Stand with Tim 12%! Epic Sweeney 2024! 30% Cripples Innovation

[Rob⛧Slayer]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czQh1vj1jF8

When talking to ChatGPT gets interesting...

Valve's influence on the gaming industry extends beyond its innovative monetization strategies to include its controversial 30% revenue cut from game sales on its platform, Steam. Initially, when Steam launched, this cut was arguably justified by the costs associated with maintaining the platform and providing services like server hosting, updates, and customer support. However, critics argue that in today's market, Valve's costs have decreased significantly due to technological advancements and economies of scale, making the 30% cut seem excessive and unjustified.

Furthermore, Valve's dominance in the digital distribution market, fueled by its loyal fanbase and the popularity of its titles like Team Fortress 2 and Dota 2, has enabled it to leverage its position to push potential competitors out of the market. By exploiting its fandom's mythology and loyalty, Valve has effectively discouraged developers and publishers from exploring alternative distribution platforms, thereby reinforcing its monopoly-like status in the PC gaming market.

This consolidation of power has led to concerns about Valve's ability to dictate terms to developers and publishers, potentially stifling competition and innovation in the industry. Critics argue that Valve's influence over game sales, coupled with its control over Steam's algorithms and storefront visibility, can result in unfair advantages for certain titles while marginalizing others.

In essence, while Valve's contributions to gaming monetization and distribution have been significant, there are valid criticisms regarding its revenue-sharing model and the impact of its dominance on market competition. As the gaming industry continues to evolve, it's essential for stakeholders to address these concerns and strive for a more equitable and diverse ecosystem that prioritizes the interests of both developers and players.

Introduction of Microtransactions: Valve was at the forefront of popularizing microtransactions in video games with the introduction of the "Mann Co. Store" in Team Fortress 2 in 2010. This move allowed players to purchase in-game items, cosmetics, and other virtual goods using real money. The success of this model demonstrated the potential profitability of microtransactions and paved the way for their widespread adoption by other developers and publishers. However, the focus on maximizing revenue through microtransactions may have sometimes come at the expense of prioritizing player experience and game design innovation.

Valve's approach to monetization, particularly through its own game titles like Team Fortress 2 and Dota 2, has indeed had a significant impact on industry standards. Here's a deeper dive into how Valve's practices have influenced the gaming industry:

Valve's Platform as a Testing Ground: As both a developer and a platform holder, Valve had a unique position to experiment with various monetization models. By observing the success of microtransactions in its own games, Valve provided a blueprint for other developers to follow. This success demonstrated that well-implemented microtransactions could generate significant revenue without compromising the core gameplay experience, leading to their adoption by many other games across the industry. However, the dominance of Valve's platform may have limited competition and innovation in monetization practices, as developers may have been incentivized to mimic successful models rather than explore new approaches.

Community Marketplaces and Trading: Valve further expanded the possibilities for monetization with the introduction of community marketplaces and trading systems within games like Team Fortress 2 and Dota 2. These systems allowed players to buy, sell, and trade in-game items with each other, creating new revenue streams for both Valve and players. This innovative approach to player-driven economies influenced other games to implement similar systems, further normalizing the concept of virtual item trading within the gaming industry. However, the proliferation of trading and marketplace systems has also led to concerns about gambling-like behavior and the exploitation of vulnerable players, particularly minors.

Influence on AAA Titles: Valve's success with microtransactions and other forms of monetization in its games influenced the development strategies of AAA titles from other publishers. Many big-budget releases began incorporating similar monetization systems, such as loot boxes, season passes, and cosmetic item sales, as a way to generate additional revenue beyond the initial purchase price. Valve's success demonstrated that these monetization strategies could be lucrative even for high-profile releases, leading to their widespread adoption across the industry. However, this trend may have contributed to a focus on short-term profit maximization rather than long-term player satisfaction and creative innovation.

