I also like the narratives of continuous game support, easy updates, being able to install games any number of times forever, making a fantastic handheld gaming device that can be hooked up to a TV that is easy to update and modify, convenient ways to communicate and play with friends, reviews, and basically everything except for the forums (which should be moderated by the game publishers).
The only complaints I recall people making about steam are losing their account because they forgot their password and valve being thorough in not just giving it to someone or that easy streaming killed physical games. To be honest, the first sucks but isn’t valve’s fault and the second is just convenience and reliability being more attractive than physical media. I have played and have had continuous access to far more games since steam than prior because I don’t have to manage physical media and the benefits outweigh the negatives of not really owning the games. Everything is a tradeoff, and I chose to get rid of old consoles because they were too much work compared to using online games services like steam.
I also did use several of the other ones in the meme and dropped them because they offered only downloading games and weren’t even very good at that.
They basically take away most of the profit margin of games created by studios. 30% is a huge cut for a virtual storefront. A single medium studios usually employ more people than steam as a whole.
It doesn’t really seem to be publicly verifiable, but if this article is to be believed, then yes.
Would be kind of weird if they wouldn’t either, since selling games is their business too, and they have to compete with Steam / PC.
Whataboutism. The fact that someone is a POS doesn’t justify you being one. But if you really want to compare, they all have major studios under their wing and thousands of employees (sub 300 for steam). Epic also only takes 12%, and GOG let’s you actually own your games, DRM free (your steam library dies with you). I’m not defending any of these stores, just pointing out that steam isn’t the good guy gamers think they are. They care about profit, that’s it, yet any critisism is met with an army of gamers ready to give their life for capitalist selfish business.
That is not a whataboutism. The claim was “30% is a huge cut for a virtual storefront”. The only way to qualify that comparison is to look at other virtual storefronts for games. If you have other cases of comparison to give apart from Sony, MS, and Nintendo, I’m open to look at them. Epic, so far, is a bit of a standout with its pricing.
Epic made it very clear from the start they were trying to undercut Steam, not by being better, but by paying out developers to create exclusive games for the Epic store, something extremely hated on PC. Even on Steam you can still sell your games elsewhere too.
Steam also controls the larger markets share of PC gaming. Of course they’re going to have to price themselves competitively. Because why would you pay more for a platform that has way less users and a bad reputation?
You can actually just pay an almost 0% cut by delivering directly to your customers, but that’s exactly why you use a storefront to sell your game. You go where the customers are, and they are at Steam.
BTW, Sony, MS and Nintendo all suck, but at least they create jobs for devs.
You’re link doesn’t make any sens. It doesn’t change anything, they all have massive studios with thousand of employees, while steam has sub 300 employees.
BTW I ACTUALLY worked with 3 studios in Montreal over the past 15 years. One had a quite successful game but they had to close anyway because they couldn’t secure funding for the following project. Meanwhile steam made hundreds of thousand of the game.
But I get it, you dont care really about games and devs, you care about convenience.
Expect a major enshitification of games because IA shit will soon be the only way to make this industry profitable.
This isn’t really a problem though, more a consideration or trade off. If Valve’s services are worth that 30% cut, because you reach more people or don’t have to make other costs that would dwarf the cut, it’s worth it. Nobody’s forcing companies to sign up with Steam, other than indirectly because it turns out doing so is a sensible deal.
Also there were honeymoon periods for Google, Elon Musk’s companies, even Microsoft during Windows 7.
First you’re grateful for quality product. Then society will force you to be grateful for them giving you “potential job opportunities”, and you must treat some underpaid and infuriating job like it was free money.
Valve does a lot of things pretty badly, it’s just that they and the fans control the narrative.
The narrative of 4 massive sales per year and constant smaller sales in between is prettay great, let me just say.
I also like the narratives of continuous game support, easy updates, being able to install games any number of times forever, making a fantastic handheld gaming device that can be hooked up to a TV that is easy to update and modify, convenient ways to communicate and play with friends, reviews, and basically everything except for the forums (which should be moderated by the game publishers).
