They really put the Streisand effect to good use here, huh? Nichegamers screenshot showed 9,000ish followers and they’re at 87,000 at the time of this comment.
Not gonna lie. It sounds like Sweet Baby should be putting their name on things they work on. Their reputation should reflect their body of work. If their poor writing is the reason people are disappointed in games, then people have a right to know. The problem is that it sounds like what they actually do isn’t writing, it’s some sort of EO QC. From what I have been able to find online, it seems like they get hired by game developers to sanitize games in a way that would appear (to some people) to be inclusive ways. However, just because you’re not a fan of their choice to make a male character female or vice versa, doesn’t necessarily mean you’re a bigot. This sounds like the same sort of thing WoTC is doing with their own IP by trying to change Drow etc. I don’t agree that Drow are problematic.
I don’t intend to spend money on new IP made products that seem to want to change lore and such with the intent of “being more inclusive” or less problematic.
Specifically because I feel like this wasn’t a conversation people were having until some people who are not negatively effected by the black = evil stereotype in media have all the sudden decided to white knight a movement against it in the most ham fisted way possible and it’s often pretty insulting.
I have said repeatedly that inclusivity works when the differences aren’t highlighted and there is a successful and not forced way to make that a part of most media, but making it the singular feature of a character in any media (that their existence is there just to fill a quota) is just tokenism.
They also write. But regardless of what they do, it doesn’t directly go into the game. Developers still gave the final say. A lot of gamers are missing this. But if I was a game developer I wouldn’t want to work with a consultancy company created by a racist/sexist. Hopefully the company makes changes or developers choose a better firm.
Looking at the curator list, whatever the intent, it’s actually a very handy list of titles with mid to astoundingly poor writing, a lot of which apparently even SBI seems to disown, since they’re not on their website (but they are credited by the games themselves).
So yeah, I don’t think I need it cause I already didn’t waste my money on any of those on their own merits, but it’s funny to see there’s a common thread.
They worked on the writing of quite a few famous things, and surprisingly, they made one niche full game themselves that I have played, one of the playdate’s initial games.
Yeah, that curator’s crusade against them doesn’t smell too good, very gamergate-y. That said the call to flag the curator en masse could get them in trouble. Probably not the right solution.
Yeah, that curator’s crusade against them doesn’t smell too good
All they want to do is boycott games made by Sweet Baby. Let them. They’re not trying to get the games removed from stores, or stopping people from buying them. Hell pro-Sweet Baby people can use the list to know that games do buy.
I’ve seen their discussion board. So yeah, intent counts too, and I’d advise anyone who may want to join/use that group to carefully consider why it was made.
you are very predictable. how can you be this predictable. they're terrible people because you don't like what they say. that does not make terrible people that means they disagree with you. that seems very childish. it just seems you cant handle people disagreeing with you.
They’re terrible people because they use transphobic slurs out of nowhere and label anything they don’t like “woke”. Only took reading a dozen messages to get to that point. Also, welcome to the block list.
A curation page is made to inform users if Sweet Baby worked a game or not. Sweet Baby employees started to harass (mass flag campaign) the curation page and it’s maker.
You know how most people never heard of this company or care that it exists? My understanding is that they consult on games to make them more inclusive. So you have a gay character written into a game, perhaps the result of this company's contributions or perhaps not, and then a bunch of people complain that Sweet Baby made the game woke or some nonsense. How did I hear of this? Steam forums became a cesspool for people crying about this company. If Suicide Squad bombs, it's because they consulted with Sweet Baby and went woke. Indiana Jones maybe features a woman in the trailer who looks like more than a damsel in distress? Sweet Baby's doing.
its curation list of games that sweet baby has worked on. this is made more difficult because sweet baby never makes there own game. because they consult leech off other peoples games and get payed for it. and that the work they do is shit and is associated with bad games so nobody wants to buy them. but as said above its not always easy to find out on what game they worked.
that’s the whole point you make it before you buy because you cant always tell on what game they worked because they don’t make the game.
But why should I care so much if this company was involved in a game? If the game is bad the reviews will reflect that, I don’t see the reason for checking an extra source to see if this company was involved or not. Let the games stand on their own.
im not the one calling people names am i. you seem to be the one wanting to rile people up. who are you kidding if it was really that boring you would not have replied in the first place.
