3 ms·

They didn't just "challenge the monopoly". They made consumer experience worse by introducing exclusives to an ecosystem that was previously largely free of th

by esyir 6y ago

They didn't just "challenge the monopoly". They made consumer experience worse by introducing exclusives to an ecosystem that was previously largely free of them. Then they bought over exclusives that were announced for other platforms. That's pretty damn obnoxious to me.

BoorishBears 6y ago
I replied to your other comment explaining this, games were already de-facto Steam exclusives with very few exceptions. Epic games became a new choice, and in an attempt to break the status wui, offered incentives for devs to not join the de-facto PC gaming store in an attempt to force them to give developers more favorable revenue splits They've stated multiple times this is all about how Steam's revenue split should be moved to 88/12. - Steam no longer provides the level of service to these developers as they did when the splits were established anyways. Once upon a time Steam was highly curated and publishing to Steam could conceivably replace a "normal" publishing push just by virtue of how many eyeballs each game got. Now thiusands of games are announced a day, it's become a cesspool of crud not worth even looking at, and at this point it's just a fancy frontend for Steamworks, a download page, and payment processing (none of which is worth 30% of revenue)
- esyir 6y ago
  >Now thiusands of games are announced a day, it's become a cesspool of crud not worth even looking at, and at this point it's just a fancy frontend for Steamworks, a download page, and payment processing (none of which is worth 30% of revenue) Regarding this. Have you even looked at the steam frontpage recently? None of the games featured there are crud by most measures. Mine has Satisfactory, Darksiders Genesis, Horizon Zero Dawn, Death Stranding and Among US. Some of these might not be to my taste, but garbage not worth looking at is a tad harsh. If you're referring to all games released however, refer to the next line? I actually like the way that they've managed to segment game distribution from recommendation/featuring, and believe that for game distribution platforms, combining a more liberal admission policy, but a more selective recommendation policy seems to be a good approach.
  - BoorishBears 6y ago
    You think having 5 already wildly successful games on the front page somehow means Steam is only accepting "good games", is that a joke? You realize Steam was accepting under 1 game a day when it launched right? And for many years after? Like there was actual meaning to getting on Steam. It wasn't they couldn't get games, they only wanted the best - If anything you are literally making my point in regards to discovery. Once upon a time if you released a game on steam you were guaranteed some modicum of traction by virtue of being a new game on Steam In 2019 more games were added in 1 year than in the DECADE after Steam launched. (I mistyped in the last comment, it was meant to be thousands of games per year, but you get the idea) Every single game you described already has a massive following. Gone are the days where you could launch with a small following and rely on Steam to do half of what a publisher exists to do... market your game. That was what was worth 30% of your revenue, having Steam pickup your game and give it halo status. Now Steam really is a crapshoot and saying your game is on Steam doesn't mean it was curated, it just means it's on Steam. The completely and utterly demolishes the value proposition of the platform as a publisher.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]

by esyir 6y ago

BoorishBears 6y ago

I replied to your other comment explaining this, games were already de-facto Steam exclusives with very few exceptions. Epic games became a new choice, and in an attempt to break the status wui, offered incentives for devs to not join the de-facto PC gaming store in an attempt to force them to give developers more favorable revenue splits They've stated multiple times this is all about how Steam's revenue split should be moved to 88/12. - Steam no longer provides the level of service to these developers as they did when the splits were established anyways. Once upon a time Steam was highly curated and publishing to Steam could conceivably replace a "normal" publishing push just by virtue of how many eyeballs each game got. Now thiusands of games are announced a day, it's become a cesspool of crud not worth even looking at, and at this point it's just a fancy frontend for Steamworks, a download page, and payment processing (none of which is worth 30% of revenue)

esyir 6y ago
>Now thiusands of games are announced a day, it's become a cesspool of crud not worth even looking at, and at this point it's just a fancy frontend for Steamworks, a download page, and payment processing (none of which is worth 30% of revenue) Regarding this. Have you even looked at the steam frontpage recently? None of the games featured there are crud by most measures. Mine has Satisfactory, Darksiders Genesis, Horizon Zero Dawn, Death Stranding and Among US. Some of these might not be to my taste, but garbage not worth looking at is a tad harsh. If you're referring to all games released however, refer to the next line? I actually like the way that they've managed to segment game distribution from recommendation/featuring, and believe that for game distribution platforms, combining a more liberal admission policy, but a more selective recommendation policy seems to be a good approach.
- BoorishBears 6y ago
  You think having 5 already wildly successful games on the front page somehow means Steam is only accepting "good games", is that a joke? You realize Steam was accepting under 1 game a day when it launched right? And for many years after? Like there was actual meaning to getting on Steam. It wasn't they couldn't get games, they only wanted the best - If anything you are literally making my point in regards to discovery. Once upon a time if you released a game on steam you were guaranteed some modicum of traction by virtue of being a new game on Steam In 2019 more games were added in 1 year than in the DECADE after Steam launched. (I mistyped in the last comment, it was meant to be thousands of games per year, but you get the idea) Every single game you described already has a massive following. Gone are the days where you could launch with a small following and rely on Steam to do half of what a publisher exists to do... market your game. That was what was worth 30% of your revenue, having Steam pickup your game and give it halo status. Now Steam really is a crapshoot and saying your game is on Steam doesn't mean it was curated, it just means it's on Steam. The completely and utterly demolishes the value proposition of the platform as a publisher.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]