Would you want a paid steam membership option?

[Merle]

Benefits could include:
-A few free indie titles a month added to your inventory (giftable)
-A 50% off coupon every month for a game that you choose
-10% off all purchases as long as you're a member

$10 a month

Would you do that?

Or maybe Valve could offer something like the sega channel though and have a selection of 30 games or so that you get to play unlimited until the end of the month. Then the next month it's a different 30 games.

[Jade]

Sythierius님이 먼저 게시:

Would you do that?

No.

Also:
http://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/10/828935673156447899/

[Merle]

Jade님이 먼저 게시:

Sythierius님이 먼저 게시:

Would you do that?

No.

Also:
http://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/10/828935673156447899/

Oh sorry, didn't see that there. I think it's a cool idea but I guess most people don't.

[Jade]

Sythierius님이 먼저 게시:

Oh sorry, didn't see that there. I think it's a cool idea but I guess most people don't.

Well generally people don't want to pay for something they're already getting for free.

Also something like this can't really work on Steam because Valve would have to get permission from the developers/publishers to give discounts on their games.

[ManiacMal]

No idea why you'd want that. Your margins are way off too, with your idea Steam would loose a crap load of money for your $10/month if giving away 50% off any title per month + 10% off + indie game per/month.

If there was such a thing I'd care not about the discounts, but being able to login/use a premium steam client that alone would be worth a monthly fee if there is library management and extra features not in the "free" client.

Jade님이 먼저 게시:

Sythierius님이 먼저 게시:

Oh sorry, didn't see that there. I think it's a cool idea but I guess most people don't.

Well generally people don't want to pay for something they're already getting for free.

Also something like this can't really work on Steam because Valve would have to get permission from the developers/publishers to give discounts on their games.

No Valve would have to eat the loss is all, obviously it has to be in Valve's favor, which in this idea, it is not.

[Kenny32673]

Hashbrick님이 먼저 게시:

If there was such a thing I'd care not about the discounts, but being able to login/use a premium steam client that alone would be worth a monthly fee if there is library management and extra features not in the "free" client.

Even that would create a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. Having a good client if you pay and a crappy bloatware sorry "feature" filled client if you don't.

I don't get why people keep trying to come up with these "premium" membership option ideas for Steam. Currently, you buy a game/item you get access to all features on Steam, why would anyone want to section off features and make them "premium" only?

[Merle]

I'm surprised nobody has commented about the second half of the OP, where steam sets up a service that's like netflix for games.

[(SOGA) SouthernBoy]

There are services all ready out there similar to what u have suggested. But to asnwer your purposal, the asnwer is a overwhelming NO.

[ManiacMal]

MonkeySeeker님이 먼저 게시:

Hashbrick님이 먼저 게시:

If there was such a thing I'd care not about the discounts, but being able to login/use a premium steam client that alone would be worth a monthly fee if there is library management and extra features not in the "free" client.

Even that would create a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. Having a good client if you pay and a crappy bloatware sorry "feature" filled client if you don't.

I don't get why people keep trying to come up with these "premium" membership option ideas for Steam. Currently, you buy a game/item you get access to all features on Steam, why would anyone want to section off features and make them "premium" only?

No doubt, but if one existed I'd be on that bandwagon, I'm sick of this pile of junk and it's inability to keep my library nice and organized and worth it. I had a much better outlook on Valve 3 years ago, now it's just a mutral friendship of investment where you just get along with each other and continue about your day but you neither like nore dislike them for what they have become. Pains me even more when you see ♥♥♥♥ like "Hey artists we want your art!" while 3 yrs pass and they still haven't made one decent feature for the Steam user other than the new game content system and some of the community changes.

[Websteroni]

No that's not a very good idea sorry.

Sythierius님이 먼저 게시:

Benefits could include:
-A few free indie titles a month added to your inventory (giftable)
-A 50% off coupon every month for a game that you choose
-10% off all purchases as long as you're a member

$10 a month

Would you do that?

Or maybe Valve could offer something like the sega channel though and have a selection of 30 games or so that you get to play unlimited until the end of the month. Then the next month it's a different 30 games.

[Sir Theta]

No.

[Merle]

TheBDK님이 먼저 게시:

Sythierius님이 먼저 게시:

I'm surprised nobody has commented about the second half of the OP, where steam sets up a service that's like netflix for games.