Apparently they don’t like Sweet Baby’s focus on “promoting inclusivity”, so just some bigot getting their panties on a twist that the “out-group” is being treated with a basic level of human dignity. They then spent a bunch of time and effort to let the world know they think inclusivity is bad.
yes of course because inclusivity always just means inclusivity and not that you want to shove your political agenda into places where it does not belong. games have always been inclusive sweet baby are essentially just sensitivity readers for games. and by that totally missing the point of what games are. showing they should have nothing to do with video games in the first place. nobody said inclusively is bad. what is bad is using inclusively as shield for your own politics. and its also bad to mischaracterize what the argument is really about.
and not that you want to shove your political agenda into places where it does not belong
Do you have any direct examples instead of just names of games (screenshots, quotes, etc)? What specific"political agenda" is being pushed, and is this falling into the pit of “everything is politics, but this is politics I don’t like?”
games have always been inclusive
That’s just a lie. It’s always telling when on Steam discussion pages I see people complaining that they can’t customize their character and to play a certain class they have to be female or a minority, as if for 99% of games the protagonist doesn’t have to be a white male. “I feel included so it’s inclusive.”
its also bad to mischaracterize what the argument is really about.
When trying to get a direct answer as to what the argument is really about is like pulling teeth, then people are going to misunderstand. Even in your post you’ve provided no sources to show that Sweet Baby lowers the quality of games, but you *do" complain about inclusivity. So the only “fact” that I can actually pull away from your post is that you don’t like them because of their focus on inclusivity. You say it’s because it makes the games worse, but you have shown no evidence of that.
i have as much examples as you have examples of just saying inclusivity is good means its actually good. its a stupid tactic and i don't appreciate it. keep your debate tactics to yourself. talk like a normal person im not in a plant debate with you. if you really want sources use some yourself first but we all know that would just be stupid in a comment section.
inclusively does not just mean that you can create a character that looks like you that's very superficial it also means that everybody can appreciate a story and like it because its a good story and has good characters no matter what race minority status or sexuality. if you need to focus on superficial characteristics your doing wrong
like i already said sweet baby does never make there own games they leech of other peoples games and get payed for it. people are making educated guesses from what the company says and what the people who work there say. they create the problem that they are the Solution to. they focus on representation as business model and they represent it in the most superficial performative hollow fake way this will never help anybody actually have good story's in games it just helps sweet baby make money by riding the wave of fake performative hollow inclusivity
if you really want sources use some yourself first
“This company does bad work! Everyone needs to avoid anything they’ve work on!”
“Okay… can you give me some examples of their bad work?”
“No! First YOU prove that the work they are trying to do is good!”
How hard you work to deflect the conversation speaks volumes towards what the real issue is here.
I tried going to the Sweet Baby Inc detected page to see what the actual issue is but nothing is explained. Just a list of games and the comment “SBI worked on this.”
Why should I care? It’s never explained. You say they do bad work, and when I ask for an example you give a long winded no. For someone who feels so passionately about them being bad you are very reluctant to actually back up your claims.
You are upset that I “mischaracterize[d] what the argument is really about” but it is impossible to find any direct statements as to what the argument is really about. Any clear statements of the curation page would help prevent “mischaracterization”, but people are twisting themselves in knots in order to not make direct statements.
I have no strong opinions about SBI, I could be convinced that they are bad and best avoided, but nobody wants to present any actual arguments no matter how much people ask. Makes it really sound like a group of people too afraid to say the quiet part out loud because it wouldn’t be acceptable.
sweet baby does never make there own games they leech of other peoples games and get payed for it.
You mean games hire them for a service? Lots of games do that. I’ve yet to see any example of the service they provide being bad.
for someone complaining about deflecting the conversation you sure do know how to deflect the conversation. i m not going to repeat myself on what the issue is.
a service that should not exist and that makes games worse. if you want proof maybe ask if you can see the scripts they wrote for the games they worked on. maybe you can show us sources and proof. because you really like sources and proof. and your not using this at all as a distraction from the point . and the point is that sweet baby is shit company that does shit work that makes games worse. if you just want to say its a company that promotes inclusion that's your problem not mine. but that would be missing the point.
i m not going to repeat myself on what the issue is.
