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.

[Pierce Dalton]

Publicado originalmente por brian9824:

Publicado originalmente por WolfEisberg:

Tencent's revenue isn't relevant anyways.

Even if it was relevant I'm not sure why people keep ignoring basic logic. A company can be profitable, but that doesn't mean every product in that company is profitable.

If someone had a company with 10 products and they know they can never make a profit off 2 of their products they don't keep producing them forever at a loss. They cut their losses, drop those products, and focus the money on what is profitable.

Yup, that's exactly why Toyota stopped production of other cars and only focuses on the Corolla model now.

[Pierce Dalton]

Publicado originalmente por Crazy Tiger:

Publicado originalmente por WolfEisberg:

- Loyalty Program, get 5-10% back in rewards that can be spent on buying games/DLC/Microtransactions.

- No forced updating of games (Steam does forced updating of games)

- A choice to use official EGS client, or community created clients like Heroic Launcher, Legendary, or Playnite.

- real family share, where 2+ people can play from the same account at the same time with 2+ different games on 2+ different computers with in the same household, both being online.

None of that is relevant when the store doesn't have the games someone wants.

I'm in the same boat as nameless commander, the catalog the EGS has isn't actually interesting for me and what little they have I can get on the other platforms I already use. They're currently still irrelevant in that regard.

So is Gamersgate, mind. First digital store I used, but completely irrelevant nowadays.

Well, thanks for mentioning Gamersgate, Tiger. It's a bit funny that people keep saying EGS will eventually shutdown but Gamersgate still exists... of course, one may argue that Gamersgate doesn't purchase and give away free games, but they do purchase keys, lots of it. And how many do they sell yearly?

I don't know, but it can't be much.

[Doomerang]

No. Unless the games are cheaper for me to pass the savings down like they lied about.

[Start_Running]

Publicado originalmente por ragefifty50:

Publicado originalmente por Start_Running:

[Citation Needed]
Keep in mind the data being refferred to was 'Hardware Data'. Your usage habits and whatnot are another thing entirely and you did opt into it by creating your account. since you had to agree to the SSA and in doing so grant them explicit license to do so.

everything we buy in computer digital world is similar ToS...

Your physical software disks also came with a TOS . So did the cartidges you bought in the days of yor.

Publicado originalmente por ragefifty50:

again i could be wrong... just because your data is not
presented in survey at your request.. does not mean staff
at steam/valve cant see your hardware data at anytime either...

They actually can't. Whgen working out some issues some years back i was actually asked about y hardware I was actually ask to copuy the information in system information and send it to them.

If they had access to that data, they wouldn't have asked me to submit it.

Publicado originalmente por ragefifty50:

they would have full access to your account which is their account...

But your hardware data isn't really stored in your account data. Since your account can be accessed from any number of machines.

Publicado originalmente por ragefifty50:

i am really not sure what your trying to say...

they dont know i am using a stick of ram or they do..

i can think they do... just by what makes sense to me...

Yeah you can think that. You can think of lots of weird conspiracy theories.
Those with actual evidence, know otherwise.

Publicado originalmente por Pierce Dalton:

Publicado originalmente por brian9824:

Even if it was relevant I'm not sure why people keep ignoring basic logic. A company can be profitable, but that doesn't mean every product in that company is profitable.

If someone had a company with 10 products and they know they can never make a profit off 2 of their products they don't keep producing them forever at a loss. They cut their losses, drop those products, and focus the money on what is profitable.

Yup, that's exactly why Toyota stopped production of other cars and only focuses on the Corolla model now.

This is true. but that's the exception to the rule and usually that's because of some clause or sentimental value. Or good old nepotism. I mean if it's the CEO's daughter's product line better believe they gonna keep making it.

THing is. Thats usually the sign of bad business practices or mismanagement and is considered a red flag. Wghich is why they generally find a way to make it profitable or they can it.

A common trick is to justapply the name of the failing product to an actual successful product.

[Pierce Dalton]

Publicado originalmente por Start_Running:

Publicado originalmente por Pierce Dalton:

Yup, that's exactly why Toyota stopped production of other cars and only focuses on the Corolla model now.

This is true. but that's the exception to the rule and usually that's because of some clause or sentimental value. Or good old nepotism. I mean if it's the CEO's daughter's product line better believe they gonna keep making it.

THing is. Thats usually the sign of bad business practices or mismanagement and is considered a red flag. Wghich is why they generally find a way to make it profitable or they can it.

A common trick is to justapply the name of the failing product to an actual successful product.

You know what else is true? Steam, EGS, GOG or any other store doesn't invest anything in the production of games except for their own games. Therefore, there's zero reason to stop offering them even if they're not selling much.

The only expenses generated by that are storage and bandwidth, that's pocket change for companies that deal with billions.

[Zefar]

Publicado originalmente por Rob⛧Pentakill:

Steam moderators are volunteers and rarely ever do developers pay someone to moderate. Community managers get paid (sometimes) support gets paid - not moderators.

Eeeeh no, that's not how it is.
Steam Moderators as those that works for Valve are paid. All of them. They are not Volunteer because they applied for a job position at the third party company to be Moderators on the entire Steam community.

Now third party Moderators on various game forums on Steam that a Developer has appointed are free but they are not really "Steam" Moderators. Just Moderators for that section.

Publicado originalmente por Rob⛧Pentakill:

Just because Steam is baseline doesn't mean it isn't invasive DRM. We're being punished for buying games legally.

If they're going to collect our data for research and development they should at least give us free games once a week like Epic does or.... take less from the industry so developers don't have to worry as much about cost and can make better games. 30% cripples innovation and forces developers to take less risks.

30% cripples innovation? I'm sure you got some proof of this right?

Lethal Company did pretty damn well and it was innovative.

