• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Tim Sweeney emailed Gabe Newell calling Valve 'you assholes' over Steam policies, to which Valve's COO simply replied 'you mad bro?'

Magic Carpet

Gold Member
The tech industry is pretty big

When I think of great companies in that space, none of them are glorified walled garden digital storefront beneficiaries that merely take a transactional cut. At least Apple also makes great physical products with great software

Steam could go away tomorrow and the industry would be just fine on some other platform
I feel that if Steam went away tomorrow, the ramifications of the gaming meltdown would reverberate around the entire world several dozen times over.
Obi Wan Kenobi would have a headache lightyears away.
 
Last edited:
The mongs at PC Gamer don't even check the source. Valve did not reply to Sweeney.

LFbNAv8.jpg
 
PC Gamer changed "simply replied" to "simply observed" and now to "replied internally". Kek.
People who don't know what CEO and COO are will read it as "Gabe replied". This is why gaming journalism is a joke.
 

Sanepar

Member
The tech industry is pretty big

When I think of great companies in that space, none of them are glorified walled garden digital storefront beneficiaries that merely take a transactional cut. At least Apple also makes great physical products with great software

Steam could go away tomorrow and the industry would be just fine on some other platform
All platforms can die the only that matters is Steam.
 

Braag

Member
The tech industry is pretty big

When I think of great companies in that space, none of them are glorified walled garden digital storefront beneficiaries that merely take a transactional cut. At least Apple also makes great physical products with great software

Steam could go away tomorrow and the industry would be just fine on some other platform
It would have a massive effect in gaming considering how big the market is. Even Sony is hastily trying to bring all of it's recent backlog to Steam cause of how great it is.
 

ProtoByte

Weeb Underling
If Steam was so hostile to developers, I wonder why Origin/EA Play, Uplay, the Microsoft Store, or even Epic Games never took off?
That doesn't make any sense. Again, you're conflating "consumer friendliness" with "producer friendliness".

None of those other stores took off because consumers are sticky when it comes to incumbent storefronts and platforms.

All of them were created specifically because publishers believed that Steam was taking too much out of their pies.

Oh wait, maybe Sweeny is completely full of shit and it's not hostile in the slightest, 30% makes sense given how much work Steam puts into its UI and software. From the controller support, VR support, and Linux compatibility work it's very obvious whatever money Valve is getting from the 30% is being put to effective use.
Meanwhile, what the hell has Epic Games done since the store first opened years ago? Last I can recall, they added an "add to cart" button and that's it.
Other than the UI and base functionality of the storefront (congrats, neither are unique or particularly hard), none of that has anything to do with the value of a place on the storefront to the producer.

I don't know what Epic has done with their store or launcher, and I doubt you do either. I'd be shocked if you had it installed.

Developers don’t give two shits about you.
Of course, but we're on a game forum talking about the business of games. These storefront fees are one of the reasons publishers behave the way they do.
 

Senua

Gold Member
The tech industry is pretty big

When I think of great companies in that space, none of them are glorified walled garden digital storefront beneficiaries that merely take a transactional cut. At least Apple also makes great physical products with great software

Steam could go away tomorrow and the industry would be just fine on some other platform
Post of the year so far
 

Topher

Identifies as young
Tim has a point. His store have better discounts for consumers and lower fees for developers.

Epic is the most pro-consumer and pro-developer company in the market.

Not true. You are not taking into account that you don't have to buy Steam games from Steam. You can go to other store like Fanatical and Green Man Gaming or many others to get discounts from Steam games. That is why I and others are constantly posting price aggregation sites like gg.deals so that folks can find the best price.

And what about being pro-consumer after the sale? EGS support pages are shit. Even the most obscure games on Steam have a community hub where gamers can discuss issues they are having.

For example, Rebel Galaxy Outlaw:


Now EGS:


One has a hub. The other gives you an email address.

Bottom line here, is that there are concrete reasons why Steam has such a dedicated following and why EGS is considered a joke among so many in the PC gaming community.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Identifies as young
The tech industry is pretty big

When I think of great companies in that space, none of them are glorified walled garden digital storefront beneficiaries that merely take a transactional cut. At least Apple also makes great physical products with great software

Steam could go away tomorrow and the industry would be just fine on some other platform

Washington Wizards Bruhh GIF by NBC Sports Washington
 

Nvzman

Member
That doesn't make any sense. Again, you're conflating "consumer friendliness" with "producer friendliness".

