Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break
1–10 of 190 posts
Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break
#2I feel uncomfortable that smaller developers will be less profitable because they... don't have as much negotiating power?
Valve is being very Walmart-esque with this move.
Already game developers are the lowest paid workers in the IT industry - and a lot of it has to do with the huge revenue shares ('platform taxes') charged by the monopoly platform holders.
I'm not arguing against any change, it just seems spiteful that Valve are sticking it to the little guys who can't go anywhere else. If those tiers ($10m and $50m to reach 25% and 20% respectively) had a zero removed from them, I would be more understanding.
This could have been a great chance to improve Steam overall, by reducing the commissions for all developers (in order to fend off a future Epic store - one undoubtedly tied into UE4, and probably with a 12% commission, based on statements from Tim Sweeney), and increasing the quality on the low-end slightly with a Steam Direct fee increase from $100 to $500.
Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break
#3I feel uncomfortable that smaller developers will be less profitable because they... don't have as much negotiating power? Valve is being very Walmart-esque with this move. Already game developers are the lowest paid workers in the IT industry - and a lot of it has to do with the huge revenue shares ('platform taxes') charged by the monopoly platform holders. I'm not arguing against any change, it just seems spiteful…
On the other hand - the big publishers need Valve less, so from a purely business perspective it makes a ton of sense to keep them on the platform, which is the biggest storefront for purchasing games.
Yes, smaller developers have to pay more, but they're getting a heck of a lot of exposure for that take, without having to spend big on traditional advertising like the large publishers have to.
Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break
#4I feel uncomfortable that smaller developers will be less profitable because they... don't have as much negotiating power? Valve is being very Walmart-esque with this move. Already game developers are the lowest paid workers in the IT industry - and a lot of it has to do with the huge revenue shares ('platform taxes') charged by the monopoly platform holders. I'm not arguing against any change, it just seems spiteful…
That will be sad since most of the games I buy are from indie developers. They put good amount of work in their games and don't charge much too. If Valve keeps doing this kind of stuff and forces them to move to other marketplaces, I will move too.
Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break
#5I feel uncomfortable that smaller developers will be less profitable because they... don't have as much negotiating power? Valve is being very Walmart-esque with this move. Already game developers are the lowest paid workers in the IT industry - and a lot of it has to do with the huge revenue shares ('platform taxes') charged by the monopoly platform holders. I'm not arguing against any change, it just seems spiteful…
On the other hand - the big publishers need Valve less, so from a purely business perspective it makes a ton of sense to keep them on the platform, which is the biggest storefront for purchasing games. Yes, smaller developers have to pay more, but they're getting a heck of a lot of exposure for that take, without having to spend big on traditional advertising like the large publishers have to.
That is unfortunately not correct. A large amount of advertising and PR is very necessary to receive any attention for a launch on Steam.
Unfortunately a mere 'launch' on Steam has been devalued, by Valve allowing anyone with $100 to launch on the platform (and the majority of the launches on Steam are very low quality as a result).
If you want to make a middle class income from launching games on Steam, you will need to become very familiar with online advertising. Have a look at the Positech blog for details.
Indie devs are now realising why the big studios spend 30% of their budgets on marketing...
Of course, it all gets a bit easier once you have an existing profile, an existing fan base, etc.
Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break
#6I feel uncomfortable that smaller developers will be less profitable because they... don't have as much negotiating power? Valve is being very Walmart-esque with this move. Already game developers are the lowest paid workers in the IT industry - and a lot of it has to do with the huge revenue shares ('platform taxes') charged by the monopoly platform holders. I'm not arguing against any change, it just seems spiteful…
> Already game developers are the lowest paid workers in the IT industry
That is not true if you factor out all the people developing games independently on their own dime, against better financial advice. To counteract that, there just aren't enough developers working on enterprise Java architecture for no money, out of passion.
It's also only fair that people who get to work on "fun" things like games are paid less. If they don't think it's fun, they can switch industries and earn more. Nobody is doomed to be a game developer.