[( ( < < <🤖> > > ) )]

Publicado originalmente por Start_Running:

Publicado originalmente por ragefifty50:

everything we buy in computer digital world is similar ToS...

Your physical software disks also came with a TOS . So did the cartidges you bought in the days of yor.

Publicado originalmente por ragefifty50:

again i could be wrong... just because your data is not
presented in survey at your request.. does not mean staff
at steam/valve cant see your hardware data at anytime either...

They actually can't. Whgen working out some issues some years back i was actually asked about y hardware I was actually ask to copuy the information in system information and send it to them.

If they had access to that data, they wouldn't have asked me to submit it.

Publicado originalmente por ragefifty50:

they would have full access to your account which is their account...

But your hardware data isn't really stored in your account data. Since your account can be accessed from any number of machines.

Publicado originalmente por ragefifty50:

i am really not sure what your trying to say...

they dont know i am using a stick of ram or they do..

i can think they do... just by what makes sense to me...

Yeah you can think that. You can think of lots of weird conspiracy theories.
Those with actual evidence, know otherwise.

i really dont do conspiracy...... just because you are requested to
send something doesnt mean its not just part of a process...

me clicking on steam system info could record my system
data on a steam data base.... forever... and i have done and do the survey...

is it possible... yes... nothing to make up to create a conspiracy

my data could be scraped from any discussion i may have
about my computer also... i use window 11 and led ram... oh no.... security breach...

anything is possible... does it really matter... no... not to me..

the place where i bought my computer... now thats another story....

[cinedine]

Publicado originalmente por Zefar:

30% cripples innovation? I'm sure you got some proof of this right?

Lethal Company did pretty damn well and it was innovative.

What is so innovative about Lethal Company? Looks a lot like Deep Rock Galaxy, Phantasmowhateever or a lot of co-op heist games just without the waves of enemies. Also, IIRC that game is done by a single person.

The more you can get out of a product, the less risky it is to produce it. That's why Hollywood has become stale and we mainly see the same blockbuster concepts that have proven well in cinema since DVD sales have fallen off. Before you could have a bust in the box office but make it all back in DVDs.

[LoTekRabbit]

Some of y'all really need to get out more.

[Tito Shivan]

Publicado originalmente por Rob⛧Pentakill:

Valve's fandom is part of the problem they've created a mythology around Valve that doesn't exist and their arguments don't hold water.

Publicado originalmente por SlowMango:

This is the problem with Valve's fandom - the mythology and inflated achievements.

Never said it was "all Valve".[/quote]
Not sure what's your beef with the revenue share of games you've repeatedly claimed won't buy anyway.
It's not like you're buying games on Epic either. Just piggybacking off the freebies.

Publicado originalmente por SlowMango:

I mean, the emails from the Wolfire lawsuit show that it seems like the store was launched with the plan of Steam backing so they could use it in the Apple lawsuit. When Valve didn't comply, Tim Sweeny threw a little fit because he knew it meant the end of his lawsuit.

It's not that surprising, TBH. It was a loss-leader tactic played by the book and they were pretty transparent about it.

IT was kinda double 'failed' in a sense. Steam didn't really have to follow through because devs didn't really change ship in large enough numbers and most just 'double dipped' on Epic like they did in other stores.
In a sense exclusives would have been a more effective way to strongarm Valve into their bidding, however it was a sensibly more expensive strategy to follow through.

[( ( < < <🤖> > > ) )]

Publicado originalmente por LoTekRabbit:

Some of y'all really need to get out more.

we are all sitting in park playing on our computers... .... where are you...

[Boblin the Goblin]

Publicado originalmente por Rob⛧Pentakill:

Publicado originalmente por SlowMango:

Devs have to opt out of Steam support moderating their forums.

By default, Steam support moderates their forums.

Steams DRM is baseline is just requires Steam to be running. It doesn't require an Internet connection after first launch.

Steam moderators are volunteers and rarely ever do developers pay someone to moderate. Community managers get paid (sometimes) support gets paid - not moderators.

Just because Steam is baseline doesn't mean it isn't invasive DRM. We're being punished for buying games legally.

If they're going to collect our data for research and development they should at least give us free games once a week like Epic does or.... take less from the industry so developers don't have to worry as much about cost and can make better games. 30% cripples innovation and forces developers to take less risks.

Again, you are wrong about the moderators.

Game hub moderators can be volunteers or employees if the developer if they opt out of Steam support moderation. If they don't, the moderation team is the same paid moderators that moderate these forums. Steam does not enlist volunteer moderators anymore.

Devs can choose whether to have DRM in their games. Steam's DRM isn't a requirement, it's only offered.

Developers are free to put their games on sale whenever they like. Nothing is stopping them from giving out their games.

If that 30% really crippled innovation, we wouldn't be getting smash hits like Valhiem, Stardew Valley, Dead Cells, Project Zomboid, Deep Rock Galactic, Lethal Company, etc.

[Silenius]

This is why we cannot have good things like OpenAI turning to profit and it is just greed greed greed. Di di di make more money you have billions that lose all value anyways... If you see on street 5 cents drop to canal i know you are going to go there you have to have it Di di di di di... Endless greed... See only money, have sex with money, eat money, sleep on money for eternity nothing else...

[Rob⛧Slayer]

This community is eventually gonna have to start talking about its parasocial relationship with Valve and how toxic it is for the industry. This fandom’s mythology makes it impossible for Valve to evolve.

[Brian9824]

Publicado originalmente por Rob⛧Pentakill:

This community is eventually gonna have to start talking about its parasocial relationship with Valve and how toxic it is for the industry. This fandom’s mythology makes it impossible for Valve to evolve.

You should check out the steam beta news. Some new great features being tested right now. Seems to be evolving just fine.