-
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.
Paradox Interactive: "The 70/30 revenue split is outrageous"
- Thread starter IbizaPocholo
- Start date
silentstorm
Member
Yeah, the amount of DLC is ridiculous, though apparently only a few of them are actually any good and give more meaningful content.
Wouldn't know, the games always looked boring to me, i did try Stellaris a bit after release since some people i know can't stop playing and talking about Paradox games, but i found it too annoying at first and when i started actually understanding the game i found i wasn't actually having much fun and stopped, and none of the DLC looked good enough to make me come back.
As for Crusader Kings II, only tried a bit but the experience was the same, maybe i didn't understand it and that was why i didn't like it?
I mean, it's a game where you are apparently supposed to watch hour-long tutorials to even understand, so maybe i missed many subtleties that would make the game fun, but after trying it a little i didn't actually feel myself thinking investing my time into it would be worth it, just something about that kind of game never really interests me, or at least, never interests me enough to actually play enough to learn it.
Wouldn't know, the games always looked boring to me, i did try Stellaris a bit after release since some people i know can't stop playing and talking about Paradox games, but i found it too annoying at first and when i started actually understanding the game i found i wasn't actually having much fun and stopped, and none of the DLC looked good enough to make me come back.
As for Crusader Kings II, only tried a bit but the experience was the same, maybe i didn't understand it and that was why i didn't like it?
I mean, it's a game where you are apparently supposed to watch hour-long tutorials to even understand, so maybe i missed many subtleties that would make the game fun, but after trying it a little i didn't actually feel myself thinking investing my time into it would be worth it, just something about that kind of game never really interests me, or at least, never interests me enough to actually play enough to learn it.
lukilladog
Member
Better comparison would be other tech companies.
Last edited:
vaibhavpisal
Member
As data center costs are expected to reduce via optimization and lower power consumption, chances are even 12% would become more lucrative in future than it is today.
A.Romero
Member
Margin (as in profit margin) is what you get after deducting all your operating costs and taxes. We don't know what percentage of what Steam charges is actual profit. We only know they charge 30% of what is sold on the store, just as Apple, Google, etc.
While datacenter costs go down, some services consume much more datacenter power than others. For example, storage can be really cheap but streaming (like shareplay) is not. I think Valve does save a lot on people (I have this idea because their customer service sucks) but technologically it does surprise me they turn a profit for the reasons listed in previous posts.
I too wish to give more to developers but I don't think Epic is being honest about what they are complaining about and I think there are many other things at play.
While datacenter costs go down, some services consume much more datacenter power than others. For example, storage can be really cheap but streaming (like shareplay) is not. I think Valve does save a lot on people (I have this idea because their customer service sucks) but technologically it does surprise me they turn a profit for the reasons listed in previous posts.
I too wish to give more to developers but I don't think Epic is being honest about what they are complaining about and I think there are many other things at play.
manfestival
Member
I personally just want to see where the support comes from on this statement(aka the proof). I am not trying to argue with you. I was personally curious about this but your statement isn't exactly evidence of the claim.
Texas Pride
Banned
Then lower the price of digital versions of games since it's by his own admission "cheaper". Can't have it both ways Devs....
Mendax89
Member
If they think that, create a new client. Steam charges 30% only on Steam sales, we can sell a Steam game on your store and Steam gets nothing. Steam charges 30% but offers a great service, local and online streaming, payment methos, security, forums, cloud saves. Paradox CEO shlould worry about creating better games without 1000 DLCs.
Facism
Member
it helps somewhat in steams case that only games bought through the steam store are subject to that 30%. Outside of that, authorised stores like GMG, Humble etc set their own percentages, where keys sold through a developers own site pay 0%.
I've not got a dog in the race, but what irks me about Epic's store at the moment is the lack of choice as to where i can buy a product for it. When metro got announced as an exclusive, the price went up from £35 from CDkeys (i will cede they aren't an authorised steam retailer) to a flat £49.99 through epic. As a customer, that's a bit shit for me. I'm hoping they can sort that side of their business out, sooner rather than later for all levels of customer, as I've no problem with multiple storefronts.
MeatSafeMurderer
Member
Prior to EGS showing up and throwing their money around Steam, GOG, and most other (reputable) key stores such as GMG, all took 30% at a baseline, with Steam offering 20% if your game sells well enough. Humble was the exception at 25%.
Steam, Humble and GMG haven't budged. Only GOG decided to match Epic...and to do that they had to end the Fair Price Package.
Uplay, Origin, Battle.net are all non-factors, as while Uplay and Origin might be open to accepting third party titles, as they stated in the past, no third party titles have ever actually been sold on them to my knowledge.
Last edited:
manfestival
Member
I appreciate what you are saying but it can summarized as saying "trust me." That is since there are no sources cited for any of this information. I think Steam is something everyone already knows is 70/30 but everything else?
Alexios
Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
Huh? Ubi games for one big example were on Origin same as they were on Steam. Actually, tons of publishers are on Origin where you can filter by "publisher" as well as "developer".
I thought UPlay was similar but I can't find evidence of it any more. I'm pretty sure there had been indie games on there in the past but can't find anything but Ubi franchises atm.
Huh?
IGN: Steam's 30% Cut Is Actually the Industry Standard
https://uk.ign.com/articles/2019/10/07/report-steams-30-cut-is-actually-the-industry-standard A good article by IGN? Anyway, it isn't anything we did not know but it's a good reminder for those who complain ONLY about Valve. Also it's worth noting from the article that Publishers can also get...
