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.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Цитата допису WolfEisberg:

Цитата допису SlowMango:

You mean like budgeting 6% of their 30% cut to that specific store and distributing the rest to their other projects?

When other developers work is involved, then the developers should only be paying for the service that is being given to them and not paying for stuff that has nothing to do with the services they are using.

They are paying for the service given to them.

[D. Flame]

Цитата допису WolfEisberg:

Цитата допису SlowMango:

Or to fund other things since not everything they do operates at a profit.

They need to figure out how to make a profit on those other things and stop ripping off the developers of so much money.

Android allows side loading and Alternate App Stores to be installed. If devs dislike the terms, they can distribute their apps without google.

The issue is that they just want to keep their cake and eat it too. They want all the benefits of Google Play with none of the costs and responsibilities.

[Ben Lubar]

Цитата допису WolfEisberg:

Цитата допису SlowMango:

You mean like budgeting 6% of their 30% cut to that specific store and distributing the rest to their other projects?

When other developers work is involved, then the developers should only be paying for the service that is being given to them and not paying for stuff that has nothing to do with the services they are using.

If developers don't want to put their games on Steam and use Steam's Steamworks services or don't want to put their games on the Play store or use Google's Play Services, they're welcome to pay for their own stuff and not use the storefront that essentially works like a government with taxation that every other developer is fine with.

[WolfEisberg]

Цитата допису Ben Lubar:

Цитата допису WolfEisberg:

They need to figure out how to make a profit on those other things and stop ripping off the developers of so much money.

If you want to try to make people pay for YouTube or Proton, you're welcome to try.

Proton is software for Steam, so that's already being paid for by the ~6% that Steam needs to cover the costs. Youtube needs to figure out to get more people to subscribe, or get more lucrative ads, just something else, app developers shouldn't be paying for it.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Цитата допису WolfEisberg:

Цитата допису Ben Lubar:

If you want to try to make people pay for YouTube or Proton, you're welcome to try.

Proton is software for Steam, so that's already being paid for by the ~6% that Steam needs to cover the costs. Youtube needs to figure out to get more people to subscribe, or get more lucrative ads, just something else, app developers shouldn't be paying for it.

"Just figure it out."

Man, why didn't they think of that?

[Ben Lubar]

Цитата допису WolfEisberg:

Цитата допису Ben Lubar:

If you want to try to make people pay for YouTube or Proton, you're welcome to try.

Proton is software for Steam, so that's already being paid for by the ~6% that Steam needs to cover the costs. Youtube needs to figure out to get more people to subscribe, or get more lucrative ads, just something else, app developers shouldn't be paying for it.

You can use Proton without Steam and you can view YouTube videos on Android devices. The lines between various things companies do aren't as set in stone as you think they are.

[❤ Sly Succubus ❤]

You know whats funny is that none of us are developers of games and out of all these years, only 2 so far out of all of Steam's history left to whine about the whole pay system, both of which have over the years tried several times to sue Steam and not once came close to even being in court?

Its like we can whine about if it was 2% or 30%, does it matter? Not in the least bit because we are not the developers that deal with it, its an issue we literally have no part of and mostly wont even if we get into development because only the guy who pays everyone else in the studio or even the smaller team would have any actual real value when they say anything

I get how Epic's CEO is running out of ideas how to personally goat Valve and most of his claims are just short of overblown issues that only he even understands as the guy who pays other people that are on Epic but he's whining to people that DO NOT remotely actually have any part in it

We can take this topic here for a perfect example, how many people here are developers? Now how many are the head dev or the guy paying the rest of the team? I bet no one is so frankly anything said in this entire long drawn out topic is literally void because NONE OF US literally HAVE ANY PART OF IT TO START WITH and!


AND


AND


Yes I will drag this out down to here.

AND IF THERE WAS AN ISSUE. Then the developers who are on Steam would come out and literally say there was an issue, they would not go and ask some dweeb from Epic to say he spoke with them, they would not speak to us users, no they would go to freaking Valve and speak to the business itself AS A BUSISESS WOULD

Seriously what was the entire point of this topic IF WE WERE NEVER INVOLVED WITH IT TO START WITH? "Oh no Valve takes 30%-" and oh no look its someone whos not remotely effected by it from the get go.

