• Demigodrick@lemmy.zipM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    That’s a poor take, steam doesn’t set the prices. They take a cut, sure, but so does every store. The dev/publisher sets the price.

    Games aren’t too cheap, again the publishers set the price and I’m sure there’s plenty of research that goes into that.

    Im not sure what you think steam are telling publishers to do? The only rules I’m familiar with are the consumer protection rules, and the not selling a steam key cheaper than they’re selling the game on steam.

    I’m not sure what part of what you’ve mentioned is therefore a harm to the publishers? Where publishers sell their games for maximum sales is going to be based on where the users are. If another company wanted to change this then they need to focus on what makes the consumer go there. Epics idea to lock publishers into their store with big wads of cash is what is actually harmful to the pc market (and didn’t work anyway).

    As others have pointed out, competition here is usually dictated by shareholders which means the end user is exploited for maximum profit. One of the reason steam is so successful is that they don’t have this problem.

    • MudMan@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      No, Steam will outright tell you they’ll delist you (or at least keep you from placement) if you offer a sale on a different store and don’t match it on Steam. Emails saying as much outright were released on the last round of antitrust lawsuits for this exact reason.

      Games are too cheap. There is, in fact, plenty of research to show that.

      Steam is telling devs of all sizes to do a bunch of things. When it’s something they like to advertise it typically gets coverage, like tweaks to Early Access info or other consumer-friendly stuff. When it’s more controversial less so, like telling indie devs to invest on localizing to Chinese to go with Valve’s China expansion plans or risk worse store placement.

      I never once mentioned Epic. I am flabbergasted by how this Cult of the Gaben devolved into a weird console wars rehash between Epic and Steam. They’re both big corporations, neither is your friend, both have valid strategies to get your business. Stop it.

      Competition would have a hard time being dictated by shareholders given that at least two of the top contenders in the space are privately owned. Because, since that’s your focus, yes, Epic is privately owned as well. Incidentally, GOG is one that is publicly owned and they are arguably the most pro-consumer player in this space.

      I am not surprised at Steam having maneuvered its PR to position this way, but it’s always a bit shocking how well they did it without a ton of traditional marketing involved. I don’t think they’re a bad service or a particularly terrible company, but much like Nintendo the are a major tech corporation that works like a major tech corporation and you forget that at your peril, especially as a developer.

      They are certainly a good argument for how public ownership doesn’t maximize value, because Steam is ridiculously undervalued by typical business analysts and they have maintained that status quo for many years and turned it into a sizeable yacht fleet. If anyhthing, Amazon guy’s surprise surprises me.