Quoting: GuestFirst, the people who buy it from the start keep on losing their save games, mods, playstyles and have to re-learn how to play the game every few or so updates. It's frustrating even if the game gets somehow better.

This. I honestly avoid buying thier games at release because if this "inevitability".

Honestly, the business practice.... None of that should be happening for a full release; the broken save games, relearning how to play. That's something you'd expect from early access. Not a full release and years later. But then you can't really sell DLC and still claim to be early access with out getting push back from gamers.

It feels to me, I have to wait for patches and buy a bunch of DLC in order to get the "real" game and not something that's incomplete at launch, even if it is a good game at launch, because I know all these changes and DLC are inbound. And because of the inflated cost, I'm not looking to buy at full price, which is less money for them, if I even remember to make the purchase (backlog, etc).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I'm a little confused on boxedwine? I don't think I understand the purpose. Is it like a container so a dev can bundle it and worry about conflicts from a different cpu/kernel?

The game I think makes me more confused. A windows game is using it to emulate a Linux environment to run on windows? What is the benefit? It's all the same package for distribution, so only version to deal with for support?

I'm not trying to sound mean, I'm just confused

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Arten

Quoting: denyasis

Quoting: ArtenThere is one more think. 30% is a misleading. Valve has their cut only if they sell it. But if developer generate key and sell it elsewhere (humble bundle,...) key is free, game has full support of steam store but valve has 0 money from it. So in 30% is also calculated usage of infrastructure for "black passenger" whom did not payed it. Devs did note use this? How it is Valve fault? Devs have this option!

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/04/why-valve-actually-gets-less-than-30-percent-of-steam-game-sales/ [External Link]

I think that's really interesting. Thank you for sharing. I did not know that. Great engagement tool. I assume the idea is to re-capture the consumer once they get back to Steam for the next and subsequent purchases?

I assume it's a great lock-in tool on the sales side too since a key seller doesn't need thier own infastructure, there's no point in investing in a full store/client/distribution system. Hence no full on competition to Steam since they need Steam for thier store?

Edit. Sorry for the double post. Im honestly not sure what I did.

Probably. Or they just want expand comunity. Or Gaben see it as moral thing to do, Valve is not public traded company, so they can do what they want, even if that is clear loss for them, because the did not have shareholders from whole world who want only money (I don't think it is this case, but it is possibility)

That a good point, and a possibility. I'll admit I'm skeptical of that though. Customer Engagement through freebies is pretty common in a variety of tech industries (and others). In this particular arrangement, all roads lead to Steam and it's cheaper to keep a customer than attract a new one. It's likely considered an expenditure, not a loss, to get customers (new and repeat) to come to the store since the idea of to get a net gain with subsequent purchases.

I finally thought of a comparable example overnight. GOG's Connect. Where they'd give you the game if you had the Steam version. Same idea. Take a "loss", to get customers in the store. Again, once you get them engaged as a customer it's cheaper to keep them and is paid for by later purchases.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ArtenThere is one more think. 30% is a misleading. Valve has their cut only if they sell it. But if developer generate key and sell it elsewhere (humble bundle,...) key is free, game has full support of steam store but valve has 0 money from it. So in 30% is also calculated usage of infrastructure for "black passenger" whom did not payed it. Devs did note use this? How it is Valve fault? Devs have this option!

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/04/why-valve-actually-gets-less-than-30-percent-of-steam-game-sales/ [External Link]

I think that's really interesting. Thank you for sharing. I did not know that. Great engagement tool. I assume the idea is to re-capture the consumer once they get back to Steam for the next and subsequent purchases?

I assume it's a great lock-in tool on the sales side too since a key seller doesn't need thier own infastructure, there's no point in investing in a full store/client/distribution system. Hence no full on competition to Steam since they need Steam for thier store?

Edit. Sorry for the double post. Im honestly not sure what I did.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: scaineThat's why these devs, who got thousand plus sales before the algorithm change, suddenly...

Quoting: Purple Library GuyThat thing Scaine is talking about with the algorithm, that's terrible, and very real

While I agree with you, I think it's worth asking if the algo is really the main issue or is it control they have over a games potential success?

Valve basically can pick the winners and losers by what they decide to put on thier store front. Wether they use an algo or not to make those picks seems secondary. Would you agree that is more the core issue?