You dont pay $60 per movie on netflix, then pay a monthly fee to actually watch them.

I meant that you pay a monthly fee and you get access to a lot of different games without having to buy them. It's like 30 or so month-long rentals.

[Spawn of Totoro]

Sythierius님이 먼저 게시:

I meant that you pay a monthly fee and you get access to a lot of different games without having to buy them. It's like 30 or so month-long rentals.

That was discussed in this thread:
http://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/10/828937262024301068/

You know how many games I can beat in 30 days? Any form of rental service would cost the Developers/Publishers money. It isn't like a physical game (console) rental.
-----
Fomr the thread:

It isn't like a movie that made it's money back (with profit) from the theater, or a TV show that was paid for by comercials.
-----
Physical media vs digital. It is easyer to keep control of physical media. If the game isn't returned, you can charge the person for it or charge them for theft. You will know if a physical copy wasn't returned.

Blockbuster and Gamefly pay several hundred dollars (or more) per a copy and for the rights to rent it out. They also pay a percentage.

You realy can't compare the two.

I worked for Blockbuster one summer (long ago). Employee theft was a major concern. You could get a bonus for turning in another enployee for theft because of how much the company paid for the movies and games.

[Vancepants]

MonkeySeeker님이 먼저 게시:

Hashbrick님이 먼저 게시:

If there was such a thing I'd care not about the discounts, but being able to login/use a premium steam client that alone would be worth a monthly fee if there is library management and extra features not in the "free" client.

Even that would create a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. Having a good client if you pay and a crappy bloatware sorry "feature" filled client if you don't.

I don't get why people keep trying to come up with these "premium" membership option ideas for Steam. Currently, you buy a game/item you get access to all features on Steam, why would anyone want to section off features and make them "premium" only?

I agree 100%! Come on guys, you're getting an amazing FREE service with Steam. It's a great deal, and it brings people in.

Why create a tiered, segragated community?

[Kenny32673]

Spawn of Totoro님이 먼저 게시:

Sythierius님이 먼저 게시:

I meant that you pay a monthly fee and you get access to a lot of different games without having to buy them. It's like 30 or so month-long rentals.

That was discussed in this thread:
http://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/10/828937262024301068/

You know how many games I can beat in 30 days? Any form of rental service would cost the Developers/Publishers money. It isn't like a physical game (console) rental.
-----
Fomr the thread:

It isn't like a movie that made it's money back (with profit) from the theater, or a TV show that was paid for by comercials.
-----
Physical media vs digital. It is easyer to keep control of physical media. If the game isn't returned, you can charge the person for it or charge them for theft. You will know if a physical copy wasn't returned.

Blockbuster and Gamefly pay several hundred dollars (or more) per a copy and for the rights to rent it out. They also pay a percentage.

You realy can't compare the two.

I worked for Blockbuster one summer (long ago). Employee theft was a major concern. You could get a bonus for turning in another enployee for theft because of how much the company paid for the movies and games.

It's not as if services like what the OP described don't already exist though - Metaboli for example. Onlive also although that is streamed rather than downloaded to the PC.

They don't add the latest "AAA" titles to their packages anyway it's older games or lower budget/indie titles that are in these packages.

I still wouldn't want Valve/Steam to have a premium level paid service but you talk as though something like this just couldn't ever happen when it already does.

[Spawn of Totoro]

MonkeySeeker님이 먼저 게시:

It's not as if services like what the OP described don't already exist though - Metaboli for example. Onlive also although that is streamed rather than downloaded to the PC.

They don't add the latest "AAA" titles to their packages anyway it's older games or lower budget/indie titles that are in these packages.

I still wouldn't want Valve/Steam to have a premium level paid service but you talk as though something like this just couldn't ever happen when it already does.

With realy old game. Like 10 or so years, yes it has. Mostly indi games too, from what I have seen. On a small scale, the industry could tolerate it a bit. On the scale of Steam, is could hurt the industy.

Onlive's model is horrible too. Games are on a fixed settings, 720p everything on medium. Input lag too. Not to mention they were losing a lot of money. They actuly "sold" their assets to a company called "Onlive2", keeping all subscriptions, firing all their employees and screwing over the investore (who got nothing from the sale).