- cross-posted to:
- steam@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- steam@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
Quick! Let’s add about 800 useless Managers!
700 should suffice for the first level, but then, you need more than one level.
Who each will need a couple of consultants from McKinsey, PWC, you name it, to do their jobs!
What’s Mckinsey, a type of cheese? PWC? Is that a firearms company?
Ok… let’s walk through that together! This is my comment if your guesses were correct:
“Who each will need a couple of consultants from a type of cheese, a firearms company, you name it, to do their jobs!”
See how that a) doesn’t make any sense b) is not funny and c) is grammatically dubious at least?
You could probably do better punch-up if you tried, right?
the manager:
That’s less than the number of employees who worked on Left4Dead 2.
THB, they could use a few more employees and it shows. Community moderation is awful and there are many nazi groups. The whole trading ecosystem is ripe with frauds and many games released are cheap shovelware, asset flips or broken. And don’t get me started on the problems with abandoned Early Access games. Valve could hire a few more people and maybe try to tackle those issues.
The shitty games released on steam are the outcome of it being relatively easy to publish a game on the steam, and that should absolutely not change. Let people publish their crap that nobody will play, you don’t see the vast majority of it.
This take will probably be unpopular, but FWIW I agree with you. I rarely use the community feature and I don’t care about the trading so personally I would like it if they just stuck with what they do well.
No ones forcing me to use them. No issues here.
Yeah same. I don’t play a ton, mostly on the deck,. And I also avoid interaction with other people on their platform. But I’ve never had an issue.
I assume Valve, like the vast majority of tech companies, outsources moderation. It’s normally outsourced to incredibly underpaid and overworked people in the global south not given proper training for these things.
Not sure what valve can do about abandoned early Access games other than remove them if they’re not updated in a certain amount of time. Although that causes problems too.
Not really clear how having more people would fix these issues
They could create a new flag for Abandoned Early Access games. If an Early Access game hasn’t been updated in a long time, that could trigger an automatic email to the publisher saying “Hey your game hasn’t been updated in a long time and could be changed from Early Access to Abandoned Early Access. Consider updating the game or store page to keep Early Access status. If you would like to switch to Abandoned Early Access, you can ignore this message and it will automatically update in two weeks or you can manually change the status on your game’s Steam page.” Wouldn’t really need more employees to handle this unless the current employees are all too busy to implement something like it.
They could easily prevent devs that abandoned an early access title from launching another one. They could check if the devs have a reasonable business plan and are able to fulfill their promises. They could vet them and check if they did manage to release some games. And so on. It is not impossible and would help us gamers, because nobody wants abandoned games.
Steam is successful because they’re the only company in that market treating customers right.
I’d be very upset if the courts side with EA.
Steam could use better search. Ideally I’d like to be able to just use SQL, but I understand why not.
There’s been a few times where I wanted to find something in Steam, but spent most of the emotion on clicks and fucks before launching something, concluding that yeah, I wanted this, and stopping it because I don’t want this anymore.
Steam DB has a pretty decent search. It’s not SQL but the filters are a bit better.
I know how you feel tho - so few consumer orgs give us an advanced search worth it’s salt. I want to have (x AND y) OR z, or maybe x AND (y OR z)… Not whichever specific combination was preordained for me.
I know it’s not as horrible as some.
If only this were still a thing in search engines.
They’re also one of the few (possibly only) that has not gone public.
Just a coincidence, I’m sure.
There are plenty of private companies that are shitty too. It definitely helps being private (and maybe is a requirement?), but you also have to have the right owners for private companies to be good.
For sure… Just one more reason to adopt co-determination laws like those in Germany.
Public or private, if the board of the company actually contained literal workers, it could make things so much better.
What are EA doing with Valve? The lawsuit this came from is between Wolfire Games and Valve; far as I can tell, Valve and EA work together on some stuff.
and because they are not publicly traded company.
Well that’s why they actually do right by their customers. That said I definitely agree
Wait what’s going on in the courts between valve and EA?
