Nintendo seems happy with their infinite scroll solution for the eShop on Switch, and like 20 pieces of crap launch there every week.
I am not happy with it.
Regional pricing, sigh. That’s the reason I barely buy on Steam now that they made it regional and pricematched to physical stores. It’s about 10-15 dollars more per (non discounted) game than it used to be.
So far prices on epic are still in USD, here’s to hoping they keep it that way and ignore the existence of my silly country.
Which is probably why they changed it. Too restrictive for the decent customer and too easily abused for the unscrupulous one.
You are on fire today. Stop making me laugh out loud at work!
He is talking to TimJames.
But don’t feel too bad, I’m laughing at you.
hah, if there is one thing Epic store has done, it’s made Valve be more open and proud about what they actually do when it comes to Steam, hence article overview like this
They’ve been busy.
Interesting they explicitly avoid the elephant in the room. The unilateral cutting of UA impressions by Steam for new games.
So yeah the “hey look we removed the biggest reason you should pay us our cut, but here are all the baubles we did instead” doesnt really answer the criticisms.
A far cry from when Steam was growing and they proudly guaranteed one million or more impressions for each game. Now thats gone they need to earn their cut another way and “discovery algorithms” dont help.
Isn’t this a logical and inevitable consequence of opening up the platform to everyone?
I dont see why it would be. Steam has a lot of UA impressions to throw around. Its gonna be a long time till new game releases would eat up that massive pie.
However if it is the case that they just dont have the clout to help new games anymore then really its just Steam saying they cant support any new partners. So those partners should go elsewhere if they want launch support.
But like I say I think Steam still has a LOT of headroom on the partner UA side.
Just so we are clear, by UA impressions you mean a view of game store page by a unique customer or something else?
Correct, although it doesn’t have to be unique.
Really its just the broader issue. Obviously devs want UA/launch support. Thats the primary function of a digital store from a sellers perspective. Nothing else really matters.
Its why you have seen such a change in attitudes against steam recently If you are not going to promote games on your service then its not surprising that games will leave.
I mean if I want to just sell a game with zero UA support on a great service then I can put it on Itch today and they take an appropriately lesser cut. If that makes sense?
What’s UA an acronym for? User Acquisition? User Activity?
User Acquisition yeah. Marketing dollars in other words. The deal usually is “We give you X free marketing dollars and we take 30% for it.”
Even large and sometimes dev hostile platforms like Apple go out of their way to at least try and give the impression of adding value here. So they will really try and feature as many games as they can for example. Valve went from a hard guarantee to nothing or pointing at algorithms, and they did it without telling anyone either. Which kinda lost some folks trust.
No, because you do not have the customer base on itch. You can put a game anywhere you want but it will not make a difference if people cannot find it. If someone expects any service to market their game for them, then I think they are in for a rude awakening. No one will do so effectively until they have a known vested interest in doing so. Known is the key word in that sentence too because it may be in the interest of Epic, itch or anywhere to market your product so they can get their 12%, 25% or 30% but frankly there is no guarantee of payback that their marketing efforts will pay off and the payback is usually not worth the effort unless there is a high likelihood for making a return. Of course, there are exceptions for launches of services and large, known games that already have high demand - those that have had marketing to create the demand.
Exactly my point.
If its not going to be seen on Steam anyway, it may as well be on a platform where you get a bigger cut per sale.
Because Itch has no UA either and you have to drive each new customer to the page. Now you need to do that on Steam then all other things equal you take the partner who gives treats you better which is obviously Itch.
Now its not absolute, of course Steam still does give views but its gotten pretty bad.
Isn’t the root issue that there’s just too many people making too many games? If Steam makes a strong marketing push or the 10,000 games to be released this year, how does that change anything?
Or are you just saying that since there’s too many games, you might as well just migrate to whatever offers you to best revenue split and be done with it?
You may have missed my point. At least it has hope of being seen by many customers on Steam. It has no hope of being seen by anywhere near that many customers elsewhere.
The days of sticking it on Steam and raking in the dough are long gone. It once was that if you got on to Steam then it was almost a guarantee of success. That has not happened for many years. Developers complained about not being able to break into Steam. Now they are complaining that too many people have.
I genuinely dont think there are too many games but maybe lets dodge that rabbit hole for now?
But for sure yes if you are offered two services which give similar support and one offers you a better cut and is more friendly to you and your business then you take the better cut is my thinking. I could be wrong of course :)
If it’s not too much of a tangent, what do you feel like Steam could do to increase UA?