It’s kind of crappy (and pretty self-evidently counter-productive) of Steam to pull those categories. If enough fuss is made I’d guess they’ll be back, but it was dumb to get rid of them in the first place since those are clearly tags some customers value.
But yes, I definitely had to stop and stare for awhile at “everyone deserves visibility and money.” That’s not a thing, kids.
I think the tags are still there, just the categories are gone, so… who knows what that means exactly.
Right, wasn’t clear, I mean since the tags clearly get used, they should clearly keep the categories for the same folks.
It means they don’t get a dedicated page that highlights games of that tag. A category also promotes the way the tag works in searches so you get more precise results. For example, in the past searching for “Action RPG” would give you all games with either the “Action” tag or the “RPG” tag. The search seems to be a bit better now, but I remember the last time I was trying to find another “Diablo-ish” game it was a pain in the ass to convince the search to give me just that.
Based on how many customers actually interact with the front page, I’d also guess that there are also a lot of people that just poke around the provided categories, so it’ll be easier for those games to find their intended audience.
I don’t have a strong opinion on whether or not those particular categories should exist or not, but it’s certainly bad optics to start with them there and take them away.
You could have use the argument of ‘these tags are important enough to have a category’, but not that argument. There are always many more tags than categories, as there is a limited space for categories but not for tags. Most tags don’t have a category.
Wolfire Games explaining why they’re suing Valve.
I did not set out with the goal of suing Valve, but I have personally experienced the conduct described in the complaint. When new video game stores were opening that charged much lower commissions than Valve, I decided that I would provide my game “Overgrowth” at a lower price to take advantage of the lower commission rates. I intended to write a blog post about the results.
But when I asked Valve about this plan, they replied that they would remove Overgrowth from Steam if I allowed it to be sold at a lower price anywhere, even from my own website without Steam keys and without Steam’s DRM. This would make it impossible for me, or any game developer, to determine whether or not Steam is earning their commission. I believe that other developers who charged lower prices on other stores have been contacted by Valve, telling them that their games will be removed from Steam if they did not raise their prices on competing stores.
While talking to other developers about problems that they were having with Steam, they kept referring to it as a “monopoly,” and saying that there was nothing that we could do. I wondered, has anyone actually checked if Valve is obeying antitrust law? So I consulted with legal experts, which eventually culminated in the complaint.As the dominant platform, when developers list their games on multiple PC stores, the majority of their sales will come through Steam. I believe this makes most developers afraid that if they don’t sell on Steam, they will lose the majority of their revenue. To those developers, avoiding Steam would add unacceptable risk to the already high risk of game development in general. I believe that most developers have little or no choice but to sell on Steam and do as they’re told by Valve.
I believe that businesses are free to do whatever they want within the law. However, once a company reaches a certain level of power over an entire market, the antitrust laws forbid those companies from distorting competition. I believe that Valve is taking away gamers’ freedom to choose how much extra they are willing to pay to use their platform. I believe they are taking away competing stores’ freedom to compete by taking advantage of their lower commission rates. I believe they are taking away developers’ freedom to use different pricing models.
In my opinion, this is part of why all competing stores have failed. This suit insists that Valve stop interfering with pricing on other stores, and allow gamers and developers to make their own decisions. That’s why I joined the lawsuit.
I find that hard to believe. GOG, Itch.io, Microsoft Store have no DRM (or a different type of DRM) in their games and their games can be had at a lower price.
Also “I believe that other developers who charged lower prices on other stores have been contacted by Valve”. This is a lawsuit either they did or they didn’t. Everything Wolfire listed is conjecture.
I think the big outcome you’d see from what Wolfire is proposing is Valve no longer generating free Steam keys for devs on request, as they could be used to significantly undercut Valve’s own sales and Valve has absolutely no obligation of any kind to provide that service. Maybe there’d still be an advantage for the consumer in that, I don’t know. But I sure like getting Steam keys on other stores.
It’s kind of an awkward moment to be making that particular complaint. I can cite an awful lot of folks that clearly had a choice and availed themselves of it over the last while.
Yup.
I don’t think that’s true (talking about list price). Find a game (that anyone cares about) that has a higher list price on Steam than any other store and I will eat my words. (“That anyone cares about” means more than 100 Steam reviews)
Sales and time-limited giveaways don’t count
202 steam reviews
I saw your exception. I can look for a timeline but Caladrius Blaze had a lower price for awhile on GOG (without a sale).
I don’t know what that says. (Steam keys on reseller sites also don’t count btw)
And it’s not my exception, it’s purportedly Steam’s exception. (Since obviously games are cheaper elsewhere than they are on Steam for a limited time if they’re on sale somewhere that isn’t Steam.)
Control.
Here’s a better view. Steam is green.
Did I… did I really have to say it has to be the same edition?
Control Ultimate Edition is the same on both stores. I don’t think you can buy bare-bones Control on Steam. But yes, “bare bones” Control is cheaper on Epic than Control Ultimate Edition on Steam. That also doesn’t count
I’m just looking at USD here, though.
Still, if you can find screenshots of the actual store pages (not an aggregator) showing the price of the SAME EDITION is cheaper on Epic, even in Canada Bux, I will eat my words. Preparing to eat now. Got the salt ready
It was listed as Ultimate Edition on ITAD but you’re right it isn’t.
Unfortunately most of the games I play don’t have 100 reviews or is available anywhere else. But just to make make you eat your words :)
Epic
Steam
I only post this in jest. I’m sure you’re actually right and I’m thinking of sales.
Nitpick time.
Which includes contract law, genius. Which may or may not be invalidated in certain clauses by a bunch of different reasons, but it isn’t the clear cut argument he thinks it is, legally or even ethically. If it were, things would’ve changed by now.
Hmm. I wonder if this guy had thought through what happens to a bunch of half-baked indie developers when his lawsuit prevails and Steam stops generating and giving away as many free Steam keys as the dev wants.
This seems like such a dumb argument vs Steam. Yes, Steam insists you don’t undercut it in standard pricing if you’re going to be selling on its platform. But in reality, every other Steam key seller has constant sales that undercut them. I can’t remember the last time I bought a game from Steam directly.
If I’m reading that right, the historical lowest price on both platforms is the same. Valve’s docs imply that’s what they’re checking, although I don’t know anyone who claims to have been warned by Valve to verify if they’ve gone beyond that.
What’s interesting, and maybe only implied by the blog post but which seems like it could be far more explicitly stated in the contact from Steam (which has the resources to have very good attorneys who have thought these policies through) is Steam positioning its services/product as DRM – that happens to come with a store-front listing attached to it.
I am purely speculating here, but I would imagine that positing themselves as a provider of DRM who happens to do other stuff like sell games from a ubiquitous storefront gives them a lot of leeway, legally speaking.