logoalt Hacker News

LiamhCryptokeystoday at 7:55 PM3 repliesview on HN

The Valve comparison is apt. The difference is Valve built Steam as infrastructure first, then quietly stepped back from games. Epic did it backwards — they built the game first, then tried to force the infrastructure (EGS) into existence with money. Much harder to do it that way.


Replies

adrian17today at 8:47 PM

> Epic did it backwards — they built the game first, then tried to force the infrastructure (EGS) into existence with money.

Didn't Valve push Steam through HL2? It's a different kind of forcing of course, but still.

darkteflontoday at 8:00 PM

I remember when Steam was just something I had to crack to play HL2 as a broke uni student. In the intervening decades I’ve shelled out for over 500 games on Gabe’s little experiment. Wild.

modelesstoday at 8:09 PM

Valve built more games than Epic in the past 10 years. Epic essentially only released Robo Recall and Fortnite + extra content, plus a spinoff of Rocket League which was an acquisition. Valve released a couple of duds (Artifact, Dota Underlords) but also some good games: Half-Life: Alyx, Counter-Strike 2, and Deadlock. They also did "The Lab" and "Aperture Desk Job" which, while not full games, were quite good as demos for their hardware.