- cross-posted to:
- gaming@lemmy.zip
- pcgaming@lemmy.ca
You must log in or register to comment.
I just want to say I support your freedom to post your opinion, no matter how absolutely fucking terrible it is…
I just want to say that I support your right to be wrong, no matter how much evidence is proving you wrong.
Funny how you ignore all the comments calling out your crap in depth, i suppose you know you’ve got a load of nothing here.
Valve provides unlimited bandwidth for the rest of eternity for your game in exchange for a refundable $100 deposit and 30% of sales, with exceedingly few rules regarding what you put on the store, all without ads, optional additional FREE revenue streams in trading cards and marketplace items, and free unlimited bandwidth for mods via workshop integration; not to mention free Multiplayer matchmaking and unlimited free steam keys you can give out or even sell on secondary markets with very few restrictions. Neither itch nor gamejolt can financially offer half of those features, and no other publishing platforms comes close to offering all of these features, much less all of these features at such a ridiculously low cut as valve takes.
Just a minor correction: the 100$ one time deposit cannot be reclaimed manually. Instead, it gets automatically returned once your game hits 1000$ in sales.
https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/gettingstarted/appfee
The purpose of this fee is to block low effort automated scam games from misusing the shop.
Many successful indie devs have voiced that the 30% is actually impossible to beat for them if they tried other distribution approaches. Some even closed down their existing alternatives including self hosted shops which would grant them 100%, simply because the overhead costs ruin the percentage for them, plus a whole lot of time and effort that have to go into maintaining that.
Yes, steam has a very strong monopoly position on the games distribution market. That is problematic for all the usual reasons with monopolies. What makes steam unique is that the company behind it, Valve, has demonstrated in all their efforts that maximizing short term profits is not necessarily their prime directive. This can obviously change at any time, so being wary is always good, but convenience is simply extremely attractive to everyone involved, devs and customers alike.
The anticompetitive practice is, sell for the same price here or we won’t sell your game? They don’t want to be undercut, can’t blame them for that.
If they forced exclusivity deals, sure that is anti competitive. If they dictated prices, that would be anticompetitive. If they forced users to buy bundles to get certain games, if they forced a subscription to access games, if they gobbled up every other game seller and closed them down…
We have seen a lot of bullshit in corpo land. I’m not saying valve is perfect, or I love and trust them, but this is pretty weak in terms of objections. I’d rather deal with valve than Microsoft. Then again I was saying that about Google 15 years ago, now a lot less so.
Every time I see this opinion being shared I just imagine a tiny, angry Tim Sweeney throwing a tantrum because Valve bad. Why? Because… Because I said so, okay?!
My biggest issue with Tim Sweeny is he’s convinced that Microsoft Windows is not somebody else’s property but rather a camp that’s controlled by its users. Meanwhile he can obviously acknowledge Fortnite and similar are his property.
He seems to use a bad experience with some Linux users as his justification for this massive cognitive dissonance and lack of interest in funding and developing for a truly independent platform (Linux) like Valve has.
Honestly, I’m fine with having another game store compete, but the anti-Linux at nearly every turn is 👎 from me (I mean at least they let EasyAnticheat develop the proton layer… But still).