Seems like it would have been trivial to copy past if it had already been made clear.
maybe you can show us sources and proof
Of what? That nobody is making a clear statement as to what the issue is with SBI? Okay, here’s one source that implies SBI is bad but gives no reasons as to why: …steampowered.com/…/44858017-Sweet-Baby-Inc-detec…
I am not arguing that SBI is good, I’m trying to get a clear argument as to why SBI is bad and keep hitting brick walls. I don’t know what type of “source” you expect for that other than gestures broadly at the comments.
and the point is that sweet baby is shit company that does shit work that makes games worse
There’s lots of shit companies that make shit games. I don’t need a curated list of shit games do be able to avoid them, I can look at reviews and even get a refund through Steam. What makes SBI special such that reviews and refunds are insufficient to be able to avoid poor quality games?
Seems like it would have been trivia to read comments that are already posted. see i can do that to.
you hit brick walls because you want to hit brick walls. ignorance is bliss and all that.
I have. All I’ve seen are deflections, and vague statements that the company does bad work with nothing to back it up or to clarify why their work specifically requires a curated list instead of just reading reviews and avoiding poor quality games.
you are doing this purpose now. you keep asking me to repeat myself im not going to. i can already see you will just pick and choose what i said. if you just ignore what i say then what is the fucking point but it was fun maybe just a bit repetitive.
I keep asking you to make a clear direct statement which you are purposely refusing to do. So that just leaves me to guess at what that reason could possibly be that you don’t want to say it out loud.
what is the fucking point
If you’re not going to say anything then what is the fucking point of replying? It would take just as much effort to “repeat yourself” and prove my questions are as disingenuous as you claim.
i have said it its in the fucking comments you just need to read like i already told you. even now you are making me repeat myself. you could have already read it by now if you just read the comments like any normal person would. that's what they are there for. that's why i said your questions are disingenuous.
if you want to go so far in repetition just so you don't need to read that sweet baby is a superficial performative hollow fake company that is your problem my dude.
i have said it its in the fucking comments you just need to read like i already told you.
And, to repeat myself: I have. All I’ve seen are deflections, and vague statements that the company does bad work with nothing to back it up or to clarify why their work specifically requires a curated list instead of just reading reviews and avoiding poor quality games. (see how easy that was to copy and paste?)
sweet baby is a superficial performative hollow fake company
So what is the need for the curated list? If the company doesn’t do anything useful that’s on developers to not use them. If the company makes games bad that’s what reviews are for and I won’t buy games that are bad, I don’t need to cross reference my purchases with a 3rd party list to avoid poor quality games. If they work on a game that isn’t bad why should I take the advice of this list to not purchase it?
If ignorance is bliss you must be literally the happiest being in all of existence. If you were even a touch smarter you’d be embarrassed enough by this exchange you’re losing to delete your comments, but you’re not.
not as embarrassing as saying someone else should delete there comments because you cant handle words. just the arrogance in thinking that's a good thing to say. maybe talk like a grown up and not a baby that is just funny thank you
That isn’t what I said at all, but I can’t expect you to understand that I suppose. What I actually said was that if you were even slightly smarter you be so embarrassed by them that you’d delete your comments. Not sure why you think I’d want them deleted, the longer they’re here the more embarrassing it is. Or would be, if you weren’t so dense.
Practice some reading comprehension, judging by your comments you should start with Mr Men books, that’ll be about the right level for you.
may dude the implication is that i should delete my comments you just put some window dressing on it. you are telling me what i should do. maybe you need reading comprehension more then i do to know to not talk for people.
That first paragraph is the most cringe inducing thing I’ve ever read. If you had written guttural sounds and whines you’d have sounded less stupid. Go and learn something you embarrassment.
you have not seen much have you. you assume to much and you like to talk for people because you like talking to yourself and make up conversations don't really know if that's good state of mind to have maybe look into that. you seem like someone that's very sensitive someone not made for the internet.
I’m not talking for anyone, so you seem to have gotten a little lost again. It’s ok, go back and re-read, do it slowly and sound the hard words out loud so you can work out what they are. Maybe you’ll extract some of the actual meaning from the word, then you can finally make a comment that actually follows a conversation instead of this weird straw man about someone “not made for the internet.”
And dude, the conversations I’m responding to are literally right there above my comments, where is it you think that stupid line of thought is going? Everyone can see what you said. Are you struggling with object permanence as well?
my dude you are talking for me again and you are sniffing your own farts. being this far up your own ass will never be a good look. you are funny thank you very much i appreciate it.
people should be free to know who worked on the game they buy. If they don’t like sweetbaby’s products, then they are free to not pay money for them. Transparency is good.
