-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Tim Sweeney: “If Valve commits to a permanent 88% revenue share, we’ll stop making new exclusive deals” (Read Staff Post)
- Thread starter Carlius
- Start date
Quite interesting that the existence of Proton opens up Windows games to potentially a few million more Linux Steam users.
https://twitter.com/galyonkin/status/1111453752609910784
Also:
2014
https://www./threads/beyond-two-souls-fan-port-cancelled-after-quantic-dream-contacts-team.962176/
We all knew it had to happen some day!
:(
I was recently approached by the co-CEO of Quantic Dream. He told me that he is aware of this project and would like me to stop working on it. He and the rest were amused by it though!
:)
I was also contacted by the CTO of Quantic Dream. We are currently in talk about some things...
But yeah, the inevitable happened. I'm afraid I can't continue on the port / tools. Sorry everybody, it's been a blast. A big thanks to everybody who supported / helped me with the project :D
Even though the port might be legal, I want to keep everyone at Quantic Dream as allies, so I'm not going to be disobedient.
To be continued...?
Then why aren't publishers releasing there without the moneyhat? If it's so good that it makes up for the lack of Steam features, surely they'd all want to be there, they wouldn't need any extra incentive.
On the left, you have the situation before Epic. On the right, you have the situation after Epic.
Its fucking maddening talking about the Epic Store with people having no knowledge on why the Epic store is so god damn bad for consumers.
Epic Games is very opportunistic company. Back in Xbox 360 times they shat on PC gamers because PC gaming was "dying", because "piracy" because... reasons. Now that PC gaming is booming again their major focus is PC. They will drop PC support without thinking twice as soon as PC platform hits another hardship like it happened in 2005-2010. They will go heavy into consoles again or into streaming etc. and Tim will once again bash PC platform.
What I'm trying to say is Epic doesn't really care about PC platform long term, it's all just a facade they try to keep up.
What I'm trying to say is Epic doesn't really care about PC platform long term, it's all just a facade they try to keep up.
The 30% cut only applies to games sold on the Steam storefront. In fact, Valve allows developers to freely generate as many keys as they want, which they can then distribute to any store they wish, or even sell them directly to consumers.
Which wouldn't even be so terrible in itself, if at very least they could spare us the cheap rhetoric and the pretense of doing all of this as the "saviors of PC gaming" (that was actually doing mighty fine without them).
With my admittedly near-nonexistent grasp of the law involved, I kind of suspect that Steam is functionally incapable of budging. 30% is not just the industry standard - it's the market standard. Most everyone else takes 30%, on PC and consoles. This is important because those "everyone else" are Steam's competitors, existing in the same market as them.
What this means is, due to Steam's dominant market position - a so-called "natural monopoly" they ended up as because nobody challenged them - Valve can do nothing to shift the market conditions in their favor. Law identifies a monopoly as a business that 1) has a dominant market presence, and 2) uses that presence to influence market conditions. So Steam reducing their revenue split to 80/20 on a general basis would constitute an exploitative, anti-competitive move, that could potentially drive other stores such as GOG.com out of business, and get Valve slapped with some hefty fines. Effectively, competition law prevents Valve from using Steam's influence to drive prices up or down, forcing them to expand their featureset rather than buy exclusives or offer better revenue to publishers.
EGS can get away with its 88/12 split because they're not dominant in the market. They're using both this undercutting tactic, and exclusive deals - both identified as "anti-competitive exploitative practices" by competition laws - to increase their market share, fully knowing that Valve can do nothing to match them until and unless their market share increases to be comparable with Steam's.
Because customers have made it very clear they're on the side of Valve and don't want to use EGS. Without the moneyhat it's just another expense that'd bear no fruit. Nobody said it makes up for the lack of Steam features.
Tim's a real piece of work, isn't he.
All of his piousness over the years about Microsoft, the industry et al, unravelled.
When his current strategy doesn't work, 5+ years down the road, I wonder who or what he'll blame instead of himself.
All of his piousness over the years about Microsoft, the industry et al, unravelled.
When his current strategy doesn't work, 5+ years down the road, I wonder who or what he'll blame instead of himself.
But they don't have to stop releasing on Steam, just have it on both stores. They can't even go through that trouble for the higher margins? They do for other stores selling Steam keys, GMG doesn't get their keys from Valve, they get them from publishers.
tim sweeny says a lot of things these days, some of which dont even hold true for a couple of days.
so im gonna take this statement with a grain of salt.
so im gonna take this statement with a grain of salt.
I don't even understand his logic with this statement. If Epic currently seeks out exclusives as a means of ensuring that the Epic Games Store will remain competitive, and Epic's more attractive cut for developer isn't doing that on its own, then why would Epic ditch future exclusives if its other competitive advantage was eliminated by Valve adopting it? I'm convinced at this point that Tim Sweeney is just clinically insane.
