Tim Sweeney Criticizes Steam Again as Epic Games Store Struggles to Challenge Valve's Dominance

Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney and Valve have been at odds for a while now, with Sweeney again criticizing Steam’s dominance in the PC gaming space. Sweeney has been a vocal critic of Valve’s business practices, especially its revenue-sharing model and the ways developers use Steamworks to support their games.

However, his latest comments have generated a lot of attention, with many players wondering if Epic Games is in a position to criticize its biggest rival. The Epic Games Store has been around for several years now as an alternative to Steam but has struggled to achieve the same level of popularity and loyalty from PC gamers.

PC Gamer picked up Sweeney’s most recent comments in a report.

After a conversation with a former principal animation programmer at Epic Games, who was critical of Valve’s 30 percent cut of game sales. They also suggested that developers could employ AI-assisted coding to quickly create an alternative distribution platform. The idea is that services like Cloudflare and other modern development tools can make it easier to build a storefront, and developers are able to keep more of their money.

Sweeney chimed in, saying that Valve has been holding back the gaming industry for years with the way it has approached Steamworks. In particular, he targeted what he called a walled garden, saying developers using Steamworks could find themselves restricted in how they connect their games with players on different platforms.

His comments once more highlighted the relationship between Steam's distribution services and the wider PC gaming ecosystem. However, the criticism also received a community note pointing out that developers can use Steam Datagram Relay and Valve's servers across different platforms, provided their games are distributed through Steam.

The dispute also highlights a problem that has dogged the Epic Games Store since its debut. Sweeney, meanwhile, continues to criticize Valve’s business model, while Epic has had a tough time convincing enough PC gamers to make its storefront their primary place to buy games. The platform initially generated buzz with generous giveaways of free games and exclusive deals, but those efforts haven’t necessarily translated into the kind of long-term customer loyalty Epic would have hoped for.

When the Epic Games Store first opened its doors, the company took a couple of aggressive steps to lure players.

It also gave away free copies of big releases such as Grand Theft Auto 5 and secured temporary or full exclusivity deals on a number of popular games. Notable examples include Hades, Final Fantasy 7 Remake, Metro Exodus, Dead Island 2, and Red Dead Redemption 2. Epic Games also helped fund the development of Alan Wake 2, which launched exclusively through its PC storefront. 

The problem is that simply giving away a game doesn’t provide people a reason to stay with a given storefront. Many players were pleased to grab the free games Epic Games was giving away but then went back to Steam when they wanted to actually buy something or manage their existing libraries.

Similarly, exclusives could create a short-term bump in interest for the platform, but they didn’t create a lasting relationship between  Epic Games and its customers. Another big selling point was that developers would get a larger cut of the revenue, but that didn’t seem to be enough to change people’s purchasing habits in any meaningful way.

Steam has spent years developing an ecosystem that is much more than just selling PC games. With its community features, user reviews, achievements, discussion boards, controller support, and other services, it helped create a familiar environment for players. The platform also provides developers with tools to support multiplayer functionality and other online features. Beating Steam is not just a matter of getting a handful of exclusives or slashing prices as a consequence. 

The Epic Games Store has also faced ongoing criticism on this point. Despite being around for a number of years, the storefront has drawn criticism for lacking features that players have come to expect from Steam.  Epic Games has evolved over the years with new features but has not been able to carve out a successful niche for itself. 

But the revamped storefront reportedly launched with missing functionality.

This situation in turn opened the door for more criticism, particularly because players have been asking Epic to improve its launcher for a long time. Faster loading times and a redesigned interface are welcome, but they don't necessarily solve the bigger concerns surrounding the platform. Players who have used Steam for years aren’t going to switch just because another store opens a little faster. 

Sweeney’s criticism of Steam’s supposed walled garden has also raised questions about  Epic Games’s own track record on exclusive releases. The company has historically depended on exclusivity deals to draw customers, sometimes even blocking PC players from buying certain games on Steam at launch.

An example is Red Dead Redemption 2, which first launched on the Epic Games Store and Rockstar Games Launcher before coming to Steam about two weeks later. While details about any exclusivity deal were not confirmed in the talk, the release strategy illustrated how Epic Games leveraged timed exclusivity to compete with Valve.

Other releases, like Kingdom Hearts, Final Fantasy 7 Remake, and Metro Exodus, helped populate the early Epic Games Store library. While these deals may have provided developers and publishers with additional financial support, they also created situations in which players were forced to use a different storefront to access games they wanted to play. This makes Sweeney’s critique of Valve’s practices a bit hard to distinguish from  Epic Games’s own business practices. Steamworks is not a requirement for developers, but  Epic Games has used exclusivity deals in the past to try and push players away from Steam for certain titles.

Criticizing a platform’s business practices is also different from convincing customers that an alternative is better.

Sweeney has argued that developers need more control over their revenue and distribution options, and that remains a critical discussion for the PC gaming industry. Valve's 30% cut of revenue has long been a point of contention, and developers are right to look for other ways to distribute their wares.

But to build a successful competitor takes more than a different revenue split. But players still need a storefront that delivers a reliable experience and gives them reasons to come back. A platform also needs to build trust with its audience through consistent updates, useful features, and a smooth purchasing process.

The conversation has also highlighted how much the Epic Games Store needs to improve if it wants to be a serious competitor. Epic has been slowly backing away from getting big exclusive releases, with Blades of Fire being one of the more recent examples mentioned in the discussion. The company still gives away games for free, but there are questions about the sustainability of that strategy and whether it provides enough financial value to justify the investment. There is not enough public information from Epic to determine the long-term return on these efforts.

Ultimately, perhaps the biggest issue the Epic Games Store has isn’t Steam, but the lack of a clear identity that distinguishes it from the competition.

Take GOG, for example, which has cultivated a loyal following based on its commitment to DRM-free games and game preservation. That provides players a specific reason to support the platform beyond simply finding another place to purchase PC games. Epic Games, meanwhile, has relied on free giveaways, exclusivity agreements, and a more favorable revenue split for developers, but none of these approaches has established the same level of attachment.

Sweeney's continued criticism of Valve is unlikely to change that situation on its own. Epic Games has to convince players to buy from its store, not just that they should be unhappy with Steam. Until the company addresses the missing features on its platform and builds a stronger identity, its attempts to challenge Valve's position will likely face significant obstacles.

The Epic Games Store has a lot of work to do before it can be a genuinely competitive alternative for developers and players, but it could be. If  Epic Games can address its current shortcomings and offer something genuinely different, it still has an opportunity to build a stronger position in the PC gaming market.