this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024
564 points (95.9% liked)

Steam

9898 readers
3 users here now

Steam is a video game digital distribution service by Valve.

Steam News | Steam Beta Client news

Useful tools:
SteamDB
SteamCharts
Issue tracker for Linux version of Steam

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 360 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (5 children)

Valve could reduce their cut honestly, perhaps some program for independent developers to help them get on their feet. I don't think the top games or big publishers should be getting cut reductions.

Either way, Valve haven't been buying out studios for exclusive games, so Epic and Sweeney can go fuck themselves, they are scum.

[–] [email protected] 120 points 5 months ago (1 children)

At the same time it's not like Valve is not making use of the extra money to use it only for taking in profits. It might of been what made it possible to try entering the hardware market with VR and the Steam Deck and putting resources in trying to make Linux gaming for accessible for regular people. Might of been what allowed them to not be deterred after the failure of the Steam machine and Steam Controller.

[–] [email protected] 77 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Might have, brother. Might have.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Why do I see this online so often? Is it an educational thing? Is it an auto correct thing? Or something other? I am not a native speaker, so I have no clue how this happens.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

My understanding is folks tend to gravitate towards that because it's indeed very close to might've and whatnot phonetically. My anecdotal experience as a non-native speaker is we tend to be less affected since we usually tackle speaking and listening more seriously after we've already familiarized ourselves enough with writing/reading, grammar and vocab.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

Pretty much the tl;dr here, yeah 🤣

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

It blows my mind as well. My native language is Spanish, but for me it's way easier to follow language rules properly in English. May have something to do with the fact that my native language is my regular language for expression, so I don't pay much mind to how I use it, but English being a second language, I actually try to make sure I'm understood. Anyway, that's what I think could potentially be the reason.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yes no maybe I don't know 🎶

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Can you repeat the question.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Lol. Good to see I'm not the only one that sees the impact in not using proper language rules 🤣

[–] [email protected] 48 points 5 months ago (1 children)

If I recall correctly valve did lower their cut in the wake of EGS having better terms for devs.

[–] [email protected] 49 points 5 months ago (1 children)

For the first $10m earned it's 30%, then it's 25% until $50m, then it's 20% from then on.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Ok yeah that’s still pretty shitty

[–] [email protected] 82 points 5 months ago (21 children)

Why?

If steam has to do the work to host the game then the majority of effort is going to be getting to the published and available to buy step, which is recouped along with server costs early on. As it scales, the efficiencies kick in and the price gets lowered a bit.

A company keeping 70% of retail price is still a higher cut than they would get for a game on a shelf at a store, and most likely with a far higher number of sales through steam. Plus it is digital so they don't have all the physical distribution costs. For smaller games those additional costs and advertising are going to keep them from being feasible.

Valheim and Palworld wouldn't have been massive successes on store shelves. 30% for visibility and unlimited scaling if the game is more successful than expected is a pretty good deal for the benefits it provides. It actually does buy something, it isn't the mob's cut for pretending to protect your business.

[–] [email protected] 46 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It's the other overheads too, publishing cuts, marketing cuts, QA etc before you get down to the money made for wages etc.

Valve are absolutely in a position to take less, but the service they provide is like no other.
I don't give a fuck about EA/Ubisoft etc getting a smaller cut, but independent developers could absolutely benefit from some sort of program.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Plus the income lets them take care of their employees, and to the best of my understanding it is a pretty good working environment.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Many studios are in a real pinch right now. I don’t know what valve’s overhead costs are but I’d imagine they could afford to kick back some more to devs.

[–] GregorGizeh 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Heard that too. Since valve is a private company they aren’t being hounded by shareholders, allowing them to give all their employees really great compensation and benefits. Iirc they have one of the lowest turnovers in the whole industry. It also lets them make more long term decisions like developing the steam deck despite the initial failed attempts at entering the console market.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

It should be reversed so that small devs don't get shafted for not being able to sell millions of dollars worth of copies of their game. The ones making tens of millions of dollars should be paying more.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Was about to ask what's with all the shilling here but just realized which community this is. Have fun shilling for a mega Corp. Go tell yourselves that 30% cut isn't ridiculous.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Okay, so you say a 30% cut is ridiculous.

But let's move that away from the mega Corp [sic] everyone here is supposedly shilling for. Let's talk about cuts lost to distribution and delivery for a second.

I cannot answer this for a lot of industries, but for example for board games ~7%-9% go to the actual designer. That's 91%-93% that is lost along the way. Even if we take Sweeney's 25% example that the devs get, that's still 3x-3.5x as much as for physical products.

