Epic Games is challenging a prominent industry narrative about its digital storefront with fresh performance data. The company argues that player engagement and spending on third-party titles have reached historic highs in 2025. This update directly addresses recent skepticism from market analysts who questioned the platform's long-term viability against competitors. Readers tracking PC gaming market share will find these figures relevant to understanding the current competitive landscape.
Record player hours and spending figures prompt market research firm to clarify previous analyst statements
The core of Epic's rebuttal centers on two specific metrics reported for the 2025 calendar year. The company states that players accumulated a record 2.78 billion hours playing third-party games on the Epic Games Store. Additionally, player spending on these third-party PC games increased by 57 percent to reach an all-time record of $400 million. Epic Games presented these figures to demonstrate that the store is expanding its user base and revenue from external titles.
Newzoo, the market research firm behind the original commentary, issued a formal disclaimer regarding its analyst's previous statements. Emmanuel Rosier, a Newzoo analyst, had previously suggested that the Epic Games Store could not recover against Steam and should focus on Fortnite development. Newzoo clarified that Rosier's remarks were not supported by their internal data or analysis. The firm explicitly stated that these comments should not be treated as an official Newzoo market assessment.
This exchange highlights a divergence between external analyst opinions and internal corporate performance data. Epic Games continues to position the Epic Games Store as a growing platform for third-party developers and players. The store's strategy appears to be gaining traction in terms of user hours and direct spending despite earlier industry doubts. The situation remains a point of discussion for observers monitoring the PC gaming distribution market.
Source: NotebookCheck




Discussion
0 comments