UK Retailers Threaten to Ditch Steam Games
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
[/quote]Amen. You can walk into most places like Game, HMV and Gamestation and expect to find at best one shelf section dedicated to PC games. I hate this idea that Steam becoming a monopoly is such a bad thing - they're providing an excellent service, excellent prices, after-product support and a community built up around it. I can buy a new PC tomorrow and have all my games loaded at the click of a button, along with the save games in some cases.
Long live Steam, I say. If local game retailers stopped selling PC games completely I wouldnt care in the slightest.[/quote]
Well put. At the end of the day at least valve make some of the games they put on steam, and care about making good games as well as giving developers big and small a platform to sell games. There are so many indie games that don't have the cash to get into big retail that steam helps out. If Microsoft and Sony are trying to get steam on consoles as well, then what are the retailers going to do? drown in their own stupidity and short sightedness id imagine.
Long live Steam, I say. If local game retailers stopped selling PC games completely I wouldnt care in the slightest.[/quote]
Well put. At the end of the day at least valve make some of the games they put on steam, and care about making good games as well as giving developers big and small a platform to sell games. There are so many indie games that don't have the cash to get into big retail that steam helps out. If Microsoft and Sony are trying to get steam on consoles as well, then what are the retailers going to do? drown in their own stupidity and short sightedness id imagine.
Very much this.Cousin_IT said:
I love Steam. I buy all my games off of Steam. I still find it very much mad that this community (which is at times so anti-DRM and anti-Monopoly) could argue that Steam holding a monopoly over PC sales is anything other than bad.
Anyone saying that "buying from the retailer should be more attractive then" is missing the point. If I buy Black Ops or something from a retailer, I have to install Steam - ergo, there is no competition. Brick and mortar retailer can give me as good a deal as they want, but Steam still ends up on my system, and I still have to sign in and get presented with the storefront if I want to play my game.
I imagine if you had to sign into Gamestops website to play a game bought at Gamestop - their would be uproar. This... really isn't that different.
EDIT: That's not to say a lot of brick and mortar stores have shocking support for the PC, and it's quite right that improving this service would improve sales. That's not to say that right now it really isn't a level playing field, and that they have no right to grouch about this.
It's not Steams fault that companies are incoporating them as a cheap DRM solution. Show me evidence Steam is twisting anyones arm or using their market share to 800lb Gorilla Steamworks into a game. DEVELOPERS are including Steam and Steam Worksas a simple, effective, and pervasive DRM/PC Trophy Tracking/Multiplayer community system.Snork Maiden said:
Where are all the people bitching about Facebook being the 90% market share social website?
If you want to rectify this, you have to go back to the Developers and the Publishers, and get them to smack down the shekel to create a competing product. And good effing luck, because the more digital distributes there are the more the community splits the less money any one company makes. Theres no incentive for developers or publishers to create their own service despite the nebulous fear Steam may become a Monopoly, which is still illegal under the anti-trustfund acts I believe and if it comes to it Steam can be busted in court. It happened to MICROSOFT, a far more massive 800lb Gorilla, and it can happen to Valve and WILL.
They're not going to stock games that use Steamworks? This won't prevent any further growth of Steam. What it will do is make digital distribution seem like that much more of a favorable way to purchase games.
I /applaud these retailers in their contradictive futility.
Seriously, I think it is wonderful someone is taking a stand against digital distribution, but the method of not stocking... and removing the option to buy a game in a store really only leaves one method for obtaining it.
I appreciate the stand you have made, now if only you had thought about a method of how to do it longer than the fact that you wanted to do it, this might have been effective.
Seriously, I think it is wonderful someone is taking a stand against digital distribution, but the method of not stocking... and removing the option to buy a game in a store really only leaves one method for obtaining it.
I appreciate the stand you have made, now if only you had thought about a method of how to do it longer than the fact that you wanted to do it, this might have been effective.
To be fair, it's unreasonable to expect retailers to charge less for a physical box copy than a digitally distributed game. There is a heck of a lot more involved with a "bricks and mortar" shop.Legion said:
That said, I think there's a limit to how much you can expect customers to pay, and as an Australian I notice they seem to almost always come at a massive premium. Buying off Steam just makes more sense to me. I have never really seen the appeal of physical disks; physical disks scratch, get lost, and take up space that I'd rather leave free for other stuff that I'm more likely to still be using a year from now. Much better that I have the ability to simply download a game when I feel like it, especially if it also gets me a constantly up to date version so I don't have to hunt through spyware infested websites for patches.
You know what? Game stores have been mistreating the PC crowd for years now, so screw 'em. They can complain about lost PC sales when they dedicate an entire wall of their shop to it like they used to, not just a small corner sandwiched between their pre-owned PS3 and DS stock. I mean I understand completely if that's all their sales warrant in store space, but if they sell that badly then they're not exactly losing out on much.
Well, I guess that is why they are only threatening now. If they just straight up said 'no more', it would be different.viranimus said:
Not the the publishers it won't. Steam nets about half of total PC sales. If you give up half of your market, you lost a lot of money.dradiscontact said:
Also, based on financial reports of companies like EA and Activision, the PC market is way, way bigger than they let on.
Here's a quote from the Mysterious Digital Distributor Complainer.
