So... it's free? Valve takes a cut whether or not it uses Steamworks.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Dark Souls PC trailer [Matchmaking, new bosses, enemies, NPCs, weapons, armor, areas]
- Thread starter Pooya
- Start date
- Status
So... it's free? Valve takes a cut whether or not it uses Steamworks.
They haven't actually announced it for Steam (as far as I'm aware), and part of the reason for it being on GFWL could be because of a previous licensing agreement. If their hands are tied, I doubt there's much they could do even if they wanted to. This doesn't defend GFWL, obviously, but that kind of stuff does happen.
Potentially what it could mean is that the game ends up being double-dipped (if they put it on Steam) due to licensing fees, thus providing less revenue to Namco/From. Lots of this is just speculative though, there's no actual way to know what agreements From/Namco has signed with regards to Dark Souls.
If they're not bringing it out on Steam then they are committing marketplace suicide. And even if they are not bringing it out on Steam, they'll be paying the Steamworks tax to a different e-tailer so what's different about what I just said?
Wait, what? You high, man?
Maybe, maybe not. Again, prior agreements signed by these groups could potentially forego payments to these e-tailers or make them a smaller percentage, potentially, than what Valve offers.
Assuming they signed a licensing agreement with Microsoft for the online portion of their game, they would potentially have to pay not once, but twice because of Microsoft's fees and because of Valve's fees at the point of purchase. If they forego certain groups, they can avoid or minimize the second expenditure.
Every store online has fees at the point of purchase, unless you're suggesting that Dark souls will be exclusively launched at GFWL marketplace with lower fees (something we have no idea if it's true or not), which would be market suicide.
I can't think of a single game released on GFWL marketplace that's not available elsewhere.
If they were really worried about double fees then they should have went for Steamworks since that solution is 100% free, unlike GFWL.
Steamworks is free, distributing a title on Steam is not. And thus far there's nothing that indicates they are doing so. I find this strange, considering they are advertising Wal-Mart, Amazon, and Best Buy as distribution chains.
FateBreaker
Member
I really don't understand your logic. Regardless of where they sell the game someone is taking a cut unless Namco is going to open their own DD service.
Felix Lighter
Member
I believe, in theory they could use Steamworks and not sell the game on Steam. That would be insane but I believe that is an option. That being said, all DD retailers take a similar cut, so there wouldn't be any additional fees they wouldn't already be paying elsewhere, anyway.
ThaiGrocer
Member
The retail links are for the console version. The website is advertising all versions. As for no indication of Steam, we'll have to wait and see.
It's not free to distribute titles in any of those stores either.
Also out of those only Amazon will distribute Dark Souls for PC (for the moment being anyway), neither Wal-mart or Best Buy have DD and the game was announced to be DD only in the US. Those links are there to publicize the PS360 version of the game.
Well, this is the thing that's kinda unknown. Is there a reliable source where we can see what percentage of a sale Valve vs. Amazon vs. whoever takes for digital distribution? This is kind of the crux of the argument.
I'm aware that the creator of Breath of Death VII and Cthulu Saves the World (Zeboyd Games) had at least a few problems with the pricing structure and just how much Valve takes out of a sale. He was happy his sales increased, but he, as a developer, wasn't ecstatic or anything. I tend to think that there's a lot more going on in the background than we give credit for.
HungOverOnATues
Member
That trailer looks sooooo good. Day one purchase, GFWL be damned.
I believe DiRT uses Phyre Engine, so yes.
Sony's PhyreEngine
AcceptableGhost
Member
How so? No matter whether they use Steamworks or not they are going to put it on all of the digital retailers (unless they are dumb). They are all going to take the same cut most likely (maybe some less known retailers will take less but most of the revenue will come from Steam and maybe one other).
This is all very speculative until they announce their distribution platforms.
AcceptableGhost
Member
If they don't put it out on Steam I almost want to doubt that this port would even make its money back - but then again that physical release will probably sell well in Europe (in the areas where those region restrictions don't apply of course!).
Salacious Crumb
Junior Member
It would be monumentally stupid for them to do anything other that put it on as many DD services as they can, especially steam which is around 90%* of the DD market.
*Make that 70%
No disagreements there, but it does cost more money for them to do this.
I think Steam is in the 70s, but yeah. Would be rediculous not to. This isn't fucking Diablo 3.
AcceptableGhost
Member
What the hell are you talking about? Do you think Steam (or the other DD platforms) requires some sort of up-front flat rate just to put up a game? There is no up-front money, they just make an agreement and take a cut (generically 70/30 for DD platforms).