I think people often hate steam for their success, but fail to see it’s the result of customers’choice in a free market. (I see it enough I’m not sure if people get paid to hate on them… To ruin the thing they have most of customer respect)
Steam is not publicly traded and does not act like every other publicly traded company. It invests in its customers experience and custtomer come back for that. It does not nickel in dime or use its position to hold its customer captive and enshitfify its product. It’s not an ISP…
It invests in hardware and software development it believes the industry needs not to make a massive profit but to be a champion of what gaming should be (Linux, steam link, index, bug picture, steam controller, steam deck) These products are experimental and usually sold at or near cost not to make money but to prove to the market there is a need and a demand.
They are often a champion and voice of the gamer.
They could have tried to be like Bethesda and tried to monetize their workshop but they didn’t.
Sometimes they’re quiet and we don’t hear anything about what they’re working on, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t working on things.
I can’t imagine pc gaming would have survived and resurged without steam. And I hate to think what it would be like if there were just 5 epics, origin, Uplay, whatever other launcher. I think gaming would look like mobile games…,… which takes a 30% cut too and can only sell in apple or android markets… No one bitches there and they offer no services.
These products are experimental and usually sold at or near cost not to make money but to prove to the market there is a need and a demand.
Well, no… I think it’s more akin to the concept of “loss-leaders”. Get people in the door and while they’re there, they’ll buy a game or two. Which is where their real profits come from.
In the end, it’s still just a business strategy intended to result in profits for Valve.
However, that being said, the fact that they don’t have a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders to maximize profits and keep that stock price up at (literally) all costs, allows them to operate the way they do.
But don’t get it twisted, they are a for-profit corporation, and their ultimate goal is making money. They’re just not as shitty about it.
The bar is REALLY fucking low these days.
Oh for sure they are there for a profit. But as the best example in the industry let’s not unnecessarily attack them. Imagine how much more money they make if they did go public and how awful it would be for all of us.
Totally. I wasn’t trying to rag on Valve… More just a comment about capitalism in general and how shitty it is.
I agree with you, but justifying anything by saying they’re successful in a free market is really iffy. There are plenty of large evil companies that are incredibly successful. That said I agree with everything else you’ve said.
I personally think 30% cut is too much for any app/software store. But if anyone deserves it Steam does
justifying anything by saying they’re successful in a free market is really iffy
The important part is why they’re successful; unlike many companies which try to lock customers in and take advantage of them as much as possible, Steam/Valve try to build a good product at a reasonable price, and trust that it’ll bring them customers.
And look at that, it does.
In human societies culture matters. People who become managers often have intrigue and taking advantage of people as their main useful skills. So they just go on doing what they know. No reason to scold them even, this is life. After all, something should serve as the backdrop for companies doing it right.
Valve started differently.
But you surely already know all that, Revan. How’s Bastila doin?
My reference to free market is only a means of saying customers choose steam because of its offerings not that they have too.
I agree it would be nice if they charged less. However do we know their full PNL/balance sheet? People just keep taking revenue/employees as if employees are the only overhead.
They provide the servers, and do have an rde cost for development for services we discussed like cloud saves, control support etc. if people have this much energy over it attack pharmaceutical for there insane mark ups that would drive way more positive social change. But the people driving are mostly trying to make more money by cutting there publishing expenses through steam. I’m sure psn and Xbox also take 25 to 30percent cuts.
They also championed low publishing costs of only 100 dollars to list a game. I don’t know enough to speak to their update charges though. Hell psn been known to charge 25k for visibility in top of their 30% cut and there are no other market options Reference
Everyone focuses here cause developers and publishers want more of this cut and to me seem to try to push steam into regulator cross hairs as a way to force the changes they have failed to negotiate.
I would also point out brick and mortar sellers also take 15 to 20% cut and then also charge for storage, disposal, fulfillment, return on and on. Amazon does the same. It’s the nature of a market place. Reference
Overall it doesn’t make sense to me as a community that we attack our best example of what a game market place should be.
They make enough profit for the boss to be a billionaire, enough said.
No harm meant. I do think Steam is the golden example of a big business done right. All I’m saying is that there’s room for improvement.
