Steam Sales Double [Again] in 2011

[Andy Chalk]

Steam Sales Double [Again] in 2011

Steam sales in 2011 more than doubled the mark set in 2010, making it the seventh straight year of 100 percent growth.

Is the ironic "PC gaming is dying" thing still cool? I don't want to appear unhip, so maybe I'll just get right to the point: based on the 2011 "growth data" recently released by Valve, the Steam [http://store.steampowered.com] juggernaut is bigger and badder than ever.

Year-over-year unit sales for 2011 grew by more than 100 percent, the seventh consecutive year of double - not double-digit, but straight-up double - sales growth. Stop and think about that for a moment: exponential sales growth for seven uninterrupted years. That's a hell of an accomplishment.

It's also 780 Petabytes of data delivered to over 40 million accounts from across the globe, five million of whom were logged on simultaneously at one point during the 2011 Holiday Sale. More than 14.5 million copies of Steamworks games, including Skyrim, Modern Warfare 3 and Deus Ex: Human Revolution, were registered in 2011 alone, a 67 percent jump over the previous year, while in-game item trading broke the 19 million mark. Steam now has over 1800 games on offer, including 18 free-to-play releases.

2011 also saw a dramatic upgrade to Steam's service capacity as well as the deployment of a new content delivery system to improve download efficiency. For 2012, Valve head honcho Gabe Newell said users can look forward to the launch of the "Big Picture UI mode, which will allow gamers to experience Steam on large display and in more rooms of the house."


Permalink

 

[gigastar]

And this is why Steam is Valves lisence to print money.

Not Half Life, not Team Fortress 2, not Left 4 Dead, not DOTA 2, but providing a reliable digital distibution service with DRM that satisfies the publishers and developers and doesnt kick users in the metaphorical balls at the same time.

Oh, and the sales. The Steam sales are some of the greatest things ever, for example right now[footnote]At the time of posting[/footnote] the daily deal is the X-Com complete pack at 66% off.

 

[Jaeger_CDN]

Makes me wonder why EA decided to go on their own with Origin and strip a bunch of titles from Steam. Hissy fit or not they must of seen a huge drop in their bottomline when they did that.

I've even logged on to Steam while I was overseas on a Christmas holiday to catch their sales and this year's Christmas sale actually surprised me on the number and discounts on recent releases (Deus Ex, Batman, Skyrim, etc). I managed to pick up a few AAA titles at 50% off that I was prepared to wait a year until they came down in price.

From the amount of uplayed titles in my Steam Account, I likely won't be buying anything for the better part of 2012.

 

[HavoK 09]

so the big picture UI isnt dead after all, thats good to hear i though they just had burried that and pretended that it never existed

 

[Brawndo]

I only purchase from Steam during massive sales, so I'm not sure how much money they really make off of me. I don't think I've ever bought a game on Steam for over $10.

 

[Jaeger_CDN]

From the amount of uplayed titles in my Steam Account, I likely won't be buying anything for the better part of 2012.

Don't kid yourself, you know as well as I that that won't be true xD

Aww c'mon I can wish.

I got games I bought at last years Christmas sale that I haven't even played yet either let alone finished. Between Deux Ex, Arkham City, Dead Island and LA Noire (not to mention Skyrim which I had before Christmas and am playing through), I'm sure I'll have square eyes, bed sores on my arse and no wife left at the end of it (atleast until next Decembers sale).

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Makes me wonder why EA decided to go on their own with Origin

sales in 2011 more than doubled the mark set in 2010, making it the seventh straight year of 100 percent growth.

Revenue decrease US$3.654 billion (FY 2010)[1]
Operating income decrease US$706 million (FY 2010)[1]
Net income decrease US$677 million (FY 2010)[1]
Total assets decrease US$4.646 billion (FY 2010)[1]

I just wonder.

 

[LilithSlave]

Steam now has over 1800 games on offer, including 18 free-to-play releases.

And I already own more than 100 of them.:/

And I don't even like them as developers as I'm not a first person shooter fan and that's all they make.

