly traded means not under control of the PRC. Okay ha ha." lol....it means they are under the control of a lot of people. PRC? Sure....ok, them to. Again, don't care. "Devs that have gone to the Epic store exclusively have benefited players how?" Well, that's a beef I can understand. Why didn't you just go with instead of all the PRC nonsense? 'Epic says, "No choice. Sell your game here and only here."' Oh....that's bullshit and you know it. Stop pretending Epic has a gun to someone's head. These devs have every choice in the decisions they make. They took money to go exclusive to EGS. Yeah....that's the first time that's ever happened in gaming. /s I'm done here. This discussion is pointless
It isn't 40%, that's a typo on my part. Its higher. Also the PRC bit matters. If you can't see that I can't help you. Governments controlling media means they manipulate narratives. It isn't BS. Again, if you can't see that I can't help you. And considering the PRC's history when it comes to media and entertainment control it is dangerous. Devs do not have a choice with Epic. Epic isn't consumer friendly because they do not believe in their store - if they did they would simply be better. And they are not really dev buddies. Think about that. Sell only with us or go somewhere else. That actually isn't dev friendly. For all of the bragging about Epic helping devs this is the central point that works against devs and it matters.
Correcting ignorance so no one else buys this bullshit narrative. "In 2013, well before Fortnite became a global entertainment phenomenon, Tencent acquired a 40 percent ownership in Epic for $330 million. Tencent's gaming portfolio is vast: it completely owns Riot Games, Clash of Clans maker Supercell, and holds a 5 percent interest in Ubisoft." "After the investment in 2013, Sweeney said that "two Tencent representatives joined Epic's board of directors, in addition to the three directors and two observers appointed by Epic." What influence do these representatives have over Epic's decisions? In a back-and-forth on Twitter in February, Sweeney said that the board members "weigh in on discussions and vote as fiduciaries on behalf of the interests of the company," but that Tencent can't "dictate decisions" to Epic. Sweeney is the controlling shareholder of Epic Games, and Tencent is not. " Wait....what did that say? "Sweeney is the controlling shareholder of Epic Games, and Tencent is not. " Yeah....that's what I thought it said. Pretty much exactly what I said. https://www.pcgamer.com/tim... This is a good article for anyone who cares about facts and not whackjob conspiracy theories. "Devs do not have a choice with Epic. " Simply a lie.
"Simply a lie." No it isn't. Anyone believing Sweeney on anything is being played by a greedy charlatan. Also, note page 133, Section 11, Para (a), subpara (iii) http://cdc-tencent-com-1258... "In July 2012, the Group acquired certain equity shares of Epic Games, Inc. (“Epic Games”), representing approximately 48.4% of its then issued share capital, for a cash consideration of USD330,000,000 (equivalent to approximately RMB2,087,217,000). Epic Games is a US incorporated company principally engaged in developing game engine technology, as well as game titles for personal computers, consoles and mobile devices. Since the Group has the right to nominate directors to the board of Epic Games, Epic Games is accounted for as an associate of the Group." That isn't some article. That is an actual financial report. Lying on said report would subject the company to action by the SEC (In the United States) as well as other Exchanges abroad. And so you are clear on Issued Share Capital: https://www.investopedia.co... "Issued Share Capital Issued shares are the shares sold to and held by investors of a company. These investors can include large institutions or individual retail investors." But as far as being unable to tell the truth: "I'm done here. This discussion is pointless" Apparently some people can't keep their word. So I guess Sweeney, all by himself owns at least 48.5% of the company. Really? Do you think the board will side with him or with an entity like tencent? Sweeney said that the board members "weigh in on discussions and vote as fiduciaries on behalf of the interests of the company," Board members, some of whom are appointed by tencent and who know on which side their bread is buttered. Devs do not have a choice. They actually limit their market...severely...by going with Epic. With Epic it is Epic or nothing. That isn't really a choice. With other store fronts it is take it to any other store any other medium you want. That is called choice. Epic store also limits consumer choice. There is no competition, one of the most beneficial factors for the consumer. Epic locks the game to their store. And the so called benefits of Epic's sole control have not been seen in individual titles for consumers.
Here is how a guy phrased it on another forum 'Look what happened last year when the "I don' take orders from tencent" popped up. First of all people say that tencent owns 40% of Epic when tencent's own financial report, which is subject to the legalities of the SEC, states they purchased 48.4%. When Tim was asked if he was the Majority Shareholder, he stated he was the Controlling Shareholder. And this is a very important distinction. When someone then asked, "So you own 51%?" he dodged. His reply was , " A controlling shareholder ... controls the composition of the board of directors ..." is the legal definition and that's the case." Of course he would not answer the next question concerning the two personnel appointed to the board by tencent. But the devil is in the details. A Controlling Shareholder does not need to own the majority of shares to control the company. If other shareholders, including Majority Shareholders or enough Minority Shareholders cede their authority to another Shareholder, that person can be the Controlling Shareholder. And those shareholders on the board can remove that grant of control at any time. Likely it is tencent themselves who ceded to him so they do in fact pull his strings.'