Normalization of Monetization Practices: Perhaps most significantly, Valve's adoption of microtransactions and other forms of monetization helped normalize these practices within the gaming industry. What was once seen as controversial or exploitative has become widely accepted as standard practice. However, this normalization has also sparked debates about the ethics and impact of monetization on game design and player experience, with concerns raised about potential exploitation and the creation of pay-to-win mechanics. As a result, developers, publishers, and platforms must navigate a delicate balance between profitability and maintaining player trust and satisfaction.

In summary, while Valve's innovative approach to monetization has undoubtedly reshaped the gaming landscape, there are concerns that the pursuit of profit may have sometimes overshadowed considerations for player experience, creativity, and ethical integrity. Moving forward, it's essential for all stakeholders in the gaming industry to prioritize the creation of engaging and immersive experiences while ensuring transparency, fairness, and respect for players' rights and well-being.

[76561199559798421]

OMG that review i has seen it like 100 times or more in dozens of games, that is the perfect example of the fake good reviews that are flooding steam, where is the steam review moderators to remove that false content from the game reviews?

i am under the impression that epic games is out preforming steam which is why everyone who is steam loyal hates epic games and any talks about it.

my perspective is different from a majority of the brainwashed individuals who are marketed to everyday. my perspective is nobody is really buying anything on steam because the real users on steam hardly exist, that steam is full of steam owned an controlled accounts that write fake reviews and populate games with in platform purchasing to self promote products for developers.

that the real developers you see on steam struggle to get a few 1000 people on most games, even high end studio games struggle like this.

either way my perspective might be flawed no denial on that, but in the case its not then i can only imagine how much better epic games is doing then steam.

[Pierce Dalton]

Originalmente postado por BJWyler:

What many people conveniently choose to ignore in topics like this, is that multi-billion dollar corporations become multi-billion dollar corporations for a reason. One of those reasons is by not holding on to dead weight.

Whether tencent made 20 Billion last year or 20 Quadrilltion trillion is irrelevent, as is how much they lost on the EGS. At some point corporations expect returns on their investments. That's why they invest in the the first place. No one invests in something just to keep on losing money hand over fist ad infinitum on it. That's how you go out of business. So whether the there's a 5 year plan, a 10 year plan, or a what have you plan in the books, at some point, everyone with an investment in the EGS expects that a profit will be made off of it at some point in time. If it fails to meet those expectations, then the necrotic flesh gets cut away. Happens all the time in business - when employees get the pink slip, when company policies get changed, and when loss leaders are shed. Losing propositions are just that, and will eventually be treated as such if they fail to change.

Personally speaking, I care nothing for Steam, EGS, WildTangent, Humble, or any of these online retail gaming stores. Whether they exist for another Century or wink out of existence in the next hour is completely immaterial to me outside of the one factor of being able to play my games. Quite frankly, I see far too much fanboying around here on both sides. It's really all quite silly to me. So y'all can keep up with your genitalia measuring contests. I'll still be eating over at the big boy's table, enjoying my games, regardless of who sells them.

Well, another thing that people conveninetly choose to ignore is that EGS doesn't even need to sell games to see profits. Funnily enough, the same applies to Steam because they do have Counter Strike. If tomorrow Steam stopped selling 3rd party games, it would still survive for many years thanks to CS.

[cinedine]

Originalmente postado por The nameless Commander:

GOG is bombarding me with coupons, I am emptying my E-mail box every month. All for games I don't care about.

Opt out of their marketing emails?
Every email has a link to their unsubscribe page at the bottom (as required per EU).

[The nameless Gamer]

Originalmente postado por cinedine:

Originalmente postado por The nameless Commander:

GOG is bombarding me with coupons, I am emptying my E-mail box every month. All for games I don't care about.

Opt out of their marketing emails?
Every email has a link to their unsubscribe page at the bottom (as required per EU).

I'm not saying it's necessarily a bad thing. Just pointing out that Epic are not the only ones handing out coupons left, right and center. I know, I made it sound like I'm annoyed, but it's actually not really that much of a hassle. They don't clog up my primary mailbox. And maybe something of what they throw at my wall WILL end up sticking. It's like playing a lottery without buying the ticket.

