Everyone that's excusing it because "it's the same as every other store" would be ok with Steam suddenly charging for MP because all the other services do too right?
Everyone that's excusing it because "it's the same as every other store" would be ok with Steam suddenly charging for MP because all the other services do too right?
What...? This is more about why bother singling out Steam for this, not a statement of whether or not 30% is bad or good.Everyone that's excusing it because "it's the same as every other store" would be ok with Steam suddenly charging for MP because all the other services do too right?
Might've skimmed over it, but something else about cuts.
Humble used to take about 5% (not sure if they still do, as that was a couple of years ago). Assuminng they still do (or at least, charge less than Valve): What developers could easily do, is sell more Steam keys through Humble. They pay less of a cut, but the consumer still ends up with a Steam key.
Because it's a monopoly, it's also why the other storefronts charge the same rate, because they know that devs have no choice no matter what even if they seek alternatives.
Because Steam is the monopoly, so they define the standard.
It's the same cut in every digital store
Humble takes 15% for themselves, and another 10% for charity for every Humble Store purchase. Developer cut is 75%. Humble claims that 15% is to cover hosting costs, and they have a fraction of the featureset that Valve has with the entire Steam ecosystem. Kinda helps put into perspective how much money is sunk into just providing the user with the products they purchase.
Virtually every digital game store takes the same cut. PC, console, mobile.
Everyone that's excusing it because "it's the same as every other store" would be ok with Steam suddenly charging for MP because all the other services do too right?
But Steam didn't define the standard...
Steam exists on a platform that is already there - they don't sell PCs they don't sell the operating system installed on them. Their only investment is the storefront software
They did. Why do you think the first reaction from a pc gamer when a game is announced is "Is it coming on Steam?!?!?!"
They did. Why do you think the first reaction from a pc gamer when a game is announced is "Is it coming on Steam?!?!?!"
Steam is different though. Apple, MS and Sony sell and market the devices you launch on - they arguably charge more to cover the investment and costs involved in that.
This article is 4 years old. See my post for more recent information:
Humble's just barely better, and they can't opt out of the charity costs.
Ah, thanks for the updated info. It's unfortunate that HB has raised their cut because this was/is the main reason why I like to support them.
Totally agree that 30% is an outrageous cut for what the digital storefront actually offers, considering they don't actually build the devices that the store is on like Apple, Sony, Nintendo etc do - they don't create the market.
Totally agree that 30% is an outrageous cut for what the digital storefront actually offers, considering they don't actually build the devices that the store is on like Apple, Sony, Nintendo etc do - they don't create the market.
I'm surprised, though, that all of the publishers are setting up their own stores. They have to understand that that kind of fragmentation will ultimately keep people on Steam for usability reasons alone.
What they should have done is come together and create a non-profit company backed by all of the big boys (every major publisher of PC games) that would create a digital storefront to compete with steam and only take whatever cut it needs to provide a competitive service, 10 or 15% or whatever the numbers work out to be. If you had that kind of competition you'd see Steam shape up real quick.
Can you imagine the value of an extra 20% of all game sales on PC for these publishers? You're talking major money here. But each having their own store... I can't see it working out.
As I have stated many times on here, Valves advantage was:
1. They signed a deal with Activision for MW2 and WB for FEAR2, 2 first major games to be PC exclusive. You would be kidding yourself if they think they paid 30%
2. Vocal fans forced ISP to mirror early steam releases, remember when you could pick ISP from download mirror list? now you can only choose your state.
Uhhh, Modern Warfare 2 and FEAR 2 were never PC exclusive.
Capitalism is a bitch.
They have an effective monopoly and they know it.
Oh he's well aware of all this.
I like Tim Sweeney, but all he's doing here is simply using his influence to try and generate a push against one of his competitors, to his own advantage. It's fine - he's free to do it. But the act of ignorance is fairly transparent from someone as clever and experienced as he is.
What games are available on Mastercard and Visa?
.
What does that % represents?
They take 30% of every sale in their stores?
Sony takes 30% of every game bought on PSN? Like, a 60 dollars game purchase on PSN means they are getting 18 dollars just because they are distributing it in their store???
If that is it... holy shit. That is insane.
Posts about Steam not being a monopoly always make me laugh.
It's like saying Microsoft isn't a monopoly in the PC OS space when Linux and Mac OS exist. As though the majority of people give a shit about the other two.
And now they want to limit the amount of keys publishers can generate.
they were the first offical steampowered AAA games
worded wrong sorry
And now they want to limit the amount of keys publishers can generate.
And now they want to limit the amount of keys publishers can generate.
"While our changes did impact the economics of trading card farming for new products coming to Steam, there are still a lot of games and game-shaped objects using Steam keys as a way to manipulate Steam systems. As a result, we're trying to look more closely at extreme examples of products on Steam that don't seem to be providing actual value as playable games-for instance, when a game has sold 100 units, has mostly negative reviews, but requests 500,000 Steam keys. We're not interested in supporting trading card farming or bot networks at the expense of being able to provide value and service for players."
Yup, just because you like the product, doesn't mean it's not a monopoly. It checks every box.
As I have stated many times on here, Valves advantage was:
1. They signed a deal with Activision for MW2 and WB for FEAR2, 2 first major games to be PC exclusive*. You would be kidding yourself if they think they paid 30%, this caused a ton of retail issues as these and others messed up return policies and most likely cause the publishers a headache. Australia for example had stickers on every retail PC game warning of Steam DRM.
2. Vocal fans forced ISP to mirror early steam releases, remember when you could pick ISP from download mirror list? now you can only choose your state/country.
*steampowered, my mistake
Im not sure Steam is to blame for this, I'll even go as far to say that if they said 'Ok we'll just take a 1% cut so the games are cheaper' the big publishers will just be like 'lol the msrp aint changing.''
It was mostly always like that for digital, because it was based on a retail system that has around 20-30%.
Im not sure Steam is to blame for this, I'll go as far to say that if they said 'Ok we'll just take a 1% cut so the games are cheaper' publishers will just be like 'lol the msrp aint changing.''
Totally agree that 30% is an outrageous cut for what the digital storefront actually offers, considering they don't actually build the devices that the store is on like Apple, Sony, Nintendo etc do - they don't create the market.
I'm surprised, though, that all of the publishers are setting up their own stores. They have to understand that that kind of fragmentation will ultimately keep people on Steam for usability reasons alone.
What they should have done is come together and create a non-profit company backed by all of the big boys (every major publisher of PC games) that would create a digital storefront to compete with steam and only take whatever cut it needs to provide a competitive service, 10 or 15% or whatever the numbers work out to be. If you had that kind of competition you'd see Steam shape up real quick.
Can you imagine the value of an extra 20% of all game sales on PC for these publishers? You're talking major money here. But each having their own store... I can't see it working out.