This would indicate that digital distribution is far better than physical for developers making games, as they get a vastly bigger percentage of the money. Within the digital space, we can compare things a little bit, at least for video games.
Digital storefronts seem to roughly all come out at 30%, for which Valve provides more value than say Google or Apple, as they also give you forums, mod integrations, and various dev tool to use to simplify development of your game's modding and multiplayer features.
We also know that consoles are pricier, as you have to pay certification costs for updates on top of the original distribution, and in a way this is true of the mobile stores, too.

Now, don't get me wrong: 30% is a ton of money, and I cannot see where a rich company needs this much money. However, I would argue they're one of the last companies to tackle in improving as far as them not taking excessive money goes, and everyone else (Google, Apple, MS, Sony, even Epic considering how they do fuck all for the 12% cut they take) should get impacted first, plus it's still difficult to argue that digital cut is excessive to begin with comparing the vastly improved developer cut comparing the physical distribution space - as good as I can compare board games vs video games, granted. But I would estimate that the overhead costs of physical sales for video games aren't that different, manufacture, shipping, it's all comparable after all. Video games need less container space, but they also sell for less.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago
  • YouTube takes 30% from fan-funded revenue
  • Twitch takes 50%, which was an increase of their 30% cut, and people have called them out on it
  • Apple take 30%, but recently reduced that to 15% for apps making under $1M/yearly
  • Google Play has the exact same system
  • GOG takes a 30% cut
  • Epic Games takes a 12% cut, but they are purposely operating at a loss and this comes with a lot of strings attached (exclusive contracts, passing transaction costs to users, etc.). This is not sustainable, and developer should expect an increase as soon as they take over more of Steam's userbase. (If they take it over...)

Overall, calling a 30% cut "ridiculous" is patently false. It is the industry standard.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Digital marketplaces use a near monopoly to extort developers into accepting these inflated cuts. I simply will never accept an inflated rate caused by a monopoly as a good thing. Without that near monopoly there is no way they could maintain a 30% cut.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Without that near monopoly there is no way they could maintain a 30% cut.

I admit, it sounds high to me - like I said above. But I also got 0 clue, for all I know 80% of that are their costs. 🤷 Lack knowledge to judge that. At least in digital space 70% go to the makers, and usually 20-25% remain at the end, not 2%-8% like with physical goods.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I think the high profit margin on digital goods is almost entirely due to the more efficient distribution of the Internet vs a supply chain, not because steam enabled it. If anyone deserves that cut because of the lower cost of distribution it's the people that created the Internet, and thank God they were publicly funded scientists and not corporations.

Also keep in mind that the infrastructure of the Internet charges a usage fee, not a percentage of profit. If I change $5 for a game on steam vs $60, is steam really doing more work to justify a percentage fee?

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] [email protected] 40 points 5 months ago (3 children)

I do think Valve could drop it to 25% and not lose much sleep over their coffers.

[–] [email protected] 42 points 5 months ago

I mean I don't know how much money steam is banking, but they provide quite a good service for their share.

Max download rates at all times (almost).

Amazing steam overlay. Online gaming. Online saves. Workshop. Linux support.

And many more. Some of that epic has too but in comparison epic launcher is shit.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 5 months ago

It would effectively not do anything for game devs to reduce it by 5%.

On the dev side steam provides distribution and a bunch of tools while you develop your game. Tomorrow you can pay 100$, and steam will support you with keys, releasing and publishing your game, reviewing it for free etc.

I have a game I've been developing for 5 years part time. I have steam keys I share with testers, and can distribute version for free, with all the patch notes and update features from steam for 100$.

When I do release, they'll have earned the 30%, and if I don't release I'll have saved a ton and steam will take the costs. This greatly reduces the barrier to self-publishing. Out of all the companies I deal with, this is by far the fairest and lest predatory model there is. Gaben could have just bled us of our money even more and it would have worked. They are very rich because they are very humble in a sense.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I think Steam's cut should probably be something like 0.05 * (log(x) + 1) where x is number of copies sold.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You mean that games need to have 100 000 copies sold to get to the 30% cut?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago

Yes. It would mean that small indie games with low sales wouldn't be hit as hard by Steam taking a cut, and huge hits that sell millions of copies would help subsidize this.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Awesome article, see? Just like Apple and Google... No, wait, I was thinking of a parallel reality. Never mind.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The reason big studios get better rate is because they have leverage. Just as Amazon has leverage against apple in app store

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Its based off revenue, obviously more revenue made overall gives Valve more money with less cut than small revenue at a larger cut.