DrQuint, (edited )

but why 30%, why not

To which the response is: I don’t care. I would have paid the same amount of money for games no matter which of the stupid funny numbers you picked out.

The beginning and end of how much one should care is “are the devs happy with it? Is that the standard for digital stores as well?”. And the answer to both is Yes, so the concerns are abated.

If it opens them to driven out of the market by a more generous competitor: Cool. But that alone doesn’t impact me, the costumer. The generous competitor needs to do more. And you know, they know that. That’s why Tim gave me so many free games.

No you wouldn’t.

Immortals of Aveum cost 70 monetary-whatevers and killed its studio and no one commented on it. It would have cost 60 whatevers two years ago and still would have killed its studio. But if they did 70, they would have torpedoed that price point in the news circles as a death sentence. They only had the gall because literally no one dared release a game for 70 till Activision did it and others like Sony and Nintendo followed along.

Steams share has zero impact on my wallet. The market is dictated by things way more arbitrary. Everyone with brain knows this.

  • Wszystkie
  • Subskrybowane
  • Moderowane
  • Ulubione
  • esport
  • Technologia
  • rowery
  • FromSilesiaToPolesia
  • fediversum
  • test1
  • Spoleczenstwo
  • lieratura
  • muzyka
  • sport
  • Blogi
  • Pozytywnie
  • nauka
  • motoryzacja
  • niusy
  • slask
  • informasi
  • Gaming
  • games@sh.itjust.works
  • Psychologia
  • tech
  • giereczkowo
  • ERP
  • krakow
  • antywykop
  • Cyfryzacja
  • zebynieucieklo
  • kino
  • warnersteve
  • Wszystkie magazyny