> I'm not arguing against any change, it just seems spiteful that Valve are sticking it to the little guys who can't go anywhere else.
The little guys can go to itch.io, which charges as low as 0% commission. They may even have more visibility on there than on Steam, given that it's a smaller pond. There's also the Humble Store, which leaves commission up to the buyer.
> This could have been a great chance to improve Steam overall, by reducing the commissions for all developers...
They did reduce commissions for everyone by 5%. The extra 5% is for those who are at risk of moving off the platform because they can create their own visibility.
Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break
#7I feel uncomfortable that smaller developers will be less profitable because they... don't have as much negotiating power? Valve is being very Walmart-esque with this move. Already game developers are the lowest paid workers in the IT industry - and a lot of it has to do with the huge revenue shares ('platform taxes') charged by the monopoly platform holders. I'm not arguing against any change, it just seems spiteful…
That will be sad since most of the games I buy are from indie developers. They put good amount of work in their games and don't charge much too. If Valve keeps doing this kind of stuff and forces them to move to other marketplaces, I will move too.
If you look into it you will find that you can buy many indie games directly from the developer and still get a Steam key.
If you don't want that Valve charges "too much" from indies, then you should be proactive and join other marketplaces. It's a hen-egg situation.
Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand - the big publishers need Valve less, so from a purely business perspective it makes a ton of sense to keep them on the platform, which is the biggest storefront for purchasing games. Yes, smaller developers have to pay more, but they're getting a heck of a lot of exposure for that take, without having to spend big on traditional advertising like the large publishers have to.
That is unfortunately not correct. A large amount of advertising and PR is very necessary to receive any attention for a launch on Steam. Unfortunately a mere 'launch' on Steam has been devalued, by Valve allowing anyone with $100 to launch on the platform (and the majority of the launches on Steam are very low quality as a result). If you want to make a middle class income from launching games on Steam, you will nee…
It's not just lack of marketing, it's the fact that there are now far more games, but gamers have neither more money nor time to compensate.
There are too many game developers, it's as simple as that. Too many millennials don't want the regular old "grown up" jobs anymore, they want to be creatives or artists and the market just can't soak them all up.
If you think it's hard as a game developer, try living off painting or sculpture or music or literature. The vast majority never get there. Meanwhile, a game programmer at least has ordinary programming jobs to fall back on - if they can stomach it.
Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break
#9I feel uncomfortable that smaller developers will be less profitable because they... don't have as much negotiating power? Valve is being very Walmart-esque with this move. Already game developers are the lowest paid workers in the IT industry - and a lot of it has to do with the huge revenue shares ('platform taxes') charged by the monopoly platform holders. I'm not arguing against any change, it just seems spiteful…
> Already game developers are the lowest paid workers in the IT industry That is not true if you factor out all the people developing games independently on their own dime, against better financial advice. To counteract that, there just aren't enough developers working on enterprise Java architecture for no money, out of passion. It's also only fair that people who get to work on "fun" things like games are paid less…
See for yourself:
https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2018/#salary
> The little guys can go to itch.io, which charges as low as 0% commission. They may even have more visibility on there than on Steam, given that it's a smaller pond. There's also the Humble Store, which leaves commission up to the buyer.
Steam has a monopoly. There is no alternative for anyone with revenue below $10 million (hence this change). Itch.io yields about 1% of the revenue of Steam.
The best you can do is sell Steam keys direct from your website, using the Humble Widget which charges 5%. However you will suffer from reduced visibility on the Steam store (since visibility is based on sales).
> They did reduce commissions for everyone by 5%.
No, only once a game reaches $10 million of total sales revenue.
Re: Valve creates new revenue sharing tiers to give big sellers a break
#10I feel uncomfortable that smaller developers will be less profitable because they... don't have as much negotiating power? Valve is being very Walmart-esque with this move. Already game developers are the lowest paid workers in the IT industry - and a lot of it has to do with the huge revenue shares ('platform taxes') charged by the monopoly platform holders. I'm not arguing against any change, it just seems spiteful…
[deleted]