However do we know their full PNL/balance sheet?
We can make an educated guess. Amazon’s S3 charges roughly $0.025 per GB, so an 100GB game would cost $2.50 for Steam to upload to a user. For a $30 game, that’s around ~8.5% or just over 3 downloads before it’s unprofitable.
Obviously Valve isn’t paying consumer level S3 prices, and obviously users can download multiple times. But I would be extremely surprised if they didn’t make a rather large margin on each sale
Total fair always room for improvement, no ones perfect.
Appreciate the good discussion!
Amazon’s S3 charges roughly $0.025 per GB
For storage or for download?
Download. It’s also rounded up. Storage is negligible compared to bandwidth, especially considering Steam’s business model
Assuming there will never be any updates, 3 downloads is what regular gamer can do. First computer, second(friend’s) computer and reinstallation on first computer.
$0.025 per GB is the most expensive option on S3 I could find rounded up. It would be absolutely insane if Steam were paying those prices when they have their own servers. I also used 100GB game size as a large number, and $30 as a small price tag (for an 100GB game).
I was trying to be charitable with the numbers and it still came out pretty positive
$0.025 per GB is the most expensive option on S3 I could find rounded up.
What is cheapest and at what speed?
I also used 100GB game size as a large number, and $30 as a small price tag (for an 100GB game).
I get it, but then there are all those heavy f2p games like War Thunder, from which Steam doesn’t get anything.
You can look it up yourself, I was just giving a worst case scenario
Steam was apparently already cool when I was a kid. Though the reason I knew about it was that I had 2 games with Steam support bought in stores (one of them I gifted without installing\registering, another one I installed without registering).
Others are still at that point - you buy a game and you get something like GameSpy and such as an optional thing nobody thinks about. They are trying to make those services the entry point, and I guess for AAA players they have already succeeded.
It’s not an ISP…
Valve has AS number, so it is an ISP
Having an AS does not make you an ISP. It just means you have a public AS, which you can use to peer with providers on the Internet, if you have an agreement to peer.
Correct. In fact many, many companies have ASNs. Little companies all the way up to large ones. The key difference for an ISP is they allow you to route traffic through them. Almost every company that has an ASN blocks traffic from being routed through them, assuming they know how to configure that and that they have different peering points. Valve most certainly does not allow you to route through their network, they already have enough traffic just doing their own CDN stuff.
I think people often hate steam for their success
I hate them for forcing me to use a kind of DRM which will stop working once their servers stop.
Halflife was just fine without steam. Adding steam seemed to be a way to stop players from sharing CD keys.
The way I see it, Steam having DRM is Valve’s way of giving publishers and devs that choice, and said choice just makes Steam more likely to stick around for the future, which makes the biggest drawback of DRM (losing all your games) less likely.
You can play: Half-Life 1: Source Half-Life 2 Half-Life 2: Episode One Half-Life 2: Episode Two All with steam closed. Original half life expansions aside, your take is senile. I suppose alyx could’ve done without it.
Okay, but what about all the games that have come out since steam has launched and ONLY have online-only drm options?
Not talking about MMOs because those are their own beast. I’m talking about a huge amount of games though excluding mmos.
I don’t mind
digital distributionDRM platforms, I just want a choice. I want licenses to be portable and I want to be able to re-sell licenses for games I do not wish to own any longer. I don’t want to be bound to just console games either.Okay, but what about pre-steam DRM? But what about services that have existed for less time and actually done the slippery slope shit you’re cowering in your boots about (Uplay)? You’re so busy listing possible problems and making problems up that you are not comparing and contrasting your available options. It strikes me that you are complaining to complain and don’t have realistic solutions in mind, you’re asking for either a rental system where you put up collateral to play a game or you’re suggesting that the developer only be able to sell a game once. Are you one of those crazy “first sale doctrine” sovcit types?
I don’t think resellable licenses are a great idea. It works with physical media because it will have flaws that affect quality and price, but I don’t see how that would work for digital without screwing over devs. I can completely get behind transfers or trades with friends or between platforms, but not really for resale.
