👾 A 2-Weeks Notice for discontinued games 🙀

[☆ƧQυiяяєL♫]

I've noticed a few games on my wishlist are "at the request of the publisher, this game is no longer for sale" on their store page or the store page is entirely removed.

The Steam store has a "Upcoming New Releases" category of preplanned or pre-release (pre-purchase option) game(s).
I wouldn't mind a 2-weeks notice discontinued category, something like, "Discontinued games, get them before they're Gone!"

I missed EA's "Shift 2" pull during a midweek EA sale, had there been an announcement that EA was pulling this game off of Steam and during mid sale, I woulda nabbed it!

[FxMxRx]

I notice the EA was pulling some NFS games out because I daily enter the r/Steam, they announced the removing just 24 hours before the games are gone, I got luck for having money idling on my wallet. I already missed games I intented to buy and that suck.

A warning for followed or wishlisted games that will be removed would be really good, but that its up to the devs.

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

Quint the Alligator Snapper の投稿を引用：

That's when they write the contract.

And the problem comes when contracts expire and new ones need to be negotiated.

And the expiration of those contracts does not come sudenly.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

No. No they do not. Nor should they. That would be an egregious overreach.

Actually, yes they do.

They do not.

Yes they do.

You just don't want them to do anything.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

As the dominant player, they hold a degree of monopoly/monopsony power (depending on which way you look at it) that gives them clout to influence such contracts.

Valve is not a monopoly. They wield no monopoly power. Being the prefered/dominant player in a market doesn't mean you control. It means you're just the best at doing what you do.

Steam is not a pure monopoly, but is dominant enough that they are the place to put PC games one wants to sell, and the place that people standardly assume sells the PC games they want. It has by far the biggest selection of PC games and the biggest customer base for PC gaming. Developers know that if their games aren't on Steam they are unlikely to sell well (and this has been documented in various articles).

With this comes a position of significant influence in being able to set the industry standard for how things operate. Note how Humble and Indie Gala will reference how positive a game's Steam userscore is, for example.

It doesn't mean that Steam is the best at what it does. In fact, it has often lagged other vendors in features -- for example, how GOG offered a refund policy before Steam did, spurring Steam to make its own. And for that matter, Steam remains dominant out of inertia, retaining people because it's already big, despite the fact that its platform carries a hugely disproportionate number of scammers and other miscreants compared to other digital PC game vendors.

But that influence is there if Valve wants to use it. Valve has generally seemed hesitant to do so, apparently preferring to coast, but should they change their mind, it is there.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

Ironically if Valve actually did try to exercise that kind of control that would put them squarely into anti-trust territory.

Actually, the anti-trust territory that they're wading in is the fact that they don't let developers sell their games cheaper elsewhere, even if those games sold elsewhere don't carry Steam keys.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

When dev/pubs have 2 weeks notice, they tend to give a heads up. When they do not, they can't becauuse again that becomes a case of false advertising if things change .And that counts for some hefty fines...per region.

If someone forces an entity out of a contract against their will, then it is not that entity's fault.

Who's forcing who out of a contract here m8?

You're assuming, wrongly, that contracts just go poof all of a sudden.

Contracts exist specifically to avoid that sort of suddenness.

[Start_Running]

Quint the Alligator Snapper の投稿を引用：

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

And the problem comes when contracts expire and new ones need to be negotiated.

And the expiration of those contracts does not come sudenly.

And this brings us back to the problem. DO they give the two weeks notice assuming the contract will not be renewed/extended and open themselves up to false advertising claims? Doo they make a point of not renewing the contract at all which basically kills the game dead in the water? I don't think any company is going to take that chance.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

They do not.

Yes they do.

You just don't want them to do anything.

No M8. They literall do not have the power to do so. If they did and they exercised it basically they'd be liable for anti trust penalties right there.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

Valve is not a monopoly. They wield no monopoly power. Being the prefered/dominant player in a market doesn't mean you control. It means you're just the best at doing what you do.

Steam is not a pure monopoly,

You're either a monopoly or you're not.

but is dominant enough that they are the place to put PC games one wants to sell, and the place that people standardly assume sells the PC games they want.

At the moment. Andthats only because they have been and continyue to be the best at whatt they do. That can change rather quickly.

It has by far the biggest selection of PC games and the biggest customer base for PC gaming.

