The self-publishing option long announced by Epic is getting closer. The tools required for this are now being tested in a closed beta. This means that the store will soon catch up with Steam in another area. Such an option is of great interest to indie developers.
While Steam has long given independent developers an option to sell their games without a publisher on their own initiative with Steam Direct, Such a possibility is still missing at Epic Games. The beta test is intended to serve as a stress test and to collect feedback in order to improve the necessary tools for developers.
According to the Epic FAQ, participation is not limited to a number of participants; instead, participation is decided on a case-by-case basis. This seems necessary for a test phase in order to filter studios whose games, for example, only consist of purchased asets from the engine marketplaces.
Developers with flexible scheduling would be prioritized for approval, writes Epic, but “many other criteria” are also taken into account. The selected engine is irrelevant for the publication, only crossplay with other online platforms on the PC must be guaranteed. In addition, only rudimentary requirements are made: Games “must start, run and correspond to the information on the product page”.
Alternative to unfair offers
Self-publishing options on established platforms are important for indie developers. This was recently made clear by “jakefriend”, who is working on the Kickstarter-financed action adventure Scrabdackle. On Twitter, the developer published conditions from an offer that a publisher made on his own initiative. This included a six-figure advance payment, but also unilateral penalties with vaguely worded triggers and conditions.
Let's start with the heaviest stuff : If the business invokes the breach of contract clause, here & # 39; s what happens:
– They keep the right to sell the game, and I lose my royalty (so, they keep 100% of revenue)
– I pay them back all money ever given to me, and …& mdash; jakefriend (@jakefriend_dev) August 13, 2021
In the event of a breach of contract, which is “really easy” to trigger, he must pay an unlimited amount for the completion of the game, all amounts received refund and lose the rights to his product. The developer notes that the conditions would make it attractive for the publisher to identify and argue violations of the contractual conditions.
Catch them underpaying you? There's no penalty clause (you're repaid only what was withheld), and you're going to pay for that auditor even if you DO prove fraud. For the Nth time, the exploitation is not just penalty-free but also PROFITABLE if I don & # 39; t opt to gamble that cost.
& mdash; jakefriend (@jakefriend_dev) August 13, 2021
The company protects itself against the opposite case by means of clauses; he just has to do his best. The contract sent to him does not provide for penalties for the publisher. This is also not the case if jakefriend does not receive the share of sales to which he is entitled; it is also up to the developer to pay the necessary auditor in any case. According to the terms of the contract, payments will be made quarterly anyway, with the company allowing itself a further four months after the end of the quarter for the transfer. The publisher also gives himself a say: If the desired features are not built in, he can commission them elsewhere at the developer's expense.
The indie studio OblitusGames confirms via Twitter that this is not an exception. Self-publishing becomes a solution for this situation: There is an alternative in hand for indie studios, provided that the financing of their projects can be secured in another way.