this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

PC Gaming

8071 readers
438 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] echo64@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (36 children)

What's the efficiency in taking 30% of almost all game sales on a platform? I know we all love valve, but the efficiency here is having a store that everyone has to use if they want to make sales at all.

[–] BigSadDad@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (13 children)

Valve's 30% is high, sure. But you're not seeing the total cost of selling a game.

And yes, I've done this before.

Besides the user count, besides all other factors. Digital sales are kinda hard.

You need to offer the actual game. If you're selling an indie game that's a few hundred megs, well you get to go sign up for a service to deliver it. Could be as simple as a google drive link, but because this is business use you get to pay business prices.

Are they charging a flat rate per month, per gig? Per download? Some combinations?

Now there's updates and patches that need to be delivered. Same deal as before, but also now you need to handle the actual patching. Do you ship one big patch that checks for previous patches? Small individual patches that your users have to figure out what one they need?

Does your game have multiplayer? Well damn have fun with that.

What about support and refunds and GDPR stuff? Gotta factor all of that in too.

Now we get to do payment processing. You get to pay a company to accept payments on your behalf because you are NOT doing that yourself you WILL get stuck on inane and silly laws.

That's part of it. Paying steam 3 bucks on my 10 dollar game to handle ALL of that? Yeah that's fair. Could it be cheaper? Sure. a lot of things could. I don't spend months on a game and then cheap out on the most important part: sales.

My time is valuable and worth 30%

[–] ApexHunter@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Nobody is arguing that valve shouldn't be compensated for the value they provide. Many of us do, however, argue they are taking too much. Their revenue per employee being so much higher than anyone else in the market supports that argument.

[–] Shiggles@sh.itjust.works -1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Uh huh, and I’m sure you’re privy to the exact financial breakdowns?

If someone could actually provide a better service than steam at a better price point, they would. The epic games store is shit, uplay is shit, origin is shit.

[–] ApexHunter@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago

RTFA, it is right there ffs

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I agree with you, but its not an argument in Valve's favor, that is unless you support monopolies. "They should take whatever they can, because no one else is competition." Yeah, great. Capitalism at work. I agree that's what they should do if we're talking pure capitalist ideology, maximize profit at any cost. Is it the right thing to do though. They obviously (from the topic of this thread) make more than enough to pay every employee extremely well and then have a ton left over. They don't need to charge 30% to get by.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (33 replies)