Even as a console gamer, I not shocked about this happening in the slightest. I welcome it and want to see more titles I like hit the PC and Steam. Steam is the easiest platform to use and access games on in the planet. I can use it on a laptop, a desktop, any computer that I can download and use Steam on safely and successfully. PlayStation Network is nice, heck, I like its library much better than Steam's, but guess what? Steam does have relevant titles I like. And I can use them on a laptop on the go, I can use them on, again, any PC of mine on any ISP. Easy, convenient, reliable.

 

[Ciler]

I wish Microsoft would take a page from this and realize that people actually want good sales. Instead of offering incredibly bad 12 days of Christmas "deals" that are mostly just discounted DLC that no one cares about anymore.

 

[castlewise]

I can't figure out whether to be happy because I like steam, or to be worried that when Valve eventually becomes a public company everything will go to hell.

 

[MrTub]

I just wish that they would upgrade their servers a bit more. I used to be able to download at 10-11Mbyte/s but now I'm lucky if I get up to 1Mbyte/s ... :/

 

[viranimus]

See, look how profitable it is when you legitimize piracy. Now before you go breaking your mouse to hit the quote button to write an aneurysm inducing Wall of text post to "prove me wrong" understand that I already know those points. I accept those points, I look past them in order to see a bigger picture and make an assessment not based in seeing and supporting a more narrow view. Feel free to save yourself the energy because steam is actually worse than piracy as it is infinitely closer to theft than what we consider to be piracy ever will be. Only difference is that Steams form of legitimized piracy places the bulk of the "theft" more on the shoulders of the consumer than the developer. (though the consumers have a choice to buy the same thing cheaper elsewhere in many cases, but for developers especially indie developers they are essentially strong armed into accepting steams virtually monopolistic program as a delivery system or accepting that they will sell a microscopic fraction of what they would otherwise.

Spoiler: Other thought: Irrationality of people and steam sales.

Why do people revere steam for "steam sales"? It is an astounding case example of mass ignorance. Heres the proof. Even during the summer and winter steam sales events, their prices invariably are only equivalent to market averages. Let us look at a random title, though you can do the same thing with the bulk of steams catalog. Well choose LA noire.

Now we will ignore the argument that anti used advocates use that claims from the used games suffer no deterioration like anything else that is sold used, which typically justifies the reduction in price for buying something used. Though it is equally as valid to compare a used copy of a piece of software to a new one because as they say, essentially there is no difference, but I digress, were going to ignore that point in this because were not going to compare the differences between steam versions of a title vs console versions, even though it is valid, its not the point to be made here.

Now Steam sales will typically reduce the cost of a title by 33, 50, 66, 75 or in some extremely rare cases 80% off of the base price for a title. These sales can either come in the form of daily deal, mid week madness, Weekend deal, but the larger of those reductions typically are reserved for the summer and winter sales events. So using our case example of LA noire, and the recent winter sale price, the cost of LA noire was 12.50 USD or 75% off. However, if you look at the comparable game from Amazon.com you can find the digital download version of LA noire the complete edition for the every day low price of 12.49 USD. Any day of the week right now you can get the same game, in essentially the same format on amazon for what you would have had to have wait for the "sale" on steam, and even then, that price was only available for a total of 48 hours (once during the sale, and again on recap day) for 1 cent more, and otherwise the price is 50$

Also remember, you own NOTHING in steam. That totally awesome price you see during the inconv. sales window is not for a product. You dropping your money for a title you see on sale in steam grants you a license, not a product, and with such no rights of ownership are transferred. So, in their discretion for any reason they so chose, steam can block and ban your account, thereby nullifying ever cent you ever paid them on that account leaving you with absolutely nothing, no right to recompense because you agreed in accepting the TOS that you were not getting a product, you were exchanging money for a license of usage that confers absolutely nothing to you as the consumer. So, because you decide to be an ass, stir up trouble on the valve forums and claim that Gabe Newell looks like the fat illegitimate love child of Ellen Degeneres, Joe Walsh and a chicken and provide his personal email address for public view, they can should they so desire ban your account and nullify everything you spent all because you did something they did not like.

