this post was submitted on 29 Dec 2024
512 points (100.0% liked)
Games
19825 readers
338 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Devs are happy to loose 30% ? Uhrffdruhehu jirddrhuduh
30% when you get hosting/friends/multiplayer support/advertising/bandwidth out of that, and you don't have to do anything? Yes, they are happy to pay that.
Apple and google take half of that with a great visibility. Microsoft takes 30% of sales made through the digital store. Howevee, for PC releases, Xbox shifted to 12% in line with Epic's revenue-sharing model. So I doubt that everybody is as glad as you pretend. Where did you get that BTW ?
Apple and Google used to take 30%, but they were forced to take less due to Epic's lawsuit. They are in a very different position since they control the platform and thus have a monopoly.
Valve, on the other hand, lets devs make keys for free and sell them on their own website (or competitors'), has no exclusivity agreements, and only owns their Steam Deck platform (which you could install alternative stores on at launch, and launch thist competitor games through their compat layer).
Valve goes out of their way to not abuse their position, whereas Apple and Google needed a lawsuit to force them to act somewhat reasonably. If devs didn't think the 30% was worth it, why wouldn't they just sell on EGS, GOG, etc and directly on their website? Because Steam improves sales dramatically and provides a ton of value for that fee.
I wish they would reduce their cut, but I also think they provide a fantastic service, so I'm actually okay with it, and it seems devs are as well.
They can keep that 30% if they sell their keys (free to generate BTW) on their own website. I've bought a few games that way and it totally works. They can sell their games on other stores with a smaller cut (e.g. EGS) without any issues with Valve.
Many game devs don't bother doing it though, which tells me Valve's marketing is doing its job selling games.
A key that will send you where ? On steam. It is just a way to keep the Devs captive. 30% is absolutely insane specially for a licence, not something that you own.
They can sell a direct download as well, the key is merely an option.
If they want to do their own marketing, they can still piggy back off Steam's infrastructure with the only cost being the keys sold directly through Steam.
30% is not insane if it's completely opt in and there are other competitors. Google and Apple charging that much was insane because they completely control the hardware and OS, and as such there was no competition either by policy (e.g. Apple) or scare tactics (Google). Steam only controls the hardware and OS on their Steam Deck, and there's no barriers to installing competitor platforms whatsoever, and they make it easy to play those in the main Steam interface as well (I play EGS and GOG games through Heroic all the time).
The reason people sell through Steam is because Steam provides a better service vs DIY or any of their competitors. Users buy from Steam because it offers a better experience than either directly buying or buying through a competitor. Everyone wins here.
I wish the fee was lower and Valve can certainly afford to take a smaller cut, but they totally make up for that cost in the value they provide. People are willing to stick with Steam even though it doesn't have the most popular games (Minecraft and Fortnite), their competition gives away free games and has exclusives, and they aren't installed by default. Steam doesn't win because they're a monopoly, they win because people prefer their service to the competition.
A key that will send you wherever the Publisher and Distribution platforms allow for. Look at Humble for an easy example, a bunch of their games provide keys that will work on Steam, Epic, GOG, and even direct download if the publisher/developer has the servers for it. It doesn't keep any one captive.
No, they can't. Valve's TOS forbid devs from offering lower prices on other stores. If not for this, a dev could list a game for $60 on Steam, $50 on Epic, and $42 on their own website and let the customer decide where to buy it from while making the same amount of money from either of these sales. Valve is not competing fairly.
Uhh that's completely wrong. I've bought keys from tons of different stores (humble being the majn one) when there were sales going on for the game. All registered with steam keys.
So they're not games on other stores, are they?
They are sold cheaper than on steam...the fuck are you talking about, literally you said they can't sell them cheaper. And that's completely false.
No, I said Valve forbids devs from listing games for cheaper on other stores. If other stores are selling STEAM KEYS, they are not listed on other stores and Steam still gets a cut. Do learn to read.
Except they're literally listing them on other stores cheaper than on steam. The fuck are you talking about?