Valve sometimes uses an algo to put games on the store front. From what I can see they also handpick things as well (thier self promotion is pretty obvious to me). I'm curious how much active manipulation they do to the results beyond thier self promotion. I'm also curious how much extra a publisher or dev has to pay for that service. I'd expect it's the type of service that's only offered to certain clients.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Steam is the Amazon of PC games.

Quoting: GuestThat's not the whole story of the lawsuit though. It's not just about a 30% cut, it's also about if you want to sell on Steam and another store, then Valve are (allegedly) forcing certain conditions related to using the other store. That puts a different perspective on the matter - it is (allegedly) using the market share of Steam to keep other stores from offering better prices.

I would imagine, this, if true, is the crux of the issue. I know of what I assume are other "non compete" clauses in other industries, but most I've heard of are smaller, face to face businesses (like doctor's and such).

Quoting: kuhpunktYou can't force being popular. No algorithm in the world can change that.

Fun fact, you can do that actually, to some extent. The best name I've seen for it it the "Brain Dead Megaphone" but I'm sure there's better one from the marketing world. It's not complicated in theory, but not easy in practice. Luckily, Valve is in a rather unique position to actually be able to do it with minimal effort. Most examples I've read about are political or marketing, so I think the premise fits:

Presume popularity = communication (how much is talked about, mentions, if you will)
The idea of that you saturate the "media" with that message. Eventually, because it's every where, other people start talking about the message. It's a natural effect of it being "in your face" all the time.

A more practical example would be Valves game Artifact. They put it on everyone's steam page. Even have it that announcement window. For days. Every time you open steam. Valve has the shear numbers to get a large number of people to engage with ita, start talking about it and then you see it on gaming websites (most likely coupled with a Press release). And we can see the result. Fairly high player counts which causes it to remain on the charts for some time (possibly further increasing counts). Now obviously, we know the counts fell off a cliff, but popular doesn't have to be forever. Most fads aren't. Remember Pogs?

Another example is from another store. I really believe you cannot find a single webpage on GOGs domain that doesn't have CP2077 on it. Similar saturation idea. By my understanding, also fairly good sales?

These are fairly easy examples, as both outfits have a lot of resources and eyeballs to achieve this effect pretty easily. Almost in a unique way as they reach millions rather effortlessly due to thier market position. It's much harder for a smaller outfit (think like a more traditional PR blitz) because the ability to grab eyeballs is more limited.

They key here is that it is forced, as opposed to other things, like the Among Us craze, which, as far as I understand, was mostly "word of mouth" via streamers and social media. Similar function, the reputation, seeing it everywhere. Just a different genesis; more organic.

--source: I was forced long ago to take a cooperate organization and messaging class... 10 weeks... I'm glad I finally got to use it... Thanks for letting me sound smart!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Luke_NukemI remember buying this on release because a linux port was promised.. that was what, 6 years ago? More?

This came out in 2004/5-ish? It was the first to go full 3D IIRC.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

From the description I think of Arcanum.
I might keep an eye on it. I really like the premise.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEPThat... does look improved, sure, but not like a 70GB game.

I'm a little curious about that too, especially with the reported high FPS reported in the article. I imagine the size might relate to the sheer number of assets?

I'm also curious about the gameplay. How is the balance? Are there still non historical/fantasy units like in the original? How is the enemy tactical AI?

This might be my one exception to purchasing a game this year, so I'm really curious as to some of the improvements and your alls thoughts on it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I think, for me, the compelling part of GOG is the DRM free nature. When they go out of business (and they will), I'll still have playable games. When Steam goes out of business (and they will), I have no garuntee that the games I paid to play, I will be able to play.

I've been burned by other stores closing in the past, so I'm a little wary in that regard.

I still use both services and find them acceptable. Steam is very easy to use which I like. GOG lets me have control, which I also like.

Besides to be fair, what other stores are there? Everything else I can think of is either a key-reseller or novelty.

Quoting: CatKillerand one could overclock one's computer with a pencil

Hehe, takes me back. Good old Athalons. Wow I don't even remember how to spell it, been so long. Thanks for that, and for sharing your perspective. And thank you Purple Library Guy for your thoughts as well.

View this comment - View article - View full comments