[KapKap55]

Interesting phrasing, as indies aren't getting onto the storefront at all without accepting timed exclusivity. It's not an option that can be taken, it is mandatory to be on the storefront unless you have enough clout to tell Epic to shove it (CDProjekt Red).

That's assuming of course that Epic chooses to accept your game in the first place. My major issue with discussions regarding the EGS is that everyone discussing it talks as if every developer has access to what it's offering, which is not the case even in the slightest.

[ocdtrekkie]

The timed exclusive offering is a great option for indie developers, and the fact that so many have taken it seems to reflect that.

My understanding is that right now Epic's submission pipeline is very manual, there's not a lot of self-servicing. So they are focused on submissions which move the needle the most for Epic: Exclusives, free titles (also available to indies), and then AAA games. I believe they've suggested the wider release of EGS for more developers should be sometime this year.

[mikepurvis]

Maybe not the exclusivity part, but it being a curated platform is very much a win from the consumer's point of view. Being good enough to be on the EGS actually means something in an age when anyone can ship their garbage on Steam or itch.io or any number of smaller storefronts.

[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

Speak for yourself, I happen to like the idea that there isn't some arbitrary gate keeper determining what is and isn't good enough to be on their store. I'll decide what is worth my money thank you very much.

[mikepurvis]

Sure, and Steam exists for that. But that's also why it's clogged with thousands of shovelware GameMaker titles, porn games, and downright scams. Discovery on Steam is completely broken.

The EGS is much more akin to a console ecosystem. You don't have to use it, except perhaps for the occasional exclusive. But lots of people feel that there is value there.