Imagine arguing that creating a service so much better than the competition available in that industry that it drives people to spend the most money on that platform is a bad thing.
It isn’t better though? GOG is a better service. DRM-free, web based downloads (galaxy is completely optional). They even invest development resources to get old games working better.
Steam is mostly the dominant platform due to first-mover advantage. They aren’t the best and most of the games on Steam aren’t even exclusives.
I like GOG and love DRM free games however another point is that many, many games are never even available on GOG to begin with. So what do you do then?
Would you rather buy them on Xbox, PlayStation, Epic or Steam?
Most people choose steam because it is the best out of all those options.
I agree having a DRM free game that you own forever is the best option but 7 times out of 10 a new game won’t even be listed on GOG in the first place and if it is refer back to the link about how they often get abandoned with no updates or DLC and therefore less features than on other platforms.
Also, talking about getting old games to work better I would refer you to the Proton compatibility layer that Valve develops.
Proton is built on the open source project Wine and private products from CodeWeavers. Yes, Valve has contributed a tremendous amount to the project but they aren’t deserving of sole credit for it.
I own neither an Xbox nor a PlayStation (nor a Switch, for that matter).
There are LOADS of other options besides AAA games on the big platforms. There are countless vintage games, freeware, shareware, and abandonware that can all be played on the Internet Archive. There are countless indie developers out there to support, including some that have been in business for more than 30 years.
It really bothers me when gamers act like the big publishers are the only game in town (while also complaining about how bad AAA games are now). I mean if you like AAA games, fine, no argument there from me. But if you also like games for their stories and gameplay and don’t need AAA graphics to have a good time then there are thousands and thousands of options out there. I just think most people are unaware of them.
Yes Proton is Valves own compatibility layer though. They built it in collaboration with Codeweavers but Valve built it with Steam money. Codeweavers needed that money to make it into what it is today and Valve provided it.
And that’s ok that you don’t own any of those systems but you are acting like Steam is unreasonable when the rest of the industry does the same thing.
There is sales on PlayStation and Xbox all the time too but why aren’t most of those games unplayed and more bought on Steam? Because the market decided that was the best platform to buy it on. Do you not think Xbox and PlayStation “create FOMO” by offering sales too or just Steam?
And sure if you want to play old games or Indie games lots of options exist Itch.io is a good one too in addition to GOG.
But that’s not really what’s being talked about is it? This was about which storefront is better for consumers and most gaming consumers are playing AAA titles and of the storefront options for those titles there exist Steam, Epic, Xbox, and PlayStation and on some games itch.io and GOG but like I said before out of all those options Steam is the best one for new games and even old games sometimes when the developers don’t give their GOG versions love like they should.
GOG gets shafted on updates and DLC and also doesn’t even usually have like 70% of new games as an option to buy on them at all. Yes, I too prefer to own games but like I mentioned that isn’t always the best option on GOG because of reasons stated above.
Also my abandonware and some others have had Malware problems in the past although so has Steam but it gets caught on steam usually quicker.
I don’t think Steam is unreasonable, I just think they get way more goodwill from their customers than they probably deserve. It’s like with Apple or the Catholic Church. A lot of people love them but they do have ugly sides.
I think convincing people to buy games they never play is a scuzzy thing to do. Is it as scuzzy as gambling? No. But it’s not up there with something like a co-op bakery or coffee shop that sells products (and a cozy environment) at a reasonable price that people actually enjoy.
People have been saying “well they support indie game developers” and sure, yes indie game developers sell a lot of games during Steam sales. But there’s a problem there too: if loads of people are buying indie games but not playing them then that distorts the indie game market. It takes revenue away from less-well-known developers and gives it to popular/viral flash sale developers whose games people aren’t playing. That’s bad for anyone who wants to reward developers for making better games that we actually want to play but otherwise haven’t heard about.
I just think they get way more goodwill from their customers than they probably deserve.
That’s fair. They do a few things I don’t appreciate but overall I like them a lot better than any alternative other than GOG but I do hate that developers don’t update stuff the way it deserves on there sometimes.
Its always good to be a little critical of any service.
But the thing about the sales is that the developers and publishers set the sale price, not Valve. Valve still takes the cut of course.
