Support NeoGAF

[Kevin]

People will complain for a week or two then go back to buying their games. Companies know and expect this as it's what always happens.

If this wasn't the case then EA would have reversed course and went back to releasing their games on Steam.

Yeah maybe a handful of people will "fight the system" and not purchase the games but Bethesda knows that 99% of these people complaining will give in and support their platform.

It sucks but it's the trend. Companies don't want to have to lose 30% (or whatever the Valve Steam cut is) on games that they develop when they can get the full 100% profit on their own platforms.

I predict that Steam will eventually be nothing but an Indie platform in a few years from now. I've used Steam since beta and have really enjoyed the service but publishers no longer want to support the platform. It might be time for Valve to either lower the percentage charge and attempt to win back some of these publishers or eventually see Steam begin to go down hill in the long run.

 

[Shin-chan]

I think the writing has been on the wall in terms of the long term future of PC gaming since EA and Ubisoft decided they'd prefer not to give Steam a slice of the pie.

If a publisher has a large enough PC portfolio expect a storefront to sell you these games within the next 5 years. Whether they do an EA and remove them from Steam altogether who knows, but I can definitely see the Ubisoft model being the norm for Steam games in the near future.

That Microsoft of all publishers (who have next to zero PC gaming presence for the last decade) has even tried to capitalise on this should tell you just how much is in it for other publishers who are already well established.

Edit: an interesting thing to consider will be Valves response to this. They clearly don't make many games anymore and have revenue driven from f2p and platform royalties, which kind of feed into each other. Do they make more games? Do they provide more incentives to keep publishers using Steamworks? I think it will be slow but they will see some impact from this kind of development and how it progresses.

 

[Ludens]

I really have to wonder about the analysis that goes into the decision to launch one of these. Can anyone make a convincing case that uPlay has been a worthwhile endeavor for Ubi once you account for opportunity cost?

The analysis is: less 30% cut to Steam.

 

[DocSeuss]

Um where is Desura? And the Windows 10 Store?

Desura is dead

 

[Nabbis]

The analysis is: less 30% cut to Steam.

Let's be honest. Corporate culture is filled with assholes that would make this into a reality even if steam only took a 1% cut.

 

[Synth]

What I always wondered about is why these third party launchers don't interface with the Steam authentication API to give you a basically one click option to create an account in their system directly tied to your Steam account and then never have to bother with their launcher again by having it automatically log in when accessing it through Steam. That would at least make them less of a hassle if you bought their game through Steam.

Because then they wouldn't have bothered making a launcher at all.

 

[charlequin]

Oh god fucking dammit, haven't I got enough of these clients already?!

Just taking a look here, it seems I have Steam, battle.net, Origin, and GOG Galaxy (plus uPlay that I don't let start with Windows.)

I think they look at the long term potential benefits. They don't see the reason to pay 30% to Valve on each sale when they could start their own service, sure they'll have a smaller amount of sales in the short term if they keep there games exclusively to that platform but eventually in the long term they could potentially make more money since they are getting 100% profit as the amount of users grow.

This is in most cases very poorly quantified aspirational thinking. It's certainly possible for some set of publishers to make more by going exclusive to their own storefront, but also certainly impossible for every publisher to do so. When Blizzard can do this, it's because they have a pre-existing player network and a bunch of enormous, evergreen, network-oriented games. When EA can do it, it's because they have a deep bench of huge PC games, many of them online-oriented, with a big range of target markets (from The Sims to Battlefield), all of which are heavily and effectively monetized with high-attach DLC. Bethesda has a much smaller overall set of titles, only a couple of which are enormous (and those are intensely single-player-oriented titles.) For them, giving up effectively 100% of catalog sales and taking a top-line hit on those big games is going to soak up most if not all of that 30%, even before you consider the not-inconsiderable costs of architecting, building, and maintaining the service itself.

The analysis is: less 30% cut to Steam.

