Selling your steam games on market place or a steam user store

[Leo Major]

I know there was this new games library platform clone like Stream,GOG,EPIC, etc that game out called RobotCache but with a pretty cool twist..... which was the ability to sell your own games on the app/platform to other users.

This is a great idea... There are plenty of games I have that bought that I don't like like Marvel Midnight Suns (the first 2 hours were all cut scenes and by the time I realized the game wasn't for me It was too late to refund) and I would have no problem selling this game for 20$ to someone on steam. Ofc Steam would probably make it so they get a cut of that sale.... even if just 2% or high as 10% it would add yet another revenue stream to steam.

Of course it would cost money paying programmers to add this feature to the platform and make sure it's not abused in any way.... For example if someone bought a 80$ AAA title and turned around and tried to sell it for 1$ to a freind.... would that be acceptable or would there be a bare minimum. Perhaps you had to have owned the game for at least 30-90 days... or you couldn't sell a game below 5% of what it costs in the steam store etc etc.

But I believe it would be a great feature to add to steam.... and the fact they have a competitor doing it... (regardless of how small) it should certainly be on Steams Radar.


Is there anyone who likes this idea or am I going to get a lot of people gatekeeping the idea?

Thanks for reading.

[76561199540158642]

you are helping the speculation by repeated the said comment, this is only creating more speculation, you have to understand that if people start repeating things that are said they will spread and eventually that speculation will become fact.

somewhere i once read that steam gave Volunteer Moderators free game keys so they could mod the game forums for games. this speculation also presides the fact that those games where not purchased by steam users but in fact given and that many of the steam accounts containing 1000's of games are simply ex moderator accounts and or steam employee accounts that are trying to mingle within the forums.

yeah i know its so crazy it almost makes sense.

[Leonardo Da Pinchi]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Golden Unicorn:

stop being so upset that simple logical thought says nobody is dumb enough to buy 1000's of games and leave it at that, if your taking offense over anything its obviously truthful declartion.

if i owned 1000's of games on steam i would surely want to sell them all and buy different ones, not keep the same 1000 games, thats why none of you even play the games you own.

Sell them and buy games you want to play with the funds. easy logic.

now make it happen.

Simple logistics cites users with good faith in a platform, actually contribute to that platform.

[76561199566220743]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Golden Unicorn:

somewhere i once read that steam gave Volunteer Moderators free game keys so they could mod the game forums for games. this speculation also presides the fact that those games where not purchased by steam users but in fact given and that many of the steam accounts containing 1000's of games are simply ex moderator accounts and or steam employee accounts that are trying to mingle within the forums.

yeah i know its so crazy it almost makes sense.

You read that from yourself, on your other account, try again, Ivan.

[Brian9824]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Golden Unicorn:

somewhere i once read

That would be called fiction. I once read that the moon was actually made of cheese...

[Gwarsbane]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von A:

What else in society can you buy that you are not allowed to resell if you really wanted to? For example if I bought a tv I could resell it to someone else, A vaccuum cleaner, heck I could even resell a toothbrush if I really wanted (and someone was sick/silly enough to buy it) but when it comes to the games that we buy digitally that we should own... our right to resell is completely taken away.

A vacuum doesn't have a licensing agreement that you have to sign before hand.

A vacuum over time will break down.

My mom once had a 20+ year old vacuum, she paid over 1500 dollars for it. Never had any issues with it for a long time, then it finally died. The vacuum I have now was 130 bucks, it sucks, and not in a good way. I know people with 400 and 500 dollar vacuums that died after a few years. They have to keep replacing it with something that does the same job.

Digital games, do not break down over time. They get patches and stuff up to a point, sometimes longer then expected (Valve patched a 15+ year old game). You don't buy a vacuum and get upgrades for it for a few years. You buy it once, hope it keeps working and if you are out of the warranty period you go and get a new one or try to get it fixed at a repair shop which costs you money.



Also there are companies out there that are trying to do subscriptions for physical items. Tesla and a couple of other car companies for example are trying to do subscriptions for stuff you already bought and are in your car.... heated seats and steering wheels. Don't pay and you can no longer have a heated seat to sit on in the winter or a warm wheel in your hands. But you don't get them installed after you start paying for the subscription, they are already installed in your car, you are just not allowed to use them.

Thankfully there has been a backlash against that and governments are starting to move and make laws against stuff like that, but where does it stop if they didn't? Want to use any power plugs for items in your car, that will be 10 bucks a month please. Want to have a car seat/mirrors that remembers its settings based on the driver? That will be 10 bucks a month please. Want to use the backup cam that was factory installed? That will be 20 bucks a month please. Want to use the radio? That will be 5 bucks a month please. Want to connect your phone to the car so that you can listen to the music you have on it? That will be 20 bucks a month please...