88/12 is unsustainable, one. Two, Steam is not a monopoly. Three, 30% is the standard across all industries. Four, publishers see that money not devs, unless they self publish.
That is not to say it is not right, but EGS is clearly practicing anti-consumer practices and Steam does not.
Yes he is.
And that's why, aside from everything else he's stated for EGS reason, this statement is
I don't get all these posts making this out to be some unobtainable goal for Valve... like are you looking at the wording here? Is kind of a huge hint at what he's getting at.
Valve can do 20% but they prefer to offer rates close to that only for AAA games and/or titles that already exceed millions of sales.
Epic would absolutely fall into this category with Fortnite if they put it on Steam.
Valve can do 20% but they prefer to offer rates close to that only for AAA games and/or titles that already exceed millions of sales.
Epic would absolutely fall into this category with Fortnite if they put it on Steam.
Last edited:
It's crazy how many people here are still so willfully ignorant and believe Epic's continual line of bullshit even when repeatedly informed why it is.
It's essentially just like talking to Republicans who parrot disingenuous talking points when posts are made clearly disproving them. "Monopoly!", "competition", 88/12", "pro-dev" while ignoring its all PR nonsense.
It's essentially just like talking to Republicans who parrot disingenuous talking points when posts are made clearly disproving them. "Monopoly!", "competition", 88/12", "pro-dev" while ignoring its all PR nonsense.
User Banned (1 Week) - History of ignoring staff posts and dismissing concerns
....88/12 is unsustainable? Proof please? All I've heard from people in the industry is that is plenty for a storefront. Why should devs/pubs get robbed, just because it is the standard line you said? What a terrible reason. Because it all goes to only pubs? Might be true, but how do you know that? And at least those people took risk on the game
People are just being babies about the EPIC store not launching perfectly -_- and boohoo they'll have to download another client for some games
Whatever. My friends have epic store, I think its working and I'm glad
Blatant PR move intended to redirect the (mostly) righteous anger currently being pointed at Epic.
The revenue share Sweeney claims he wants Valve to adapt, lowers that of third party stores, preventing them from digging into their share to offer the discounts to customers they can manage with non-EGS keys. Because of this, in my region EGS keys cost 11-28% more than non-EGS keys. You also get things like 2K taking money away from charities on Humble, to make 2K's larger revenue share possible.
So when Sweeney suggests that game companies getting a larger share by taking more money from customers is great and that he wants this to also be the case with Steam keys, to me that is not a particularly convincing argument that it's Valve I should be having a problem with.
But that's just me of course, it's been shown to me over and over again over the past months that people either do not get this or they don't care.
Like, Kotaku wrote a whole article about Why People Are So Mad About The Epic Games Store and didn't mention this once.
So I'm fully expecting this PR move to actually work. Some us here might react poorly to this, but it's the perception of the general public that matters.
Valve is the bad guy even more now that the company fucking over customers has said that Valve also should.
Valve ought to have a larger pile of money than Epic. So if the two were to capitalism this out, Valve would probably win.
But I kind of don't think they'll bite on this, you know. They're not meant to.
What's possibly good about this though is that, Sweeney being willing to publicly state that they'll stop moneybagging exclusives if X...there is a nebulous inkling of an indication that Epic might be prepared to actually stop doing that at some point. That'll be the day when I can finally stop giving a shit about all this.
The revenue share Sweeney claims he wants Valve to adapt, lowers that of third party stores, preventing them from digging into their share to offer the discounts to customers they can manage with non-EGS keys. Because of this, in my region EGS keys cost 11-28% more than non-EGS keys. You also get things like 2K taking money away from charities on Humble, to make 2K's larger revenue share possible.
So when Sweeney suggests that game companies getting a larger share by taking more money from customers is great and that he wants this to also be the case with Steam keys, to me that is not a particularly convincing argument that it's Valve I should be having a problem with.
But that's just me of course, it's been shown to me over and over again over the past months that people either do not get this or they don't care.
Like, Kotaku wrote a whole article about Why People Are So Mad About The Epic Games Store and didn't mention this once.
So I'm fully expecting this PR move to actually work. Some us here might react poorly to this, but it's the perception of the general public that matters.
Valve is the bad guy even more now that the company fucking over customers has said that Valve also should.
Valve ought to have a larger pile of money than Epic. So if the two were to capitalism this out, Valve would probably win.
But I kind of don't think they'll bite on this, you know. They're not meant to.
What's possibly good about this though is that, Sweeney being willing to publicly state that they'll stop moneybagging exclusives if X...there is a nebulous inkling of an indication that Epic might be prepared to actually stop doing that at some point. That'll be the day when I can finally stop giving a shit about all this.
Why is locking games 3rd party games down to 1 storfront a good thing?
Well, I, for one, can't wait for the EGS cut to remain the same a few years from now. It's too easy and bold to make such claims when your business is on the rise and you don't have a fraction of the feature set your competition has, and then you justify your own controversial practices by blaming them.
