Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break

gamasutra.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 190 posts

Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break

#121

Post by gnarbarian »

adamrezich wrote: post #114

I don't know if anyone's noticed the unprecedented price-slashing that's been happening in AAA games this year but I think we may be in for another AAA game crash. For indies I don't think it's much better unless you're one of the Big Names in that space. (Incidentally, getting into making games professionally through any means other than self-funding seems basically impossible at the moment.) Any other perspectives…

It's not across the board. Red dead redemption 2 is a huge hit. The big launches which are failing and getting lots of press (fallout 76, and battlefield V) are doing so because of anticonsumer practices. In the case of fallout 76, the game is so buggy nobody wants to play it. Plus, launching fallout 4 after people were wrapping up Witcher 3 really put things into perspective as to how far behind Bethesda is compared to CD project red. Side by side fallout 4 was garbage.

As for Battlefield V. I've been a die-hard battlefield fan since BF 1942, I played the BFV demo and it proved to me that they are continuing to move backwards. Pay to win microtransactions and even less destructible environments show that they are dead set on destroying the mechanics which make battlefield fun and alienating their core customers. Perhaps they are doing this in a misguided attempt to capture some of the fortnite/call of duty market but instead they have sacrificed their core customers in an attempt to entice people away from games they are perfectly happy with. Then they top it off by sanctimoniously insulting their customers and telling us not to buy it if we don't like their changes.

Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break

#122

Post by user5994461 »

michaelmrose wrote: post #74
user5994461 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the point. Doing internationalization and payments for 12-18 countries is a pain. Steam helps you with that. You could try to do better yourself but the effort is not worth saving a few percent of fees (on a lot less sales).

You are making assumptions. 30% is not a few percent. You are also assuming that merely being on steam and having users encounter your game while browsing will be the primary method people encounter your game and decide to buy it thus the "on a lot less sales" People encounter games via many means. If you only sell it via steam or steam is merely the most convenient means of acquisition then the fact that the buyer b…

It is a few percents. All online marketplaces, steam, apple store, airbnb, booking are 20 to 30% commission.

It takes at least 10% commission to be able to run a company of this type. It's possible to run with as low as 5% in some niches, given a very lean operation and a billion dollar scale to amortize fixed costs. Eventually most of the company will be devoted to customer support and billing related tasks.

There is really not that much that can be shaved off. Small studios could never make a platform any efficient. A small group could spend all their time working on distribution and billing, never shipping an actual game. It's a really good deal to just use steam instead.

For AAA games it's annoying to pay 30% and they're rather make their own platform, that's why steam is dropping commission to 20% for top selling hits.

Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break

#123

Post by cptskippy »

dogma1138 wrote: post #52
PakG1 wrote: post #32

I actually am surprised that services like Steam, the Apple App Store, and Google Play are able to command as high a margin as they do for sales commission. I mean, it's obviously possible because it's reality, but it's nonintuitive. I wonder if it will continue to be that way. For iOS, you don't really have a way to install apps outside the app store without jailbreaking, but you do for macOS, and I've seen a number…

Brick and mortar stores pay about $45 for a $60 dollar game, and have additional bonuses for sales targets. Some larger publishers operate on a different scheme similar to the large DIY and big box stores in which they “rent” shelf space, pay for promotional services and share a smaller percentage of each sale revenue. A lot of times there are other restrictions such as game stores need approval for things like unoff…

> If you buy an EA, Activision or Ubisoft game on Steam atm you don’t download it from Steam you’ll download it from the Publisher via their own client.

All of my Ubisoft titles have been downloaded via Steam and not the UPlay client.

Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break

#124

Post by [deleted] »

gnarbarian wrote: post #121
adamrezich wrote: post #114

I don't know if anyone's noticed the unprecedented price-slashing that's been happening in AAA games this year but I think we may be in for another AAA game crash. For indies I don't think it's much better unless you're one of the Big Names in that space. (Incidentally, getting into making games professionally through any means other than self-funding seems basically impossible at the moment.) Any other perspectives…

It's not across the board. Red dead redemption 2 is a huge hit. The big launches which are failing and getting lots of press (fallout 76, and battlefield V) are doing so because of anticonsumer practices. In the case of fallout 76, the game is so buggy nobody wants to play it. Plus, launching fallout 4 after people were wrapping up Witcher 3 really put things into perspective as to how far behind Bethesda is compared…

[deleted]

Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break

#125

Post by user5994461 »

kbwt wrote: post #73
user5994461 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the point. Doing internationalization and payments for 12-18 countries is a pain. Steam helps you with that. You could try to do better yourself but the effort is not worth saving a few percent of fees (on a lot less sales).