But the reason you are seeing that most people buy them and don’t play them on there specifically is because it’s just the most used service for gaming. They have a higher userbase than playstation and Xbox combined. And that really just ties in with them being the most customer friendly.
I’m not saying they arent without faults but they are better overall than any of the competition.
Also to add to this PlayStation has been known to limit and straight up restrict indie developers sales prices on their platform sometimes straight up not letting them do it at all. So that’s another reason it all ties together to Valve not being a shit company. I’m sure that Xbox probably does the same thing but haven’t researched it as I sold my Xbox when they did the gamepass price hike this last time.
In my opinion letting indie developers set their own sale prices is good for the industry. But not letting them certainly isn’t.
Wait, why we should not argue?
Steam is not perfect so we yap.
Also not good enough considering it’s just a game listing library and still taking 30% cut from devs imo.
I said imagine your argument being that because a service does sales all the time and consumer relations better than almost all the competition available in the industry that that’s a bad thing because people spend money on said sales.
Its a bit of a shit argument.
“They have so many sales all the time that they force people into spending money they shouldn’t spend! And that’s bad!!”
Also, all those devs are free to use any other platform that doesn’t take 30%.
Remind me again how much PlayStation and Xbox take? Oh yeah, 30% huh.
Btw, PlayStation and Xbox provide whole console system, Apple store and Google play are also 30% and they provide iOS and Android. It’s not same as Valve.
Me saying “imagine arguing” is the same same as saying “your argument is stupid because” and that is not the same as saying not to argue.
I said imagine arguing the points they argued because they are silly. Lots of storefronts have sales shit epic even gives shit away for free every week and gives 20% back in points when you buy a game fron them but you don’t hear anyone talking about how they “create FOMO” by not participating in their storefront.
Its a dumb argument. That is what “imagine arguing” means in that context. Hope that helps.
And yeah they make the console that you have to pay a fee to use internet on. Valve doesn’t do that. If you stop paying their exorbitant fees to use the internet you pay for already to play their games online then you lose half the functionality of your game that you bought. (For multiplayer ones of course).
Valve also makes systems but yes it isn’t quite the same as how PS and Xbox do it I understand what you are saying. However, everyone acts like Steam is greedy dickheads for charging the exact same rate other platforms charge without also charging you some dumb online play fee which is the real greedy fuckery. Despite them having more users than PlayStation and Xbox combined.
I think its funny that no one calls out the other companies greedy fuckery though. Just the one that is the nicest to their consumers (being steam)
You’re still defending Steam’s 30% fee for no good reason besides cherry-picking failed competitors.
Also if you think “sale is good” and “Steam is customer friendly” (I think so too), why are you so mad when I talked about Steam’s 30% fee? I just said 30% is too high for just a game launcher. Fee acts like tariff, if Steam lowers fee little bit, game price will go down too. Which is super customer friendly. Don’t you like it?
Look, I don’t care how much you fangirling Steam, but it certainly doesn’t help Steam any better.
You mean all of them? PlayStation, Xbox, and GOG literally the only two that don’t do this is Itch.io and Epic and Epic games store hasn’t been profitable since it came out in 2018. And Itch is pretty much indie games only. Please name one other competitor that sells AAA titles that doesn’t do that besides epic which again hasn’t been profitable as a game store since 2018. They supplement it all with that fortnite money.
You want steam to be the only one that has AAA titles for sale that doesn’t take the same percentage cut every single other one takes?
Not fangirling either I’m pointing out that your hate is completely unwarranted. You should hate the gaming industry as a whole if you hate the pricing model it has set up.
The reason people put their games on PlayStation, Xbox, GOG and Steam is because that’s where all the players are. They could easily only sell it on Epic and not sell well if they wanted to do that. (The fee being so low on Epic is why they don’t make money BTW give it a search online)
These developers could even set up their own payment processing system and sell it directly on their own website which would take about, oh look at that 20 - 30% of profits without any of the exposure PS, Xbox, GOG, and Steam gives you. I wonder why they don’t do that if its such a bad deal for them? (Payment processing fees, bank fees, website hosting fees - add it all up you’re not talking about some random checking account you’re talking about an account moving millions of dollars through it)
You know Xbox and PlayStation could also stop charging you for the internet you already pay for and that would be super consumer friendly too. Also could not take 30% “Don’t you like it?” GOG could do it too. What’s stopping them?