That's what you call a positive feedback loop. More games, more customers, more customers bring more developers an their games. And so it has gone

Developers know that if their games aren't on Steam they are unlikely to sell well (and this has been documented in various articles).

Bit misleading. A game can sell well without selling on STeam. It just sells Better when it is released on STeam.

With this comes a position of significant influence in being able to set the industry standard for how things operate.

Ironically that's been one of the things that makes STeam preferable to its Suppliers. RThey don't try to impose standards or practices on anyone. Beyond the standards and practices dictated by law. Just about everything on SSTeam is optional.

You don't want to use Steam as a DRM, you don't have top. DOn't want to use the STeam Forums, as your primary forum, you don't have to.

Note how Humble and Indie Gala will reference how positive a game's Steam userscore is, for example.

Yeah because the STeam Review system is more reliable and meaningful than the other reveiw systems out there. COnsumers know that, Developers know that, and stores know that.

It doesn't mean that Steam is the best at what it does. In fact, it has often lagged other vendors in features -- for example, how GOG offered a refund policy before Steam did,

It actually did not. STeam had a refund policy and has had one for about as long as GoG has. It just wasn't a 'No Questions Asked' refund policy.

spurring Steam to make its own.

Or steam decided to figure out a way to stream line their process so it required less manpower and thusly money on their part.

And for that matter, Steam remains dominant out of inertia, retaining people because it's already big, despite the fact that its platform carries a hugely disproportionate number of scammers and other miscreants compared to other digital PC game vendors.

Er...CItation Needed

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

Ironically if Valve actually did try to exercise that kind of control that would put them squarely into anti-trust territory.

Actually, the anti-trust territory that they're wading in is the fact that they don't let developers sell their games cheaper elsewhere, even if those games sold elsewhere don't carry Steam keys.

Your first statement is not an anti trust issue. This is standard in retail. And if you CHeck GoG r any other store you'll find the same caveats in their contracts. That's something developers have to agree to and a term which VAlve is well within their legal rights to put in their contracts. Its no different than a non-compete clause for artists.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

Who's forcing who out of a contract here m8?

You're assuming, wrongly, that contracts just go poof all of a sudden.

No M8. The point I and others have been making, which you are willfully misrepresenting (as usual), is that there is no knowing if the contract will be renewed. It going poof is a given. It being renewed is the sticky wicket here.

Contracts exist specifically to avoid that sort of suddenness.

And sometimes the ticking clock they impose creates exactly that sort of uncertainty.

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

Quint the Alligator Snapper の投稿を引用：

And the expiration of those contracts does not come sudenly.

And this brings us back to the problem. DO they give the two weeks notice assuming the contract will not be renewed/extended and open themselves up to false advertising claims?

"This game is expected to stop being sold on this store in 14 days, but whether this discontinuation happens depends on a contract that has not yet been finalized."

Easy.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

No M8. They literall do not have the power to do so. If they did and they exercised it basically they'd be liable for anti trust penalties right there.

Anti-trust penalties are for practices that hurt customers through use of monopoly power -- not ones that help customers. If the world worked the way you suggest it does, there'd be anti-trust penalties for doing things like taking public stances on political issues in order to move the industry in a certain direction. But clearly that's not how things work.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

Steam is not a pure monopoly,

You're either a monopoly or you're not.

This tells me you haven't studied economics.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

but is dominant enough that they are the place to put PC games one wants to sell, and the place that people standardly assume sells the PC games they want.

At the moment. Andthats only because they have been and continyue to be the best at whatt they do. That can change rather quickly.

No, they're not "the best at what they do"; they're good enough and coast on continuing to have the biggest customer base and game selection. You're right that that is not a permanent advantage, but a change in this situation is a long-term change, not a short-term one.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

Developers know that if their games aren't on Steam they are unlikely to sell well (and this has been documented in various articles).

Bit misleading. A game can sell well without selling on STeam. It just sells Better when it is released on STeam.

You're the one being misleading. While it is possible for a game to sell well without being on Steam, most games get far more publicity from being on Steam than from simply staying on other platforms, such as itch. Steam also has a relatively permissive process when it comes to letting devs sell whatever on Steam compared to other stores.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

With this comes a position of significant influence in being able to set the industry standard for how things operate.

Ironically that's been one of the things that makes STeam preferable to its Suppliers. RThey don't try to impose standards or practices on anyone. Beyond the standards and practices dictated by law. Just about everything on SSTeam is optional.