Ultimately, it's a case of man up and develop a competitor to Steamworks. Developers and publishers want an SDK that does matchmaking, server listing, DLC sales, patch distribution and DRM, all for the low price of free. This is what Steamworks provides, and that is why its use is increasing. GfWL tried, but failed, was hated by the community and was expensive for the developers (patching validation costs), and overall lack of Microsoft support. Man up, develop and support a competing system, or shut up when publishers start using Steamworks. At the moment, the only potential competitor is Battle.net (Impulse: Reactor went down with Elemental's failed launch. Will it rise again? Time will tell, but for now it's out of contention) once Activision gets Blizzard to license it out, which they inevitably will, probably before the end of next year.
It's interesting that the last QQ about Steamworks by retailers was shortly after the release of Modern Warfare 2. Now it's shortly after Black Ops' release, and retailers are QQing about Steamworks. I wonder what their responce will be when Call of Duty changes over to Battle.net? Will retailers QQ about Battle.net every time a CoD game is released for the PC?
Spot the problem with his arguement.
Ultimately, it's a case of man up and develop a competitor to Steamworks. Developers and publishers want an SDK that does matchmaking, server listing, DLC sales, patch distribution and DRM, all for the low price of free. This is what Steamworks provides, and that is why its use is increasing. GfWL tried, but failed, was hated by the community and was expensive for the developers (patching validation costs), and overall lack of Microsoft support. Man up, develop and support a competing system, or shut up when publishers start using Steamworks. At the moment, the only potential competitor is Battle.net (Impulse: Reactor went down with Elemental's failed launch. Will it rise again? Time will tell, but for now it's out of contention) once Activision gets Blizzard to license it out, which they inevitably will, probably before the end of next year.
It's interesting that the last QQ about Steamworks by retailers was shortly after the release of Modern Warfare 2. Now it's shortly after Black Ops' release, and retailers are QQing about Steamworks. I wonder what their responce will be when Call of Duty changes over to Battle.net? Will retailers QQ about Battle.net every time a CoD game is released for the PC?
Ah, the sound of change. Precious. Reminds me of the time trains became popular and scientists said that drivring faster than 10 miles per hour would damage your brain.
Needless to say that these scientists all had an interesst in the horse buisness.
Needless to say that these scientists all had an interesst in the horse buisness.
Oh, Steam is brilliant, and right now Valve are lovely too. Don't get me wrong - I love everything about Steam, and I totally agree that brick and mortar chains are just... really poor at selling to the PC platform.TsunamiWombat said:
That doesn't mean they can't ***** and moan. It also doesn't mean that I should be obligated to install Steam to play a game even if I don't buy it through Steam. It's absolutely true that the develpers/publishers are as much to blame as anyone else, but really that just means that pulling those games from shelves is an entirely legitimate strategy by B&M companies - if selling a game helps a competitor, it might be better just not to stock it.
I don't think B&M stores are necessarily the good guys, but that doesn't make their issues with Steam (or this approach against it) any less wrong.
I agree, as it is more expensive for them to run and therefore they need to recoup more money to make a profit. However, they don't do themselves any favours with the way they go about it, especially in the UK. They very rarely have games that aren't currently in the charts and their prices are extremely disproportionate (I saw Gears of War 2 GOTY for almost the exact same price as the standard game second hand in one shop).Dogmeat T Dingo said:
Also in my case, the closest game shop to me is about an hours round trip by car, so it isn't worth it for me unless I am in the area anyway.
fanboyDelusibeta said:
GFWL is doing fine and is growing considerably.
It is hated, but no where near as much as Steam was when it first came around
Patches do not cost a dime on the PC side of things
Microsoft is releasing two PC exclusive titles, while revamping the marketplace, but still isn't supporting it? Okay.
/fanboy
How about you sell the games as cheap as steam or not for full bloody price for once.
That might help sales.
That might help sales.
http://www.game.co.uk/Games/PC-Games-and-Downloads/_/N-1z13fvfZ1z13mn1Z68a/
And that is why Steam has 80% of downloaded games.
Seriously, try to find one game which is cheaper to download than buy physical.
I've found 1 so far.
And that is why Steam has 80% of downloaded games.
Seriously, try to find one game which is cheaper to download than buy physical.
I've found 1 so far.
From my perspective, not stocking Steam games means they will just take off and fly on their own. Steam and other platforms like Direct2Drive are just great ways to keep your monstrously large games.
Heck, the Steam method even makes those huge apps PORTABLE - you can just save the entire Steam dir off to a drive when you need to reformat or change computers, put it back when you're ready, reinstall Steam to that location, and all of your games are still there and working - no download required.
Contrast this to the hours (or days) of reinstalling, redownloading patches and DLC, and restoring your settings, and that's just a better way to roll.
Heck, the Steam method even makes those huge apps PORTABLE - you can just save the entire Steam dir off to a drive when you need to reformat or change computers, put it back when you're ready, reinstall Steam to that location, and all of your games are still there and working - no download required.
Contrast this to the hours (or days) of reinstalling, redownloading patches and DLC, and restoring your settings, and that's just a better way to roll.
Oh well.
Steam's probably better in the long run, and that way, Valve can have more money and thus make more games. Good thing a company like Bungie didn't think Steam up.
Steam's probably better in the long run, and that way, Valve can have more money and thus make more games. Good thing a company like Bungie didn't think Steam up.