[bisby]

While I won't argue loot boxes, and I dont know enough about mod/skin communities...

The 30% developer fee makes a lot more sense if you consider that steam is much more than a game store. They host forums, guides, achievements, cloud saves, multiple versions of the game at once with beta channel access, screenshots, remote play, extras like Proton support, a friends list that will show you when other people are playing a game (advertising). And the store page has all sorts of stuff like ratings, reviews... a shopping cart and ability to purchase more than 1 game at a time (didn't know that was a feature, but apparently it is). And top of all that, it's just frankly where PC gamers are, so theres a ton of built in marketing.

Not every game benefits from all these things. But it's hardly just a storefront. I would question Gamestop taking a 30% cut. I would question if EGS wanted the same 30% cut as valve gets. Gamers prefer Steam over EGS, and the reason they prefer it isn't just because "it's a nicer store front." It's a whole platform thing.

[madeofpalk]

Steam taking 30% cut is fine. No one is being forced to use Steam (unlike on iOS)

If developers don’t like it, they can chose other options to distribute their game.

[account42]

Technically no-one is being forced but network effects mean that not publishing on steam is essentially suicide for any dev without a huge marketing budget to overcome those network effects. This means that Steam is in a position where they can demand feeds in excess of what they could in a healthy competitive market.

[madeofpalk]

Is there anything preventing a healthy competetive market for game stores on PC? Does Steam/Valve engage in behaviour that limits competition? Alternatives do exist - itch.io, GOG, Epic Game Store, and just putting an .exe file on your website.

If the market is not being artificially suppressed (I don't believe it is), and developer still think it's financially advantageous to pay Steam's fees, doesn't that indicate the fee is "correct"?

[mulletbum]

Epic has lots of games that aren't published to Steam. They seem to be doing fine.

[ryathal]

Epic recently admitted their store isn't profitable.

[m_0x]

That doesn't mean the Epic Store is not profitable for the developers.

[ryathal]

It does mean that at any point in the future the store could simply not exist with short notice.

[Sabinus]

Epic pays those Devs for timed exclusivity on EGS, with the profits from Fornite and Unreal.

[dontlaugh]

Most game developers aren't Epic.

It's Steam or bust for the vast majority.

[Ferret7446]

Another way to word that, is that the benefit that Steam provides through their distribution/passive marketing service is so large that it justifies the 30% price tag. If it did not, then developers would go find another service. It's basic economics.

[jquery]

Here is where I come in and recommend everyone check out Playnite: https://playnite.link/

When I care about supporting a developer or publisher and they offer their product on their own storefront DRM-free, I will often go there to buy. Or I buy from GoG which takes a smaller cut. Playnite lets me launch my Steam and non-Steam games in a seamless fashion. Steam still does a great job as a game installer/patch manager, and helps me discover new games. But I'm not locked into paying them a 30% fee, which is pretty brutal for some smaller publishers.

[mattl]

Windows only?

[jquery]

It can run on Linux/Steam Deck apparently:

https://www.reddit.com/r/playnite/comments/15q2x16/i_install...

I have only used it on my Windows install, so I can't recommend this.

[hyperbovine]

Who is being forced to use iOS?

[csdreamer7]

Literally people will look down on you if you don't buy an iPhone.

They back off when they find out my line of work, but you hear about bullying and peer pressure in school over bubbles. That does not end when you leave high school.

One VC said that people that buy Android don't have taste and wouldn't work with them. Now they say Android is for poor people. Freedom to sideload or install a custom os be damned.

[serf]

>That does not end when you leave high school.

It's not a high school thing, it's just amplified during that point in life; there is always pressure to conform.

I don't care about whether or not some VC thinks I have class either professionally or personally. Avoid people that jump to conclusions and you'll be better off, regardless of how fancy their personal titles are.

[dotBen]

Don't worry, there are a (perhaps) surprising amount of VCs who love Android.

I'm one of them. We are not all the same!