"But as far as being unable to tell the truth: "I'm done here. This discussion is pointless" Apparently some people can't keep their word." lol...I never gave "my word". I changed my mind. I'm not going to let you spread your nonsense unchallenged. As far as Tencent, I'll just refer to the exact same financial document that you just held up as infallible truth. "Associates are all entities over which the group has significant influence BUT NOT CONTROL, generally accompanying a shareholding of between 20% and 50% of the voting rights. " Page 86 Section 2.3 By Tencent's own legal definition of Associate, they do NOT have control. Nothing else you have posted is relevant in this regard. Tencent does not control Epic. Your assertion is flaty proven false. And I'm not going to respond to your other forum poster. I'm going to post the actual back and forth that Tim Sweeney had with Twitter users. A conversation that Tim Sweeney was under NO obligation to engage in whatsoever. https://twitter.com/TimSwee... "Devs do not have a choice. They actually limit their market...severely...by going with Epic. With Epic it is Epic or nothing. " lol....they can choose to NOT take the money and put their game on any store they want! No matter how you try to frame this as the dev being a victim, the simple fact of the matter is that you are failing to even acknowledge that the developer did NOT have to take any deal. It was 100% a choice. That is indisputable fact. Stop lying.
You said you were done. One does not have to say "I give my word". You just become angry and claim to have character and a code until it becomes inconvenient when you are even more upset. You really do not understand the market or how associate companies function. Or Chinese business for that matter. Tim Sweeney was on twitter earlier this month making an ass of himself and getting hammered because he would say things - go look it up and then when asked to support his claims he could not. There is a reason he and his lies have their own subreddit. Epic is the antithesis of consumer freedom. Although I have discussed developer freedom - and Epic is all about limiting that freedom, a control they would not even relinquish for charity - in fact it is the consumer that matters to me. And Epic cuts against choice. Its more hostage taking and no consumer freedom. You are so deadset on protecting a man who is actually harmful for gaming. Laughable. None of the predictions about the Eden that would spring from lower royalties has remotely appeared. Their store remains trash. They built a store to make money for themselves without building one for consumers. They have been browbeaten into every inch of ground they have ceded beginning with refunds. Sweeney actually saw no need for that. I have owned you on one statement after another. From proper share ownership on down the line. So let me educate you and demonstrate how saying what you mean functions, since in that matter you are clueless. I am done with this conversation. See? And I keep my word. An ability with which you are wholly unfamiliar.
"You said you were done. One does not have to say "I give my word". " lol... by that idiotic logic if I say that I'm going to eat cereal for breakfast and but change my mind and eat eggs and bacon then I've broken "my word". What an idiotic notion. Some of us reserve pledges of their "word" to more important stuff than changing ones mind on posting on video game board. lol...you act like I made a solemn vow. Your posts come be summed up with one word: delusional. "You really do not understand the market or how associate companies function. Or Chinese business for that matter." Pathetic response because you cannot refute what was proven. There is no single definition of an "associate company". It can take many forms. Love people like you say shit like "you don't understand" but have the inability to actually explain it. Means they don't know what the hell they are talking about. I gave you the definition of "associate" as it relates to Tencent. Show some integrity and admit you are wrong. By the way, I neglected to point out that the 48.4% purchase of issued share capital is NOT 48.4% of equity. You are pretending that share capital and equity are one and the same. They are not. Tencent owns 40% of Epic equity. So wrong yet again. "Tim Sweeney was on twitter earlier this month making an ass of himself..." Couldn't be any worse than you here. I cut the rest of your rant because you are not adding anything new. Just biased personal view with still nothing showing how devs were forced to take deals their timed exclusivity deals with Epic. Your absolute hate for the company is obvious and ridiculously misguided. So we have established the following: 1) You would stoop to equate "I am done" with a solemn vow or promise because you have become desperate to find something to be right about. But you failed there as well. 2) Tencent does NOT control Epic based Tim Sweeney's statements and Tencent's own definition of their relationship as stated to their own stockholders in the PDF you provided. And Tencent owns 40% of Epic equity. 3) Developers who have taken Epic's deal for timed exclusivity did so of their own will. It was indeed a choice. You been shown to be wrong on all these counts. "I am done with this conversation. See? And I keep my word. An ability with which you are wholly unfamiliar." No...you are bailing on this conversation because I've refuted every single one of your points. Yeah....I know you are pretending it isn't true. That's fine. Enjoy your delusion.
This is an insane deal for devs. Expect to see lots of devs flock to them because of this.
Hopefully not too many, remember Jerry Maguire.
Hopefully we see more of genDes next game soon
That would be awesome
AWESOME!! Super glad to see Remedy and Gen Design get some stability/support, cant wait to see what comes out if this.
So I guess this means Microsoft did not acquire PlayDead.
Ew. Great idea in gereral, but Epic? Ew.
Seems like the best way to go. I don’t know how you pass that up as an indie dev.
I don't trust this.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.