This is one reason why physical media is so important in this day and age, and people are ignorantly allowing companies like this to erode ownership rights and the alarming thing is that people are willingly allowing those rights to be eroded because they have been tricked into thinking steams prices are good, and accepting a reduced value for the same product. Thats why comparing a steam version of a game to a console version is insanely relevant because invariably the steam version will have less intrinsic value as it cannot be sold, and is not something you own, and can be taken from you with or without reason or recompense, whereas a used copy of a console title HAS ownership, CAN be resold, and as the anti used people will tell you there is essentially no difference between a new and used copy. Thus it has more intrinsic value than a digital download of the same thing, but typically ends up selling for even less "because it is used"

This is why the whole occupy movement is pointless, the same people protesting that corporations are wrongly using their power to influence government are the ones who are supporting these same sort of corporations by willing conceding their rights to them, or else we would not see valve having a 7 year streak of 100%sales figures. What point is there to protest corporate corruption when you willingly fund that corporation and give them the excess spending clout to manipulate the governmental controls designed to protect the people?

In short, this is really a very saddening news article.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Also remember, you own NOTHING in steam.

I just want to point out regardless of what you think, believe, feel or what should be otherwise when you buy a game you own NOTHING. All you get is a licence to use 1 copy of the game and that is it and if publishers could and are to a degree exercising its control on physical product I you may as be buying from Digital Distribution given the EULA which we should have all read but have agreed to for years.

I highly doubt any of us have ever actually owned a game in our lives.

 

[viranimus]

Also remember, you own NOTHING in steam.

I just want to point out regardless of what you think, believe, feel or what should be otherwise when you buy a game you own NOTHING. All you get is a licence to use 1 copy of the game and that is it and if publishers could and are to a degree exercising its control on physical product I you may as be buying from Digital Distribution given the EULA which we should have all read but have agreed to for years.

I highly doubt any of us have ever actually owned a game in our lives.

Well I have written several games myself and do hold legal trademark on them. However the games are not very good, technically incomplete and I would never set any of them up for distribution. But as for your point, I do get what your trying to drive at. Much like my case the person who made it "owns" the product and is allowed to freely sell it, modify it, or do with it as they see fit, but you are missing the point in that extends only until it is sold.

Your assessment is not only woefully incorrect but dangerously misleading, because that is not what was being discussed. If your statement were true it would be completely illegal to sell physical copies of games and I know no one thinks that is true. However by that logic no one has ever owned a copy a book, print, album or any sort of media

Remember that with physical copies you are not creating an agreement between you and the developer/publisher/distributor via a ToS contract or EULA.



Once someone creates something for the purposes of distribution and copies of it are made, it is 100% without question completely possible to OWN one of the distribution copies. Using my earlier analogy of a painter, If a painter creates an image and does so that "prints" are also created from that image and they sell one of the prints, the person who purchased it still holds the right to do with it as they see fit. The painter still "owns" the original, but ownership of the print was transferred as a part of the sale if the print. The person who purchased is free to manipulate it how ever they wish, They might not be able to modify it and resell it as their own, (even though they CAN resell it, they just cannot claim it as their own work) but there is still a level of ownership there that IS (at least was at one time) protected under the law.

Anyone who games in essence has owned a copy of a game and there are definitive levels of protections established for that level of ownership, granting the freedom to buy, sell, trade, use the source files,(again as long as doing so does not infringe on other rights) use it as kindling, or destroy it in any way one sees fit. If you own a PS3, you can buy discs for it and they will run regardless if those discs are new, used or stolen from your neighbor. Your PS3 will not shut down if you contact Sony and call them every name in the book and pray their families die of malaria. It will continue to run and even if by some chance Sony DID take exception, and somehow managed to illegally disable your system, you could still take those discs, purchase a different PS3 and they will still run perfectly fine.

With steam there is no such protection because what you buy on steam are licenses, a completely different entity than a physical game even if the content and code is indistinguishable from each other and they are in no way the same thing as a physical copy. With steam licenses if you use them in any other way than what is intended it puts you in violation of the EULA and as such gives valve the justification to revoke your license, not just for the offending license, but for ALL of your licenses and do so with or without reason or recompense.

THAT is where the problem lies. People do not understand the laws that exist, lack the ability to comprehend the language they are written in and refuse to take responsibility for such. Honestly I think a major reason why something like this is occurring is because our generations are infinitely too far removed from the depression era generation when corporations were pulling the same sort of stunts as they are today and legislation had to be enacted to protect the willfully ignorant from screwing over not only themselves but everyone around them from their decisions that lead to monopolistic corporations in the first place. This is why I find this to be a very sad state of affairs.