The only complaints I recall people making about steam are losing their account because they forgot their password and valve being thorough in not just giving it to someone or that easy streaming killed physical games. To be honest, the first sucks but isn’t valve’s fault and the second is just convenience and reliability being more attractive than physical media. I have played and have had continuous access to far more games since steam than prior because I don’t have to manage physical media and the benefits outweigh the negatives of not really owning the games. Everything is a tradeoff, and I chose to get rid of old consoles because they were too much work compared to using online games services like steam.
I also did use several of the other ones in the meme and dropped them because they offered only downloading games and weren’t even very good at that.
Those sales are on the devs.
Whoever they’re on, I like 'em.
Then be grateful for the devs, not the platform!
ur right, ever since steam came out, games have been getting less expensive
Apart from running gambling for children (pretty hefty thing to put aside, but still), what do you mean?
They basically take away most of the profit margin of games created by studios. 30% is a huge cut for a virtual storefront. A single medium studios usually employ more people than steam as a whole.
Don’t Sony, MS and Nintendo take the same 30% cut from third-party games sold on their platforms?
It doesn’t really seem to be publicly verifiable, but if this article is to be believed, then yes. Would be kind of weird if they wouldn’t either, since selling games is their business too, and they have to compete with Steam / PC.
Whataboutism. The fact that someone is a POS doesn’t justify you being one. But if you really want to compare, they all have major studios under their wing and thousands of employees (sub 300 for steam). Epic also only takes 12%, and GOG let’s you actually own your games, DRM free (your steam library dies with you). I’m not defending any of these stores, just pointing out that steam isn’t the good guy gamers think they are. They care about profit, that’s it, yet any critisism is met with an army of gamers ready to give their life for capitalist selfish business.
That is not a whataboutism. The claim was “30% is a huge cut for a virtual storefront”. The only way to qualify that comparison is to look at other virtual storefronts for games. If you have other cases of comparison to give apart from Sony, MS, and Nintendo, I’m open to look at them. Epic, so far, is a bit of a standout with its pricing.
Yeah let’s ignore Epic, just because .
And let’s also ignore the kid gambling epidemic created by Valve.
And let’s ignore the fact that you don’t own your steam games, but send death treath to Ubisoft if they say the same.
BTW, Sony, MS and Nintendo all suck, but at least they create jobs for devs.
Epic made it very clear from the start they were trying to undercut Steam, not by being better, but by paying out developers to create exclusive games for the Epic store, something extremely hated on PC. Even on Steam you can still sell your games elsewhere too.
Steam also controls the larger markets share of PC gaming. Of course they’re going to have to price themselves competitively. Because why would you pay more for a platform that has way less users and a bad reputation?
You can actually just pay an almost 0% cut by delivering directly to your customers, but that’s exactly why you use a storefront to sell your game. You go where the customers are, and they are at Steam.
Let's ask actual developers.
source
You’re link doesn’t make any sens. It doesn’t change anything, they all have massive studios with thousand of employees, while steam has sub 300 employees.
BTW I ACTUALLY worked with 3 studios in Montreal over the past 15 years. One had a quite successful game but they had to close anyway because they couldn’t secure funding for the following project. Meanwhile steam made hundreds of thousand of the game.
But I get it, you dont care really about games and devs, you care about convenience. Expect a major enshitification of games because IA shit will soon be the only way to make this industry profitable.
This isn’t really a problem though, more a consideration or trade off. If Valve’s services are worth that 30% cut, because you reach more people or don’t have to make other costs that would dwarf the cut, it’s worth it. Nobody’s forcing companies to sign up with Steam, other than indirectly because it turns out doing so is a sensible deal.
What are you talking about?
The Conspiracy
Allowing and Promoting child gambling for example.
They are still way better than the other megacorps but they also have some skelletons in their closet.
Also there were honeymoon periods for Google, Elon Musk’s companies, even Microsoft during Windows 7.
First you’re grateful for quality product. Then society will force you to be grateful for them giving you “potential job opportunities”, and you must treat some underpaid and infuriating job like it was free money.
That singular example is certainly valid. Is there anything else?