[fennecfoxy]

Apple knows this and has curated it. Why do people think that they had specific bubble colours for messaging devices inside/outside Apple ecosystem.

They even did deep, dirty tricks like this: https://uxdesign.cc/how-apple-makes-you-think-green-bubbles-.... Not only that but Apple just love to lean heavily on their own custom functionality rather than coming up with open/reusable technologies. Apple are happy to use Wifi & Bluetooth standards to compete in the market, but not so much standards for chats/group chats (where Android users find things don't mesh as well/they don't have the same functionality as iOS users).

I can't for the life of me find it now, but I remember reading an article a while back on how Google found a way to trick iPhones into accepting Android messages as "blue bubble"/iOS messages by dumping some string onto the end or something. I'm sure it was a HN post but I can't find it, which sucks cause it was pretty funny reading.

[waihtis]

you shouldn't tie your self-worth to the mobile phone brand you use

[vincnetas]

It's easy to understand this when your matured, not so much when you are developing, or literally get excluded from activities because of that.

[smoofles]

I mean, $800 is kinda cheap for self-worth, if we’re honest. Cheaper than a sports car or house with a view or own apartment or even one vacation someplace fancy.

But yeah, ideally one shouldn’t tie self worth to perishables.

[mattl]

What’s your line of work that you need an Android phone?

I find dealing with Android users from iMessage tiring but everyone I know who uses Android also uses WhatsApp and that works just fine cross platform.

[account42]

Same goes for Steam though, especially for multiplayer games.

[dontlaugh]

I believe you, but that sounds made up.

[beefsack]

Not being forced to use iOS, but if you are on iOS you are forced to use the app store.

[nkrisc]

I think the point is Valve doesn’t own the store and the platform.

[redkoala]

They do now for the Steam Deck, but customers can always choose to play on Desktop or x86 handhelds instead.

[johnnyanmac]

SD is ultimately a linux computer, so you can still throw on another store if you really care. It's also a relatiely niche device, so not quite prone to monopoly effects anyway.

[vel0city]

You can install other game stores on your steam deck. You can directly install apps outside of Steam. You can even install a different operating system if you want. It's not locked to Steam in the slightest.

Let me know when I can install fdroid on iOS.

[littlestymaar]

Literally every app developer who want to target the iPhone user market.

[rfoo]

Don't forget, they are also forced to buy a Mac. License demand that iOS SDK must be used only on Apple hardware.

[allarm]

No one is being forced to drink water as well.

[hyperbovine]

So to complete the analogy, if you don't use iOS you'll die.

...?

[smoldesu]

s/you/iPhones and yes, that does line up.

[walteweiss]

No one is being forced to breathe!

[_cenw]

People Make Games did a great half-hour documentary on it. It's... pretty bad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMmNy11Mn7g

[scarby2]

according to polygon gamestop's margin on new games was around 25%. So that's not massively different and steam absolutely provides more value for the developer than gamestop.

[johnnyanmac]

I don't really get the GS comparisons. GS was from a different time where your options for distribution on console was selling in brick and mortar stores or barely selling at all. they 100% can't justify 25% in 2023 as digital purchases supercede physical, but that's not when these rates were negotiated upon.

[tapoxi]

I mean the entire Unreal Engine 5 is a 5% cut, a 30% cut to host forums and screenshots is a little ridiculous.

[mrguyorama]

Other features steam develops for you with that 30% cut: Multiplayer friends list apis, cloud save apis and space, wide open VR apis (that get turned into Unreal Engine apis, game streaming, voice chat (though it's terrible by today's standards), workshop (modding and UGC) apis storage and management, Free keys to give out on other platforms which actually decreases that 30% cut depending on how much you use that functionality, built in "markets" for in game items, steam remote play apis and functionality, remote play together api (streaming gamepad stuff over networks without needing any crazy configuration or special programs), the new input system which is just incredible and can basically eliminate any work an individual game developer has to do to support powerful input tools and accessibility, free selling games on linux with very little dev work needed to support it and way less demanding bugs from linux users, built in customizable (but purposely bad) DRM if you only care for a minimal implementation, etc

"Steam" is not just a game store. It's like if walmart built an entire industry around maintaining, supporting, and extending anything you sold through them. 30% is a lot, but Valve is the only company out of basically the entire retail industry actually providing value to sellers and buyers alike, rather than just a storefront.