None of those other stores took off because consumers are sticky when it comes to incumbent storefronts and platforms.

All of them were created specifically because publishers believed that Steam was taking too much out of their pies.


Other than the UI and base functionality of the storefront (congrats, neither are unique or particularly hard), none of that has anything to do with the value of a place on the storefront to the producer.

I don't know what Epic has done with their store or launcher, and I doubt you do either. I'd be shocked if you had it installed.


Of course, but we're on a game forum talking about the business of games. These storefront fees are one of the reasons publishers behave the way they do.
Nothing you said here is correct.
Steam has the dedicated base that it has because of its ecosystem being incredibly robust and feature-dense that no other store front has. You act like anyone would WANT to willingly migrate from Steam, when does any other store have the features Steam has that people use on a daily basis? No? So why the fuck should consumers not be sticky about it?
My point is that Steam is not "hostile to developers" just because it has a 30% cut. They actually have clearly used that cut to improve the infrastructure, which in turn actually helps developers far more than you think. For example, Steam's own controller input wrapper saves developers from having to implement both Xinput and Dinput support, as Steam can handle it itself. Same thing for no longer needing native Linux ports, which has become big in itself thanks to the Steam Deck. Some games have seen huge, immense amounts of purchases (see: Black Ops 3 with Zombies mods and Rivals of Aether) long-term just from getting workshop support integrated. All of this saves time, which in term saves money, which as far as I know, EA, Ubisoft, Epic, and Microsoft Store have done absolutely nothing like this. It's not just about the cut, Steam has significantly better infrastructure for developers, especially smaller ones.
But say "OH BUT MUH 30% CUT".
"I don't know what Epic has done with their store or launcher, and I doubt you do either. I'd be shocked if you had it installed."
I have 400+ hours on Fortnite and I bought Tony Hawk 1 + 2 on it day 1. Fuck off. The Epic Games Launcher sucks, Sweeney is a prick, and you don't know what you are talking about. Why did you even bother posting when you clearly don't know anything about this?
 
Last edited:

Topher

Identifies as young
Too much truth for one post?

Stanning for Steam is the gaming equivalent of claiming Walmart is the best company in existence

Steam is fine. Most progressive tech company though? That’s a big laugh from me, dawg.

You lost me at "merely take a transactional cut". And I didn't see the post saying they were the "most progressive tech company". It was "most consumer friendly software outlet", right? You were asked what company was better, but you didn't give a response. I think you should answer that question.
 
Last edited:

Nvzman

Member
You lost me at "merely take a transactional cut". And I didn't see the post saying they were the "most progressive tech company". It was "most consumer friendly software outlet", right? You were asked what company was better, but you didn't give a response. I think you should that question.
Don't bother, the dude is either Sweeney's alt or is trolling. It's obvious no one can intentionally be that dense.
 

James Sawyer Ford

Gold Member
You lost me at "merely take a transactional cut". And I didn't see the post saying they were the "most progressive tech company". It was "most consumer friendly software outlet", right? You were asked what company was better, but you didn't give a response. I think you should that question.

I think consumer friendly encompasses more than just cost or open access.

I want a company that provides genuinely innovative platforms or software.

Valve was a far more interesting company when they still made actual games.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Identifies as young
Don't bother, the dude is either Sweeney's alt or is trolling. It's obvious no one can intentionally be that dense.

James Sawyer Ford James Sawyer Ford is a good poster. I think he is way off base here though. It's alright to disagree.

I think consumer friendly encompasses more than just cost or open access.

I want a company that provides genuinely innovative platforms or software.

Valve was a far more interesting company when they still made actual games.

Their game output is an entirely different criticism. One that many PC gamers share. That's not what this is about.
 
To me EGS, Origin, Steam, Amazon at some point, Ubisoft, Xbox Gamepass, etc. are all the same. I’ll go with the cheapest option

I’ve gotten issues launching game on steam, I’ve had issues with Xbox, others. That’s why pc gaming is just a headache…I like it for the enthusiast side pushing power tho
 
Last edited:

HyzerChucker

Neo Member
Steam pushed the entire industry into DRM-by-default, online-by-default even for single player games, eliminated the secondhand market, and can take anyway anything and everything you've purchased leased from their store for violating arbitrary and capricious rules or for no reason at all. It's evil.