That's not an analysis. I know that these decisions are made by idiot sales executives who topped out at grade school math, I'm not interested in re-verifying that. What's actually potentially interesting is the full line business analysis: costs to develop, lost sales due to storefront placement, etc. etc.

 

[Vuze]

I couldn't care less about 95% of their games but I really don't want this to become a uPlay situation where you have to install the PoS launcher to play even if you bought the game through Steam. Assuming they won't pull their games in the first place...

If it's just a client used for retail key activation and the Steam version remains independant from it, whatever.

 

[Jibbajabbawockky]

Oh come on Bethesda.


Its bad enough that I try to fire up Fallout 4 for the first time since Decemeber to try and play it and it straight up doesn't launch at all anymore.

I understand all these publishers wanting their own storefront and their own client. But fracturing the PC gaming space like this just kind of cuts down on the visibility of certain games. When I'm going on Steam, I'm looking through my wishlist or seeing what's on sale. I rarely ever fire up Origin unless I'm playing a very specific game, that I probably already have a Steam shortcut to anyway. 9 times out of 10, all these extra launchers and clients are just an extra pain in the ass.

And with Bethesda in charge of this one I don't even want to imagine all the extra technical headaches it would likely entail if they ever made their games exclusive to it.

 

[FataIChoice]

I really don't want another damn launcher and I feel this exists for Bethesda to have a seperate platform to relaunch paid mods, something that cuts Valve out of their share of each sale.

 

[nOoblet16]

I don't mind origin because it is good now but the biggest thing about it is that you don't find EA games anywhere else and that alone makes it important.


With uplay, I don't see the importance because their games are available outside of the platform and yet will require uplay regardless of it. If Bethesda does the same thing here then that's unnecessary.

 

[charlequin]

CRM program. Huge retention and remarketing program. You don't make the money selling games on it, you make the money RE-targeting users in the database to up sell them on future games and DLC. You learn a shit ton about your users too through cookieing and behavior analysis of their web usage, to build models for programmatic media targeting. It's efficient. It's why everyone has one, and most companies do.

I'm skeptical of the scope of real returns on this for most game publishers, but this is a good point of a factor that isn't covered in the facile 70-percent analysis, so thanks.

 

[funkystudent]

Surprised Activision hasn't done this yet for COD and their other non Blizzard games.

 

[8-Bit Sunset]

uPlay is the greatest ever.

You monster!

 

[Vital Tundra]

So glad there is an all in one client being worked on.

 

[Urthor]

I mean this was pretty inevitable.


Zeni-Max has been building their portfolio beyond Elder Scrolls for years and years now, and as everyone has pointed out, the fact is no matter how shitty the launcher is, +30% revenue from cutting out Steam is still +30% from cutting out Steam. This was so obv part of Zeni's long term strategy, it's aligning Elder Scrolls Online and Doom with Dishonored and BGS' regular productions. Elder Scrolls Legends as well, although judging by the interface design my advanced business analysis skills say that game is destined to be a flop simply because holy shit that's a lot of the colour brown, and that will turn off infinite consumers used to Hearthstone having an absolutely perfect UI.

That is the nature of the business at the end of the day. Not to mention the success Blizzard had from cross marketing Hearthstone and Heroes of the Storm (even though it wasn't a success, would it have succeeded without it?). Steam's success itself is built on it being an advertising platform at the end of the day, devs don't pay 30% for the overlay, they pay 30% because every single Steam game gets shown to 100k free steam users on the big banner on the front page, and if the game can generate click throughs and sales Valve will keep showing it ad nauseum.

The fact is no matter how shitty the launcher is from the end user, for the business this is SO stacked, I'm actually shocked they didn't do this for FO4.



Gaf needs to stop thinking like customers ordering figurines from Amazon and get back to its roots dissecting financial statements and leaking sales figures. Emphasise with the position of the developers and the suits.

From a fan based perspective, it can potentially bring back paid mods, which I personally support because the creators of Falksaar/Wyrmstooth/Enderal/The Lost Spires/Tears of the Fiend/Kvatch reborn and others deserve to make money off their work, that isn't at Valve's ridiculous margin for skins.