The CS:GO child gambling problem is HUGE though, and unconscionable. I don't know how Gabe feels about that, but I don't care. It should be exceptionally illegal to give a child access to a "gambling like" game that ever touches real money.

[tapoxi]

Friends list and matchmaking APIs are also provided by Epic Online Services, and work on consoles, multiple engines, and multiple stores, for free.

That 30% cut still seems egregious. Those features are all nice but none of them can be used to make a game.

Unity is even cheaper, at 2.5%.

[skeaker]

Evidently it's not egregious to the people putting games on the platform, so agree to disagree I suppose.

[kemotep]

I’m fairly certain Microsoft and Sony both take a 30% cut too.

[skeaker]

Yes. They knowingly put things on the platform with the 30% cut in mind because it is worth it to them, ergo they do not find it egregious.

[TerrifiedMouse]

They also host the game download and all its updates allowing buyers to (re)download whenever they want.

30% is the standard retail cut if I’m right. So if you sell your game at Walmart, they take 30% too.

Edit: There is actually a way to bypass Steam’s cut - provide by Valve strangely enough - if I’m right. As developer you can mint as many API keys for your games as you like and sell those through other means. Your customers will still download and play through Steam but Steam gets nothing - i.e. you use their infrastructure for free; of course they would get their cut from copies sold via their store.

[awill]

yea, I don't get how people complain about Valve. Google, Apple, Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft all take roughly the same.

The difference is people actually like using Steam. They actually want to be locked in. I'd rather by a game on Steam vs Gog. Consider that. DRM free, but people prefer the lock-in. That's because Valve is nailing it.

Imagine people saying the same about Microsoft, Epic, EA etc.. Nope.

[bisby]

Many games on Steam are DRM free. You have to download the game through Steam... but from Gog you have to download the games from Gog too. One uses their app as a gatekeeper and the other uses a website. KSP is an example just off the top of my head where you can download the game, delete steam and keep playing. Not all games implement Steam DRM.

But also yes. Steam has made the gaming on linux process so much easier. Using steam is the easiest way to game now and I definitely prefer all my games to be there.

[johnnyanmac]

They all do. You can argue it's too high but the issue is that they all own those platforms and the hardware you develop on (except Google). Valve, not so much.

>The difference is people actually like using Steam. They actually want to be locked in.

yup, and that's where the danger starts. People like being locked into Apple as well. the consoles all conditioned people to being locked in. I understand it, but don't think it's a good thing.

Microsoft does technically have a lock in with PC, but they have enough historical lawsuits on those issues that they are lax on what is hosted on Windows. The reckoning for Apple/Google is definately coming, though.

[TerrifiedMouse]

> but the issue is that they all own those platforms and the hardware you develop on (except Google). Valve, not so much.

Console manufacturers charge a separate per unit royalty for every game published for their consoles, typical in the range of 10-20%.

That’s how they make most of their money before online stores - the console is sold at near break even typically but they do earn on extra accessories.

The store charges are separate and independent.

[nottorp]

> People like being locked into Apple as well.

I don't. I just use Windows and Linux occasionally and that reminds me why I prefer Mac OS.

It's easy to get lock in effects when the alternatives are crap wrt usability. Even if you can get larger numbers for less money on the spec sheet.

[devilbunny]

On one level, it's evil lock-in. On another, it's all-products compatibility with very tight integration.

