[zeroname]

> Already game developers are the lowest paid workers in the IT industry

That is not true if you factor out all the people developing games independently on their own dime, against better financial advice. To counteract that, there just aren't enough developers working on enterprise Java architecture for no money, out of passion.

It's also only fair that people who get to work on "fun" things like games are paid less. If they don't think it's fun, they can switch industries and earn more. Nobody is doomed to be a game developer.

> I'm not arguing against any change, it just seems spiteful that Valve are sticking it to the little guys who can't go anywhere else.

The little guys can go to itch.io, which charges as low as 0% commission. They may even have more visibility on there than on Steam, given that it's a smaller pond. There's also the Humble Store, which leaves commission up to the buyer.

> This could have been a great chance to improve Steam overall, by reducing the commissions for all developers...

They did reduce commissions for everyone by 5%. The extra 5% is for those who are at risk of moving off the platform because they can create their own visibility.

[beerlord]

See for yourself:

https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2018/#salary

> The little guys can go to itch.io, which charges as low as 0% commission. They may even have more visibility on there than on Steam, given that it's a smaller pond. There's also the Humble Store, which leaves commission up to the buyer.

Steam has a monopoly. There is no alternative for anyone with revenue below $10 million (hence this change). Itch.io yields about 1% of the revenue of Steam.

The best you can do is sell Steam keys direct from your website, using the Humble Widget which charges 5%. However you will suffer from reduced visibility on the Steam store (since visibility is based on sales).

> They did reduce commissions for everyone by 5%.

No, only once a game reaches $10 million of total sales revenue.

[zeroname]

> See for yourself: > https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2018/#salary

Like I said, you need to factor out those unsuccessful developers that don't make any money. This is self-reported data is of questionable merit, but if you switch to US, game developers aren't at the bottom anymore and none of the salaries listed are bad in any way.

Again, if you do what you love, you should be able to stomach a pay hit. If you don't love it after all, don't wait for the industry to change, change industries yourself.

> Itch.io yields about 1% of the revenue of Steam.

That doesn't generalize across different titles. Maybe some title has zero visibility on Steam, but some visibility on itch.io. Then you're better off with itch.io.

Either way, it's just a guess.

> No, only once a game reaches $10 million of total sales revenue.

I misread that, my bad.

[leafo]

> That doesn't generalize across different titles. Maybe some title has zero visibility on Steam, but some visibility on itch.io. Then you're better off with itch.io.

as the person who runs itch.io, I can say that this is true

[suby]

> (since visibility is based on sales).

This is a point I don't see mentioned often enough. I've wondered in the past if it's actually better to forego every other platform in order to increase visibility through Steam. Higher sales means that Valve will promote you more, which may offset whatever revenue you'd be generating from sources like itch.io. Would be interested to hear if anyone has any opinions or idea about this.