 

[iNvid02]

I really have to wonder about the analysis that goes into the decision to launch one of these. Can anyone make a convincing case that uPlay has been a worthwhile endeavor for Ubi once you account for opportunity cost?

its probably a combination of benefits they perceive they get from doing this now - absolute control, greater independence from another corporation, additional or more detailed metrics and user analysis, 30% cut, improvement/experience with their own infrastructure, end user familiarity with the service, and most importantly the ability to more smoothly flip the switch and push everything through their own service whenever they feel its time

they are getting all the benefits with being on steam etc in addition to the above, these are long-term plans and could fall either way, but i dont find it too difficult to see some of the reasoning behind these decisions

 

[Imperfected]

I already have a Bethesda games launcher.

It's called the Nexus Mod Manager.

 

[Nyoro SF]

It must be working for other publishers otherwise they wouldn't keep going for it and sticking with it.... at least that's how I see it from a first glance.

 

[Mivey]

Everyone should try Trion Glyph*

*recommended by leading dermatologists.

 

[Linkark07]

So will the users mod this launcher to make it run flawlessly?

 

[L.O.R.D]

Soon,Capcom client for their games.
Resident Evil 7 is exclusive to them.

SE launcher for FF XV.

 

[Basileus777]

What I always wondered about is why these third party launchers don't interface with the Steam authentication API to give you a basically one click option to create an account in their system directly tied to your Steam account and then never have to bother with their launcher again by having it automatically log in when accessing it through Steam. That would at least make them less of a hassle if you bought their game through Steam.

Didn't Valve scrap that API to the ire of many? It's why the humble store had to change how they give out keys.

 

[exmachina64]

Hahaha, no.

No, Bethesda.

 

[Trojita]

That poll is a trap.

 

[Nzyme32]

Soon we're gonna have to use 4 or 5 launchers instead of just Steam

...which is already the case for quite a lot of the major games. Sure these are independent to Steam in most cases.

Origin
Battle.Net
Uplay
GOG
Epic Games Launcher
Nexon Games Launcher
Rockstar Social Club

These are all pretty damn popular - or rather used a lot out of necessity.

 

[SSPssp]

I hope itch.io comes out with a client now. Would be nice to have a client to +1 my greenlight games to. Poor Desura.

 

[8-Bit Sunset]

These are all pretty damn popular - or rather used a lot out of necessity.

Which is a nicer way of saying they are forced onto the user

 

[Sesha]

Soon,Capcom client for their games.
Resident Evil 7 is exclusive to them.

SE launcher for FF XV.

RE.net already exists, so it wouldn't surprise me.

 

[Netherscourge]

Not surprised.

Every major publisher will do this soon.

They save the 30% Steam charges them.

Steam will soon become an Indie-only platform.

 

[Demoskinos]

stuff like this is why I hate PC gaming. You have to have 30 different accounts and 20 different launchers now days for stuff.

 

[Apathy]

Bethesda must be tired of only getting 70%.

Well if they force me to go through this with no alternative they can get 0% of my money

 

[Composer]

Oh wow this is pretty crazy. I don't mind it to be honest. More options and competition is always a good thing. Steam has had it easy for too long.

Spoiler

Gog rules, steam drools

 

[SirMossyBloke]

So glad there is an all in one client being worked on.

But that's yet another client you'll need to run, and the games you run from it will also need to launch its original client.

It's a nice all in one idea, but it doesn't help the situation.

 

[Caronte]

I won't use it but I don't see more competition for Steam as a bad thing.

 

[SatelliteOfLove]

By having a launcher, you have complete control over the user and the experience.

You also don't compete directly with your retail partners by setting up a store that literally does nothing other than sell keys.

And once that control is established, you can utilize the business intelligence that goes along with tracking usage, building databases of customers which includes identifying, profiling and targeting users of different levels and then marketing to these people directly.