 

[Vigormortis]

Seven straight years of DOUBLED growth? Good God, that's practically unheard of in just about any market.

Also...780 Petabytes of transferred data from a single platform? That's quite impressive considering how small Valve actually is.

So why the hell haven't you guys created Half-Life 3 yet?

Anyway, I did contribute to some of that. I now have KOTOR and Terraria, and the latter is too damn addictive. I could never get into Minecraft but Terraria appears to be a different story.

Ah. And here I thought I was alone. I could never get into Minecraft. Partly due, me thinks, to the fact that I'm burned out on sandbox games. Mostly notably Garry's Mod. (what I still consider the epitome of the genre)

But Terraria...I don't know. It's just different. I was gifted it during the Christmas sale, and even then only tried it out of obliged curiosity. Since then, though, I've sunk hours into it. Alone and with friends. I guess it just clicked with me.

so the big picture UI isnt dead after all, thats good to hear i though they just had burried that and pretended that it never existed

I've only heard vague rumblings about it. What is it exactly? Care to enlighten me?

 

[LorienvArden]

Also remember, you own NOTHING in steam.

I just want to point out regardless of what you think, believe, feel or what should be otherwise when you buy a game you own NOTHING. All you get is a licence to use 1 copy of the game and that is it and if publishers could and are to a degree exercising its control on physical product I you may as be buying from Digital Distribution given the EULA which we should have all read but have agreed to for years.

I highly doubt any of us have ever actually owned a game in our lives.

Bullseye, thanks for beating me to the punch here.

Steam itself is quite different from other DRM Systems disguising itself as "digital distribution platforms". You can play offline. You can install it on any machine you want. You can mod and prod your games to your hearts content. No hassle in 90% of all cases. 10% or so might get some problems with freaked out installs constantly updating itself or games downloading themselfs instead of installing from DVD etc.

Unless you speak about the golden age of Games that did not force you to be online for installation, verification, identification and rectal cavity search before you get access, then it makes no bloddy difference weither you bought your game from steam, Ubispy ,EA or Hacktivision. Once the Verification server goes down, you have a 40$ coaster with a fancy image on one side.

edit:
What you describe in your second post is sadly not accurate. While you can own a physical copy of a game, access to said game is only possible if you accept the licensing agreement, which clarifies that you DO NOT OWN THE GAME.PERIOD. You can not resell it (you only have one key and transferring said key is against the EULA). You might not be permitted to alter the game (modification of code / modding ) etc.

OT: The christmas sales this year went totally off the rocker. I would have bought quite a lot of games if I could afford it, but I still got some good deals on DLCs, Chthulu saves the world, Bastion and Recattear ~ around 30? or so and Bastion alone netted in a good 10h of gametime so far.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Also remember, you own NOTHING in steam.

I just want to point out regardless of what you think, believe, feel or what should be otherwise when you buy a game you own NOTHING. All you get is a licence to use 1 copy of the game and that is it and if publishers could and are to a degree exercising its control on physical product I you may as be buying from Digital Distribution given the EULA which we should have all read but have agreed to for years.

I highly doubt any of us have ever actually owned a game in our lives.

Well I have written several games myself and do hold legal trademark on them. However the games are not very good, technically incomplete and I would never set any of them up for distribution. But as for your point, I do get what your trying to drive at. Much like my case the person who made it "owns" the product and is allowed to freely sell it, modify it, or do with it as they see fit, but you are missing the point in that extends only until it is sold.

Your assessment is not only woefully incorrect but dangerously misleading, because that is not what was being discussed. If your statement were true it would be completely illegal to sell physical copies of games and I know no one thinks that is true. However by that logic no one has ever owned a copy a book, print, album or any sort of media

Remember that with physical copies you are not creating an agreement between you and the developer/publisher/distributor via a ToS contract or EULA.



Once someone creates something for the purposes of distribution and copies of it are made, it is 100% without question completely possible to OWN one of the distribution copies. Using my earlier analogy of a painter, If a painter creates an image and does so that "prints" are also created from that image and they sell one of the prints, the person who purchased it still holds the right to do with it as they see fit. The painter still "owns" the original, but ownership of the print was transferred as a part of the sale if the print. The person who purchased is free to manipulate it how ever they wish, They might not be able to modify it and resell it as their own, (even though they CAN resell it, they just cannot claim it as their own work) but there is still a level of ownership there that IS (at least was at one time) protected under the law.

