You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
-31 points

Do you think you would get the same buggy mess if every single publisher had 30% more budget to work with?

What actually doesn’t benefit you is the hundreds of millions being accumulated in gabbens bank account.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

I’m totally cool with just downloading it from their website. Or they could send me a flash drive. Wasn’t Steam originally the cheaper, easier option instead of designing a box and writing a bunch of disks?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

No, the problem steam was originally created to solve was distributing updates for pc games. Before steam getting updates meant visiting shitty dev websites or ad farms that also hosted update files and manually patching your game.

It was awful.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

That’s literally when I did most of my PC gaming. What was even wrong with visiting a website to download a patch? It was way more convenient to update at your own leisure instead of having to log onto a service that would randomly install updates every week before you could even start the game up like nowadays.

You could even save the patches locally and when you had to reformat Windows, you could have your games installing before you even had the internet back up, hah.

There was literally nothing wrong with downloading updates from a “shitty dev website” because they worked just fine and the worst thing you had to do was decide whether you wanted to run the install wizard or not lol

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points
*

Do you think you would get the same buggy mess if every single publisher had 30% more budget to work with?

Yes, 1000%.

Games are buggy because developers/publishers/players don’t care. Money has nothing to do with it and if they had more money, they would just pocket it and release garbage for people like you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

Money has nothing to do with it

While I agree with everything else, I think it’s the opposite of this, money has everything to do with it. If people stopped preordering and buying day 1 every AAA game, they would rethink their strategy, but since money keeps coming the don’t need to change much.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Yes, the issue is the low standards.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

We are the problem

I absolutely agree. Customers are just endorphin (dopamine?) riddled animals waiting for the next opportunity for expenditure to drop.

I’m not even joking, this is the problem with pretty much everything. If we could pace ourselves, the world would look very different, but we just can’t stop consuming. I have colleagues who kill boredom with shopping.

Anti Commercial-AI license

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Shareholders always want more money, i.e. as much money as is extractable from the consumer. So yes, I think companies would still invest as little as possible to make a game profitable, even if that leads to bugs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

“There’s this flaw with capitalism.”

“No no, it’s a feature!”

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Steam, GameStop, Toys-R-Us, Walmart… Someone always makes a profit on selling games, or any products - even digital. Steam has not reinvented the wheel here. It’s not a new concept. Are you arguing that the idea of stores should be eliminated?

In return, the game is more likely to be seen, just like placing a product in a real store where people walk by it. It also gets advertised, reviewed, has another community outlet, and Steam uses their own servers and bandwidth to distribute it.

It’s not a bad deal for the devs and publishers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I’m mostly tired of seeing huge soft monopolies being defended. Whatever competition they have doesn’t actually compete with them. They lock people into their ecosystem just as much as Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony do.

And just like other shady companies like Walmart and Amazon, they should be regulated to death, or something. But not defended and treated like some gold furred lamb. Everytime a post pops up, dozens jump over themselves making excuses for Gaben.

Replace steam with Amazon and reread the thread and my point of view might be better understood. I don’t understand the veneration, they use and sell our data, they kill competition, they do all the bad stuff. They just have a better pr team and realized they could leverage Foss to save on OS dev costs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

We have plenty of examples of this.

No Man’s Sky came out to much fanfare, and was kind of shit. They took their massive profits (of which a significant chunk went to distributors, publishers, etc., just like back when physical copies were the norm) and used them to transform their initial offering into something that was far more like their vision than the original product.

Minecraft also followed this paradigm for a very long time.

Now, how many very successful game developers just took the money and ran? A lot? Yeah, a lot. The simple fact is not many companies are willing to spend already-earned profits for a fraction more sales.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Do you think you would get the same buggy mess if every single publisher had 30% more budget to work with?

Has capitalism given you cause to think otherwise thus far?

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

i mean, games launched on epic arent perfect either… and devs get much more of a cut, and a bonus if its unreal engine.

FF7R for example ran poorly, stutters in directx modes due to a poor implementation of shader compilation and these bugs STILL exist in the game today last ive seen.

the developer didnt take a 30% cut for the game, being epic exclusive and being unreal means the oppisite, they got PAID and still released a buggy POS.

its a fallacy to assume if a dev had 30% more budget that a game would be bug free.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

i think if steam took 0%, the number of bugs in larger games would remain completly unchanged.

It might help the smaller devs, but not the big games.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I think you severely underestimate the cost of hosting servers for ~46.000 Games, across 9 regions, in 190 countries, with 500Mbit download speeds. On top of that billions of screenshots, trillions of lines of text, customer service, development of new features and hardware, etc.

Valve has an est. revenue (not profit) of roughly $10 Billion this year. Tencent Games has an est. $85. How is Steam even remotely considered to be a monopoly in gaming?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

In fact I do think that, but it’s not like I’m arguing in the interest of his bank account either; I don’t see this directly affecting me, so I don’t care.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points

It’s affecting you because of a loss of quality in the product you are receiving, a loss directly caused by greedy middle men you are here defending.

The amount of companies being taxed by Gaben, Microsoft and Sony is vaste and not many of them would just take the 30% and run. There’s a lot of indie and medium sized companies that are barely making it.

You can plug your ears all you want, it is affecting you and you are boot licking for pretending it isn’t. Gaben isn’t your friend even though he probably spends a lot of money trying to make you think he is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Again, I’m not defending Gaben. If you think I’m a bootlicker, you can lick my ass. As stated, I don’t agree that it affects the quality of the product to the extent you’re suggesting, and going “well, it does” isn’t going to change my opinion.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The inverse of 70% is not 130%

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

It’s weird to me how people(are they?) here bend over backwards to defend a monopolistic drm platform like steam.

I get gamers like their games. But come on.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

I think it’s because there’s no real competition and nobody wants to be buying DVDs (blu-rays?) nowadays.

Consider that the only other storefront that treats its’ users with any sort of dignity is GoG and many major publishers would rather avoid it because it has a policy of being DRM free, so you lose out on a lot of games by sticking to GoG for everything.

You’re left with Steam, Epic Games Store, and some other platforms nobody’s ever heard of. Epic Games’ policy is “we don’t need a better store interface because it doesn’t affect sales” and “there’s no need to support Linux, nobody uses it”. Steam has a good-enough UI and not only supports Linux for Linux-native games, but also integrates Proton (which Valve also develops) so you can play Windows games on Linux.

Sure Epic will take less of a cut from publishers, but I’ll have an inferior experience and probably pay the same.

permalink
report
parent
reply

PC Gaming

!pcgaming@lemmy.ca

Create post

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

Community stats

  • 4.9K

    Monthly active users

  • 3.4K

    Posts

  • 19K

    Comments