Also no, I’m “mad” because you willfully misunderstood what I said earlier and said I was saying not to argue which is not what I said. But ok, let’s argue about it, then. You dont seem to know what you are talking about because so far your argument is shit because every single other competitor does what you’re crying about steam doing. Except the one losing money.
Calm down bro. I don’t hate Steam. I have hundreds of games on Steam and I launch Steam every day, play some games.
Ah yes, cashing process. Steam takes 30% after transactional fees applied, you know that right? Or are you talking about web/transactional server cost? Yeah it costs some but not like that much as you mentioned. Still feels like 30% of fee is too much for just a game launcher with cashing process. I don’t care about your business models with lots of swear, without solid convincing data about 30% of fee is necessary to maintain Steam.
Also swearing too much doesn’t make you look good, I’m sorry but I felt like talking to an angry cult member.
Again you are wrong that 30% includes payment fees give it a search and educate yourself.
But yeah all those “failed competitors” I “cherry picked” charge the same amount steam does which was your original argument about why it sucks so bad. So you should be outraged at PS and Xbox charging that AND a fee to use your internet on multiplayer games.
Literally the only one that charges less hasn’t been profitable. You’re out of your element Donny.
Every single other competitor charges the same thing they do, is that enough evidence or are you going to claim every single other service is a failed competitor again? Maybe you will say that Steam should go against the rest of the industry and charge less than literally any other profitable competitor even though they have the biggest userbase out of all of them?
And if the word shit hurts your feelings you should probably know what you’re talking about and not accuse me of saying stuff I didn’t say like suggesting I said not to argue about steam which again I never said. Reading comprehension can be hard, I get it.
Imagine arguing that creating a service so much better than the competition available in that industry that it drives people to spend the most money on that platform is a bad thing.
It isn’t better though? GOG is a better service. DRM-free, web based downloads (galaxy is completely optional). They even invest development resources to get old games working better.
Steam is mostly the dominant platform due to first-mover advantage. They aren’t the best and most of the games on Steam aren’t even exclusives.
Here’s a blog post on GOG talking about how many developers abandon their games on there so they don’t get updates or DLC like they do on other platforms https://www.gog.com/forum/general/how_do_games_recieving_updates_work_on_gog
I like GOG and love DRM free games however another point is that many, many games are never even available on GOG to begin with. So what do you do then?
Would you rather buy them on Xbox, PlayStation, Epic or Steam?
Most people choose steam because it is the best out of all those options.
I agree having a DRM free game that you own forever is the best option but 7 times out of 10 a new game won’t even be listed on GOG in the first place and if it is refer back to the link about how they often get abandoned with no updates or DLC and therefore less features than on other platforms.
Also, talking about getting old games to work better I would refer you to the Proton compatibility layer that Valve develops.
Proton is built on the open source project Wine and private products from CodeWeavers. Yes, Valve has contributed a tremendous amount to the project but they aren’t deserving of sole credit for it.
I own neither an Xbox nor a PlayStation (nor a Switch, for that matter).
There are LOADS of other options besides AAA games on the big platforms. There are countless vintage games, freeware, shareware, and abandonware that can all be played on the Internet Archive. There are countless indie developers out there to support, including some that have been in business for more than 30 years.
It really bothers me when gamers act like the big publishers are the only game in town (while also complaining about how bad AAA games are now). I mean if you like AAA games, fine, no argument there from me. But if you also like games for their stories and gameplay and don’t need AAA graphics to have a good time then there are thousands and thousands of options out there. I just think most people are unaware of them.
Yes Proton is Valves own compatibility layer though. They built it in collaboration with Codeweavers but Valve built it with Steam money. Codeweavers needed that money to make it into what it is today and Valve provided it.
And that’s ok that you don’t own any of those systems but you are acting like Steam is unreasonable when the rest of the industry does the same thing.
There is sales on PlayStation and Xbox all the time too but why aren’t most of those games unplayed and more bought on Steam? Because the market decided that was the best platform to buy it on. Do you not think Xbox and PlayStation “create FOMO” by offering sales too or just Steam?