Steam certainly won't internationalize your game for you.

Steam is translated and comes with support for many languages. It takes all currency and it has region settings for pricing, currency and release dates. For the anecdote, it's maybe the only US service that sells well in Russia.

It certainly won't translate the game for you, not that translating a bunch of text files is the hardest part, but it will help with everything else.

Ask international users what they think of other platforms. Like the one they couldn't use because it didn't accept their names with an accent or couldn't enter a billing address without a state.

Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break

#127

Post by notSupplied »

mtgx wrote: post #42
PakG1 wrote: post #32

I actually am surprised that services like Steam, the Apple App Store, and Google Play are able to command as high a margin as they do for sales commission. I mean, it's obviously possible because it's reality, but it's nonintuitive. I wonder if it will continue to be that way. For iOS, you don't really have a way to install apps outside the app store without jailbreaking, but you do for macOS, and I've seen a number…

The reason Google and Apple are able to command such high commissions, it's because they are monopolies in their own markets. Most people who want iOS can only buy iPhones and use the app store. Most people who want to use Android, tend to buy Android phones and don't switch to iPhones. As such, Google and Apple's app store's don't really have strong competition against each other. Plus, most developers pretty much h…

This. Indie developers opt-in to Steam's 30% cut because they've done the math and found thay it's better than going at it alone.

If iOS developers had a choice, many would find that Apple simoly does not do enough for them to justify their cut.

The same thing is happening with Google, except you DO have the option to bypass Google play if you have enough muscle, which is exactly what Fortnite did.

One argument I often hear is that "Becsuse they created the platform! They deserve to tax it!". This presumes that platform is doing software a great service. Funnily, just a generation ago, Mac was widely considered the losing horse because "all the software is on Windows." So the question of "who needs who more badly" was reversed.

Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break

#128

Post by user5994461 »

zanny wrote: post #116
adamrezich wrote: post #114

I don't know if anyone's noticed the unprecedented price-slashing that's been happening in AAA games this year but I think we may be in for another AAA game crash. For indies I don't think it's much better unless you're one of the Big Names in that space. (Incidentally, getting into making games professionally through any means other than self-funding seems basically impossible at the moment.) Any other perspectives…

Despite how the industry likes to try to pitch it games aren't as disposable as developers want you to think they are. At least for me, I'm spending more time playing titles I've owned for years today than on new releases. And every year adds more games to that backlog / history of games to get around to. And some games never get old - I still revisit probably twice a year Quake and Doom (the original) to play all th…

+1 on that.

There are more games than ever. New games are competing against other new games while also competing against every old release of every game, on sale at a huge discount. There is no time and no money for all.

Much worse than that, there is no more groundbreaking innovation in technology. 20 years ago there was the move from 2D to 3D. 10 years ago came realistic 3D with facial expressions and destructible environments. Today call of duty cannot be distinguished from last decade call of duty.

Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break

#129

Post by redisman »

michaelmrose wrote: post #44
user5994461 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> I actually am surprised that services like Steam, the Apple App Store, and Google Play are able to command as high a margin as they do for sales commission. What makes you think that they have high margin? It's not like each game creators could run a worldwide distribution and payment operation with just a few percent more of revenues.

"It's not like each game creators could run a worldwide distribution and payment operation" You mean like a website? I think it's more fruitful to imagine multiple merchants competing to sell devs wares and lessor commissions as a result of competition.

It's also a major sales channel. Valve has over the decade rounded up a huge chunk of the people who buy PC games into one place.

Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break

#130

Post by notSupplied »

lbotos wrote: post #27
ksec wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are any of those you mentioned popular with Gamers though? I only ever hear Steam in gaming. What do you mean by own launchers? Surely not a Store right? Is Battle.Net a "Store"?

Launchers are 1 step away from a "store". I was playing fortnite, and via that launcher they can easily upsell/cross-sell me to their other titles. I might consider it a "distribution channel" which could serve as a store for sure.

The main between a launcher and a store is how many people have transacted on your platform once and have a credit card saved on file. Epic has secured "1st time payment" from a huge swath of players. This is such a huge and rare opportunity, I'd be surprised if they're not making moves towards becoming a Steam competitor, especially given Tim Sweeny's historically bitter conflict with gatekeepers such as the Windows Store.
Post reply on HN