Just for you, I gave Eurogamer my information to farm and sell of to the highest bidder. And I learned nothing new. Ubisoft want to have their game on Steams store, Steam says “alright sure, these are the requirements”. Ubisoft breaks that agreement, Steam says “then we won’t sell your game”. Okay? So? No one is forcing them to sell on Steam if they don’t like it.
Steam only takes a share on sold copies.
Having YOUR game on THEIR site while selling it cheaper on your OWN site would effectively be leeching free exposure off of Steams front page. How is it not reasonable for Steam to not want that?
I don’t get it. Steam does not have a chokehold on supply of servers, hardware, software, personnel, investments, nothing. Steam has a huge base because people like their platform.
If the big publishers would pull out of Steam, you think it would survive? If Ubisoft and EA and Rockstar and all of the others decide hey, we’re just gonna sell on our own platforms from now on, you think Steam would prevail anyway? Counter-Strike is not THAT profitable.
The CORE ISSUE is not Steam having a 30% fee, it is THE OTHER PLATFORM ARE CRAP and people rather not play your game than install Uplay.
And again, Valve are not setting any prices. They do 2 things,
Set their fee
Won’t accept you using Steam as a free advertisement window
Look, I don’t like the 30% fee either. They could lower it drastically and probably still be fine.
But make no mistake; if, say, EA had launched an equivalent to Steam in the early 2000s, today it would be common practice to have Ads in the launcher, Subscriptions for “better deals”, Fees for adding more games to your library, Spyware, and don’t think they would have more generous fees for developers. If anything, they would have a HIGHER fee than 30% and if anyone tried to launch a competing game launcher they would buy it up and shut it down.
Stop acting like Valve isn’t the best we could ask for out of all the alternatives.
Speaking of God Given Rights, “we want to sell our games on Steam but not on their terms”. Don’t like it? Don’t do it. “but they have the largest market share 😢” , because you keep selling on their platform. I don’t understand how this shit is so hard to grasp.
None of that first paragraph is in the article OP linked lmao, at least not the one I can see.
Why would Steam put your game on their site for free, giving it exposure to potential buyers, just for the buyers to turn around and buy it cheaper somewhere else? Steam only takes a cut on sold copies.
Xbox, Ubisoft, EA, Blizzard/Activision, Epic, Rockstar, all have launchers. Hell, even Amazon has got a game launcher.
Had any of them been better than, or at least as good as Steam, people would probably buy a game there if it was not listed on Steam.
“give us your money or let us install cookies” yeah no I’d rather not read the article then.
deleted by creator
Okay my guy, whatever you say <3
deleted by creator
Just for you, I gave Eurogamer my information to farm and sell of to the highest bidder. And I learned nothing new. Ubisoft want to have their game on Steams store, Steam says “alright sure, these are the requirements”. Ubisoft breaks that agreement, Steam says “then we won’t sell your game”. Okay? So? No one is forcing them to sell on Steam if they don’t like it.
deleted by creator
Steam only takes a share on sold copies. Having YOUR game on THEIR site while selling it cheaper on your OWN site would effectively be leeching free exposure off of Steams front page. How is it not reasonable for Steam to not want that?
deleted by creator
I don’t get it. Steam does not have a chokehold on supply of servers, hardware, software, personnel, investments, nothing. Steam has a huge base because people like their platform.
If the big publishers would pull out of Steam, you think it would survive? If Ubisoft and EA and Rockstar and all of the others decide hey, we’re just gonna sell on our own platforms from now on, you think Steam would prevail anyway? Counter-Strike is not THAT profitable.
The CORE ISSUE is not Steam having a 30% fee, it is THE OTHER PLATFORM ARE CRAP and people rather not play your game than install Uplay.
And again, Valve are not setting any prices. They do 2 things,
Look, I don’t like the 30% fee either. They could lower it drastically and probably still be fine. But make no mistake; if, say, EA had launched an equivalent to Steam in the early 2000s, today it would be common practice to have Ads in the launcher, Subscriptions for “better deals”, Fees for adding more games to your library, Spyware, and don’t think they would have more generous fees for developers. If anything, they would have a HIGHER fee than 30% and if anyone tried to launch a competing game launcher they would buy it up and shut it down.
Stop acting like Valve isn’t the best we could ask for out of all the alternatives.
Speaking of God Given Rights, “we want to sell our games on Steam but not on their terms”. Don’t like it? Don’t do it. “but they have the largest market share 😢” , because you keep selling on their platform. I don’t understand how this shit is so hard to grasp.
deleted by creator
None of that first paragraph is in the article OP linked lmao, at least not the one I can see.
Why would Steam put your game on their site for free, giving it exposure to potential buyers, just for the buyers to turn around and buy it cheaper somewhere else? Steam only takes a cut on sold copies.
Xbox, Ubisoft, EA, Blizzard/Activision, Epic, Rockstar, all have launchers. Hell, even Amazon has got a game launcher.
Had any of them been better than, or at least as good as Steam, people would probably buy a game there if it was not listed on Steam.
Feel free to share it, I’m not paying for it.
deleted by creator
Tell me, what have Valve done that is so evil? In your own words