[Brian9824]

Originalmente postado por The nameless Commander:

Originalmente postado por cinedine:

Opt out of their marketing emails?
Every email has a link to their unsubscribe page at the bottom (as required per EU).

I'm not saying it's necessarily a bad thing. Just pointing out that Epic are not the only ones handing out coupons left, right and center. I know, I made it sound like I'm annoyed, but it's actually not really that much of a hassle. They don't clog up my primary mailbox. And maybe something of what they throw at my wall WILL end up sticking. It's like playing a lottery without buying the ticket.

Typically in business the struggling businesses are the ones that are handing out coupons left and right in a desperate bid to draw people in. When your business is suceeding you don't have to push it so hard.

Coupon's are a nasty double edged sword that can do more harm then good. When you often have coupons people get into the mentality that they won't buy from you unless there is a coupon and you are inflicting long term damage for a short term gain.

[( ( < < <🤖> > > ) )]

egs would of been better to start off with offering
a get $35 credit with every $100 spent... spend $1000 get $350 more to spend..

i am sure people would have jumped at something like that in the start of egs..
gamers would make purchases that are meaningful making a stronger
sense of connection to the store... free games is no connection..

do they have a sales and marketing team...

[Brian9824]

Originalmente postado por ragefifty50:

egs would of been better to start off with offering
a get $35 credit with every $100 spent... spend $1000 get $350 more to spend..

i am sure people would have jumped at something like that in the start of egs..
gamers would make purchases that are meaningful making a stronger
sense of connection to the store... free games is no connection..

do they have a sales and marketing team...

That would completely bankrupt them lol.

When you spend $100, they only get $12 of it, so for every $100 you'd spend they'd lost $23 (that isn't including the operating costs that would raise that even more). With the 12% commission which most users don't care about they don't have much room to discount it for the user without screwing themselves.

They were hoping dev's would offer their games cheaper but whomever on their team thought that would happen wasn't very bright....

[Pierce Dalton]

Originalmente postado por The nameless Commander:

Originalmente postado por Pierce Dalton:

Well, at least one game in your library can be considered AAA. Besides, the majority of games given away by EGS is not AAA but that isn't the point here. So let's get to it... reviews are an interesting feature, but far from essential. Honestly, I hope that EGS never adds reviews or I'll start seeing this there too:

"I am a 45 yo father, probably one of the oldest people playing this game. I am a single father to my Son, who is 14 now. My son got this game for Christmas in 2021 from his uncle, so we installed it on his computer and he started playing. By the end of the week he had 24 hours on this game. This was horrible for me, as it was already hard for me to find ways to spend time with my son, as he is always out with his friends or just watching YouTube. So i decided to make a Steam account and get this game to see if I could maybe play alongside him. I loaded into the game, picked my character and world and started playing but I was stuck on what you where supposed to do. I asked my Son for help and he hosted a game for me to join. I loved it as it was the best time I had spent with my Son since my wife had died. This game has ever since brought me and my son closer again and now we actually spend time together outside the house together as well. This game reminded me that there's fun to be had in everything, and it has brought both me and my Son many happy memories."

Game hubs can be used to find answers, sure, but so can Google. As a last resort, you can always contact the devs if you have a question about a game. I rarely post anything on them, I consider it a pretty much useless feature that I wouldn't miss at all. Same for reviews honestly, the only reason I write reviews is to keep track of how many games from my library I've played.

Well, I prefer using a dedicated game hub because it narrows down the search. It spares me the trouble of wading through millions of potentially useless hits on Goggle. Most of the time, a game-related question I post on the Steam community hub gets answered within a few hours. I don't have to pester the developer either if the question can be answered by another player. And if I'm stuck on a portion of the game, which is more efficient? If I waste a few hours slogging through a "let's play" on Youtube or posting a question on the specific instance in question and get a screenshot and explanation in return?

Fine, you do you, mate. That doesn't change the fact that for me (and some other people) those things are not important. As for pestering the developers, in reality it's common to see them replying to threads in their own game hubs so I don't see any difference there, and if it's an obscure game you'll hardly get any replies from other users. About YouTube, you don't have to waste a few hours, you can simply skip to the section you wanna see.