But they support a lot of Linux development, so that's nice.
 

ProtoByte

Weeb Underling
Nothing you said here is correct.
Steam has the dedicated base that it has because of its ecosystem being incredibly robust and feature-dense that no other store front has. You act like anyone would WANT to willingly migrate from Steam, when does any other store have the features Steam has that people use on a daily basis?
I didn't say any of that. I understand why consumers are sticky.

No? So why the fuck should consumers not be sticky about it?
My point is that Steam is not "hostile to developers" just because it has a 30% cut.
It's the 30% cut and the increasing discoverability/competition via lack of curating problem. Sweeney's definitely high horsing it, but again, you have failed to address the simple fact that if everything was hunky dory, EA, Ubisoft and Activision wouldn't have bothered putting in the time and effort to try and build their own storefronts and force users to go there for their games.

They actually have clearly used that cut to improve the infrastructure, which in turn actually helps developers far more than you think. For example, Steam's own controller input wrapper saves developers from having to implement both Xinput and Dinput support, as Steam can handle it itself. Same thing for no longer needing native Linux ports, which has become big in itself thanks to the Steam Deck. Some games have seen huge, immense amounts of purchases (see: Black Ops 3 with Zombies mods and Rivals of Aether) long-term just from getting workshop support integrated. All of this saves time, which in term saves money, which as far as I know, EA, Ubisoft, Epic, and Microsoft Store have done absolutely nothing like this.
Blah blah blah blah. You think Linux support and controller calibration comes to even 10% of a developer's work or revenue considerations when it comes to PC ports? Lol

We get it, Steam is a de facto monopsony and can use that to box out competitors who cant justify spending the money to kit out their stores with semi-significant or fringe accoutrements. That's the whole point of this discussion.

It's not just about the cut, Steam has significantly better infrastructure for developers, especially smaller ones.
But say "OH BUT MUH 30% CUT".
"I don't know what Epic has done with their store or launcher, and I doubt you do either. I'd be shocked if you had it installed."
I have 400+ hours on Fortnite and I bought Tony Hawk 1 + 2 on it day 1. Fuck off. The Epic Games Launcher sucks, Sweeney is a prick, and you don't know what you are talking about. Why did you even bother posting when you clearly don't know anything about this?
You need to chill out, Gabe. This isn't a Fortnite lobby. But consider me shocked.

Steam can do what it wants, but pretending like there's nothing to address or discuss here smacks of fanboyism.
 

James Sawyer Ford

Gold Member
Their game output is an entirely different criticism. One that many PC gamers share. That's not what this is about.

I think it is though. It could be the “PC first party” to make their ecosystem more attractive, but they clearly have no need to at this point and it’s easier to just sit back and collect the storefront money
 

FoxMcChief

Gold Member
The tech industry is pretty big

When I think of great companies in that space, none of them are glorified walled garden digital storefront beneficiaries that merely take a transactional cut. At least Apple also makes great physical products with great software

Steam could go away tomorrow and the industry would be just fine on some other platform
If Steam collapsed today, PC gaming would take a super, super, super huge hit. Bigger than if Sony left the gaming market, imo.
 

Nvzman

Member
I didn't say any of that. I understand why consumers are sticky.


It's the 30% cut and the increasing discoverability/competition via lack of curating problem. Sweeney's definitely high horsing it, but again, you have failed to address the simple fact that if everything was hunky dory, EA, Ubisoft and Activision wouldn't have bothered putting in the time and effort to try and build their own storefronts and force users to go there for their games.


Blah blah blah blah. You think Linux support and controller calibration comes to even 10% of a developer's work or revenue considerations when it comes to PC ports? Lol

We get it, Steam is a de facto monopsony and can use that to box out competitors who cant justify spending the money to kit out their stores with semi-significant or fringe accoutrements. That's the whole point of this discussion.


You need to chill out, Gabe. This isn't a Fortnite lobby. But consider me shocked.

Steam can do what it wants, but pretending like there's nothing to address or discuss here smacks of fanboyism.
Your fundamental misunderstanding is thinking that they made their own service because there's something wrong with Steam's 30%, and not that they just simply want 100% of the money and no cut at all. How come this only became such a "hot" topic when Sweeney started to relentlessly bitch about it? I don't recall any of the other companies complaining, just that they had their own storefronts. Even if Steam only had 15%, they would still do the same thing, because they think they can.