I don't like being locked into Apple, but I can't argue with the extraordinary convenience of doing it their way. New iPhone or iPad? Just set it next to your old one and it will pull everything over. New Mac? You can clone from a backup of a different Mac. I started with an iPad, got a Mac a few years later, and finally got an iPhone after Google released the amazing (loved the fingerprint reader on the back for unlocking) but disastrous (the battery would decide to go to hell one day, no warning, and you were losing 30+% of power per hour) Nexus 6P.

[jamesfinlayson]

I don't remember the details but I thought they clamped down on the CD key work-around in the last year or two.

[SXX]

No. Valve was never against legit developers using their infrastructure for games sold elsewhere even if Valve dont get any cut. If you have game that sold 1000 copies on Steam you can still generate 10,000 keys for selling elsewhere.

What they clamped down on was developers who built $0.01 game for trading cards farming. Now Valve just have some fair usage rules so developer of game that sold 10 copies on Steam can't request 1,000,000 keys for it.

Disclosure: I am indie game studio co-fouder so Steam keys is something we deal with.

[jamesfinlayson]

I found it - in February 2023 it looks like added some limits and are enforcing that Steam customers don't get a worse deal than customers who use CD keys.

But yes they have clamped down on the fake games for trading card farming too.

[SXX]

It was a news in February 2023, but Steam had this as part of their ToS for decade or more. Basically Valve want you to run the same discounts on Steam as you run on other stores.

AFAIK it's perfectly fine to temporary run something like lowest-ever price outside of Steam on a condition that within some timeframe (not sure about timing) there will be similar sale on Steam.

[christophilus]

Valve has done a massive favor to us Linux folks with their work on Proton and other Linux-related development. That’s also worth something.

30% does seem a bit too high, though. I’ll grant you that.

[pjmlp]

Actually they have done a massive favour to the games industry, keep targeting Windows and get Linux for free, what a deal.

[dragonwriter]

Promotion probably plays a bigger role in enabling profit than engine, though.

Whether it should may be a different issue.

[Alupis]

Discovery is a major reason why so many people use Steam.

That, and Steam hasn't really burned many folks, ever. They even pioneered returns after you played the game...

As a user, I've never once been mad at Steam.

[madeofpalk]

Note that this was after Valve was taken to court and was ordered to pay fines for violating consumer protection laws by not offering refunds.

> Valve must pay a fine of AU$3 million (about £1.6m/US$2.3m/€1.8m) for misleading Steam users in Australia by stating they were not entitled to refunds for faulty games on Steam

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/australia-fines-valve-over-...

[Alupis]

Australian laws do not apply to the rest of the world - and a $2.3m fine is pennies anyway. So no, that is not why people in the US can get a refund after playing a game for up to 2 hours...

[johnnyanmac]

>So no, that is not why people in the US can get a refund after playing a game for up to 2 hours...

okay, here's the EU part: https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/new-valve-refund-poli...

not brought to court but that right-to-return law put another fire under their butt for sure.

[flkiwi]

The only thing I get mad at Steam about is that the client updates (baseless accusation incoming) WAY too often and/or desperately needs to have some sort of incremental update system. I am, however, not a game developer. But as a consumer it's been very good.

[hug]

> They even pioneered returns after you played the game...

They were forced to do so by the Australian government, so it was hardly "pioneering".

[johnnyanmac]

Feels very apple-esque when people spin up compliance to government regulations as "pioneering". Then Epic has the same spin every other company does and they are ground to dust in the internet discourse.

But yeah, difference is Valve knows to be good to consumers (mostly) but make dev support a nightmare if you're not big enough.

[jamesfinlayson]

> That, and Steam hasn't really burned many folks, ever.

I think like many new things it got off to a rocky start in 2003 and 2004 (especially with the launch of Half-Life 2). I only started using Steam on 2007 I think and I've never had an issue.

[jahsome]

Minimizing the value of utilizing steam to those two things is ridiculous (ly disingenuous).

Is 30% fair? I don't really have an opinion, but putting your game on steam isn't required for game development.

[ozim]

Same as 7 million dollars for 30 sec air time for commercial during Super Bowl, ridiculous.