Anyone who games in essence has owned a copy of a game and there are definitive levels of protections established for that level of ownership, granting the freedom to buy, sell, trade, use the source files,(again as long as doing so does not infringe on other rights) use it as kindling, or destroy it in any way one sees fit. If you own a PS3, you can buy discs for it and they will run regardless if those discs are new, used or stolen from your neighbor. Your PS3 will not shut down if you contact Sony and call them every name in the book and pray their families die of malaria. It will continue to run and even if by some chance Sony DID take exception, and somehow managed to illegally disable your system, you could still take those discs, purchase a different PS3 and they will still run perfectly fine.

With steam there is no such protection because what you buy on steam are licenses, a completely different entity than a physical game even if the content and code is indistinguishable from each other and they are in no way the same thing as a physical copy. With steam licenses if you use them in any other way than what is intended it puts you in violation of the EULA and as such gives valve the justification to revoke your license, not just for the offending license, but for ALL of your licenses and do so with or without reason or recompense.

THAT is where the problem lies. People do not understand the laws that exist, lack the ability to comprehend the language they are written in and refuse to take responsibility for such. Honestly I think a major reason why something like this is occurring is because our generations are infinitely too far removed from the depression era generation when corporations were pulling the same sort of stunts as they are today and legislation had to be enacted to protect the willfully ignorant from screwing over not only themselves but everyone around them from their decisions that lead to monopolistic corporations in the first place. This is why I find this to be a very sad state of affairs.

I never said any of this was right but by buying and using a game you are "agreeing" to the ToS and EULA even though you never signed anything and as I said whether you like it or not or believe otherwise this is the actual unfortunate case. No it is different for books and etc as they do not have these agreements. Did you ever have a PS1? Well if you did you remember the now iconic load up screens when you start your console in them it states you are not within your rights to lend or borrow games without permission. Did people do it? Of course they did there is no use being niave but it was breaking an agreement with them that was never truly made.

Now that no one has called them up on these bullshit agreements over the years they actually exist with people actually agreeing to them through updates on consoles. Sad but true. If you have ever gamed on PC everytime you install a game you do and if pubs could get this in your face on consoles you can bet your keyboard they would.

I never once said this was legal or even protected under the law in anyway now did I? Stop making assumptions that I genuinely believe this is right and am a Defender of these agreements. You are under the impression that companies see these copies as otherwise which is wrong. Unfortunately wrong due to ToS and EULA and hopefully they never are binding in an actual court of law.

No the problem is not what you perceive it to be the problem is people like you do not actually know what they are buying. Gaming is the only thing where you must buy the product and than agree to all the terms and conditions and has been as such for years but no one has said anything about it. That is a sad truth. Although with the way consoles are going it will come a time when they can enforce this stuff more easily they can already brick your PS 3 or Xbox 360 if they wanted to if you go online. Stuff like online passes is the begining of this.

You know what the bricking of consoles would not be illegal because you have already agreed to it in the ToS with updates what not. As such it is now illegal to put 3rd Party OS on a PS 3 if you have the latest firmware updates as it has since been made illegal so if you put something on it and get it bricked you can't do anything about it. Seriously whip out one of your games and read the manual. I am not joking do it. Either that or find the companies ToS and EULA online and actually read it and see what it says and believe me when I say some of the stuff in it genuinely scares me and I can't believe they have existed in this state for so long. Once again thankfully it would not last in a court of law like an ice cube in a desert(the hot kind of course). Just because you have had this illusion of ownership that is thankfully currently backed by the working legal system doesn't mean it was there in the first place.

That is quite an unfortunate truth but it is true you are actually under the EULA not allowed to lend a game to your friend physical copy or not. Now as I know and everyone knows real laws say otherwise at the moment but all games you buy are only licences.

No the problem is it has always been like this and we have let it stay like this and you know what now they actually have the power to enact it because we have enabled them by laughing at the ToS and EULA and not bothering to get off are fucking lazy ass holes and doing something about such a rigid and unfair thing from existing.