It’s not a plugin, and as far as I know it uses publicly available information.
I just don’t understand the use case. So people look for a game they’d like to try, then go and check that list, then go back and purchase the game if it’s not on the list? Why? If they make games bad the reviews will tell you the game is bad.
And it’s perfectly reasonable for people to ask “why don’t you want to buy a game sweetbaby worked on?”
For example: I won’t purchase a game produced by Blizzard. If someone asked me why I wouldn’t evade the question by saying “I am free to do so, that is my choice.” I will happily tell them it’s because of how poorly they treat their employees, and how they actively make games worse to try to squeeze more money out of people. The entire point of a boycott is to inform people why this company should be boycotted.
All this dancing around answering the very simple question of “why do you actively want to avoid purchasing a game SBI worked on” speaks volumes as to how generally unacceptable that reason must be. Makes it look like people are afraid to “say the quiet part of loud.” Why else would they not just answer the question?
True. Just be aware that when someone says “this looks like bigotry,” if the only response they get is “I don’t have to explain myself to you!” That doesn’t make it look less like bigotry.
Any reason at all would have looked better. Or just not replying.
I never said otherwise. I simply said “the reason they don’t want to buy this isn’t because of what the product is, it’s because they are bigots who don’t like the fact that there are people involved who promote inclusivity,” and nobody has presented any alternative reasons.
People can absolutely buy or not buy whatever they want. And when bigots do things because of bigotry I can point out that bigotry when people ask why they are doing those things.
People can absolutely buy or not buy whatever they want. And when bigots do things because of bigotry I can point out that bigotry when people ask why they are doing those things.
There’s all sorts of things I won’t buy and companies I won’t purchase from. When asked why I’m perfectly happy to give my reasons instead of just saying “I don’t have to and you can’t make me!” Repeatedly.
You have been spending a lot of time “not justifying your choices” to other people, when no one has claimed that you have to. So what are you trying to achieve here if not “justify your choices?”
People can absolutely buy or not buy whatever they want. And when bigots do things because of bigotry I can point out that bigotry when people ask why they are doing those things.
I think it’s always reasonable to report bigots playing stupid bigot games. The fact that the Steam Group had to delete every discussion and completely lock their discussion area to maintain compliance with Steam’s policies seems to indicate those reports were warranted.
Racist and sexist remarks are never appropriate. Do you have specific examples you are concerned about? Or are you going to give me some vague “they are the ones saying racist things!!1!” Nonsense with nothing to back it up?
They have been gaining a reputation for poor writing, ‘wheadonesque’ if you know the term. Some lowlights on the game Forspoken that they worked on being a recent funny example. I don’t like them because I do find the writing bad, but some people don’t like them for their politics.
IMO that one works because of how little character each actual character has by design. Dumb jock is dumb and jocky, stoner is stoned, virgin is timid. It’s a play on the lack of real character that mid to low budget horror movies often have.
It’s a great movie but I do find when Wheadon tries to do anything else, it just simmers down to kitchy one-liners that elicit a mild chuckle and nothing else, and that gets old very quickly.
Speaking as a huge fan of firefly, I’m not even gonna pretend that the writing doesn’t have a very specific set of issues, and that cancellation might have saved it from becoming aggressively mid and boring.
If Serenity was more or less the intended ending to the season (specifically revealing the alliance actually created the reapers and are unequivocally villainous) I’m actually happy they didn’t get to put that in the show.
Same for the Shepherd Book backstory comic where he was actually a brown coat double agent in the alliance, because god forbid we have to accept that your enemy isn’t ontologically evil.
But the best criticism I’ve seen of Whedon is that all his dialogue has over time exceedingly forgone character voice in favour of funny quips.
So much of his later production’s quotable lines are almost impossible to attribute correctly just from the lines themselves.
They are contractor writers, if a company is using such services for their games instead of hiring their own staff writers, then they are not that interested in quality.
In a similar lawsuit against Apple, Epic lost on several claims though the game developer convinced a judge that the phone maker should loosen restrictions on payments through its app store.
I don’t like Google (and they deserve an L), but Epic really shouldn’t be given a win either. Pardon my Australian, but Tim Sweeney is cunt with ulterior motives and dreams of buying his way into his own monopoly.