[allarm]

Yeah, probably the reason why it’s not only forum and screenshots? Don’t know.

[undersuit]

Oh, thanks for reminding me to claim my free game from Epic Games this week.

[yrro]

Don't forget the network backbone for multiplayer game traffic.

I'd love to see a "what has Steam ever done for us?" sketch produced :)

[highwaylights]

I thought it was just a very sticky library where people keep buying Steam games because all the games they already own are on Steam.

Also, both Xbox and PlayStation have more-or-less all those things you mentioned but you get subsidised hardware in the deal too.

[crtasm]

One major plus with Steam is buying a single copy of certain games and having a friend join instantly via remote play.

Also nice to be able to buy some new games and run them on an old laptop, can't do that on my xbox 360 anymore. My library all runs on my latest computer too. At least xbox makes a fair amount of the catalog backwards compatible, it's not a thing on Playstation.

edit: plus I can give friends access to my entire library, providing I'm not using it at the time.

[OmegaMetor]

Another fun thing about steam: There's no setting for the game developer to enable/disable the networking, so if a steam game uses steamworks and doesn't have multiplayer through steam, it can just be modded in and works great.

[crtasm]

Is this the best tool for that?

https://github.com/m4dEngi/RemotePlayWhatever

[ChoGGi]

And monthly online fees?

Or is that only PS?

[highwaylights]

This is fair, but it's an oddly mixed bag on Playstation for legacy reasons.

Free-to-play games can be played online without a subscription, but paid games require a subscription - I imagine as a holdover from pre-Fortnite days and cross-platform play.

I'm a subscriber for the game catalogue and only really play online multiplayers that are F2P anyway, but yeah it doesn't seem at all justifiable. It's a strange decision too - I can't imagine the subset of people who are NOT subscribers for the monthly games and/or catalogue AND are playing games online that are NOT f2p is big enough to be a significant impact to their bottom line. If anything it would be a deterrent from choosing the platform.

[Spivak]

> I would question Gamestop taking a 30% cut

Why? Physical distribution is way more expensive and they handle the entire consumer lifecycle.

[bisby]

Gamestop has a single interaction with the sales process. Once I've bought my game, unless I want to return it, I never have to think about gamestop again. So while the "get the game to the store" costs more, the act of swapping money in exchange for the game is basically 0 work. Gamestop has logistics to deal with as their primary service.

Valve has a perpetual obligation. I might buy the game and then never even download it. Or I might download the game. delete it. download the game again next week. delete it ... etc... And take 1000 screenshots that I want them to host, and upload mods for a game that they have to host and people may download. And this may happen forever (or at least until Valve ceases to be a company).

Fable III isn't even available in the Steam store anymore... but they have a repo hosting the game files. And they still take updates (the package was last updated in july 2023, even though its been off the store for years). According to SteamDB there are 14 people playing it right now. Steam has been supporting a game that they haven't even sold in the past 8 years.

I'm willing to bet that if I ask gamestop for anything regarding support for a game from 8 years ago they'd just laugh at me.

tl;dr - physical distribution has cut and dry limited obligations, but steam has to deal with stuff forever.

[johnnyanmac]

>the act of swapping money in exchange for the game is basically 0 work.

you're still treating this as a software service. Remember that for a physical store:

1. you need to maintain the store. you can't have dirt bugs and grime everywhere 2. you need insurance to deal with various inevitable factors. theft, crime within store grounds, destruction of property, etc. 3. buildings break down faster than servers. you need to upkeep that. 4. security. Need to monitor the store in and outside of business hours. 5. yes, support. They manage memberships, pre-orders, process returns in or out of warranty/return period, check inventory for if older used games are around, and can route you to other locations for such product.

Its only cut and dry if you never think what is needed to maintain the norm for you.

[oceanplexian]

That’s not a downside for Steam, and probably totally negates any distribution cost.

Imagine if you had to go to Gamestop every time you launched a game. They would kill for that opportunity. Steam has a captive audience who goes to their store every day.

