jsnell
5738
Once again, that’d be illegal. Once again, you have failed to provide any evidence.
Or do you believe the gaming community would simply not care about a perceived “Steam Tax”?
So, to repeat the direct question you didn’t answer last time. If it was shown that Ubisoft sells games for cheaper on Uplay than on Steam without being censured by the gaming community or thrown off Steam, you’d admit to being wrong and stop repeating this nonsense?
I don’t know about Steam as I’ve never tried to sell anything on there. I do know that Amazon enforced exactly this arrangement on apps sold through their app store, when it was trying to establish itself as a serious competitor to the Android market. So saying it is “highly unlikely to happen” is a bit of a stretch - it is certainly one of the weapons in the arsenal of online stores like Steam.
Amazon were pretty up-front and clear about this. They policed this (and the maintenance of version parity across stores) automatically and gave a fair amount of slack - a week’s discrepancy or a sale wouldn’t trigger a reaction from their algorithms (though the agreement didn’t allow for that, strictly speaking), but at some point a polite generated e-mail would arrive pointing out the issue.
Steam may not have been taken such steps at this time (or at least not openly), but then again, they’ve not had any real competition. If undercutting Steam prices became prevalent, I’m pretty sure such a policy would come in place fast. As the state pretty clearly: “We want to avoid a situation where customers get a worse offer on the Steam store”.
jsnell
5740
That is the policy for Steam Keys. The claims being made are about Steam having a policy in place about pricing of games sold by means other than Steam Keys.
I do know that Amazon enforced exactly this arrangement on apps sold through their app store, when it was trying to establish itself as a serious competitor to the Android market.
Funny you should mention Amazon. They sell e-books. They have a dominant position in that market, just like Steam has in digital PC distribution. Their e-book contracts actually had a Most Favored Nation clause, just like you’re claiming Steam has. They ended up signing a five year consent decree with the EU over that.
(Amazon’s Android app store, by contrast, did not have a dominant market position.)
Wait. So we’re going from “Steam sucks because they have this policy” to “Steam sucks because they don’t have this policy, but I’m sure they’re going to introduce it at some point”?
That seems pretty unreasonable.
You said that. Not the poster you quoted. They just related their experience and belief Steam would consider it. They didn’t pass judgment. You are putting words in their mouth.
Aceris
5742
Can we just move this thread to P+R already.
All hail Steam, the one true God! Let it smote all those that oppose it’s glory and cast out the heretics and unbelievers.
Those that believe in the false messenger that is Epic must be banished to the pits of P & R!
I’m between the arguing, it’s also used to talk about the store, its upcoming features and the free game offerings. I think it’s good to have an Epic game store thread where people can discuss what they do and don’t like and exchange news. It’s just a pity this one had turned into such a high noise to signal ratio. :/
strategy
5745
As Wendelius says.
Also, I didn’t claim that Steam has a most-favored clause - as I said, I haven’t worked with them (though the language in their agreements is pretty loaded). I do know that not all conditions are necessarily written, especially ones that skirt legality - I’m pretty certain that Amazon’s admonishment to not undersell on other stores back then came on call, rather than the contract. And I do know from “colleagues” that off-the-record Discord/Skype calls to developers are absolutely a thing - also from Valve - and few developers would like to receive one.
But no, I’m not - and did not - claim that this is a policy that exists. To claim that “it hasn’t happened yet and that there is no indication it will ever happen” which is what I commented on, however, makes no sense. If it had happened, the likelihood of us knowing would be extremely low. I don’t consider Valve “bad guys”, but they’re a global business in a cut-throat market; not an altruistic organization. I expect them to do whatever they need to, in order to maintain their position, and they’re certainly not above anti-competitive practices.
Now back to the EGS bashing…
Aceris
5746
The counterargument is that when this has happened in the past (Amazon) the EU found it to be anticompetitive, and that therefore your conclusion that you were pretty sure it would happen if there was a serious challenger to Steam undercutting them on price for non-Steam keys was flawed.
Aceris
5747
if you complain about the signal to noise ratio, why are you posting disngenuous crap, where you misreprsent what strategy said in the same post you attack someone else for doing the same.
strategy said he was “pretty sure such a policy would come into place”.
You represented this as “belief they would consider [such a policy]”
P+R exists as a cesspit for that kind of nonsense.
I’m sorry to hear you feel my post only reached the level of disingenuous crap. It’s not what I’m here for.
When has that ever stopped a business? Valve must have known that regional pricing and geo-blocking in the EU is and was illegal; they (and the other publishers) still implemented it (the alternative - that they were ignorant - doesn’t strengthen the argument). The mere threat of something ending up before the EU anti-trust commission (especially when it regularly takes years for the commission to adjudicate cases) hasn’t kept companies from doing what is needed to strangle/kill off a competitor in the past; I see no reason to assume that it will do so in future.
…do you really not feel the cringe when you write stuff like this? :)
I don’t take any this very seriously. After all, we are talking about two large global corporations.
So no.
Do you cringe when you read this sort of thing?
Really? I mean, I thought it was clearly satire (what I wrote, although maybe the whole thread is some sort of group satire)
No one really cares that much about this discussion, do they?
It’s just one of those topics that people can freely (strongly) disagree on because it doesn’t really impact life. Like arguing about deflate gate.
Although it does cross a line for me, when I hear developers being threatened or discussions about market forces.
Satire or attempts at humor can be cringey too, although I grant you that it is subjective
It is very subjective.
Right now, I feel like we are having a discussion about whether you butter the top or the bottom of your toast. Although, without the massive war at the end (hopefully).
I laughed. And I also cringed a little.
jsnell
5757
Ok, fair enough. I didn’t realize you were commenting purely from that perspective. It seems kind of like muddying the waters, when the bulk of the discussion was about an alleged policy actually existing rather than it being theoretically possible.
Sure, anything could happen. Epic might start demanding human sacrifice as part of their contractual terms.