I can’t wait for Google to sue Epic for using their market share to put out their engine for free to add market share and then exert pressure on game developers by having a yearly subscription/seat and royalties.
good luck with that angle, practically “all” creative industry software have a free learning or community edition until you cross certain threshold and they are also all very dominant software, not because there are no competition, but more like existing market share friction. Like asking Maya artist to transition to Blender.
There are also plenty of game engine out there that are free or cheaper, UE4 or UE5 aren’t exactly click 2 buttons and you have a game. (in fact, people spend decent amount of time to trim features/plugins they don’t use/need from the source to cut build time and memory cost for the shipping build.
While epic aren’t the white knight we want, anti competitive practices should be stamped out. It’s come out that Spotify get special terms. How can anyone new compete with them? The cut taken by app stores for what is effectively payment process in most cases is crazy.
They command the power as they have users. However most users don’t choose to be there. They have no choice but to use the app stores. It is technically possible to download from elsewhere, at least on Android, but it gets harder and harder to do so.
Personally, a few years ago I never would have co sidered an android phone without gapps. Now it’s becoming more and more clear that it’s a necessity. More and more tracking. More and more rorting. More fees. More micro transactions. More and more locked down.
Absolutely, this is still much better than Google winning. Here’s to hoping it gives third-party app stores the power to be more than glorified APK downloaders.
care to layout how he buy his way into his own monopoly?
buy exclusives or studio? most big publishers do that.
give free games out? It’s consumer friendly.
drive Valve or other store front out of business? lol
make EGS/EOS so good and free that no one wants to publish on Steam? lol, any advance in that 2 department Steam as platform will respond way before they take foot hold. (EOS voice chat back end does work nicer compare to steam’s one if the game build for it. BUT, many gamers just use discord instead.)
anything I missed?
Epic’s capital is tiny compare to other big publishers.(MS, Sony, Tencent)
buy exclusives or studio? most big publishers do that.
In the case of studios or intellectual property owned by a publisher, you can (unfortunately) expect that to be exclusive to the publisher. When games don’t have the funding to make it past development, taking publishing deals are a necessary evil that often come with similar provisions.
Epic has a habit with inserting itself in projects that don’t need its funding, however. They have a track record of finding indie games that were funded by Kickstarter and offer up a loan in exchange for timed exclusivity to their storefront—backers who already paid for GOG or Steam keys be damned. They even bought out Rocket League and delisted it from Steam, even though it was already published and had been on the platform for years.
I can’t criticize Epic for making their own properties exclusive, but I can absolutely criticize them for being anticompetitive and consumer-unfriendly. Their publishing deals aren’t made in good faith as an investment in the game or future profits, but as a means to remove the consumer’s choice and funnel prospective consumers into their own storefront.
give free games out? It’s consumer friendly.
This is the one thing I will give them credit for, actually. It is an excellent business model for creating growth and getting users invested in their ecosystem, and it doesn’t actually hurt the consumer.
drive Valve or other store front out of business? lol
That would be the goal of a monopoly, yes.
make EGS/EOS so good and free that no one wants to publish on Steam? lol, any advance in that 2 department Steam as platform will respond way before they take foot hold.
Sorry, I’m not sure I understand what you’re getting at with this. Are you saying other storefronts/platforms on PC aren’t free, or that Epic Games Store currently does a better job?
Is run by a CEO who sees astroturfing as a legitimate form of speech, and not manipulative marketing. [Source]
Attempts to gain market share by subverting competitors rather than offering a better product. [Source p. 151]
I’m not saying Steam should be the only platform; competition benefits us as consumers. But Epic is shady, and there’s plenty of evidence to suggest they aren’t doing what they are doing for the good of anybody but themselves. Any action they take needs to be looked at critically and analyzed for long-term consequences.
With their win against Google, it’s entirely within the realm of possibility that they create an Epic Mobile Games Store to siphon a large chunk of the massive and extremely profitable mobile gaming market. It’s better than Google having 100% of it, but you can be pretty sure that they would try everything in their power to pull the ladder up after they climb it.
They even bought out Rocket League and delisted it from Steam, even though it was already published and had been on the platform for years.
As a PSN/Steam launch Rocket League player and still playing. The only thing I don’t like about this decision is that it’s losing the workshop integration since Epic doesn’t have their own implementation. Otherwise I don’t blame them for doing this and it does not affect any “new” players after the F2P switch. Workshop was eventually rectified with community mod for EGS version but I wish there is workshop maps on consoles as well, some of them are really well made, my son love those a lot.