I can get the transfers between friends part, but why between platforms? That makes zero sense from a business standpoint.
The only way that would work is to have game companies manufacture and distribute an external storage medium themselves, because platforms sure as hell won’t say “Oh you bought a license on another store? Sure, you can use our CDN for free!”. And now we’ve almost reinvented game CDs.
Luckily steamless is piss easy to use because Steams “DRM” is only meant to be preventative. As in, you’re playing it on steam for the community, workshop, cloud saves, per game notes, control scheme setups, etc etc.
That’s kind of why they are successful though, right? They were the ones that figured out how to supply games digitally for a profit, which required a way to prevent people from sharing the product for free. This was previously done with CD keys, but the advent of the internet rendered that mostly ineffective.
I think publishers value the fact that steam is essentially a form of DRM, so we got fairly lucky all things considered. Imagine if steam didn’t exist and we had to deal with software like Uplay and Origin.
Imagine if securom was everywhere again.
And the fact that they can just decide to take your games away from you by deleting your account?
This number doesn’t seem to include support staff who iirc are contract workers so might not count as “employees”.
Most of the support staff is their customers and users actually.
Most of the store is curated and moderated by the developers and publishers, but you’re not wrong about stuff like server farms and development.
But I’m also curious, there’s a line, so where is it? No business is going to include the plumber and electrician they hire to do occasional or even routine work and maintenance. So do the same techs working on server equipment count or not? Where’s the line on this who’s a contracted employee instead of contracter.
Most of the support staff is their customers and users actually.
It’s not users that process refund request, recover your account if e.g. you’ve lost your 2FA method, or any of the other innumerable things you might need to contact Steam support for. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to include the staff that do this as part of their workforce.
Is this why they suck with CS2?
laughs, then immediately weeps in tf2
Watch the heavy update will drop any second now!
Annnyyyy second now…
Just took a look at the future and im sorry to say the heavy update wont happen tho we got half life 2 episode 3
Sounds like they’re using computers effectively. Not sure why this is news.
Work smart not hard.
That’s why steam looks outdated
Counterpoint: Every other modern “flat” UI is low effort, cheap garbage. Bring back the bezels and shadows.
The fact that Steam acts like website and not an “app” is amazing. I want to be able to right click, copy and paste, and see the address bar of what I’m looking at.
It’s a great example of “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” - Steam updates usually make the software better
I honestly don’t care how it looks, provided it’s easy to navigate. Steam gets that right. Other apps and websites with constant updates just requires relearning how to do what you want.
I only need Steam to do a few things:
- work well on Linux
- customize controllers/inputs
- organize my games
- help me find new games
It does all of those well, the other stores do not. If any other store handles that, they’ll get my money.
I just read that it’s 80 people, which one is true now? https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/24263263
Valve vs Steam
What other things does Valve work on?
We may joke about valve not making games, but they do have a large amount of people working on various titles.
They also do a lot of R&D for hardware, like the Steam Deck and VR headsets.
FIGHT!
I’m reading, Steam takes 30% cut, offer practically nothing but a download system, store front and crappy forum instances per game. Largely unchanged since 2012 Basically, they’re just taking the money and running, almost pure rent.
Thor from Pirate Software has a great video breaking down how Steam works and the lawsuit that claims they are ripping off consumers. It’s very educational.
Of course, there is no requirement to use Steam. Game makes can publish their game themselves without a platform at all, which very few do. If you say they actually need a platform, there is the value they are getting for that 30%. If they weren’t getting anything of value, then they could do it themselves and benefit instead, which most do not.
Wanted to link this video, but you did it first.
Also, as mentioned in video, gamers prefer steam because developers there can’t disable or remove comments or not refund on basis of “sucks to be you” like EA and Ubisoft do.
Thor’s simping for a company like he thinks they’ll pay him for it, absolute cringe.
Thor
You certainly did call him out exactly as he is. An obvious industry shill “we can’t make non-live service games anymore because licensing boohoo”
Feel free to start a competitive game store. There’s a reason why gog, origin or epic hardly make a dent on Valves bottom line.