[Pierce Dalton]

Originalmente postado por brian9824:

Originalmente postado por ragefifty50:

egs would of been better to start off with offering
a get $35 credit with every $100 spent... spend $1000 get $350 more to spend..

i am sure people would have jumped at something like that in the start of egs..
gamers would make purchases that are meaningful making a stronger
sense of connection to the store... free games is no connection..

do they have a sales and marketing team...

That would completely bankrupt them lol.

When you spend $100, they only get $12 of it, so for every $100 you'd spend they'd lost $23

I thought they were bankrupt already.

[The nameless Gamer]

Originalmente postado por brian9824:

Originalmente postado por The nameless Commander:

I'm not saying it's necessarily a bad thing. Just pointing out that Epic are not the only ones handing out coupons left, right and center. I know, I made it sound like I'm annoyed, but it's actually not really that much of a hassle. They don't clog up my primary mailbox. And maybe something of what they throw at my wall WILL end up sticking. It's like playing a lottery without buying the ticket.

Typically in business the struggling businesses are the ones that are handing out coupons left and right in a desperate bid to draw people in. When your business is suceeding you don't have to push it so hard.

Coupon's are a nasty double edged sword that can do more harm then good. When you often have coupons people get into the mentality that they won't buy from you unless there is a coupon and you are inflicting long term damage for a short term gain.

I'm afraid you aren't wrong. For me, the game has to be worth the full price to get it. I got "Battletech", "Front Mission 1st Remake" and "Bloodstained - Ritual of the night" on GOG day 1 at full price and did not regret it at all. They just happen not to drop games I'm into frequently enough. GOG's best shtick seems to harm them a little too much: developers and publishers don't seem to like their "No-DRM-policy". Maybe I'm wrong and that's not the reason, I just can't think of any other.

Does that mean Epic are struggling too, if they're shooting coupons on rapid fire?

[Start_Running]

Originalmente postado por The nameless Commander:

Originalmente postado por brian9824:

Typically in business the struggling businesses are the ones that are handing out coupons left and right in a desperate bid to draw people in. When your business is suceeding you don't have to push it so hard.

Coupon's are a nasty double edged sword that can do more harm then good. When you often have coupons people get into the mentality that they won't buy from you unless there is a coupon and you are inflicting long term damage for a short term gain.

I'm afraid you aren't wrong. For me, the game has to be worth the full price to get it. I got "Battletech", "Front Mission 1st Remake" and "Bloodstained - Ritual of the night" on GOG day 1 at full price and did not regret it at all. They just happen not to drop games I'm into frequently enough. GOG's best shtick seems to harm them a little too much: developers and publishers don't seem to like their "No-DRM-policy". Maybe I'm wrong and that's not the reason, I just can't think of any other.

Does that mean Epic are struggling too, if they're shooting coupons on rapid fire?

GoG has actually started to give ground on that no-Drm policy.

[The nameless Gamer]

Originalmente postado por Pierce Dalton:

Originalmente postado por The nameless Commander:

Well, I prefer using a dedicated game hub because it narrows down the search. It spares me the trouble of wading through millions of potentially useless hits on Goggle. Most of the time, a game-related question I post on the Steam community hub gets answered within a few hours. I don't have to pester the developer either if the question can be answered by another player. And if I'm stuck on a portion of the game, which is more efficient? If I waste a few hours slogging through a "let's play" on Youtube or posting a question on the specific instance in question and get a screenshot and explanation in return?

Fine, you do you, mate. That doesn't change the fact that for me (and some other people) those things are not important. As for pestering the developers, in reality it's common to see them replying to threads in their own game hubs so I don't see any difference there, and if it's an obscure game you'll hardly get any replies from other users. About YouTube, you don't have to waste a few hours, you can simply skip to the section you wanna see.

