3 ms·

I just hope its not another store with a 30% commission. If they're charging developers 15% or less, I'll definitely get on board. Valve need to up their game

I just hope its not another store with a 30% commission. If they're charging developers 15% or less, I'll definitely get on board. Valve need to up their game though. Their approach of 'anything goes' when it comes to allowing games on Steam is backfiring. They need to increase the fee to list from $100 to $2000. For legitimate devs that extra $1900 charge will more than pay for itself with the attention you will get launching a game into a de-cluttered store.

lostmsu 8y ago
Microsoft now charges just 5%, if you do your own marketing.
- beerlord 8y ago
  Thanks, didn't realise that. Its a shame that the Microsoft store is so terrible. https://blogs.windows.com/buildingapps/2018/05/07/a-new-microsoft-store-revenue-share-is-coming/ https://blogs.windows.com/buildingapps/2018/05/07/a-new-micr...
tinfoilboy 8y ago
I'd have to disagree on the front of having an outrageous fee such as that on a storefront. Some people could make great games and those same people might not have the same opportunities to acquire funds to pay for that fee. Of course, the storefront isn't really needed, but at times it feels like certain storefronts are almost suicide not to release to. For instance, I released recently (in my mind) a pretty nice and functional app for Android. Not getting much traction, but that's fine, I wasn't totally expecting that. Where my problem lies is that, a large part of the mobile market, those on iOS, don't get to have the app. As their storefront costs $100 yearly to publish to. On top of requiring a Mac to develop on (easily in the thousands of dollars). I feel that the barriers of entry for developing (and publishing) applications and games should be lower, and rather instead of introducing these fees that won't do anything to people that have money and just want to release their broken asset store mashup onto a storefront. In my mind, the best solution would be better moderation and curation.

lostmsu 8y ago

Microsoft now charges just 5%, if you do your own marketing.

beerlord 8y ago
Thanks, didn't realise that. Its a shame that the Microsoft store is so terrible. https://blogs.windows.com/buildingapps/2018/05/07/a-new-microsoft-store-revenue-share-is-coming/ https://blogs.windows.com/buildingapps/2018/05/07/a-new-micr...

tinfoilboy 8y ago

I'd have to disagree on the front of having an outrageous fee such as that on a storefront. Some people could make great games and those same people might not have the same opportunities to acquire funds to pay for that fee. Of course, the storefront isn't really needed, but at times it feels like certain storefronts are almost suicide not to release to. For instance, I released recently (in my mind) a pretty nice and functional app for Android. Not getting much traction, but that's fine, I wasn't totally expecting that. Where my problem lies is that, a large part of the mobile market, those on iOS, don't get to have the app. As their storefront costs $100 yearly to publish to. On top of requiring a Mac to develop on (easily in the thousands of dollars). I feel that the barriers of entry for developing (and publishing) applications and games should be lower, and rather instead of introducing these fees that won't do anything to people that have money and just want to release their broken asset store mashup onto a storefront. In my mind, the best solution would be better moderation and curation.