Instale o Steam
iniciar sessão
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chinês simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chinês tradicional)
日本語 (Japonês)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandês)
Български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Tcheco)
Dansk (Dinamarquês)
Deutsch (Alemão)
English (Inglês)
Español-España (Espanhol — Espanha)
Español-Latinoamérica (Espanhol — América Latina)
Ελληνικά (Grego)
Français (Francês)
Italiano (Italiano)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonésio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandês)
Norsk (Norueguês)
Polski (Polonês)
Português (Portugal)
Română (Romeno)
Русский (Russo)
Suomi (Finlandês)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Relatar um problema com a tradução
Regras e diretrizes para discussões
Denunciar esta mensagem
Regions is a problem
But hell its just my guess
Not really. Invisible Inc and GalCiv3 did that for quite awhile before becoming available to the unwashed masses of Steam.
Games that have been removed from Steam are still available to users to download(with that one exception from SquareEnix about an online-only-ish game). Even if a publisher yanks a game from Steam, you can still play it. The entire infrastructure of Steam needs to exist for all the otehr games, thus the incremental cost of having an additional one is pretty much negligible at this point.
If a publisher like Activision or EA sells one of their own games on Steam, then Steam gets a cut of the sale.
But if another website sells an Activision or EA game is activated on Steam, Steam does not get a cut.
Hm.
That's the jist of it.
Because really if you think about it for most game devs Steam isn't a 'competitor'. If you're an indie dev, Steam doesn't really compete with your game. It gives you lots of free tools and simplifies development with a single platform. Remember that in the 'old' days, if you had your game on say GG, Impulse, Gamefly, etc. you'd have to package your game in entirely separate ways for each platform. Want to patch? Yep repackage your patch for each and test separately. Now you can build once, and all your customers get patches/updates etc quickly. Want to sell on more stores? Just generate keys and give them to whatever store you want. Steam is popular with devs because it streamlines a lot of your deployment, and gives you free things. And that's a good thing when typical middleware costs can be $25-100k a pop. The Source licence requires you to 'pay down' a $25k Havok licence fee. Scaleform's UI license isn't cheap either. So 'free' is very appealing.
Steam's competitors are basically other stores. And those stores saw the writing on teh wall back in MW2 days. When they decided to boycott selling MW2 because it required the Steam client. As you can imagine that went about as well as expected. Users simply bought the game from Steam because other stores werent selling it. MW2 was a best seller. Steam sold a gazillion copies. Those other stores sold zero copies. Steam is now the de-facto store for PC gaming, and everyone else is "that other store that isn't Steam"
If you think about it not many other stores have an actual integrated user experience. The only actual 'competitors' to Steam are:
Origin: which has had some form of Origin-lite in the past via EADM. They've always been kinda in the distribution game. But only really went full bore client store with Origin.
UPlay: Even this is very new. uPlay up until very recently (2012) didn't even patch your games! Nor could you even download your games from uPlay! They were reliant on DigitalRiver before when you 'bought' anything from their store. And by 'bought' they mean "you have 30 days to download the installer otherwise you just paid us $50 for nothing, unless you buy our Download Insurance"
Battle.Net: Activision itself doesn't seem to want to get into the PC arena, since they use Steam, but Blizzard has always been there. But even here, only recently has Battle.net really become an entirely integrated platform for Blizzard's PC games. And its only for it's own games.
The rest like Rockstar Social are just client addons but aren't really integrated stores or download game managers. GFWL is dead.
There really are no competitors to Steam. Origin/uPlay are the closest but even here they're stumbling. They're still reliant on their 'AAA hit titles' to drive sales. That's not sustainable. Steam wins if ANY game is successful. Skyrim STILL sells copies over 2 years since release. DayZ and Rust are in the top 10/20 all the time. Football Manager is insanely popular. None are Valve titles. But Steam benefits from those games selling on Steam. The other problem uPlay/Origin has is that they don't give a developer any incentive to be on their stores. Steamworks gives devs the incentive to be on Steam. Which generates content. Which generates sales. Which means more devs want to be on Steam. It's a positive feedback loop.
Devs are allowed to generate their own 'keys' which are used to distribute for media or other kinds of promos. STeam doesn't charge devs for making such keys for that kind of distribution, it's all done via their Steamworks page.
Because they're grey market sites and not authorized resellers. Compared to websites like Green Man Gaming, GOG, GamersGate, Amazon, Origin, GamesPlanet, and the like.
The issue there is the spam those sites were causing with their referral programs. We were removing hundreds of referrals being spammed every day as people were not reading the rules, specialy where it states no referrals.
They are unauthorized because they buy retail copies, open the box and add the key that way. Some even use bundle sites, hence why Humble Bundle stopped providing keys.
An authorized reseller gets they keys directly from the developer.
It's especially true for sports games, such as Football Manager: older ones are no longer sold here, though you can get keys from elsewhere and those work just fine.
They are unauthorized because they do not purchase games directly from the distributor
As was evidenced during the Elite Sniper 3 key revocation, authorized resellers were not impacted. Unauthorized resellers were engaging in smear campaigns trying to justify their existence
And don't say the credit card company makes money on interest from me cause I pay off my balance every month so they are getting zilch. I would think they must compensate Steam somehow for their trouble.
Nope.
Bandwidth is cheap and the 30% cut they get from games sold on Steam more then covers that. Then if you include the hats, dota 2 and CS:GO items...
The CC company also collects and sells information to cover those points. It is sells information on it's customers spending habits, what trends seem to be coming up and many more non-personal information as they don't need premission to do so. It can't be opted out of either.
As Satoru said, if it gets people to use Steam, it will easily make up for any cost.