Gog has its niche. Others didn’t even try. “Look at exclusives” from Epic doesn’t even look like trying
Even within its niche gog Galaxy still lacks a lot of features steam has, like communities, mod support, Linux support, and a few others.
The cost of freedom is still far more valuable than that to some, and that’s its niche.
Honestly, I’d be home with that if they had Linux support. They don’t, so I mostly buy from Steam. Apparently Heroic now gets a kickback (probably small) from GOG for sales, but that’s a pretty lazy “Linux support” if you ask me.
I literally didn’t make a Steam account until they had a Linux client, and now I’ve spend a ton of money there. It’s not hard to get my money, you just need to not be outright hostile to me. That’s why I have never and probably will never buy from Epic.
I tried heroic on my steam deck and it’s okay but I wouldn’t use it over Steam’s UI which says a lot.
Yup, I install through Heroic but launch through Steam on my Steam Deck, for controller support alone, it’s not worth going through Heroic directly. On desktop, I’ll play directly through Heroic though.
Yeah, the solution is obvious, break the Valve monopoly into 40 smaller companies and put Gaben in prison.
Valve created a fantastic entertainment product that people voluntarily choose to use. Who would you want to turn something people already love into something completely different? Counterproductive - especially when direct distribution is essentially free and universally accessible.
At this point steam is plain rent, coasting on their monopolistic platform power not any particular technical merit. It would be fine if valve spent this money on their userbase, but they don’t. All their other products are run for profit as well.
Stream created and maintains a platform that gamers and developers want to use but more importantly, they’ve built up a reputation that people believe in and trust.
Gamers and developers are so eager to use steam because in all the years they’ve been operating, they still support and expand upon family sharing, have a fantastic refund policy (for consumers), don’t employ aggressive exclusivity deals, don’t limit download speeds behind paywalls, and provide a great review and recommendation system.
They’ve become successful due to this reputation, why should we punish them for that?
They’re an http download website that takes a 30% cut on the hard work of artists.
That is already reprehensible, but not illegal.
They also dominate their market and their competition is laughable.
Now that is a properly punishable crime.
“And here is my hard drive dedicated to game launchers and storefronts.”
We could run just the game and nothing else.
Are you fucking stupid?
That’s a rhetorical question, I assume?
They also offer the Steam multiplayer backend, workshop, and Steam’s social system which is becoming enticing again given Discord’s latest behaviour.
GOG’s gimmick is no DRM, Itch.io has the cheapest self-publishing costs, and Epic has… well I’m not sure really, but the other two have their place, but it’s no coincidence Steam is the biggest.
Epic does sales where they release free games periodically. It’s great for people who like cloud gaming like Geforce Now.
Gabe owns so many yachts.
At some point that 30% cut and not spending it on anything, you have to buy something
Economists are praising it‘s efficiency but there are massive shortcomings when it comes to costumer support. A couple years ago I was told they have a whopping single person dedicated to matters in the german market for example. Anyone who has any idea about the german bureaucracy hellscape knows this is far from sufficient to deal with any issue whatsoever. And I suspect it‘s not running much smoother elsewhere.
It’s interesting because I’ve never had to wait for too long for a reply. So I assume they have a lot of automatic tools helping them out in some way.
costumer
I don’t think valve owes the cosplay community squat.
in a serious reply to your point though:
I appreciate their line of thought - why dedicate resources for roles that don’t add value to steam’s development just to engage with every country’s unique bureaucracy? until those countries fine valve for noncompliance it seems like an easy choice to make.
Anyone who has any idea about the german bureaucracy hellscape knows this is far from sufficient to deal with any issue whatsoever.
Maybe that’s contractable.
Does that matter when the bottleneck is this tiny? A single employee would have to contract, stay in contact and approve whatever they outsource. And going by some quirks with the german side of the store their usual response seems to be simply blocking german IPs from accessing whatever may cause extra bureaucratic work for them.
The single full time employee is the lead or manager. They have some number of contractors to work with but aren’t headcount.
Specifically that person probably contracts a law firm to handle the bureaucratic aspect, on an ongoing basis and a support team to handle low level issues.
