What makes Valve so successful with Steam? Is it the sales, the trading cards, other forms of gamified methods they use?

[Costa]

Are there statistics that show the success of Steam from the sales, or trading cards etc? I intend to write my disseration on Gamifcation and Steam, and was wondering about the success of Valve/Steam. But what brought it success to to what it is now?
why do we, as gamers, need more encouragement to buy games on a gaming platform?

[Hannibal]

A monkey could be successful if they were the only monopoly in town. That's why valve can get away with doing absolutely nothing with customer service.

[Satoru]

Its because Steam has always been 'long term greedy' not 'short term greed'. Every single initiative they do is around creating long term value. That turns into much more profit over hte long term, rather than going for easier short term gains

Steamworks - entire free. And is a cost sink since it requires constant updates and support. But Steamworks is the #1 reason games exist on Steam. Steamworks solves the content problem because devs aren't going to turn down a zero dollar middleware platform that does a ton of stuff for you for free. Which means games are on Steam, which means people buy things on steam.

SteamOS/Linux/SteamMachine - again totally free but providing long term viablity for Steam. Those inititative were in direct response to the sandboxed nature of Metro that were a direct competition to Steam. While that future has not materialized yet (though MS Is in Round 2 with thier recent unified exe initiative) it has expanded steam's sale base to Linux customers. Also has allowed Unity to be the most popular 3rd party engine as well. Again long term gain

Trading/Market - The market might give steam 15% of a transaction but trading doesnt directly give any value to steam. However the value of the system iteslf is extremelly high. Because it allows for buying and selling and trading of in-game items to ALL steam users, not just the ones that might play a certain game.

VR - Again a long term strategy to get into teh VR market first. High up front cost for potential long term gain.

Steam is always looking for long term value creation. As a private company they are not beholdent to shareholders who demand short term profits. The long tail has always been what Steam looks at for their systems

[Merzbow]

Escrito originalmente por Quint the Island Fox:

Escrito originalmente por Coolieli:

I don't, that's why I just launch them through Steam

That's functionally no different from stuffing a bunch of shortcuts in a dedicated folder.

Alternatively, I could just open up my games folder, start typing the name of the game I want to play, press enter, then start typing the name of the game again, press enter again, and start playing. No shortcuts even needed.

I don't need to search them though, my monitor fits more than half my games on my screen. Way more efficient than searching them, especially since all my games are organized into special categories

[nightsoft]

I believe it is mostly because they force folks to install it and create an account. With the VAST amount of complaints out there I would expect a sizable amount of folks simply have no choice.

So they frankly fudge it to make it look like they are popular. I expect it is likely the opposite is true.

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

Escrito originalmente por Coolieli:

Escrito originalmente por Quint the Island Fox:

That's functionally no different from stuffing a bunch of shortcuts in a dedicated folder.

Alternatively, I could just open up my games folder, start typing the name of the game I want to play, press enter, then start typing the name of the game again, press enter again, and start playing. No shortcuts even needed.

I don't need to search them though, my monitor fits more than half my games on my screen. Way more efficient than searching them, especially since all my games are organized into special categories

I don't search them either.

I basically go to C:\, type "ga", press enter for "games", type "spe", press enter for "spelunky", press down three times, and I've started the game.

Two times if I want v1.1. Three times for v0.99.9 which is what I usually play.

[Merzbow]

Escrito originalmente por Quint the Island Fox:

Escrito originalmente por Coolieli:

I don't need to search them though, my monitor fits more than half my games on my screen. Way more efficient than searching them, especially since all my games are organized into special categories

I don't search them either.

I basically go to C:\, type "ga", press enter for "games", type "spe", press enter for "spelunky", press down three times, and I've started the game.

Two times if I want v1.1. Three times for v0.99.9 which is what I usually play.

And that's too time consuming, I have no idea why it bothers you that I prefer a much easier method

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

Escrito originalmente por Coolieli:

Escrito originalmente por Quint the Island Fox:

I don't search them either.

I basically go to C:\, type "ga", press enter for "games", type "spe", press enter for "spelunky", press down three times, and I've started the game.

Two times if I want v1.1. Three times for v0.99.9 which is what I usually play.

And that's too time consuming, I have no idea why it bothers you that I prefer a much easier method

It doesn't really bother me what you specifically prefer.

I was just commenting that people oughta actually know where their games are installed to and know how to "look under the hood" and do stuff if they find the need, rather than simply passing off installations to some bulky and resource-hogging client program and then not actually knowing what's on their computer or how their game files work. And consequently doing stupid things like deleting shortcuts and thinking that uninstalls a program.

Also would like all games to work on a drag-and-drop basis, such that all you need to do is to transfer a set of files and then they all work once they're together. That would be the maximum flexibility and modularness. But that might be asking too much.

[Merzbow]

Escrito originalmente por Quint the Island Fox:

Escrito originalmente por Coolieli:

And that's too time consuming, I have no idea why it bothers you that I prefer a much easier method

It doesn't really bother me what you specifically prefer.

I was just commenting that people oughta actually know where their games are installed to and know how to "look under the hood" and do stuff if they find the need, rather than simply passing off installations to some bulky and resource-hogging client program and then not actually knowing what's on their computer or how their game files work. And consequently doing stupid things like deleting shortcuts and thinking that uninstalls a program.

Also would like all games to work on a drag-and-drop basis, such that all you need to do is to transfer a set of files and then they all work once they're together. That would be the maximum flexibility and modularness. But that might be asking too much.