If they are using GFWL or Steamworks they don't even have to update the files through those DD services either, they can just roll the patches through GFWL or Steam respectively and hit all of their customers.
You're correct, but advertising, in the case of any of these, is not free. Advertising your game on Steam costs money, just as advertising it on Amazon or elsewhere costs money. This is another disadvantage of not releasing your game on as many platforms as possible simultaneously.
Salacious Crumb
Junior Member
Some seriously indie arse looking games have had very prominent advertising on steam. I don't know how advertising on steam works but evidently it can't be very expensive.
Valve controls anywhere from 50-70% of the DD market with Steam, and their cut is substantially smaller than what retail typically takes:
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/0228/technology-gabe-newell-videogames-valve-online-mayhem.html
It's well-worth putting your game on there as the user base is huge and very active. Several GFWL titles are on Steam so Dark Souls wouldn't be a rarity.
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/0228/technology-gabe-newell-videogames-valve-online-mayhem.html
It's well-worth putting your game on there as the user base is huge and very active. Several GFWL titles are on Steam so Dark Souls wouldn't be a rarity.
Why can't they launch on a variety of platforms and be Steamworks too?
I never said they couldn't? Or even that it would be a bad idea. Just that it could be a more costly idea.
Zeliard, does the article do any comparisons of various digital distribution methods?
This might be where the misconception is
I think he believes that Valve takes a cut of Steamworks games even when they're not sold through Steam? Having a hard time following these posts
You said it was another disadvantage of not releasing your game on a variety of platforms.
30% is the industry standard for just about any digital content, be it software, music, movies, games, whatever
No, I said the cost of advertising was a disadvantage of not releasing your game on multiple platforms at the same time. You have to advertise only once if you do this.
Can you source this? I mean, it's certainly a well known fact in the music industry that the money from downloads of songs goes almost entirely to the distributor/publisher, almost none of it goes to the artist.
Why?
The point is that the storefront takes 30%, what the label/artist (or pub/dev with games) split is afterwards doesn't matter for this discussion.
You have to incur advertising costs twice if you release something twice. Chrono Trigger has been re-released countless times, and every time it's gotten a reboot/remake, it's had an advertising budget attached to it. I can't tell you why they do it, just that all companies do.
So you think putting a game out on the Steam store and the GFWL store at the same time causes an advertising budget duplication comparable to making an RPG in the 90s and re-releasing it on a modern platform
Gotcha
Release it twice? What in the world are you talking about?
No, but advertising a game for Steam costs money because you must incur the costs required to use their trademarks in your advertising. I don't think I implied (maybe I did?) that advertising is duplicated, just that it goes up for the more things you advertise it for, due to various usage of associated trademarks and copyrighted materials (logos, etc.).
This game is a re-release for a game that's already released. Effectively you are increasing your advertising budget exponentially because of having to advertise for this game (which is a new release), rather than advertising all at once (360, PC, PS3). You incur less cost if you release it to as many systems as possible this way, because you do not have to pay for a new advertising campaign. Now, you cut costs of development (because you aren't developing a new property) but in general, there is more money to be made in new properties than in old ones anyway. Regardless of what people will say, the Chrono Trigger re-release made far less money than any new Final Fantasy IP.
Dirt uses the ego engine, which was based on a much older version of phyre engine.
So they're going to go back in time and release Dark Souls on all platforms simultaneously so they don't take a marketing budget hit?
I think you've seriously underestimated the costs to rent a time machine.
Edit: Oh wait no I see what you're saying! Microsoft is going to rent the time machine FOR Namco and in exchange, Namco will put the game out on GWFL exclusively and not release it on any other retailers. Brilliant!
I'm just saying that the optimal route would have been to release to as many platforms as possible to save on advertising costs (and since this game is relatively PC-friendly because of its engines, it would not have incurred significant development costs to do so).
That aside, I suppose a time machine could prove useful. Perhaps for purposes of ice cream.
mysocksarepink
Banned
Has nobody played Gotham City Impstors..?
It's GFWL and on Steam
end of discussion, god damn.
It's GFWL and on Steam
end of discussion, god damn.
Uh, most GFWL games are sold on steam. That's not the issue, though it does seem to be a common misconception of the issue.
InfiniDragon
Member
For me, the misconception was where a game that is released on Steam might still use GFWL's infrastructure if it started on GFWL. I always thought until this thread that if a Steam release came along it was converted to use nothing but Steamworks.
Sentenza
Member
So? Who cares? The issue here is that they are using GFWL in the first place.
We aren't concerned about where they are going to sell the damn game.
@Cyrano: you sound like a very confused person.
- Status