Like you said, you do you. I have nothing against Epic nor people who are using it. I do have something against people aggressively shoving the EGS into my face on Steam's community hubs. If EGS themselves can't provide an incentive for me to use their services, these EGS "crusaders" won't have more success either. And like I said in an earlier post: I don't have enough faith in them in addition to the lacking service. Even if GOG goes under, I can still preserve the games I bought there. I can NOT preserve the licenses obtained on Steam and Epic, but Steam seems to be on very solid ground right now, whereas Epic are like a house built at the base of a volcano.

[Brian9824]

Originalmente postado por The nameless Commander:

Originalmente postado por brian9824:

Typically in business the struggling businesses are the ones that are handing out coupons left and right in a desperate bid to draw people in. When your business is suceeding you don't have to push it so hard.

Coupon's are a nasty double edged sword that can do more harm then good. When you often have coupons people get into the mentality that they won't buy from you unless there is a coupon and you are inflicting long term damage for a short term gain.

I'm afraid you aren't wrong. For me, the game has to be worth the full price to get it. I got "Battletech", "Front Mission 1st Remake" and "Bloodstained - Ritual of the night" on GOG day 1 at full price and did not regret it at all. They just happen not to drop games I'm into frequently enough. GOG's best shtick seems to harm them a little too much: developers and publishers don't seem to like their "No-DRM-policy". Maybe I'm wrong and that's not the reason, I just can't think of any other.

Does that mean Epic are struggling too, if they're shooting coupons on rapid fire?

GoG its the no DRM policy as the main reason, they also aren't a fan of their refund policy either, but the lack of any DRM makes most developers not release their titles to GoG until they've basically exhausted their sales on other platforms.

EPIC is a literal textbook example on how not to operate a business. They started off with a fine concept, giving away free games to draw in and build up their user base is perfectly fine. However its a SHORT TERM approach.

The problem is they realized that once they STOPPED giving away the games they had nothing to actually get those users to buy games from them. You can see that from their own numbers and the low attachment rates and low sales of third party titles.

Ideally EPIC would have transitioned out of the free games within the first year, which would drasticaly lower their expenses and let them operate at worst case with minimal losses. The problem now is that their store is synonymous now with free games to the point people won't even buy from them and just go there for the free stuff. If they ever stop it those users will just leave, and its a VERY hard hole to dig themselves out of.

[Pierce Dalton]

Originalmente postado por Start_Running:

Originalmente postado por The nameless Commander:

I'm afraid you aren't wrong. For me, the game has to be worth the full price to get it. I got "Battletech", "Front Mission 1st Remake" and "Bloodstained - Ritual of the night" on GOG day 1 at full price and did not regret it at all. They just happen not to drop games I'm into frequently enough. GOG's best shtick seems to harm them a little too much: developers and publishers don't seem to like their "No-DRM-policy". Maybe I'm wrong and that's not the reason, I just can't think of any other.

Does that mean Epic are struggling too, if they're shooting coupons on rapid fire?

GoG has actually started to give ground on that no-Drm policy.

Only to people that misinterpret what DRM is. All the games available on GOG can be installed from an offline installer, which means that you can (but should not) freely distribute and share them. Evidently, preventing this is the very reason why DRM exists.

[The nameless Gamer]

Originalmente postado por Start_Running:

Originalmente postado por The nameless Commander:

I'm afraid you aren't wrong. For me, the game has to be worth the full price to get it. I got "Battletech", "Front Mission 1st Remake" and "Bloodstained - Ritual of the night" on GOG day 1 at full price and did not regret it at all. They just happen not to drop games I'm into frequently enough. GOG's best shtick seems to harm them a little too much: developers and publishers don't seem to like their "No-DRM-policy". Maybe I'm wrong and that's not the reason, I just can't think of any other.

Does that mean Epic are struggling too, if they're shooting coupons on rapid fire?

GoG has actually started to give ground on that no-Drm policy.

Unfortunately. Whether they'll survive giving up their main selling point... that remains to be seen. I believe they should have stuck to their guns and focused on preserving old titles from becoming unplayable instead of trying to tussle with the big players but I'm not a business expert. Seems like their experts made a few wrong calls though.