Note, it does not mean I like or approve how they run Rocket League and recent changes. In fact I decided to stop buying anything on RL with recent removal of player trading until they implement new features or improve RL that’s worth my bucks. I’ve paid enough in RL to let me go another 57 years for my share of server cost. (base on my calculation of hosting a server with similar capacity, my numbers might be off but pretty sure I paid more than enough. average around 7090 CAD each year since launch. )
I can’t criticize Epic for making their own properties exclusive
If I buy off Skyrim’s right and have my own store and did the calculator for risk and return, you’d be dame sure I will delist it and only host on my store so I don’t have to pay another store front 30% for the new Alan Wake II engine powered version of Skyrim.
Why buying exclusive deals are everywhere because making profitable games are almost like making correct bet on penny stocks. As a developer I would choose safe income to ensure we can keep going if no one else is willing to offer exclusivity deals. Those deals are really good for indie games especially if they are self-publishing instead of having to split with a stronger backing publisher. This is the part most steam worshiper or people that criticize Epic’s moves don’t get their head around and then threaten to “boycott” their once “loved” projects or developers, call them greedy, and abandon the fans, or backers. I believe some dev even promise to give out steam/gog keys after the exclusive deal expires but still getting shamed to death by accepting such deal. Developers aren’t your personal slaves, they got bills to pay and company to run.
Sorry, I’m not sure I understand what you’re getting at with this. Are you saying other storefronts/platforms on PC aren’t free, or that Epic Games Store currently does a better job?
No, sorry for my failed sarcasm, EGS as storefront are probably worse than EA’s Origin that was retired or Ubisoft’s crazy Uplay. It’s impossible with the current market share and dominance from Steam even if Epic actually put serious resource into making EGS better, and we all know they aren’t. Because any right minded person would put more resource on product that make them money, for Epic it’s Fortnite, for Valve it’s Steam and not [Insert project name] 3. Just like Gabe have his plenty of pet projects, Tim also have his own pet store front and law suits. Rich people do what rich people do.
And, I want to point out, Tencent the venture capital/investment arm and Tencent the publisher is very different entity. Like yeah they have the CCP tie and stuff but the people that runs the venture capital is just similar to any other venture capital, they want their investment make them profit. Compare to say, EA/Activision buying your studio, I’ve heard better things from industry friends. Oh, and they would try to avoid publish that Tencent owns their shares etc to avoid this kinda of finger pointing from internet folks. Even the Tencent venture capital people knows this and suggest keeping acquisition/investment under wrap. Epic is public company so they have to disclose. Wouldn’t it make sense? If you are a venture capital project manager would you:
pick and invest company that have good potential and planning to carry out their project and product then make big bucks in return and racking in your bonus. Less effort more result?
invest and dip your fingers into everything you can using your board voting power thus make future investment collaboration more difficult. And then getting fired because the company complaint in postmortem?
EA/Activision did their thing because they were in the game of owing your IP and then cut you off from your creation. They have long history of doing that and then fuck up the sequels/prequels/reboots, they don’t care since they got what they wanted. EA was doing much better now from what I can hear.
My points and arguments are solely on don’t view Epic as a malicious actor and focus on what changes it can bring to the digital game selling store front. Way too many people just “fuck Epic” and does not see the full picture and place their loyalty with a platform, just like fans of console wars. For example, during the past sale, I bought Witchfire on EGS, bought Cyberpunk on GOG even though I don’t have good experience with Galaxy, almost bought the new Jedi on EA Play but decided against it because Disney doesn’t need more of my money and I should not give in to my StarWars fan itch and buy a so-so product from the reviews I read. I made my purchase decision solely on one simple rule, how can I give the developer more revenue cut from the purchase I made.
I would use EGS, but they don’t support Linux. Additionally they are deliberately building a walled-garden version of NFTs where you exchange “Vbucks” for emotes and skins that can work across UE games, thereby encouraging more devs to use their engine, and more customers to play games on their engine. That feels gross, centralized, and anti-consumer.
Steam lets devs use any engine, and enables players to use any OS via proton. Any DRM or anticheat present is up to the devs. Yeah, I have a library that is centralized on steam, and that’s not ideal, but it doesn’t feel like they’re exploiting that…yet. Epic doesn’t even have market share yet and it already feels like they’re exploiting everything they can.