[justinclift]

> host forums

Some of their discussion forums are incredibly toxic though, seeming to have no effective moderation.

Baldurs Gate 3 and Starfield spring to mind as clear examples, though it wouldn't surprise me if there are even worse ones around.

[bisby]

That's fair. and there are plenty of stories of game devs that do moderate their forums being incredibly toxic themselves.

But point being, Steam is a whole platform. When THPS 1+2's "Upload a custom skate park" broke, I just hit shift+tab and clicked discussions, and bam. theres discussions about it being broken for other people. and I didn't even have to launch the game, I could just go to discussions from the game on steam to see when it was fixed. I didn't have to go googling for everything.

And the beauty of it, is that valve hasn't made all of it a walled garden. It's a nice garden, but they do a pretty good job of not keeping it completely locked down (which is the main reason why proton has been so successful).

So no, Steam won't moderate your forums for you, but they will host the forums and you don't have to have your own/none. But then again, that might be more of a benefit to the customers than to the devs who may not care.

[darkwater]

Some example? I don't use Steam, nor play videogames nowadays but I played a lot the original Baldur's Gate back in the day, so I'm somehow curious about this (even simple pointers are appreciated)

[justinclift]

Personally, I insta-bought Baldurs Gate 3 when it launched due to having played Baldurs Gate 1 & 2 + the video's of it showing the graphics looking ok.

It was a mistake.

The Steam discussion/forums for it are here: https://steamcommunity.com/app/1086940/discussions/

I've not looked at them for ages as they were very toxic for a few weeks after launch, and I personally have no real desire to go looking again now. Maybe they've magically improved somehow, but I doubt it.

[BEEdwards]

>It was a mistake.

What do you mean, the game is objectively solid and is very much a continuation of the Boulders Gate series. It has flaws, but personally I think it's the best crpg i've played in years (and without nostalgia filters).

[dragonwriter]

I'm guessing its probably related to the fact that BG1 and BG2 are T-rated, BG3 is both M-rated (in part for sex) and inclusive in a way that, well, more than one review or article suggested it might be something like “the queerest video game of all time”.

To be clear, I'm not criticizing, I just am not surprised that a certain segment of the BG1/BG2 fanbase is unhappy.

[stavros]

Why was it a mistake? I've only heard good things.

[gotoeleven]

First thing on the forum: BG3 doesn't represent asexual people!

https://steamcommunity.com/app/1086940/discussions/0/3944650...

Steam takes 30% to make everyone slightly dumber

[angus-prune]

I see a thread of people talking about their experience of the game and how aspects of it made them feel. That's exactly what a forum is for, and a very legitimate way to engage with a piece of art.

Particularly for a game with strong sexual representationa and inclusion, it is legitimate to discuss aspects where the inclusion is still lacking. This may be useful for the Devs future plans, or it may change nothing but be useful for other prospective players to understand about the game.

You might not find the thread useful or engaging. I don't find the threads about compatibility with hardware I don't own useful or engaging. Not every thread is for every person.

[nsagent]

I'm honestly surprised no one has mentioned the Most Favored Nation clause, which helps enforce Steam's ability to charge 30%.

https://www.pcgamer.com/lawsuit-claims-valve-is-abusing-its-... https://www.masonllp.com/case/valve-mass-arbitration/

[huytersd]

A whole lot to say not much. It’s reviews and forums.

[johnnyanmac]

>Not every game benefits from all these things. But it's hardly just a storefront.

yeah, that's my issue. but it's all or nothing because the only thing that really matters is presence. So you just suck it up or use another store (or distribute independently).

>Gamers prefer Steam over EGS, and the reason they prefer it isn't just because "it's a nicer store front." It's a whole platform thing.

It's really just network effects at the end of the day. We've seen enough instances in other places in tech where the de facto is shit and even actively ruining its product, but people stay.

Sad thing isn't how big it is, it's how hard it is to fail.