/s

[76561199648916059]

I developed a distaste for steams gimmicks, what your shoveling I'm not buying neither are a majority of real people that use steam. I get that some people will fall for everything, however some of us fall for nothing.

Steam wants to try of rid itself of people who see potential in other gaming store platforms, steams ego tripped to hard, but sadly it's like watching a fat kid cry at a video arcade after they lose.

Gabe in a nutshell , adult size old man who is still crying about how epic games wouldn't pay him 30% to watch more corn chips and make up lies about the products steam sells

[76561199566220743]

Цитата допису Majestically Awkward:

I developed a distaste for steams gimmicks, what your shoveling I'm not buying neither are a majority of real people that use steam. I get that some people will fall for everything, however some of us fall for nothing.

Steam wants to try of rid itself of people who see potential in other gaming store platforms, steams ego tripped to hard, but sadly it's like watching a fat kid cry at a video arcade after they lose.

Gabe in a nutshell , adult size old man who is still crying about how epic games wouldn't pay him 30% to watch more corn chips and make up lies about the products steam sells

You're no more a "real person who uses steam" than the advertising bots who post scam links.

[D. Flame]

Цитата допису ❤ Succubus with BFG ❤:

-snip-

irrelevant appeal to authority fallacy

If you can't run a successful business without trying to dictate the way other business are run and how much they can charge you for their own services, then you don't deserve to run a business, period.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Цитата допису D. Flame:

Цитата допису ❤ Succubus with BFG ❤:

-snip-

irrelevant appeal to authority fallacy

If you can't run a successful business without trying to dictate the way other business are run and how much they can charge you for their own services, then you don't deserve to run a business, period.

That wasn't an appeal to authority.

[D. Flame]

Цитата допису SlowMango:

Цитата допису D. Flame:

irrelevant appeal to authority fallacy

If you can't run a successful business without trying to dictate the way other business are run and how much they can charge you for their own services, then you don't deserve to run a business, period.

That wasn't an appeal to authority.

Цитата допису ❤ Succubus with BFG ❤:

You know whats funny is that none of us are developers of games

Not in the least bit because we are not the developers

even if we get into development because only the guy who pays everyone else in the studio or even the smaller team would have any actual real value when they say anything

We can take this topic here for a perfect example, how many people here are developers? Now how many are the head dev or the guy paying the rest of the team? I bet no one is so frankly anything said in this entire long drawn out topic is literally void because NONE OF US literally HAVE ANY PART OF IT TO START WITH

[Boblin the Goblin]

Цитата допису D. Flame:

Цитата допису SlowMango:

That wasn't an appeal to authority.

Цитата допису ❤ Succubus with BFG ❤:

You know whats funny is that none of us are developers of games

Not in the least bit because we are not the developers

even if we get into development because only the guy who pays everyone else in the studio or even the smaller team would have any actual real value when they say anything

We can take this topic here for a perfect example, how many people here are developers? Now how many are the head dev or the guy paying the rest of the team? I bet no one is so frankly anything said in this entire long drawn out topic is literally void because NONE OF US literally HAVE ANY PART OF IT TO START WITH

I know what the comment is.

It isn't an appeal to authority.

[76561199648916059]

I play games on steam however as of late most valve games are nothing but cheating, far more noticable and empowered by valve to cheat, then even epic, yes it's a well known fact epic used bots in fortnite the same way steam uses bots in csgo-2. Half the population is always a bot or the games fail, the tricks not letting people know they are bots.

Which is what steam has done for it's review system and it's forums, bots running around with steam employes at the helm switching accounts trying to defame and harass all users that speak up about steams mismanagement and obvious manipulation of both forum content and the games being sold.

Steams learning the hard way when they start to lash out at people, those same people lash back, steam has a army of bots, but real users have the ability to stand up and boycott the steam gimmick

[D. Flame]

Цитата допису SlowMango:

Цитата допису D. Flame:

I know what the comment is.

It isn't an appeal to authority.

I trimmed it down to every part that is specifically an appeal to authority. If you can't understand it, then there is nothing more that I can do.