Valve’s push on Linux is THE reason that Microsoft isn’t forcing Steam, EGS, EA Play, etc, to go through the Windows Store, which would allow msft to take 30% of all their sales. Both Valve and Epic are fighting the same battle, just valve is fighting with innovation and pro consumer options, and epic is fighting in court against the same kinds of walled gardens they’re building.
Valve’s steam provides values to consumer but aren’t entirely “consumer friendly”. Some of their “give ins” are entirely because of competition.
Examples:
self refund and refund window, directly copy EA’s origin.
allow big publisher to negotiate store cut, direct response to Epic’s store cut.
linux push is entirely for steam’s own survival, not a pro-consumer move.
their policy changes on steam reviews over the years.
the Steam UI revamp multiple times and makes discovery pretty messy when they tried to gamify the discovery process. All for easier marketing campaign pushes. (I found it pretty annoying, but I also don’t like the Netflix style on EGS or other store front.)
Valve’s market place and their key/lootbox and cross game drops are among the pioneers just shy of the scummy gacha from the mobile space.
Valve’s policy dictates that you can not sell at lower price on different store front. Ie. a game dev selling on EGS can take off 18% and get the same amount of revenue from the store front, but they can’t price lower because of Valve’s policy. That’s not consumer friendly.
The fact that Valve can just charge 30% even if a developer didn’t use “any” steam feature is simply because they can. And we are all eating the cost cause developers have to factor that in as well.
I don’t think “pro consumer” is mutually exclusive with “because of competition”. In fact, I would say the two necessarily overlap. If a company does something pro consumer that isn’t driven by competition, then it’s just charity, not “capitalistic” at all. The point I’m making is that, Epic often seems to be on the other side: taking actions that are driven by competition, but not good for consumers. As I stated above, the linux push by valve is the same fight that Epic is battling in courts vs Apple and Google; the difference is that consumers benefit from the linux push, whereas mostly just Epic benefits from their court battles (and maybe some other companies).
I don’t think steam refund was driven by EA offering refunds on EA-exclusives. It was in direct response to Early Access titles being posted that were just obvious scams, with no recourse once you’ve purchased the game (maybe you read EA as a motivator somewhere and assumed Electronic Arts rather than Early Access?)
I agree valve could afford to take a smaller cut. I do believe Epic is directly to thank for all the Sony exclusive ports to PC.
linux support is 100% motivated by valve’s business interests, but also, it’s good for consumers
I’d need to know specifics about reviews over the years. I don’t read reviews, but I know they have to make a deliberate effort to prevent review bombing. “Curators” are a waste of everyone’s time.
TBH I feel like the Steam UI changes at a glacier’s pace compared to almost any other UI. It’s really not that different from what it was 20 years ago.
Yeah, the key/lootbox stuff is a valid criticism. I don’t like any digital economy that’s clearly fishing for whales.
AFAIK, steam’s price parity policy only requires that free steam keys not be sold off the platform for less than what they’re sold for on the steam store. Which makes sense, as that would open the door to just freeloading your game on the platform. I could post my game on steam for $1,000,000, never sell any copies through steam, then generate free steam keys, and sell them over on my own site for $30, keeping 100% of the profits. If allowed, every dev would just do that, and no one would ever purchase through steam. But it sounds like their policy would allow for a game to be $50 on steam, and $40 on EGS.
Meanwhile, EGS is constantly signing exclusivity deals on their platform, preventing them from selling on any other platform at all, which is very clearly anti-consumer.
The fact that Valve can just charge 30% even if a developer didn’t use “any” steam feature
The fact that the Valve is facilitating streamlined distribution of the game (and any updates) to thousands, or millions of players at the same time alone means they are already taking advantage of steam’s features. That is a huge amount of bandwidth savings and complexity that the developer just doesn’t have to think about.
And there are other articles that checks for if you can sell at lower price(without temp sales) on EGS, only 5 out of 41 did so. I take it with some handful of salt cause ars didn’t actually list out the games and who is the publisher behind those 5. That’s why I post the first link from a developer’s stand point. We will only know details once the case developed more.
