No it is not, because requesting people to pay another monthly fee vs. downloading another free piece of software are completely different things.
No, because it is not about the launcher, it is about the software library.
It is inconvenient that I have a music library split across iTunes, Amazon, and Google, and those purchases were for a much lower cost than the cost of a game is.
When MS abandoned GFWL, it left a number of titles in an unworking state; not just purchases made directly from MS.
Steam has well over a decade of uninterrupted service to its customers. There is little fear that they will abandon it if its not working out, and the way it is setup is such that even if they
did abandon it for some reason, any title that uses steam CEG is easily bypassed via a 'fake steam' wrapper. That is the reason that third parties add additonal DRM - because it can be bypassed relatively easily once it has released.
The reason more people do not do so, is because using 'fake steam' locks you out of using 'real steam', and the benefits that steam adds via its client are enough that it is not beneficial to do so - cloud saves, friends lists, chat functionality, etc.
So for EGS to be successful
on its own merits - not by bribing people who have the power to determine where a product ends up ignoring customer wishes - it needs to
compete.
It does not currently compete on featureset - ie the benefits seen by a customer as to using that service.
It does not compete on pricing - games are not cheaper to purchase, although Epic widely advertise how the producer makes more money per sale.
So apart from the lack of competition, there is the question of
trust. Videogames cost substantially more to purchase than a digital film or digital album do, and - as in the example with Ms above - when all that you own of a product is the licence to continue using it, you need to
trust that the provider is not going to get bored and give up on it and will allow you that licence to use it indefinitely.
As I stated above; Valve have earned that trust, and they did so at a time when digital purchasing was novel and people were a lot more suspicious of it.
Where's my trust for Epic?
They have lied to consumers about the benefits of using their product.
They have used bribery to force customers purchases, rather than making their product desirable on its own merits.
They have recent history of abandoning products that do not meet their secretive internal goals; Infinity Blade, Paragon, Unreal Tournament 4.
Not only have they not
earnt the trust to assume any purchases made on the EGS will be honoured in perpetuity, they have made active moves to
distrust their long term plans.
You don't throw millions of dollars at products for exclusivity, or putting them on sale without telling the producer you're doing that, or astroturfing campaigns, or weekly free games without an expectation that you are going to make all of that money back (and then some) somewhere else further down the line.