No, they're listing them on Steam and then 3rd parties are reselling the keys. Devs still can't list their games on other stores at a lower price. This is the 3rd time I say this, let's see if you get it this time.
https://isthereanydeal.com/game/red-dead-redemption-2/info/
GMG key for epic is $17.42 right now...steam is...$19.79
Are you still going to blatantly babble false statements?
This is the 3rd time I say this, let's see if you get it this time.
Those are 3rd party resellers. How many times can one man miss the same point?
So wait you're only hang-up is that the store has to offer the download? The fuck....
The store offers the downloads on the links you provided, that's not the point. The point is that if I, as a consumer, want to get a game cheaper than it's listed in Steam, I have to find a reseller to sell me a key that might not work or even get me banned (see G2A) and has none of the protections that come with buying from an official store. If not for Valve's anti-consumer policy, I could just go to Epic and buy it cheaper there because they take a smaller cut.
Those are not illegitimate reseller stores. Those keys are from the devs on those stores. I did not share a link to cdkeys or kingwin or g2a. I shared a link to a legitimate list of stores. If I buy from humble my keys are not going to get banned or not work.
Are you intentionally missing the point? Legitimate or not, it's a 3rd party seller that can't offer the same protections an official store where the dev chooses to list the game does. Just to name an example, if you even see a key from Humble Bundle, you lose the right to refund. If not for Valve's predatory policies, you could just buy the game at a lower price from Epic and enjoy the exact same refund policy that Steam has.
https://support.humblebundle.com/hc/en-us/articles/1260804812850-Support-Refund-Policies#:~:text=Refunds%20are%20eligible%20within%20two,case%20basis%2C%20at%20Humble's%20discretion.
What in the absolute fuck are you talking about?
Just stop...
So I was wrong about that one, the point still stands, specially because key resellers are also affected by Valve's policy. Why are you being so intentionally obtuse?
Where in valves policy is it showing they're affected. That right there is from the link you provided, literally stating its fine to have discounts on different stores. Steam provides the keys for free and still eats the cost of hosting the game if one of these keys are sold on a different store.
Do you just not read?
If they didn't have this rule, devs could list at a ridiculous price on Steam and sell on their store for a more reasonable price to take advantage of Steam's marketing without paying. That's unfair for Valve. Either list there and charge the same prices everywhere, or don't.
I would be surprised if other stores didn't have similar policies.
Steam also reserves the right to remove a game for any reason. If a developer does that they would have their game removed and probably receive a ban. There's no reason for that policy other than price fixing to keep consumers from making an informed decision. Stop defending the multibillion dollar company.
The only time I've heard of that happening is if the key was purchased with a stolen credit card or something. Steam actually goes out of their way to retain access to purchased games that have been delisted by the dev.
They're one of the better actors in this regard the industry. In most cases, they'll side with the customer, which is exactly what you want a company to do.
I don't care how much they're worth, if they provide a good service, I'll help clarify misunderstandings. I really don't care if people and companies get rich, as long as they do it by making a good product people want.
I think you confused "[a developer] would have their game removed" with Steam removing games from people's libraries. Nobody is talking about that.
That's the part I was responding to. Yeah, they technically could do that, but they go out of their way to prevent users from losing access to games. A dev can remove online access to a game (e.g. mp ban), but if they try to do that for offline access too, they can get delisted from Steam.
If you're talking about something else, please explain more clearly because that's what I thought you were talking about.
I'm saying if they didn't have their predatory anti-consumer policy and a developer tries to list a game for a much higher price on Steam than they do on other stores, they would remove the game from the store and probably ban the developer. It has nothing to do with removing access to user's games from their library.
But that's not anti-consumer at all, if anything that's pro-consumer because they're ensuring that the price they see on Steam is comparable to the price elsewhere, so if you prefer buying from Steam, you don't have to worry that a studio is fleecing you.
Why would a retailer permit a company to use it's marketing and distribution network while actively steering customers away from its storefront? That's not a great business relationship. The alternative would be Valve charging for keys sold outside of Steam, and that seems like an even worse policy.
Price fixing is extremely anti-consumer. They're not ensuring the price is lower on Steam, they're ensuring that it's higher everywhere else. Having a higher price than competing stores doesn't have to steer people away from your own if you offer a better service but Valve isn't willing to do that so they screw the consumer instead.