You know how it usually is relatively straightforward to create the alternative to something that already exists and make it better, but the network effect is usually the reason why your alternative will fail?
well, with valve you don’t just have the network effect, but also trying to replicate everything steam does is a giant undertaking. you’ll be looking at several years of work (if you can get a couple dozen employees) just to catch up to where steam is now (or like 5 years ago I guess? :D). and then what? you have a fully functional empty store, congratz.
this is why alternative stores usually just narrowly focus on the store aspect. itch, GOG, and those big publisher launchers like ubi connect, are all basically just ways to buy games without getting valve involved. but their narrow focus also allows them to do something different without having to compete with steam.
I mean obvs there are things valve should improve that most likely aren’t gonna happen without serious competition, but at the same time I don’t think this is gonna happen unless a benevolent billionaire decides to throw their hat into the ring. sadly, benevolent billionaire is a oxymoron.
Yeah, but there’s always that one feature that you love. For me, it’s the accessibility features that devs can list for their game. Makes my life soooo much easier for filtering out games I can’t play due to motor issues.
If a competitor doesn’t have that, I’m not even going to consider them at this point.
Even without the social features there’s still so much you’d need to copy (I think the social stuff might even be the easiest stuff to copy and get right (or do better))
No need to copy everything. Just make a good working and faithful to customers service. Not many do use steam link, family share or workshop. But almost everyone want to be able to see game reviews, buy a game, play with friends, have saves in cloud, share Screenshots and customize their profiles.
None of these features are difficult to reproduce. Considering money that Microslop and EGS have, this should be a 7 days job for a decent team.
Bonus points if anyone of these giant companies dips their toes into Linux gaming and local streaming. If 3rd party devs can do it, why not EGS?
The fall of Epic and Tim are really sad, but at the same time also extremely hilarious to watch. He is so pro AI and yet so completely incapable of using AI to do anything right…
Both GOG and Epic stores are quite full of games. Give developers the chance to sell things, and they’ll take it.
GOG doesn’t have everything since they require DRM-free, but I do most of my indie-game purchases on there. GOG have said in the past that their most-requested feature from developers is “can you make your achievements / social integration just basically exactly the same as Steam, so that it’s easier for us to integrate?”. Means game updates sometimes take longer to arrive, but hey.
Heroic launcher starts faster than Steam, so I’ll grab whatever’s free on Epic that week while waiting for it to load; but fuck giving Tim Sweeney any money obviously. Seems to have quite a variety of stuff, tho.
The problem with displacing a company with established network effects is that simply “just as good” isn’t enough - you need to be much better to start moving people over. And I’m not really clear what “much better than Steam” looks like. They have great Linux support, great workshop integration, regular sales, the forums are well-regulated, and so on.
You can’t compare alternative stores like GOG and Epic directly to Steam though, because of all the additional stuff Steam offers that GOG, Epic, and all those other indie stores can’t replicate.
That’s also why I don’t see those as competition to Steam, and more like enhancements. You can buy you DRM-free game on GOG and enjoy some of the benefits on Steam at the same time.
Thinking about it Epic might have the closest shot what with their whole Fortnite and UE stuff offering a lot of the backbone that Steam offers, but even they bungled it so hard they had to bribe devs for temporary exclusivity.
but also trying to replicate everything steam does is a giant undertaking
I don’t even use that many features of steam, so I don’t think replicating them all is required. Probably starting at the top few and prioritising by usage/request would be enough. Attracting devs and the up-front costs for not just dev but infra is probably the most prohibitive thing.
You might not use that many features, but you can’t know what other users and developers might need. For some, the built in multiplayer and voice system might be a make or break feature, and for others it might be remote play together.
With how many users, developers, and features there are, it’s not enough to start replicating a couple features and promising more later. When is the last time you bought into a promise and weren’t disappointed? If you want to be serious competition, you better give it your all.
I can’t know, of course, but it is possible to start in one area to an MVP to a good chunk of people and add features by requested priority. Trying to do all of it all at once so feels like the wrong approach (with 20 years of software engineering and some project management experience)
I mean we are talking about trying to overthrow THE gaming giant. Smol MVP and expanding from there might be the right approach most of the time, but in this case you run the risk of becoming Epic 2, the store that took several years to add a shopping cart. And in that time where you’re expanding you’re in that awkward space where people would have to use both Steam and your system.
So I think it’s better to come out of the gate swinging. Obvs you should run lots and lots of internal tests, but as soon as you release to the public, you should be able to replace Steam for lots of people.