Regarding reviews, it’s like manage or moderate a forum, but it has huge impact if your changes aren’t communicated, I just list this one but if you are more interested you can dig up older/newer changes. Simply put, if it wasn’t through backlash and developers pulling teeth to push some odd changes like this back to a more neutral place. (ie. Early Access Reviews, Product received for free, product refunded tags are all much later than this article.) Steam’s reviews would be something like youtube shorts that I simply skip. Is it better in the end? I don’t know, cause you can still influence how popular a review is by the upvote/found useful from marketing campaign. Extra costs from developer to marketing(and still subject them to exploits), harder to navigate for consumer(like Amazon reviews), it’s really messy and not really consumer/producer friendly.
I put my points in simply because there is a overwhelming “worshiping” of Valve/Steam that make the 30% cut seems justifiable, and distribution for digital good seriously can’t be more expensive than physicals right? you can go check how much average Amazon charges seller even given it’s dominant position as digital market place. Or simply put it this way, youtube/netflix/social bandwidth consumption is bigger than game distributions for average user. It might be a case for triple-As that come at 45G per game but vast majority of games are about 12 hours worth of streaming(<20GB), I’d like Valve simply provide a usage based charge like cloud providers and developers can pick and choose what features they wanted to pay accordingly. 30% cut is not normal just as lootbox is not normal, they did it simply because they can. (as in traditional brick-and-mortar shop like BestBuy charging extras for cables etc, even with Amazon as competitor.)
Sorry if I miss some parts to provide follow ups, simply too tired to focus on stuff. Mark my words, once Gabe passed gamers are gonna have the reckoning coming for them. All my purchases are based on how much money the developers can get at the end. I buy games on store/launcher even if I don’t like them, but if more bucks goes to developer, that’s where I choose to buy. That’s the important part, we buy stuff to support the developer we like/love, not to support the “platform” selling them.
Yeah, I was aware of the case, but I’m confused because it does sound like Valve’s policy only explicitly restricts the sale of free keys for less. Obviously, I’m all for Valve being held accountable if they’re actually requiring the game be the same price on a completely different platform.
I don’t think there’s any difference between “justifiable” and “simply because they can”. If they can, then they can. Yeah, I do support developers, but I’d be lying if I said steam doesn’t add any value to my experience. If it wasn’t 30% worth of value, devs wouldn’t choose it. And I’m all for EGS undercutting them to attract developers, I think that’s the right way to combat it.
If there is any regulation that needs to happen to combat monopolies, then I think it’s the same regulation that needs to happen on all content distribution and streaming platforms, which is: there should be a standard API for accessing content in a cross-platform way so that open source front-ends can be trivially developed. If steam (or netflix, or spotify, or google, or whatever) has established too much power, it’s because they’ve locked their users into their user experience, and it’s inherently inconvenient to have to switch between different platforms and UIs. But if regulation forced a common API, and open source front-ends were developed, people wouldn’t be locked into a specific user experience. You could switch between EGS or Steam or GOG or whoever, and the only thing that would change are the games that show up in your front-end of choice. IMO that’s the real way to solve it.
Whatever the article says, I comprehend why someone would cheer at his departure.
The guy is a good by-the-numbers business person. That will cut on production companies, but not on an entertainment industry so close to the consumer as any other. Just remember who cheered on the PS4 presentation.
You expect decisions to bring more gamers to your platform (Game pass did, success), or transform people into gamers (Wii did, huge success). Not nickel and dime your consumers. Plus, he is the one signs off all decisions.
PS Portal it’s the epitome of this guy. Something no one asked for, that does less than anything on the market, and is closed to its shallow ecosystem, priced way beyond its capabilities, but on paper it looks like selling like hotcakes.
What Sony needs as PS CEO is someone who understand that is a business, but also that all these platinum trophies are not real… but they are.
Michael Eisner once called himself “the last of the creative types in Hollywood” after he left Disney, and I can’t help but see what he meant when he said that when I look at the current American film and TV landscape. It’s like today’s Hollywood bigwigs don’t even understand why people watch TV and movies.
I kinda think this happened to Western video games too (yeah Sony is a Japanese company…but PlayStation has shown a pretty square focus on the Western market in the past 10 years.) From a consumer perspective I don’t think a new CEO is the answer. It wasn’t for Disney’s fans with Bob Chapek.
I dont like Sony and its still good that he’s going.
Shifting Sony to GaaS, way overpaying to acquire Bungie, and his comments on classic games are exactly the people that need to not be in leading positions at companies.
archive.ph
Gorące