You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
47 points
*

Using dishonest tactics to claw away market share won’t work with gamers. Steam got to where it is by good will, good prices and good features.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

Yeah, making it a requirement for playing your physical copy of Half-Life definitely looks like good will to me.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

And in turn diminished the industry’s piracy problm for many years, making PC Games market a stable ecosystem instead of letting all of PC gaming die.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

No? Cracks were created for that too

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

Steam got to where it is by good will, good prices and good features.

Well, eventually.

When Steam was first released, the running joke was “steaming pile of shit”. It was slow, unreliable and only a couple of shades of green away from the worst color in the world. People complained about the birth of “always online” games and about paying full price but not even getting a box with it.

It’s not exactly unassailable now either. It’s my platform of choice as a user but for indie developers, the 30% cut is brutal and last I used it, the Steamworks SDK was pretty rough. The app itself also has a lot of legacy bloat like a built in MP3 player.

It’s ahead of the rest but I think “good will, good prices and good features” might be an overly romantic take on “it’s where all my games already are”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*

the 30% cut is brutal

This part always confuses me. When Steam started allowing non-Valve games on their storefront, 30% was considered a bargain compared to selling your games at retail. In fact, PC versions of games were often $10 cheaper than their console counterparts specifically because distribution and platform fees were lower. It wasn’t until MW2 came out that PC prices started reflecting console prices.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

It’s confusing to you that manufacturing, shipping, and selling physical copies of a game was more expensive than digital distribution? The world is very different today. Digital distribution is the norm and everybody knows you don’t need 30% to make it sustainable.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Well, eventually.

When Steam was first released, the running joke was

Has anything ever worked perfectly when first released?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Yes, there’s bloat from old features, but there’s also quality tools built into Steam, such as Steam Input and Proton.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Valve is constantly looking for ways to help the customer, just in their own weird ass way. Having linux as a competitive option to windows and being able to refund/return digital games, as well as a built in mod searcher and loader being some of the things they brought to the platform because Valve employees themselves are gamers and want their platform to be useful towards gamers needs

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Refunding/returning digital games is an outcome of a lawsuit if I remember correctly

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I think they do hell the consumer. And agree it’s weird. But would argue against that being their goal with the caveat that what I’m about to say makes no real difference to anything.

I think they’re looking to increase profits first and foremost. However, because they’re not answerable to shareholders, they understand that the best way to do this is by building loyalty and ensuring “stickiness” loyalty. ¹

It’s still about money. They just understand that the safest way to make it is by having a long term view and not burning people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

the 30% cut is brutal

Reportedly Epic’s 12% barely covers costs and would not if they included transaction fees. 20% seems to be the bare minimum if you want a store to actually have good service, and then I’m giving Valve additional credit for sinking boatloads of money into general infrastructure, in the long term Proton alone is worth those 10%. Much unlike the rest of the stores (exception GOG) which take the same 30% and are run by humongous multinationals.

…and then there’s itch.io. If you’re a small and scrappy indie very much an option: They’re also small and scrappy. And they’ll probably shout at you if you try to upload a 20G game I very much doubt their servers would survive an AAA launch. OTOH, reportedly their average revenue split is 8% (customers can choose).

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

The difference is that Steam sells a ton of copies every single day. The vast majority of Valve’s fortune has come from that fee. People jump to defend Steam but it’s already been established by lawsuits against other major corporations that a 30% cut is mostly driven by greed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

I still remember being annoyed I suddenly needed to get a separate app just to continue playing counter strike.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Ah yeah, I was a bit of a hold out going to 1.6, but eventually all the servers started disappearing. That was like ~8 years ago… right?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

“it’s where all my games already are.”

My pet theory is this was realized by epic and so the only reason they give games away is to “help” users build a library they won’t want to “leave behind” for another store platform. Once they reach the market share they were aiming for I fully expect the practice to stop.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Moreover, just like that guy, Epic thinks that’s the only thing that matters, or at least the biggest issue. The idea that gamers might not use them because their service is actually just worse seems to have never crossed their minds in any serious fashion.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

That is their exact strategy…

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

If that was true, EA would have been dead in the water 12 years ago.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Didn’t EA shut down Origin or at least make it optional?

Remember Valve is the company and Steam is the storefront/launcher.

Epic is the company, EGS is the storefront/launcher.

EA is the company, Origin is (was?) the storefront/launcher.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Nope. Star Wars Squadrons (which I got from Epic, BTW) required me to download and install Origin first. I’d be salty as fuck about that if all parties involved hadn’t already guaranteed that it was a game that I was never going to pay for anyway.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

If Mass Effect Legendary Edition actually included ME3’s multiplayer I might’ve considered installing Origin again.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

Didn’t EA shut down Origin or at least make it optional?

Technically no. EA now just calls it “The EA App”

permalink
report
parent
reply

Games

!games@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

Community stats

  • 8.8K

    Monthly active users

  • 4.4K

    Posts

  • 92K

    Comments