So yeah, it is about margin and revenues. There is literally no other reason to invest in the infrastructure and people to set it up.

EDIT: what Harker says.

Yup. If you ain't seeing the walled gardens being built around you, and noticing how little it benefits you, it's too late.

Also: can they aim lower than the Uplay shitshow? Tune in next time, gentle listeners.

 

[Bizzquik]

Paid Mods incoming.

Gotta be. I bet they justify it by saying they'll split the money made with the mod creator ("50/50").

 

[elelunicy]

Good. The more publishers start to have their own clients the better. I'm tired of all these "no Steam no buy" crowd.

 

[-shadow-]

Honestly the only thing that came to mind. With how stable their software is I have absolutely no faith in this.

 

[MUnited83]

Not surprised.

Every major publisher will do this soon.

They save the 30% Steam charges them.

Steam will soon become an Indie-only platform.

Again, this makes no sense whatsoever. The only publisher to leave Steam so far was EA, and Bethesda sure isn't going to leave Steam. Só the 30% argument continues to be complete BS, because 1: the games will still be sold on Steam, and 2: you can already set up a Store a sell Steam keys for your games and get 100% of the revenue.

Steam will never ever be a "indie only platform" . want proof? Go check GTA V's sales on Steam.

I won't use it but I don't see more competition for Steam as a bad thing.

For that they would have to engage in actual competition .

 

[John Kowalski]

pls

 

[Caffeine]

Surprised Activision hasn't done this yet for COD and their other non Blizzard games.

I always thought they would move to battle.net around AW's release lol

 

[jblank83]

What's your favorite PC game launcher client/store?

Where's "none of the above"?

 

[Skii]

Publishers need to realise that the only worthwhile launchers out there are Steam and GOG. The rest are just shambolic. Awful UIs, restrictions and generally hinder performance or ease of use.

 

[Zojirushi]

Behold the brave new world guys, every fucking publisher has its own launcher and store with exclusive games. My task bar ain't ready for this.

 

[OmegaDL50]

Was it brought up in this thread that Bethesda.net is how the console version of Fallout 4 accesses mods and how modders upload thier mods for the console versions of Fallout 4?

It's not like PS4 or XB1 version of Fallout 4 can obtain their stuff from the Nexus.

Also the PS4 and XB1 wouldn't use Steam Workshop either because the PS4 and XB1 versions of Fallout 4 don't use Steam.

Bethesda.net is Bethesda's solution as a centeralized database for mods to be uploaded to and accessed through the built-in mod manager for the console versions of Fallout 4.

As much as people want to ponder the ramifications of this on PC, what other solution was Bethesda going to use without making an individual storefront on PSN and XBL. A centralized shared database works in this sense.

 

[Timeless]

Customers must be really ambivalent about non-Steam stores. Or those that are against the many stores are outweighed by the remaining 30% Bethesda can pick up.

But how much of that extra income goes straight into maintaining the store?

I want there to be at least two good PC stores. There's room for a company to compete against Valve, especially its terrible support and public relations. If EA, Bethesda, Ubisoft, etc. all joined forces, they could make a great store on par with the Steam program and store.

Instead it's a bunch of shitty ones. Origin is okay, UPlay is pretty awful, and the rest just go down from there? Maybe Battle.Net is okay, but I haven't had great experiences with it. UI looks nice. Its EXE always disappears from my start menu. I never have that problem with others.

 

[Deleted member 325805]

Pisses me off when I buy a game on Steam and I still need to use uPlay.

 

[jblank83]

Instead it's a bunch of shitty ones. Origin is okay, UPlay is pretty awful, and the rest just go down from there? Maybe Battle.Net is okay, but I haven't had great experiences with it. UI looks nice. Its EXE always disappears from my start menu. I never have that problem with others.

Battle.net is mostly non-intrusive, which is its best quality. I'd prefer it not be there, but at least it gets out of the way quickly enough.

 

[Caffeine]

i would support battle.net client if they added legacy games to it. which has been the most requested feature for like 2 years now.