That’s why they deserve to get 30% of game revenues and end up with a yearly 6.5 billion profit while having 330 employees. Because they curate user reviews.
I think that 30% is too large of a cut, but nobody is forcing devs to release on Steam. Valve has created enormous value for that 30% that has kept both Devs and Players on their platform, and preferring over the open competition.
Its different than say, Apple getting 30%, because both users and developers are locked in. Apple has no reason or incentive to improve their platform. To offer more, or make the experience better for Developers. Every single steam user is free to use Epic or GoG or anything else on PC. Developers are also free to release anywhere on PC and free to go outside of steam for addons and DLC.
For that, I don’t get overly upset at Valve’s cut. The provide value and basically zero lockin.
Right, just like “nobody” is forcing retailers to sell on Amazon. Everyone is “free” to not sell on the single largest marketplace for their product which is also the first (and usually only) place the vast majority of potential customers will look for that kind of product. Get out of here with this “zero lockin” nonsense.
Still, he’s right. Other publishers have tried and failed to bring a competitor to steam, and it’s not because valve doesn’t allow it (like Apple) but because steam is simply superior in terms of features and usability.
Even epic with massive investment in their store hasn’t caught up to half of what makes steam great for gaming.
I’m pretty certain if someone makes a real competitor to steam, it could dethrone it eventually. Epic isn’t hated because it’s not steam, but because they tried to buy their market share through anti competitive clauses.
Granted, it’s harder by the year because steam has a huge head start, and users may be unwilling to switch now after spending a lot on the platform. Maybe some form of forced legal interoperability would help foster competition
Valve’s lockin is your Steam library not being portable. A better comparison is switching from iOS to Android, or better yet Xbox to PlayStation, and having to leave behind any apps or games you purchased on one platform.
I agree that interop would be the best solution. For a brief period, GOG had a program that granted free licenses for games you already owned on Steam, verified by linking accounts. That is what has to be available for the entirety of everyone’s libraries, prospectively even if not retroactively, for there to even begin to be a level playing field.
Yeah it’s a lock in but like you show, it’s the same everywhere.
I don’t know a way we could really have interoperability between stores without major financial agreement between them, because hosting the platform and services has a cost that is paid by the cut, if you move your games elsewhere they have to provide the bandwidth for you to download your games “for free”
That’s why they deserve to get 30% of game revenues and end up with a yearly 6.5 billion profit while having 330 employees. Because they curate user reviews.
I think that 30% is too large of a cut, but nobody is forcing devs to release on Steam. Valve has created enormous value for that 30% that has kept both Devs and Players on their platform, and preferring over the open competition.
Its different than say, Apple getting 30%, because both users and developers are locked in. Apple has no reason or incentive to improve their platform. To offer more, or make the experience better for Developers. Every single steam user is free to use Epic or GoG or anything else on PC. Developers are also free to release anywhere on PC and free to go outside of steam for addons and DLC.
For that, I don’t get overly upset at Valve’s cut. The provide value and basically zero lockin.
Right, just like “nobody” is forcing retailers to sell on Amazon. Everyone is “free” to not sell on the single largest marketplace for their product which is also the first (and usually only) place the vast majority of potential customers will look for that kind of product. Get out of here with this “zero lockin” nonsense.
Still, he’s right. Other publishers have tried and failed to bring a competitor to steam, and it’s not because valve doesn’t allow it (like Apple) but because steam is simply superior in terms of features and usability.
Even epic with massive investment in their store hasn’t caught up to half of what makes steam great for gaming.
I’m pretty certain if someone makes a real competitor to steam, it could dethrone it eventually. Epic isn’t hated because it’s not steam, but because they tried to buy their market share through anti competitive clauses.
Granted, it’s harder by the year because steam has a huge head start, and users may be unwilling to switch now after spending a lot on the platform. Maybe some form of forced legal interoperability would help foster competition
Valve’s lockin is your Steam library not being portable. A better comparison is switching from iOS to Android, or better yet Xbox to PlayStation, and having to leave behind any apps or games you purchased on one platform.
I agree that interop would be the best solution. For a brief period, GOG had a program that granted free licenses for games you already owned on Steam, verified by linking accounts. That is what has to be available for the entirety of everyone’s libraries, prospectively even if not retroactively, for there to even begin to be a level playing field.
Yeah it’s a lock in but like you show, it’s the same everywhere.
I don’t know a way we could really have interoperability between stores without major financial agreement between them, because hosting the platform and services has a cost that is paid by the cut, if you move your games elsewhere they have to provide the bandwidth for you to download your games “for free”