Live data from Hacker News

72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

gamesindustry.biz

61–70 of 84 posts

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#61
I've been a "PC Gamer" for 31+ years. The 'value-add' that steam brings to the table is INCREDIBLE. Thanks to Proton/Linux efforts.

(1) my games are installable AND playable on _every_ device I use.

(2) I don't have to fight with wine/crossover/etc to get things to work.

(3) It's not hostile to the end user (yet).

I have bought more games since the Steamdeck came out then in the 40'some years before that.

Yes I know that I don't have to use steam, but they make it EASIER.

I am looking forward to Deckard for all of the above reasons and their history with the Index.

Steam makes installing software EASIER then the alternative (regardless of the OS). Auto-patching/updates of installed games.

If I was more social I'd probably use those features more. If they ever charge a monthly fee, I'll stop using it.

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#62
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No question about it! Edit: that said, the 30% fee is pretty greedy (Apple-level greedy) and they could be doing better at least in that regard.

Anytime I see the complaint about the 30% fee, I wonder what people feel would be fair for the service, because it also includes storage, distribution for new instalations and patching for older ones, along with generating keys to be sold at other stores. Would people feel better with a lower fee, but no distribution network, for example?

No other service actually saturates my download speed. That's probably an expensive luxury that could be cut. Even netflix with their CDNs in every city tries to minimize bandwith and it results in terrible video quality-if it can even deliver it at all.

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#63
post #6
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No question about it! Edit: that said, the 30% fee is pretty greedy (Apple-level greedy) and they could be doing better at least in that regard.

How much do you think they should take? Steam is the most dominant because of their extremely customer friendly policies, their insane price crashes and the ease of publishing and installing games from the platform. If other platforms are able to provide all of that, with a commission below 30%, I'm sure they could easily take over. But turns out, neither Epic nor EA are interested in serving the customer.

> How much do you think they should take?

A 15–20% fee would be much fairer in my opinion. They’d still be making plenty of money while letting developers keep more of what they earn through their hard work. At the very least, they should differentiate between big players and smaller indie developers.

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#64

Dominant and successful, yes. Monopoly, no. It take more than simply being the best or most successful business in a sector to be a monopoly. Being a monopoly is an active choice you make as a business by intentionally engaging in anticompetitive behaviors. Valve isn't putting any pressure on anyone in this sector. There is still competition, but Valve has simply been more successful than everyone else. Mainly becaus…

Yes - I tried the other platforms. Much to my surprise (and granted, I have the means to do so) I will favor steam whenever possible, it’s just significantly better.

I do mostly agree with you that Steam is better as a storefront than all other ones out there, but in my opinion the Battle.net launcher is still my favorite game launcher edging out Steam because of how snappy it is.

Steam just sometimes feels really slow when launching for the first time or when switching tabs/pages (I do also have it just sometimes be just a black windows, but I haven't figured out the cause yet but it is the only window that does it, so...). In comparison B.net just feels decently snappy.

They are both effectively using CEF for their launcher, but since Steam starts so slow for me I always keep it in the background and its WebHelper taking up 414MB (rn, but its always in that ballpark) is not helping its case.

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#65

Dominant and successful, yes. Monopoly, no. It take more than simply being the best or most successful business in a sector to be a monopoly. Being a monopoly is an active choice you make as a business by intentionally engaging in anticompetitive behaviors. Valve isn't putting any pressure on anyone in this sector. There is still competition, but Valve has simply been more successful than everyone else. Mainly becaus…

Yes - I tried the other platforms. Much to my surprise (and granted, I have the means to do so) I will favor steam whenever possible, it’s just significantly better.

People favored Google as much as possible in the '00s and then they turned evil.

For games, I favor Good Old Games rather than Steam as much as possible and go out of my way to wait for releases on their platform. Whatever becomes of them, at least I'll have my downloaded DRM-free version of my purchases.

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're even allowed to sell your game cheaper on other platforms (not Steam keys, separate keys for those platforms) so by all means charge the 30% more on Steam if you need to.

you are not allowed to sell cd keys cheaper than on steam

Do you have a source for that? I only know this [1] site laying out distribution of Steam keys

[1] https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/keys

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indie game development largely owes its existence to Steam. I know I would spend a lot less on indie games if I had to buy them from their own websites or, god forbid, through an awful laggy "app store" run by Ubisoft or Microsoft.

If competitors offer passable services for selling indie game developers, then indie game developers would be able to earn more money (due to competition). This is why developers are hopeful for alternative services.

There are competitors like itch.io, which are specifically targeted towards indies

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#68
post #29
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A third difference is that I've seen no signs of steam actually abusing their standing in the market. If anything they seem to be nicer than they have to be.

They absolutely keep a larger cut than others. With Epic the first million you make is free. After much deliberation, steam changed it so that their 30% cut is reduced if you make more than 10M. For a lot of indie devs, its pretty much a death sentence.

I'd love for the cut to be smaller, but it is absolutely not a "death sentence." With traditional consoles (Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft consoles, and those before them), the barrier to entry is very high. If you are an indie, it is practically necessary to work with a publisher to get on those platforms. The publishers demand their own cut (in addition to Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft), and as they are running a business, they only take on games that they expect will make a profit. In that environment, weird little developers making weird little games will almost always be shut down before they can even see the light of day. I think it is a little easier in the modern day (you don't need a blessed dev kit to make a console game, for example), but I think the barrier is still not trivial.

The PC games space has always been more open. If you had a weird game you wanted to share, you could share a disc with your friends or make it available on your website. But, again, if you wanted to make some decent money, you probably needed a marketing department and to have a boxed copy on store shelves (which, again, means working with a publisher). With a few exceptions, hardly anyone would ever find your game otherwise.

With modern-day Steam, an indie dev needs only to pay $100 to put a game on Steam (and I believe that $100 is refunded if the game crosses a certain threshold of sales). Discoverability is still a challenge, but just by existing on Steam, an indie game has a chance to make a bit of money. Steam itself has some discoverability features that can boost the visibility of even quirky little titles. The indie dev needs to do their own work, of course, to get visibility, but they don't need to have major resources behind them to get that visibility. They don't necessarily even need to host a website anymore - the game has a page on the Internet through Steam after all. The indie dev can direct anyone who will listen to them to go there.

All that said, I do agree that Steam is practically a monopoly. If Steam decided they hate you for some reason, then that's it. You almost certainly do not have a viable path forward for selling your PC game simply because they have such dominance (see the recent controversy where major payment processors suddenly decided they would not facilitate the sale of lewd games, and Steam reacted by pulling any game that seemed to fall into that category. Although, even in that case, the harmful monopoly tactics are coming from different actors in a different industry). For the time being, I just think they are kind of a benevolent dictator.

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#69
post #51
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They absolutely keep a larger cut than others. With Epic the first million you make is free. After much deliberation, steam changed it so that their 30% cut is reduced if you make more than 10M. For a lot of indie devs, its pretty much a death sentence.

Indie games pay for discoverabiliy (don't know if that's a word). To be clear, I mostly use GoG when I can, unless it's a multiplayer game with bad lobby/MP support (Firaxis/paradox basically)

In what way do indie devs pay for discoverability? There's a $100 fee to be listed on Steam. Is there something else you are thinking of?

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#70
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If competitors offer passable services for selling indie game developers, then indie game developers would be able to earn more money (due to competition). This is why developers are hopeful for alternative services.

There are competitors like itch.io, which are specifically targeted towards indies

Itch.io is great
Post reply on HN