• bogdugg@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t dispute they provide value, but why 30%? Why not 35? Or 25? or 80? or 3? or 29? I don’t know.

    I’m curious, how much of that 30% do you think feeds back into making Steam better and keeping it running?

    • Zorque@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Probably more than a public company, that has to pay dividends and prove worth every quarter.

    • DrQuint@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      but why 30%, why not

      To which the response is: I don’t care. I would have paid the same amount of money for games no matter which of the stupid funny numbers you picked out.

      The beginning and end of how much one should care is “are the devs happy with it? Is that the standard for digital stores as well?”. And the answer to both is Yes, so the concerns are abated.

      If it opens them to driven out of the market by a more generous competitor: Cool. But that alone doesn’t impact me, the costumer. The generous competitor needs to do more. And you know, they know that. That’s why Tim gave me so many free games.

      No you wouldn’t.

      Immortals of Aveum cost 70 monetary-whatevers and killed its studio and no one commented on it. It would have cost 60 whatevers two years ago and still would have killed its studio. But if they did 70, they would have torpedoed that price point in the news circles as a death sentence. They only had the gall because literally no one dared release a game for 70 till Activision did it and others like Sony and Nintendo followed along.

      Steams share has zero impact on my wallet. The market is dictated by things way more arbitrary. Everyone with brain knows this.

      • bogdugg@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        “are the devs happy with it? Is that the standard for digital stores as well?”. And the answer to both is Yes

        I fully disagree. On the first point, do developers accept it? Sure. That does not at all mean they are happy about it. Money is tight for games, and I guarantee you every developer would much prefer to take a bigger piece of the pie.

        To your second point, it is the standard but it is not universal. Epic Games Store takes 12%. Itch.io defaults to 10%. Google Play Store takes 15% on the first $1 million in revenue.

        But that alone doesn’t impact me, the consumer.

        I don’t believe this is entirely true. The more cash flow developers have, the more stable they are as companies, and the more able they are to put out good games. You are indirectly impacted because a larger tax on developers means fewer, or lower quality, games that get released.

        Steams share has zero impact on my wallet.

        Disagree, unless you exclusively play AAA.

        Edit: Actually I’ve changed my mind on this. I mostly agree the percentage cut doesn’t affect the optimal price point.