You don't want to use Steam as a DRM, you don't have top. DOn't want to use the STeam Forums, as your primary forum, you don't have to.

Actually, Steam does impose standards and practices, simply by default. If a dev puts a game on Steam, there is a reasonable expectation that soon most of the playerbase will be using Steam to do stuff, including the community features. It'd take a ton more work to shift everyone over to another system, which is not worth the effort in most cases.

Andfurthermore, if a dev puts a game on Steam, that dev can reasonably expect players to then bug 'em about making trading cards and achievements. Sure, they can refuse, but the pressure's definitely there.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

Note how Humble and Indie Gala will reference how positive a game's Steam userscore is, for example.

Yeah because the STeam Review system is more reliable and meaningful than the other reveiw systems out there. COnsumers know that, Developers know that, and stores know that.

No, it's because (1) Humble and Indie Gala don't have their own review systems, and (2) Steam is the biggest player in the digital games market. It's not because Steam's review system is magically better. (It is not, despite your insistence that it is.)

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

It doesn't mean that Steam is the best at what it does. In fact, it has often lagged other vendors in features -- for example, how GOG offered a refund policy before Steam did,

It actually did not. STeam had a refund policy and has had one for about as long as GoG has. It just wasn't a 'No Questions Asked' refund policy.

Steam's "refund policy", before GOG came out with theirs, was "no, unless we make an exception". GOG actually standardized the process before Steam did, prompting Steam to standardize its own process.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

spurring Steam to make its own.

Or steam decided to figure out a way to stream line their process so it required less manpower and thusly money on their part.

It still postdated GOG's action, which serves an example of Steam lagging behind a competitor in offering a feature.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

And for that matter, Steam remains dominant out of inertia, retaining people because it's already big, despite the fact that its platform carries a hugely disproportionate number of scammers and other miscreants compared to other digital PC game vendors.

Er...CItation Needed

Look at the Steam forums anytime (which I know you are since you keep posting) and you can see the sheer volume of instances of scams. This volume is not seen on other digital game platforms.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

Actually, the anti-trust territory that they're wading in is the fact that they don't let developers sell their games cheaper elsewhere, even if those games sold elsewhere don't carry Steam keys.

Your first statement is not an anti trust issue. This is standard in retail.

It's not the standard in retail by any means, considering that the same items are commonly sold at different prices in different stores.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

You're assuming, wrongly, that contracts just go poof all of a sudden.

No M8. The point I and others have been making, which you are willfully misrepresenting (as usual), is that there is no knowing if the contract will be renewed. It going poof is a given. It being renewed is the sticky wicket here.

And the point that I have been making, which you have been willfully misrepresenting (as usual), is that the fact that it is known when the contract will go poof, and information can be communicated to the consumer that the contract will go poof. If there is a question about whether it will be renewed, that information can also be communicated to the consumer.

Consumers are able to handle information, contrary to your presumptions (as usual) that they are stupid.

[Start_Running]

Quint the Alligator Snapper の投稿を引用：

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

And this brings us back to the problem. DO they give the two weeks notice assuming the contract will not be renewed/extended and open themselves up to false advertising claims?

"This game is expected to stop being sold on this store in 14 days, but whether this discontinuation happens depends on a contract that has not yet been finalized."

Easy.

And you don't see that as a bit of a scummy FOMO-Based marketing tactic?
And again that really isn't very informative. This game may/not be discontinued within 2-weeks. You do realize that it could be literally applied to any 2 week stretch in the games retail history right?

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

Quint the Alligator Snapper の投稿を引用：

"This game is expected to stop being sold on this store in 14 days, but whether this discontinuation happens depends on a contract that has not yet been finalized."

Easy.

And you don't see that as a bit of a scummy FOMO-Based marketing tactic?

And if a dev tries to use it people can ask questions about it. Plus, if the game isn't a licensed game, it's unlikely to fly anyway.

Besides, since when did you care about being consumer-friendly? :P
In any case, it's not like sales events, particularly short-lived discounts, aren't FOMO-based either.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

And again that really isn't very informative. This game may/not be discontinued within 2-weeks. You do realize that it could be literally applied to any 2 week stretch in the games retail history right?

It can, but the value of such a message to a dev depends on them not abusing it. They can be dishonest about it, but that's to their own detriment.