And sure if you want to play old games or Indie games lots of options exist Itch.io is a good one too in addition to GOG.
But that’s not really what’s being talked about is it? This was about which storefront is better for consumers and most gaming consumers are playing AAA titles and of the storefront options for those titles there exist Steam, Epic, Xbox, and PlayStation and on some games itch.io and GOG but like I said before out of all those options Steam is the best one for new games and even old games sometimes when the developers don’t give their GOG versions love like they should.
GOG gets shafted on updates and DLC and also doesn’t even usually have like 70% of new games as an option to buy on them at all. Yes, I too prefer to own games but like I mentioned that isn’t always the best option on GOG because of reasons stated above.
Also my abandonware and some others have had Malware problems in the past although so has Steam but it gets caught on steam usually quicker.
I don’t think Steam is unreasonable, I just think they get way more goodwill from their customers than they probably deserve. It’s like with Apple or the Catholic Church. A lot of people love them but they do have ugly sides.
I think convincing people to buy games they never play is a scuzzy thing to do. Is it as scuzzy as gambling? No. But it’s not up there with something like a co-op bakery or coffee shop that sells products (and a cozy environment) at a reasonable price that people actually enjoy.
People have been saying “well they support indie game developers” and sure, yes indie game developers sell a lot of games during Steam sales. But there’s a problem there too: if loads of people are buying indie games but not playing them then that distorts the indie game market. It takes revenue away from less-well-known developers and gives it to popular/viral flash sale developers whose games people aren’t playing. That’s bad for anyone who wants to reward developers for making better games that we actually want to play but otherwise haven’t heard about.
That’s fair. They do a few things I don’t appreciate but overall I like them a lot better than any alternative other than GOG but I do hate that developers don’t update stuff the way it deserves on there sometimes.
Its always good to be a little critical of any service.
But the thing about the sales is that the developers and publishers set the sale price, not Valve. Valve still takes the cut of course.
But the reason you are seeing that most people buy them and don’t play them on there specifically is because it’s just the most used service for gaming. They have a higher userbase than playstation and Xbox combined. And that really just ties in with them being the most customer friendly.
I’m not saying they arent without faults but they are better overall than any of the competition.
Also to add to this PlayStation has been known to limit and straight up restrict indie developers sales prices on their platform sometimes straight up not letting them do it at all. So that’s another reason it all ties together to Valve not being a shit company. I’m sure that Xbox probably does the same thing but haven’t researched it as I sold my Xbox when they did the gamepass price hike this last time.
In my opinion letting indie developers set their own sale prices is good for the industry. But not letting them certainly isn’t.
https://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/7/224446432324091426/
Many games on Steam don’t have any DRM enabled and will boot without it. You just need to check
Wait, why we should not argue? Steam is not perfect so we yap. Also not good enough considering it’s just a game listing library and still taking 30% cut from devs imo.
Never said not to argue.
I said imagine your argument being that because a service does sales all the time and consumer relations better than almost all the competition available in the industry that that’s a bad thing because people spend money on said sales.
Its a bit of a shit argument.
“They have so many sales all the time that they force people into spending money they shouldn’t spend! And that’s bad!!”
Also, all those devs are free to use any other platform that doesn’t take 30%.
Remind me again how much PlayStation and Xbox take? Oh yeah, 30% huh.
“Never said not to argue.” Ok.
Btw, PlayStation and Xbox provide whole console system, Apple store and Google play are also 30% and they provide iOS and Android. It’s not same as Valve.
Me saying “imagine arguing” is the same same as saying “your argument is stupid because” and that is not the same as saying not to argue.
I said imagine arguing the points they argued because they are silly. Lots of storefronts have sales shit epic even gives shit away for free every week and gives 20% back in points when you buy a game fron them but you don’t hear anyone talking about how they “create FOMO” by not participating in their storefront.
Its a dumb argument. That is what “imagine arguing” means in that context. Hope that helps.
And yeah they make the console that you have to pay a fee to use internet on. Valve doesn’t do that. If you stop paying their exorbitant fees to use the internet you pay for already to play their games online then you lose half the functionality of your game that you bought. (For multiplayer ones of course).