And what do exclusivity deals have to do with the Valve cut, anyways? Wouldn't devs/publishers just naturally choose EGS regardless because it's the obvious better choice, if it truly were?
And what do exclusivity deals have to do with the Valve cut, anyways? Wouldn't devs/publishers just naturally choose EGS regardless because it's the obvious better choice, if it truly were?
Tim himself has said that pushing fees onto customers is the only way to sustain the 12% fee in developing countries. Also idk who "in the industry" you're talking, but a vast majority of the industry seems fine with paying 30% for storefronts, including PSN, XBL, iOS app store, google play store, Nintendo eShop and more.
Oh, Nathan Grayson, also author of editorial masterpieces like "Valve needs to stop nurturing this TOXIC PRO-CONSUMER mentality among users", among the others.
Unsurprisingly, once again an article that makes its best effort to misrepresent and ridicule any legitimate grievance the audience may have with Epic's service.
Seriously, just search this man's name and do a quick check of his editorial pieces in the last two years. It's SHAMELESS.
It would be a good thing if it were attainable without passing costs onto customers and running the store on a nonexistent profit margin.
Valve offer that rate to successful titles because they rely on the profit from Steam's operation to fund the entire company and all the pro-consumer and pro-developer initiatives they're running, unlike EGS that runs everything off UE4 licensing and Fortnite MTX money. Also Valve may or may not be bound by competitive law to maintain the industry-standard revenue split so as not to drive smaller competitor stores out of business.
-----------------------------
Really, how much benefit do developers really need? The industry is focused on squeezing every cent out of gamers, do publishers and developers need even more help with doing that?
Another thing this whole pro-developer thing has made me think of, I wonder if Valve could implement a "Support This Developer" button on the store. As in, you want to give money to this developer and not give money to Steam? Great, here's a button, send money directly to them. Valve will not touch that transaction, everything you pay minus whatever fees incurred by your choice of payment system will go to the publisher/developer as if you bought a DLC key directly from them. You won't get anything in return except the vague satisfaction of doing so, but if you really want to support the developers so much, here you go, button, right on the game's store page.
Even Tim is fine with paying 30% on PSN, switch, Apple and xbox. If he was such a crusader, he would boycott those stores with Fortnite.
But what he doesn't want you to know: It is WORTH IT to put the games on stores with 30% cut.
User Banned (1 Day): Antagonizing other members and igoring staff post
Fanboys.
If this is ins't a blatant low effort flamebait then I don't know what it is.
When yea rile up a fanboy (in quotes) that is what happens.
I thought this wasn't allowed?
God, each day I'm hating this man more and more.
If Valve actually accepted that, not only they would be affected negatively, the customer too.
And it has been known that Sweeney doesn't give a damn for the customer. Hell, thanks to the recent articles, we also know that Sweeney also doesn't give a damn for developers.
So yeah, shut up Sweeney. You are full of bullshit.
If Valve actually accepted that, not only they would be affected negatively, the customer too.
And it has been known that Sweeney doesn't give a damn for the customer. Hell, thanks to the recent articles, we also know that Sweeney also doesn't give a damn for developers.
So yeah, shut up Sweeney. You are full of bullshit.
Fuck that noise unless this "competition" does something good for consumers.
I am reminded of the benefits of Steam's ecosystem daily- when I open my email and find fresh offers from Fanatical, GMG or Humble to sell me discounted Steam keys (and guess what? These 3rd party stores do the bulk of the "discoverabilty" for me, since they constantly highlight games I've never had suggested by steam- from devs and even PUBLISHERS I never heard of before. And they offer prices where I'm comfortable enough to take a risk on a virtual unknown game.
Steam's alleged "monopoly" allows my favourite store, GOG to not merely exist, but attract more and more Day 1 releases of B and Ctier titles, despite its firm, consumer-friendly anti-DRM stance being virtually antithetical to AAA pubs and their love affair with Denuvo.
These are real benefits I see everyday. Not to mention nice things all good PC platforms provide (cloud saves, user forums for any technical issues, review systems), and extras like achievements and mod workshop (I have over 1200 hours logged in Age of Empires II HD largely due to the rejuvenated custom campaign/scenario design community, since I don't play multiplayer)
In my favourite genre (RPG), 3 big upcoming releases (Cyberpunk 2077, Bloodlines 2, Biomutant) are all gonna be available on GOG Day 1. I'll be able to buy them, download DRM-free installers and own them forever without worrying about service disruptions or any crap like that.
EGS doesn't have a shopping cart, can't figure out that Canada doesn't use USD, and wants to control prices by limiting distribution channels. And I'm supposed to pay more for less and feel good about it because it's "for the select few developers we feel worthy enough of letting use our store". While stores I genuinely like (that aren't Steam) are gonna be priced out of existance?
Yeah, no. Fuck that noise, and fuck Tim Sweeney. The man's doing more harm to PC gaming than Bobby Kotick and Andrew Wilson put together.
