this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2024
191 points (100.0% liked)

Games

37263 readers
1511 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here and here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Remedy and Annapurna announce a strategic cooperation agreement on Control 2 and bringing Control and Alan Wake to film and television

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GoodEye8@lemm.ee 3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I’m not saying you should, I’m saying it doesn’t make them villains or a bad company.

I think it does. Instead of competing they chose to try and force customers to use their platform by buying exclusivity that specifically targets Steam. From the perspective of the customer they took the worst possible approach and, along with how Sweeney has talked about people like us, treated customers like a cattle to be herded, as if we couldn't think for ourselves and would throw ourselves into EGS if our games went there.

But the end goal of EGS wasn’t just to make them more money, they offer every developer more money when they publish there.

That is the PR they sold that the money goes into the hands of the developer. That is true only if the developer is also self publishing. Actually that extra money goes into the hands of the publisher and then it's up to the publisher to decide if the developers get any more money. And once again, from the customers perspective, we barely get anything out of that goal. Games don't get cheaper for us, we don't really get more games because of it. The publishers simply get more money per sale. They don't even get more money (except for the exclusivity money that Epic threw their way) because you sell significantly more copies on Steam because unlike Epic Steam doesn't treat its customers like cattle.

The underlying motivation for creating EGS in the first place was the recognition that Valve does not need to be taking a 30% cut of every game sale to provide the services they provide.

So to prove that Valve doesn't need to take a higher cut they make a store where they take fraction of the cut Steam would take but also offer a fraction of the services Steam offers? I think that would be an argument if they offered at least half of what Steam offers but they don't even do that. They made a barebones store for a barebones cut, that doesn't show anything.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 months ago

The store taking a smaller cut of the pie either means that developers get more money to spend on the game or consumers spend less for games. Full stop.

Publishers have revenue sharing percentages with the developers, if a game sells more and makes more money per sale the developer gets more money.

There is no way that Valve is the good guy or even neutral for taking more of the pie then they need to.