Also, controller support, especially when PlayStation is as popular as it is and therefore a lot of DualSense/DualShock controllers out there, is a far bigger deal than you act like it is.

Also, the fanboy argument doesn't really work, and it doesn't make you look any more right either. Because as a consumer, why should I dislike Steam? Didn't I just list out a ton of consumer-friendly practices only they do?
 
Last edited:

James Sawyer Ford

Gold Member
If Steam collapsed today, PC gaming would take a super, super, super huge hit. Bigger than if Sony left the gaming market, imo.

You’d have to click a different storefront launcher.

If Walmart collapsed tomorrow I’d go to target, costco, or Amazon

It would be ok as long as there’s be a way to transfer the digital rights

If valve was a premier hardware of software maker, the loss would be more substantial, we’d lose out on their great games
 

SmokedMeat

Gamer™
Of course, but we're on a game forum talking about the business of games. These storefront fees are one of the reasons publishers behave the way they do.

Not true. Epic’s had paid timed exclusives that launched in a poor state. They collect money from AMD and Nvidia to feature their game in GPU promotions, that release horribly unoptimized.

How many fake apologies do we see? Developers don’t care, period.
 
Last edited:

Senua

Gold Member
Steam pushed the entire industry into DRM-by-default, online-by-default even for single player games, eliminated the secondhand market, and can take anyway anything and everything you've purchased leased from their store for violating arbitrary and capricious rules or for no reason at all. It's evil.

But they support a lot of Linux development, so that's nice.
Man we have some cavemen on this forum. Eliminated what second hand market? Because that was a huge fucking thing in the early 2000s huh? Are you trying to say single player games are always online too?

"it's evil" LOL
 

Topher

Identifies as young
I think it is though. It could be the “PC first party” to make their ecosystem more attractive, but they clearly have no need to at this point and it’s easier to just sit back and collect the storefront money

Ok....I don't see that as the topic here so moving on....
 

James Sawyer Ford

Gold Member
He just seems to be anti most things PC gamers like tbh.

Not true. I’m storefront agnostic.

I don’t care about Steam vs. any of these other storefronts.

If I were on PC I’d purchase wherever it was cheapest or had the least restrictive DRM

I just don’t get the love Valve gets. They are not a very exciting company and have a lot of uncompetitive practices thanks to their moat
 

James Sawyer Ford

Gold Member
Ok....I don't see that as the topic here so moving on....

See:


That post sums it up if you don’t agree with what I consider “consumer friendly”
 

FoxMcChief

Gold Member
You’d have to click a different storefront launcher.

If Walmart collapsed tomorrow I’d go to target, costco, or Amazon

It would be ok as long as there’s be a way to transfer the digital rights

If valve was a premier hardware of software maker, the loss would be more substantial, we’d lose out on their great games
champoy-doc-rivers.gif


I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.
 

Sleepwalker

Member
I think it is though. It could be the “PC first party” to make their ecosystem more attractive, but they clearly have no need to at this point and it’s easier to just sit back and collect the storefront money

Why should Valve, a small company by headcount be the "PC first party" though? They are not a platform holder, they don't own "PC" but simply are a storefront. They produce hardware in the form of the index and the steam deck. They released their last game (HL: Alyx) the same year Naughty Dog released their last original non remaster game. In fact, they could release 1-2 games per decade and be at the same cadence as most triple A studios.

They are not the equivalent of Sony and MS in the console space. And even if they were, their refund policy and regional pricing makes them far more consumer friendly than the former 2.
 
Last edited:

SoloCamo

Member
Not true. I’m storefront agnostic.

I don’t care about Steam vs. any of these other storefronts.

If I were on PC I’d purchase wherever it was cheapest or had the least restrictive DRM

I just don’t get the love Valve gets. They are not a very exciting company and have a lot of uncompetitive practices thanks to their moat

Steam came at a time when the PC industry was a bit of a mess and was far less user friendly. The consolidation and ease of the launcher really made it a lot easier for people to switch to the platform. I wasn't the biggest fan at first (considering I've been pc gaming since the 90s) but if you gamed during the transition you can see what it did for the pc industry.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Identifies as young
See:


That post sums it up if you don’t agree with what I consider “consumer friendly”

Seriously?

The Office I Give Up GIF
 
Top Bottom