Starting to see where your idea will take things? Heck one game company was already talking about charging people money to reload their gun in game....


"Well I'll just not play games like that! I'll go play something else...." you might say.... but really hard to do that when all the games start doing that... and they will...


Another example is door bell cameras. Did you know its actually a bit difficult to find a door bell camera that you don't have to pay a subscription for even after you paid money for it? Most of them do not store the video locally, only on a remote server. Sure you can use it to see whats out there, but thats it. Want to save the video cause someone left a funny message or something happened outside your door? Only if you paid the subscription or actually found a decent quality door bell cam that can be setup with local storage.

Do you own the door bell cam? Shouldn't you be able to store the videos on it locally if you want? The only reason they are not letting you store it locally is because you wanting to sometimes be able to save the video or go back and look at the video if something happens makes them money. Thats the only reason. If you could choose to store the video locally and/or have a subscription it wouldn't be a big deal, you could have best of both worlds, local storage for easy/quick access but remote storage for backup.

There are fridges that are coming that will require a subscription to them....
https://www.pcmag.com/news/lg-wants-you-to-subscribe-to-your-fridge

You bought the fridge, but to use everything that comes with it, you will need to subscribe to use stuff in it.

I like how it is now. I pay a certain price for a game, and I get to play it forever as long as I can keep installing it or already have it installed.

This is one of the reasons why I like Steam. As long as its around, I will be able to install my games. But if they can't make money, they won't be around and I won't be able to install my games.

I have games that require no keys to install that I can still install today and play and they are 30+ years old. They didn't have always on internet back then, they had no way of enforcing anything.

But thats now changed because of always on internet. That same game today would require a key and an account somewhere no doubt... But if I ever lost the discs for those games, or the CD/DVD/Blu-ray drives I have stopped working I would never be able to install those games again. Heck I can't even install the addons for one game just because the addons require connecting to a server on the internet to verify they keys are ok and that server has been gone for well over a decade now. So those addon discs are pretty much just coasters now.

Piracy was bad back then.... its still bad now but at least with accounts needed to play stuff, its not as bad as what it would be with always on super fast internet connections.

[Start_Running]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von A:

I know there was this new games library platform clone like Stream,GOG,EPIC, etc that game out called RobotCache but with a pretty cool twist..... which was the ability to sell your own games on the app/platform to other users.

Yes and RObotCache.. is not doing very well. Care to guess why?

[Tito Shivan]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Golden Unicorn:

you are only trying to protect steams 30% profit share and not an actual developer profit share.

It's kind of funny how you accuse people of something andthen you go and suggest exactly that very same thing

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Golden Unicorn:

steam could allow users to trade in a 40 dollar game for 10 dollars, thus resell that 10 dollar purchased key to someone else for 20 dollars, and even give the developer a 10 or 20% cut of the resale

So your suggestion means Steam actually harming the developer share by not only undercutting the game sale price on the very same store, but also slashing the developer share from that sale from 70% to only 10%

Devs are going to love having a lot of licenses being sold in the same store at a high discounted price while receiving a token revenue share from that tiny sale.

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Golden Unicorn:

game stop making money on resold games isn't the same due to gamestops brick store costs and employee's they pay, 1000's of people unlike steam who has only a handful of questionable employee's.

I love when people think businesses run on magic.

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Golden Unicorn:

its already speculated that steam receives a generous number of free keys for games that they sell, leading to what appears to be steam accounts full of 1000's of games which is simply not believable by a typical video game purchaser.

And for the umpteenth time:

CITATION NEEDED

[Leo Major]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von The End:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von A:

[
Like I said I would rather buy a physical copy of everything to truly own it and be able to resell it

Then you should go for a console, there you get to that with some of the games. How long, no one really knows because consoles seems to be moving the digital download way too.

You do not buy the game, you buy a license to play the game. So you do not have anything to sell.

If it ever will be possible, prepare for game pricing to go through the roof and sales will probably just be a thing in the memory.

I want to own the game I purchase for PC, just like when I used to buy pc games at the store and owned a physical copy.

It wasn't always digital only and "right to play the game" you used to physically own the game and the CD key.

Your argument about the price going through the roof is just gate keeping or coping. It almost feels like half the people replying are steam/game dev employees ^.^

That argument makes no sense to me. If it was like that before what makes you think that going back to that model would make game prices go through the roof?

You truly think people owning the games they pay for is a bad thing? Or just don't see the devs allowing t?

[Leo Major]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Mad Scientist:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von A:

No we don't, that's projection xD You might... but 95% don't

But even if it's in the SSA/TOS doesn't make it right or something we should accept.