Valve also makes systems but yes it isn’t quite the same as how PS and Xbox do it I understand what you are saying. However, everyone acts like Steam is greedy dickheads for charging the exact same rate other platforms charge without also charging you some dumb online play fee which is the real greedy fuckery. Despite them having more users than PlayStation and Xbox combined.
I think its funny that no one calls out the other companies greedy fuckery though. Just the one that is the nicest to their consumers (being steam)
LIKE GOG THAT ALSO TAKES 30%
Where’s your hate for GOG though? I don’t see it.
I never said GOG is good either, chill.
You’re still defending Steam’s 30% fee for no good reason besides cherry-picking failed competitors.
Also if you think “sale is good” and “Steam is customer friendly” (I think so too), why are you so mad when I talked about Steam’s 30% fee? I just said 30% is too high for just a game launcher. Fee acts like tariff, if Steam lowers fee little bit, game price will go down too. Which is super customer friendly. Don’t you like it?
Look, I don’t care how much you fangirling Steam, but it certainly doesn’t help Steam any better.
You mean all of them? PlayStation, Xbox, and GOG literally the only two that don’t do this is Itch.io and Epic and Epic games store hasn’t been profitable since it came out in 2018. And Itch is pretty much indie games only. Please name one other competitor that sells AAA titles that doesn’t do that besides epic which again hasn’t been profitable as a game store since 2018. They supplement it all with that fortnite money.
You want steam to be the only one that has AAA titles for sale that doesn’t take the same percentage cut every single other one takes?
Not fangirling either I’m pointing out that your hate is completely unwarranted. You should hate the gaming industry as a whole if you hate the pricing model it has set up.
The reason people put their games on PlayStation, Xbox, GOG and Steam is because that’s where all the players are. They could easily only sell it on Epic and not sell well if they wanted to do that. (The fee being so low on Epic is why they don’t make money BTW give it a search online)
These developers could even set up their own payment processing system and sell it directly on their own website which would take about, oh look at that 20 - 30% of profits without any of the exposure PS, Xbox, GOG, and Steam gives you. I wonder why they don’t do that if its such a bad deal for them? (Payment processing fees, bank fees, website hosting fees - add it all up you’re not talking about some random checking account you’re talking about an account moving millions of dollars through it)
You know Xbox and PlayStation could also stop charging you for the internet you already pay for and that would be super consumer friendly too. Also could not take 30% “Don’t you like it?” GOG could do it too. What’s stopping them?
Also no, I’m “mad” because you willfully misunderstood what I said earlier and said I was saying not to argue which is not what I said. But ok, let’s argue about it, then. You dont seem to know what you are talking about because so far your argument is shit because every single other competitor does what you’re crying about steam doing. Except the one losing money.
Calm down bro. I don’t hate Steam. I have hundreds of games on Steam and I launch Steam every day, play some games.
Ah yes, cashing process. Steam takes 30% after transactional fees applied, you know that right? Or are you talking about web/transactional server cost? Yeah it costs some but not like that much as you mentioned. Still feels like 30% of fee is too much for just a game launcher with cashing process. I don’t care about your business models with lots of swear, without solid convincing data about 30% of fee is necessary to maintain Steam.
Also swearing too much doesn’t make you look good, I’m sorry but I felt like talking to an angry cult member.
Again you are wrong that 30% includes payment fees give it a search and educate yourself.
But yeah all those “failed competitors” I “cherry picked” charge the same amount steam does which was your original argument about why it sucks so bad. So you should be outraged at PS and Xbox charging that AND a fee to use your internet on multiplayer games.
Literally the only one that charges less hasn’t been profitable. You’re out of your element Donny.
Every single other competitor charges the same thing they do, is that enough evidence or are you going to claim every single other service is a failed competitor again? Maybe you will say that Steam should go against the rest of the industry and charge less than literally any other profitable competitor even though they have the biggest userbase out of all of them?
And if the word shit hurts your feelings you should probably know what you’re talking about and not accuse me of saying stuff I didn’t say like suggesting I said not to argue about steam which again I never said. Reading comprehension can be hard, I get it.