Last edited:
ScaryBrandon
Banned
They want to make EGS the dominant platform so they can get 88% of 1.3 million dollars. Or make the 88% the new industry standard.
mcz117chief
Member
No, that is just false. All their games I played are very intuitive and tutorial is barely needed (maybe if it is your first paradox game) and they are pretty short too. Everything is labeled and self explanatory and you can always pause the game to look at everything. If you want to cheese those games then you have to watch some videos about how some exploits and glitches work, for example how to get infinite manpower in Hearts of Iron series or how to exploit the AI etc.
MeatSafeMurderer
Member
I mean...you can just google this stuff. It's not exactly like it's a secret. The terms of working with these storefronts, including their splits, is all publicly available information.
vaibhavpisal
Member
Egs will never be a dominant store going by comments on this thread. Valve has too loyal a following.
If a company as significant as Epic comes up with a 12% cut, I would consider it as most cutting edge, upto date working of costs involved. I have no idea why people think it would go up.
johntown
Banned
The 12% EGS offers is not sustainable for growth. This is just simple economics. Just think of that episode of The Office where Michael started his own paper company and gave ridiculously low prices. Sure that would get him new business to begin with but with growth comes more expenses and cost has to go up or it is not sustainable. EGS is no where even close to the size of Valve in terms of infrastructure etc. If EGS was to take the lead away from Valve and everyone was on EGS the business model to support only taking 12% would probably not be sustainable. I say probably because of course I don't have access to their revenue or costs.
Could the split be less than 30% sure I agree it could be less but 12% is just not sustainable IMO. Just because it is digital does not mean there is no costs involved.
Could the split be less than 30% sure I agree it could be less but 12% is just not sustainable IMO. Just because it is digital does not mean there is no costs involved.
manfestival
Member
Burden of proof isn't on me. I was asking you to provide the information. Looks like another GAFfer got that before you. See below for the example. The concept is really not that hard and saying "google it is not an actual answer while being lazy.
Huh?
IGN: Steam's 30% Cut Is Actually the Industry Standard
https://uk.ign.com/articles/2019/10/07/report-steams-30-cut-is-actually-the-industry-standard A good article by IGN? Anyway, it isn't anything we did not know but it's a good reminder for those who complain ONLY about Valve. Also it's worth noting from the article that Publishers can also get...www.neogaf.com
Last edited:
lukilladog
Member
If I don´t support Epic because they don´t put consumers first, how is that loyalty to steam?.
Last edited:
MeatSafeMurderer
Member
Burden of proof doesn't really apply when it is common or easily available knowledge. It doesn't come from some obscure study that you'd be unlikely to find on your own. I told you exactly where you can find it (the terms of distribution), if you want a direct link at that point you're just being lazy.
vaibhavpisal
Member
I did Google search. Am still not convinced what Epic does can be considered anti consumer.
lukilladog
Member
I´m talking about their company politics/philosophy of putting game companies interests over consumers.
vaibhavpisal
Member
Any particular incident? Epic seems to be normal company to me. Not particularly nasty. I would support ea even if they promised a 12% cut.
manfestival
Member
You are creating excuses to justify your laziness then throwing it back on me. Once again, telling someone that asks you for something to go look for it themselves is deflecting the burden of proof and lazy. You are ultimately redefining what a burden of proof is just so you can be "not wrong"(I know it is a double negative and saying right is better but this gets the point across).Instead of this back and forth bickering you are creating. You could've easily just provided it and it would have been left alone at that. You also had the option of just telling me that you didn't want to do that and I have accepted those answers in the past before but you picked the most combative route.
vaibhavpisal
Member
Ok. Got this. I actually am not too worried about rising pc games prices cause I already have more games than I will be able to finish in this lifetime.
MeatSafeMurderer
Member
I didn't just tell you to go look for it yourself, I told you exactly where you could find it. If you can't be bothered to look there that's not my problem. At that point literally the only thing further I could have done was spend time collating the links to all their terms and link you to them directly.
manfestival
Member
You could use that same argument against yourself. If you had the source or where it could be found. Why are you so unwilling to furnish the requested information yourself? You aren't doing yourself any favors by taking this weird hard stance. Also your inability/unwillingness to disassociate telling and doing. Only gaffer who has ever actually decided to try to argue and double down rather than providing proof of their assertion. Once again, you could've avoided any conflict but keep going down this route. I am done with the back and forth as this is going down the insanity road. Say your defense now and list whatever reason you want to not just providing information and even add a jab at me if you want. I am moving on from arguing a counter point of the point.
lukilladog
Member
It´s not prices either. For example, having no forum and no guarantee whatsoever to be able to leave a consumer review, how is that loyalty to steam?.
Last edited:
MeatSafeMurderer
Member
Maybe because I don't have the tabs open here and now. If I did I would've simply linked them...but funnily enough I don't keep that stuff open 24/7 just in case someone asks for it. If it had been an obscure study I would've sought it out...but it wasn't, it was publicly available and easily found information. This entire argument is retarded anyway. You know full well I wasn't bullshitting. as you pointed out another GAFfer did link you to evidence, so continually pushing back as if you think there was a chance I was is just dumb.
manfestival
Member
Interesting so that explains it all. You have my intentions entirely wrong. Your defensive position is you doubling down on the assumption that I am coming from a counter perspective since you have nothing to base my interjection off of. Your snarky response was expected. I actually believed you the whole time but I like to believe things and there be proof with what I believe. I don't like to take peoples word on things even if it sounds correct or seems correct. You may be different but that does not matter. Your last post was more clear in intention than any of your other posts.
Similar threads
- Locked