All I ever said was that I like the convenience of having my games being so easy to launch. You just assumed I didn't know where all my games are located (which I do, I just don't care much where they are located as long as I can still play them).

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

Escrito originalmente por Coolieli:

Escrito originalmente por Quint the Island Fox:

It doesn't really bother me what you specifically prefer.

I was just commenting that people oughta actually know where their games are installed to and know how to "look under the hood" and do stuff if they find the need, rather than simply passing off installations to some bulky and resource-hogging client program and then not actually knowing what's on their computer or how their game files work. And consequently doing stupid things like deleting shortcuts and thinking that uninstalls a program.

Also would like all games to work on a drag-and-drop basis, such that all you need to do is to transfer a set of files and then they all work once they're together. That would be the maximum flexibility and modularness. But that might be asking too much.

All I ever said was that I like the convenience of having my games being so easy to launch. You just assumed I didn't know where all my games are located (which I do, I just don't care much where they are located as long as I can still play them).

I never assumed anything about you specifically.

Here's what I said:

Some days I curse how people are lazy about managing their installations and simply want convenience rather than actually setting things up and having that viscerally-satisfying feeling of double-clicking the executable.

Maybe you mistook me as talking about you specifically, since I replied to you. Sorry about that misunderstanding.

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

Also Steam's interface isn't all that convenient when I can't navigate it using keyboard.

[Merzbow]

Escrito originalmente por Quint the Island Fox:

Also Steam's interface isn't all that convenient when I can't navigate it using keyboard.

It actually is completely usable with just a keyboard, but it is more time consuming than just using a mouse. I have no idea why you'd have just a keyboard and no mouse when navigating anything on the computer though, unless you're just too lazy to reach over and use your mouse

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

Escrito originalmente por Coolieli:

Escrito originalmente por Quint the Island Fox:

Also Steam's interface isn't all that convenient when I can't navigate it using keyboard.

It actually is completely usable with just a keyboard, but it is more time consuming than just using a mouse. I have no idea why you'd have just a keyboard and no mouse when navigating anything on the computer though, unless you're just too lazy to reach over and use your mouse

I've got a keyboard and a mouse, but it takes longer to use the mouse. If we're talking about access speed, I can basically fast-type whatever I need to get to on the keyboard and let it rip, while I have to at least look at the screen to see where I'm clicking with the mouse.

Alternatively sometimes I do in fact feel tired and/or lazy and just have both my hands on the keyboard and I can open up Steam and I'm like "I can't figure out how to tab into anything here so ugh i guess I'll have to reach over to a mouse just to be able to see stuff".

I guess the library is accessible without mouse, so I'll give it credit for that.

[Costa]

Appreciate the feedback so far, but if the 'argument' can stop, it would be great. I would like more replies from people with their opinions, however if they are put off by 2 guys arguing, it wont be great. If you do want to carry on, please add eachother and talk via chat. Thanks

[Merzbow]

Escrito originalmente por Quint the Island Fox:

Escrito originalmente por Coolieli:

It actually is completely usable with just a keyboard, but it is more time consuming than just using a mouse. I have no idea why you'd have just a keyboard and no mouse when navigating anything on the computer though, unless you're just too lazy to reach over and use your mouse

I've got a keyboard and a mouse, but it takes longer to use the mouse. If we're talking about access speed, I can basically fast-type whatever I need to get to on the keyboard and let it rip, while I have to at least look at the screen to see where I'm clicking with the mouse.

Alternatively sometimes I do in fact feel tired and/or lazy and just have both my hands on the keyboard and I can open up Steam and I'm like "I can't figure out how to tab into anything here so ugh i guess I'll have to reach over to a mouse just to be able to see stuff".

I guess the library is accessible without mouse, so I'll give it credit for that.

If it takes longer to use the mouse, then you need a faster mouse. My mouse has 3000 dpi, so I can access anything at a reasonable speed with my mouse. The fact that you're too lazy to use the mouse sometimes is your own fault. I have my mouse directly next to my keyboard so it is really not that big of a deal. It takes more work for me to sit down in my chair than access my mouse

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

Escrito originalmente por Coolieli:

Escrito originalmente por Quint the Island Fox:

I've got a keyboard and a mouse, but it takes longer to use the mouse. If we're talking about access speed, I can basically fast-type whatever I need to get to on the keyboard and let it rip, while I have to at least look at the screen to see where I'm clicking with the mouse.

Alternatively sometimes I do in fact feel tired and/or lazy and just have both my hands on the keyboard and I can open up Steam and I'm like "I can't figure out how to tab into anything here so ugh i guess I'll have to reach over to a mouse just to be able to see stuff".

I guess the library is accessible without mouse, so I'll give it credit for that.

If it takes longer to use the mouse, then you need a faster mouse. My mouse has 3000 dpi, so I can access anything at a reasonable speed with my mouse. The fact that you're too lazy to use the mouse sometimes is your own fault. I have my mouse directly next to my keyboard so it is really not that big of a deal. It takes more work for me to sit down in my chair than access my mouse

My mouse itself doesn't move the cursor too slowly.

It's just that the mouse is about a foot away from the keyboard, especially with the keyboard's numpad in the way. If my hand is already on one thing, I don't always feel like moving it to the other one, because that involves moving my whole arm. And when I'm at the computer my hands are more often both on the keyboard because I'm typing a lot and I also tend to play games that can be played with keyboard alone.

I actually kinda like it better on a laptop with a touchpad right beneath the keyboard because it's closer.

So yeah I guess I am lazy about it. Alternatively I just do everything so much faster with keyboard.

Anyway, apologies to Costa, and I'll stop this here. Nice chatting.