Last year, they all came crawlin' back to Steam, and this year was another strong one for Valve.

From the opinion piece:

Last year, I pointed out how many big publishers came crawlin’ back to Steam after trying their own things: EA, Activision, Microsoft. This year, for the first time ever, two Blizzard games released on Steam: Overwatch and Diablo 4.

  • Wilzax@lemmy.worldEnglish
    123·
    11 months ago

    I don’t see a problem with it. Steam provides a ton of service as a marketplace and distributor. The social aspect of steam friends seeing what games you’re playing translates into advertising for your game. They allow for regional pricing adjustments so it’s not about blocking players from poorer countries from affording the game. And they have huge frameworks for digital item trading, achievement management, community discussion, modding and more. Their 30% cut of each sale policy is unilaterally enforced and in line with the fees charged by the VAST majority of other distributors. They don’t make exclusivity deals in exchange for taking a smaller cut, unlike some much less consumer-friendly markets. Their market is completely fair across the board. I think it’s also pretty fair to ask publishers not to push that 30% fee onto the consumer, by requiring the price on Steam to not exceed the price on any other marketplace.

    That policy is to the benefit of steam customers, because they can be reasonably sure the steam price is the best price (currently) available. It’s not about exclusivity, it’s about protecting the value that Steam offers to the consumer.

    • The Hobbyist@lemmy.zipEnglish
      68·
      11 months ago

      I don’t see how any of that justifies that valve prohibits publishers from selling their games for cheaper on a platform other than steam.

      If anything, the 30% cut is significant and if a developer finds a cheaper platform elsewhere, why wouldn’t he also be allowed to sell his game for cheaper there too?

      It’s really dubious to see valve try to control developers market strategies on platforms other than steam.

      • HeavyRaptor@lemmy.zipEnglish
        121·
        11 months ago

        I think it only prohibits them from selling steam keys for cheaper elsewhere. It serves to protect steam from bad actor publishers that would try to cut steam out by selling keys on their own website, not paying the 30% platform fee while still using steam’s infrastructure to deliver the game to players. Source

        It’s amazing that steam offers this functionality at all, not even mentioning they don’t charge anything for generating keys.

        • Wilzax@lemmy.worldEnglish
          51·
          11 months ago

          Reddit is not a source, but the source linked in that post isn’t really clear.

          However, in this Ars Technica article they state ‘Sources close to Valve suggested to Ars that this “parity” rule only applies to the “free” Steam keys publishers can sell on other storefronts and not to Steam-free versions of those games sold on competing platforms. Valve hasn’t responded to a request for comment on this story.’