Yes but they cut off their margins. As Microsoft did.
Steam key is not an advantage. It is a means of retention to keep a seller captive.
A company should be free to sell its game in any way at any price without any restriction coming from one vendor.
Microsoft cut their margins because they didn’t want to get sued.
A company should be free to sell its game in any way at any price without any restriction coming from one vendor.
And that’s exactly what Steam’s agreement is. If you sell on Steam, you can sell your game with or without Steam keys on your own website, you can sell on any competitor’s platform, and you can cancel your game from Steam at any time. There’s no lock in here. You can even add your own DRM or no DRM at all (or use theirs), you can make your game free and only sell additional content through your own website (where you keep all profit), etc. There’s no lock in whatsoever.
The key doesn’t have to go back to steam. Check Humble, plenty of games give you the choice of Epic or GOG, or even directly from the publisher if they have the servers.
Neither does Steam. The dev can sell their game directly, provide a Steam key, or a key for any other store. No lock in, this is merely an option if the dev decides to distribute it that way.
For example, I bought Factorio a little after launch (early 2013), and later got a key for Steam when they released there in 2016. I also bought FTL around launch (2012), but I didn’t have a Steam account because they didn’t yet support my OS (Linux), so I didn’t activate my Steam key until I made my account in late 2013. Some bundles also give you an option on how to get the game, and I’ve activated GOG keys instead when I already had the game on Steam.
Valve doesn’t care how devs sell their game, they only take a cut made through Steam itself. There’s no lock in whatsoever.
Let’s read the license agreement : “Developers retain the right to sell the games through other channels.”
The EU court confirms that the agreement and use of geographic restriction were harmful to competition by object.
A company should be free to sell its game in any way at any price without any restriction coming from one vendor.
People keep bringing this up like it’s some kind of a fact but any time I ask for a source I get no reply. So I’m going to ask again, can you please link the source because I’ve searched for it and I haven’t found it.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
No humor/memes etc…
No affiliate links
No advertising.
No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
No self promotion.
No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
No politics.
Comments.
No personal attacks.
Obey instance rules.
No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc…)
Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Yes but they cut off their margins. As Microsoft did.
Steam key is not an advantage. It is a means of retention to keep a seller captive. A company should be free to sell its game in any way at any price without any restriction coming from one vendor.
Microsoft cut their margins because they didn’t want to get sued.
And that’s exactly what Steam’s agreement is. If you sell on Steam, you can sell your game with or without Steam keys on your own website, you can sell on any competitor’s platform, and you can cancel your game from Steam at any time. There’s no lock in here. You can even add your own DRM or no DRM at all (or use theirs), you can make your game free and only sell additional content through your own website (where you keep all profit), etc. There’s no lock in whatsoever.
No lock with a key bringing you back to steam, with a unique price. Even the music industry doesn’t impose that.
The key doesn’t have to go back to steam. Check Humble, plenty of games give you the choice of Epic or GOG, or even directly from the publisher if they have the servers.
Neither does Steam. The dev can sell their game directly, provide a Steam key, or a key for any other store. No lock in, this is merely an option if the dev decides to distribute it that way.
For example, I bought Factorio a little after launch (early 2013), and later got a key for Steam when they released there in 2016. I also bought FTL around launch (2012), but I didn’t have a Steam account because they didn’t yet support my OS (Linux), so I didn’t activate my Steam key until I made my account in late 2013. Some bundles also give you an option on how to get the game, and I’ve activated GOG keys instead when I already had the game on Steam.
Valve doesn’t care how devs sell their game, they only take a cut made through Steam itself. There’s no lock in whatsoever.
Let’s read the license agreement : “Developers retain the right to sell the games through other channels.” The EU court confirms that the agreement and use of geographic restriction were harmful to competition by object.
People keep bringing this up like it’s some kind of a fact but any time I ask for a source I get no reply. So I’m going to ask again, can you please link the source because I’ve searched for it and I haven’t found it.
And I guess, yet again, no source is provided.
The source is Evian.
The water bottling company?