Like I said I would rather buy a physical copy of everything to truly own it and be able to resell it

How much are you willing to buy games for if this became a thing? $100 for the latest AAA with a $70 resale of which most goes to the Dev, Steam, and then pennies on the dollar for the user?

Are you willing to sacrifice all forms of sales & major sales?

This makes no sense they used to sell PC games as physical copies with cd keys all the time.....

[Boblin the Goblin]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von A:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Mad Scientist:

How much are you willing to buy games for if this became a thing? $100 for the latest AAA with a $70 resale of which most goes to the Dev, Steam, and then pennies on the dollar for the user?

Are you willing to sacrifice all forms of sales & major sales?

This makes no sense they used to sell PC games as physical copies with cd keys all the time.....

Because online distribution was still very new and underdeveloped.

[Brian9824]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von A:

I want to own the game I purchase for PC, just like when I used to buy pc games at the store and owned a physical copy.

You never owned them, you had a license that could be revoked same as Steam. The only difference is now they have better tools to manage the licenses.

Ursprünglich geschrieben von A:

Your argument about the price going through the roof is just gate keeping or coping.

Actually its pretty spot on, games are cheaper then ever adjusted for inflation, the prices have been largely static for 30+ years where as everything else has doubled or tripled in price over that timeframe.

Ursprünglich geschrieben von A:

You truly think people owning the games they pay for is a bad thing? Or just don't see the devs allowing t?

You own the same thing you own with all software and have always owned, its called a non transferable license. Its been this way since as long as software has existed. The only difference now is that managing those licenses are easier for the companies.

[Leo Major]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von brian9824:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Golden Unicorn:

snip

As someone who has worked as a software developer what you are describing is called PIRACY, and is the exact opposite of what is good for the video game industry. If developers want people to play their game they can offer a demo, a free weekened, etc. They do not want people sharing logins and passwords to access stuff they haven't bought.

That is piracy.

Yes you worked as a software dev. I can see the bias xD

Also if I had a friend over at my house and let him go on my pc or ps4 and play any game they wanted would that be considered piracy too? I don't understand why letting someone use your account on their pc/ps4 is piracy but letting someone use your account on your pc/ps4 is not?


People keep saying I am not caring about the dev and only caring about myself but I did say that if you had a feature to resell a game on steam then a cut could go to steam and a greater cut could go to the dev.

If I resell a ps4 game the dev isn't making any money, but if I resell a pc game on steam and the dev gets a cut... they are making money......

in fact they will make more money in the long run when they get 4-5-6 cuts of the same copy of a game that was resold 4-5-6 times

[Start_Running]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von A:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von The End:

Then you should go for a console, there you get to that with some of the games. How long, no one really knows because consoles seems to be moving the digital download way too.

You do not buy the game, you buy a license to play the game. So you do not have anything to sell.

If it ever will be possible, prepare for game pricing to go through the roof and sales will probably just be a thing in the memory.

I want to own the game I purchase for PC, just like when I used to buy pc games at the store and owned a physical copy.

Yeah you never did. What you owned was the physical disc the game was on.
That was pretty much a loophole that existed because games were tied to the mediab they were distributed on. That is no llonger the case.

[Brian9824]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von A:

I don't understand why letting someone use your account on their pc/ps4 is piracy but letting someone use your account on your pc/ps4 is not?

Because you only care about yourself. You don't care about the companies who lose money, who have to lay off workers, or who go out of business when sales drop because people are sharing games instead of buying their own copies.

What your describing would be like buying a season pass to an amusement park and then letting your friends go instead of you when you aren't using it. Licenses are PERSONAL, if you want to run it on your hardware and let someone else play it that's fine.

What isn't allowed is giving away your credentials so other people can access your PERSONAL licenses without you, again that is not unique to video games, ALL software licensing works that way and it ALWAYS has.

[Leo Major]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Golden Unicorn:

you are helping the speculation by repeated the said comment, this is only creating more speculation, you have to understand that if people start repeating things that are said they will spread and eventually that speculation will become fact.

somewhere i once read that steam gave Volunteer Moderators free game keys so they could mod the game forums for games. this speculation also presides the fact that those games where not purchased by steam users but in fact given and that many of the steam accounts containing 1000's of games are simply ex moderator accounts and or steam employee accounts that are trying to mingle within the forums.

yeah i know its so crazy it almost makes sense.

Considering how biased mods are for steam discussion for games I would not be surprised at all.

It's always the same behaviours with mods no matter which game discussion you go to.

Allow only the narrative to thrive, ban anyone who dares challenge it. Let the ones who support it while being rude/inflammatory to continue posting, ban the ones who don't support it and being just as or even less rude/inflammatory