It does, which is the amusing thing. Epic's cut of assets sold through the UE4 Marketplace is 30%.
Funny thing is that they do.
They do?You should've seen what Epic were charging us when everyone and their mothers used UE3.
But GAF tried to convince me that Steam doesn't have an effective monopoly on the Western market for the vast majority of devs.
https://twitter.com/jimrayvaughn/status/898329230206943232
Why are you taking 30% on UE4 marketplace?
But GAF tried to convince me that Steam doesn't have an effective monopoly on the Western market for the vast majority of devs.
Is Steam the most hated service by people that have clearly never even fucking used it on GAF?
e:
It actuallt seems like thats a thing certain GAF members keep trying to push the narrative for when its demonstrably not true
What about GOG?
Of course it's you damage controlling for Steam yet again
So now that we've come to realise the Windows Store is a booming failure we're gonna start attacking Steam instead, eh, Sweeney?
https://twitter.com/TimSweeneyEpic/status/900260093836402688
He's really delusional if he really believes that reducing Valve's share to 10% would result in lower priced games.
Why would making the devices and only selling to them justify a 30% cut on its own?
The thing is Minecraft, Forza, and KI are doing well on there so it's possible for a game to do well on there. I expect Halo 6 will be successful on the store.
It is completely correct that it's ludicrous how much power and dominance of profits that distribution channels hold over entire markets.
People don't need to defend Valve.
Also, just because other services charge the same doesn't excuse the practice.
And, as I'm here, people saying "monopoly" or such should remember:
1) The actual legal bar for monopoly is a lot higher than you think, otherwise action would be taken against, as examples, Amazon in the digital marketplace, and Waterstones and HMV in the physical. All three companies command a majority share of their markets (online sales, bricks-and-mortar book sales, bricks-and-mortar CD/DVD sales respectively).
2) As soon as Steam comes close to becoming a monpoly, you can bet your bottom dollar EA, Activision/Blizzard, MS etc are going to file legal complaints in the US, UK and Europe. If anyone really thinks their legal teams aren't just waiting for the moment, they're not thinking far enough ahead.
Also, just because other services charge the same doesn't excuse the practice.
Of course it's you damage controlling for Steam yet again
Does anyone know how much does GOG take?
Does anyone know how much does GOG take?
Does anyone know how much does GOG take?
Do you have numbers for this ? Because last I heard, Killer Instinct is coming to Steam.
What about GOG?
Does anyone know how much does GOG take?
.30% (Humble's cut is effectively 25% these days, as mentioned earlier).
The only response you can give is hope for better competition.
Did people ever accuse iTunes of having a monopoly on the digital music service?
Last I heard they had 6 million unique players [throughout March] when it launched on the Windows Store.
The sad thing about this 30% standard isn't really Steams monopoly, it's the collusion between all the stores to not undercut it, even companies like MS & Epic, even GOG who are trying to break into the market mysteriously still set their revenue share at 70/30.
Publishers set the prices. So if GOG lowers their cut, the publisher would just pocket the extra money. So since prices are then the same, you will not sell more games, and lowering the cut would be a negative for GOG.The sad thing about this 30% standard isn't really Steams monopoly, it's the collusion between all the stores to not undercut it, even companies like MS & Epic, even GOG who are trying to break into the market mysteriously still set their revenue share at 70/30.
Clearly the thinking is "we could lower the cut, but then if we do well Valve will just lower there's and we'll all just make less money, so stick to 30%"
I think we're headed in the direction of a lower percentage
The sad thing about this 30% standard isn't really Steams monopoly, it's the collusion between all the stores to not undercut it, even companies like MS & Epic, even GOG who are trying to break into the market mysteriously still set their revenue share at 70/30.
Valve is not above criticism. This though is NOT a valid line of it.
It's still completely absurd to me that people are complaining about Valve's supposed monopoly and then arguing they should undercut their competition in the same post.
Shows the level of knowledge about economics and market forces on GAF. While they rail on about monopolies and yet want companies to adopt predatory pricing tactics.
Non-rhetorical question: so cutting the royalty rate is a bad thing for consumers?It's still completely absurd to me that people are complaining about Valve's supposed monopoly and then arguing they should undercut their competition in the same post.
It is completely correct that it's ludicrous how much power and dominance of profits that distribution channels hold over entire markets.
People don't need to defend Valve.
Also, just because other services charge the same doesn't excuse the practice.
But if everyone's taking 30% (include your own storefront) then why single out Steam?
I think 10% is probably not a deal-breaker if it weren't for the other negative of Steam: separating publishers from their users.
The internet was supposed to obsolete the rent-seeking software distribution middlemen, but here's Facebook, Google, Apple, Valve, etc.