I could be wrong, but I rarely am :)
You know how it usually is relatively straightforward to create the alternative to something that already exists and make it better, but the network effect is usually the reason why your alternative will fail?
well, with valve you don’t just have the network effect, but also trying to replicate everything steam does is a giant undertaking. you’ll be looking at several years of work (if you can get a couple dozen employees) just to catch up to where steam is now (or like 5 years ago I guess? :D). and then what? you have a fully functional empty store, congratz.
this is why alternative stores usually just narrowly focus on the store aspect. itch, GOG, and those big publisher launchers like ubi connect, are all basically just ways to buy games without getting valve involved. but their narrow focus also allows them to do something different without having to compete with steam.
I mean obvs there are things valve should improve that most likely aren’t gonna happen without serious competition, but at the same time I don’t think this is gonna happen unless a benevolent billionaire decides to throw their hat into the ring. sadly, benevolent billionaire is a oxymoron.
Tbh, a lot of people don’t bother with many of Steam’s additional social features. Some people actively hate those features, seeing them as bloat
Yeah, but there’s always that one feature that you love. For me, it’s the accessibility features that devs can list for their game. Makes my life soooo much easier for filtering out games I can’t play due to motor issues.
If a competitor doesn’t have that, I’m not even going to consider them at this point.
I would call store filters a store feature, not a social feature
Even without the social features there’s still so much you’d need to copy (I think the social stuff might even be the easiest stuff to copy and get right (or do better))
No need to copy everything. Just make a good working and faithful to customers service. Not many do use steam link, family share or workshop. But almost everyone want to be able to see game reviews, buy a game, play with friends, have saves in cloud, share Screenshots and customize their profiles.
None of these features are difficult to reproduce. Considering money that Microslop and EGS have, this should be a 7 days job for a decent team.
Bonus points if anyone of these giant companies dips their toes into Linux gaming and local streaming. If 3rd party devs can do it, why not EGS?
According to Epic you can just vibe-code a competitor now ;P
The fall of Epic and Tim are really sad, but at the same time also extremely hilarious to watch. He is so pro AI and yet so completely incapable of using AI to do anything right…
Ftfy
Both GOG and Epic stores are quite full of games. Give developers the chance to sell things, and they’ll take it.
GOG doesn’t have everything since they require DRM-free, but I do most of my indie-game purchases on there. GOG have said in the past that their most-requested feature from developers is “can you make your achievements / social integration just basically exactly the same as Steam, so that it’s easier for us to integrate?”. Means game updates sometimes take longer to arrive, but hey.
Heroic launcher starts faster than Steam, so I’ll grab whatever’s free on Epic that week while waiting for it to load; but fuck giving Tim Sweeney any money obviously. Seems to have quite a variety of stuff, tho.
The problem with displacing a company with established network effects is that simply “just as good” isn’t enough - you need to be much better to start moving people over. And I’m not really clear what “much better than Steam” looks like. They have great Linux support, great workshop integration, regular sales, the forums are well-regulated, and so on.
You can’t compare alternative stores like GOG and Epic directly to Steam though, because of all the additional stuff Steam offers that GOG, Epic, and all those other indie stores can’t replicate.
That’s also why I don’t see those as competition to Steam, and more like enhancements. You can buy you DRM-free game on GOG and enjoy some of the benefits on Steam at the same time.
Thinking about it Epic might have the closest shot what with their whole Fortnite and UE stuff offering a lot of the backbone that Steam offers, but even they bungled it so hard they had to bribe devs for temporary exclusivity.
I don’t even use that many features of steam, so I don’t think replicating them all is required. Probably starting at the top few and prioritising by usage/request would be enough. Attracting devs and the up-front costs for not just dev but infra is probably the most prohibitive thing.
You might not use that many features, but you can’t know what other users and developers might need. For some, the built in multiplayer and voice system might be a make or break feature, and for others it might be remote play together.
With how many users, developers, and features there are, it’s not enough to start replicating a couple features and promising more later. When is the last time you bought into a promise and weren’t disappointed? If you want to be serious competition, you better give it your all.
I can’t know, of course, but it is possible to start in one area to an MVP to a good chunk of people and add features by requested priority. Trying to do all of it all at once so feels like the wrong approach (with 20 years of software engineering and some project management experience)
I mean we are talking about trying to overthrow THE gaming giant. Smol MVP and expanding from there might be the right approach most of the time, but in this case you run the risk of becoming Epic 2, the store that took several years to add a shopping cart. And in that time where you’re expanding you’re in that awkward space where people would have to use both Steam and your system.
So I think it’s better to come out of the gate swinging. Obvs you should run lots and lots of internal tests, but as soon as you release to the public, you should be able to replace Steam for lots of people.
I could be wrong, but I rarely am :)