[Start_Running]

Quint the Alligator Snapper の投稿を引用：

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

And you don't see that as a bit of a scummy FOMO-Based marketing tactic?

And if a dev tries to use it people can ask questions about it. Plus, if the game isn't a licensed game, it's unlikely to fly anyway.

Why?

Besides, since when did you care about being consumer-friendly? :P

Always been. You seem to be confusing me for the strawman you keep beuilding.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

And again that really isn't very informative. This game may/not be discontinued within 2-weeks. You do realize that it could be literally applied to any 2 week stretch in the games retail history right?

It can, but the value of such a message to a dev depends on them not abusing it. They can be dishonest about it, but that's to their own detriment.

Them being the entire collection of entities known as developers, the entire collection of entities known as publishers, and the entire collection of entuities known as stores.

Yeah. And again, what they call abuse is going to be very different. If it brings in the sales it brings in the sales..

As said. when dev/pubs have any certainty of expiration they will generally notify. If they do not have any certainty then they're not gonna.

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

Quint the Alligator Snapper の投稿を引用：

And if a dev tries to use it people can ask questions about it. Plus, if the game isn't a licensed game, it's unlikely to fly anyway.

Why?

Because then there's no licensing contract with some third party that the pub has to wait on, pending which Steam might not be able to sell the game.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

Besides, since when did you care about being consumer-friendly? :P

Always been. You seem to be confusing me for the strawman you keep beuilding.

No, I just "beuild" an impression of you based on the things you say, particularly your repeated and insistent opposition to suggestions that would benefit consumers.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

It can, but the value of such a message to a dev depends on them not abusing it. They can be dishonest about it, but that's to their own detriment.

Them being the entire collection of entities known as developers, the entire collection of entities known as publishers, and the entire collection of entuities known as stores.

And?

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

Yeah. And again, what they call abuse is going to be very different. If it brings in the sales it brings in the sales..

I'd like to point out that "going out of business" sales are very definitely legal.

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

As said. when dev/pubs have any certainty of expiration they will generally notify. If they do not have any certainty then they're not gonna.

But Steam can aid consumers by asking that publishers put up this info.

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

Alan Wake had a going away sale but came back after Microsoft renegotiated the music license.

[Start_Running]

cSg|mc-Hotsauce の投稿を引用：

Alan Wake had a going away sale but came back after Microsoft renegotiated the music license.

:qr:

The same happened for DUke Nukem World Tour, And DUcktales remastered
BUt what was the time frame on that?

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

cSg|mc-Hotsauce の投稿を引用：

Alan Wake had a going away sale but came back after Microsoft renegotiated the music license.

The same happened for DUke Nukem World Tour, And DUcktales remastered
BUt what was the time frame on that?

Alan Wake... https://mobile.twitter.com/remedygames/status/863012017833218049

Duck Tales...

https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/237630/view/2896333730299950074

Days

[Count_Dandyman]

cSg|mc-Hotsauce の投稿を引用：

Start_Running の投稿を引用：

The same happened for DUke Nukem World Tour, And DUcktales remastered
BUt what was the time frame on that?

Alan Wake... https://mobile.twitter.com/remedygames/status/863012017833218049

Duck Tales...

https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/237630/view/2896333730299950074

Days

:qr:

If talking about the time frame between the exipiration and new deal bringing it back for Ducktales it was 6 and a half months.
https://steamdb.info/app/237630/

Alan Wake was 17 months
https://steamdb.info/app/108710/

Again games where there is enough internal support to keep trying for negotiations for that long are the rarity.

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

I was talking about time of notice for removal and actual removal.

[Count_Dandyman]

cSg|mc-Hotsauce の投稿を引用：

I was talking about time of notice for removal and actual removal.

:qr:

Yep but I'm not sure which part Start_Running was asking about so wanted to add in the extra part.

Sorry if it seemed like I was trying to disagree with you rather than build more detail onto the answer you had given

[Start_Running]

I was talkinmg about the Time to return. And yes that is key. But the time between noticxe and removal was another important factor as well.

In the case of ducktales at least it shows that dev/puibs will try their darndest to give advanced notice, when they themselves have certainty. Imagine the backlash that'd coem from a dev putting up such a notice, taking the game down for a week only to imediately put it up. Would any game really believe the story of 'we manmaged to hammer out a deal'?