MudMan
- 0 Posts
- 150 Comments
It is exactly the same beast. The beasts are the same. It’s the same picture.
I mean, respect to your extremely wrong preferences, friend. Not everybody has the same use case. I’m not too sure who feels the need to come all the way out to do PR for a multibillion dollar corporation specifically on the basis of not being super into playing the stuff they buy from them, but you guys are clearly out there and I hope you are living your best lives. I’m not gonna say the cultish vibes one sometimes gets from the Valve apologia aren’t concerning, but if it works for you it works for you.
For the record, I don’t even dislike Valve. They’re just a gaming first party like any other gaming first party. I buy stuff on Steam just like I buy stuff on PSN. It’s all good. And I do like most of their first party stuff. If they ever decide to get back in the business of actually making games I’ll probably check them out.
Also for the record, I do download and back up everything I buy on GOG. It all goes to the same backup space where I dump my BluRays and my CDs. And I absolutely have purchased most of the 2000+ games I own on GOG through sales, so I don’t know about the value part either. Just today I played a 30 year old game and bought a brand new game from 2024 on GOG, so…
Well, most of these run on Dosbox and you can download DRM free installer packages directly from their website, so there’s that.
But the Linux gaming crowd here keeps telling me how well Lutris and Heroic are supposed to work when I explain to them that I use a Windows handheld while my Steam Deck is gathering dust, so I’ll point them to this next time instead of just telling them those don’t quite do it for me.
All joking aside, yeah, I’d love GOG having a better client overall, including a Linux port, but the quality of the packages and the lack of DRM easily trump that, so still buy these on GOG.
For straight revenue, yeah, that’d be right. Technically everything else is a rounding error. But if Epic was one of those single game unicorns like Riot or Rovio this would not make much sense. The synergies of Unreal with both the movie and theme park buisness for Disney seem like a better fit. I mean, assuming the move makes actual sense, Disney is out there talking about game collaborations and it’s not like it’s the first time they’ve spent money randomly and poorly in the gaming business. I just think the investment would make sense even if Fortnite wasn’t in the mix.
And either way it’s being blown out of proportion by the news because they haven’t even bought the company. 1.5B is what? 10% as much as Tencent owns?
Hah. The framing from normie news is so weird. It’s “bizarrely Disney is investing on Fortnite”, instead of “Disney buys a stake on the people making Unreal, which at this point is like half of their and everybody else’s VFX pipeline”.
I wonder if the gaming news guys will have a better picture or the “Disney Fornite whaaaa?!” angle is what people will take away from this across the board.
Ah, welcome time traveller. Can you take me back to 2008 with you? It was so much nicer there.
Seriously, every multiplayer game I’ve played the last few years has cross-platform play, both them and Sony have been making PC ports for ages and the reason I own a Series X is that it’s quietly the best set-top media player out there, price-to-performance, and a cheap, convenient platform to play games on a TV.
I mean, if this is a prelude to them no longer making hardware I’d be bummed out, but not for those reasons.
No, listen, get with the program. You’re supposed to be very, very mad that a brand is losing its exclusives. You’re also supposed to be very, very mad if any PC storefronts ever fund a game to sell as an exclusive, unless they’re Steam. You’re also never supposed to acknowledge the contradiction.
You’re being a gamer wrong.
I agree that dev to user is best, and I agree that the current greenlight processes for game publishers are pretty busted, no arguments there. I also have bigger issues with the sub model he’s not even mentioning.
In fairness, though, I think for majors with that busted greenlight process the sub model does enable some games to get made that wouldn’t otherwise. Some games just don’t work at full price and just can’t stack up to the major productions but they do get checked out in a sub. For smaller games and devs the sub money can guarantee survival.
But that doesn’t take away that a subscription-dominated market is poorer, the preservation issues or any of the other problems with that being the primary thrust. Tech guys tend to be all-in on things and think they should be THE way because more money is more optimal and if they dominate then that’s more money. In reality for a content ecosystem to thrive a multi-window ecosystem is probably best. Also, I want to buy games I can own, and the less they let me do that the more I want it, so… there’s that.
I’m not sure if you read my comment backwards or you’re just agreeing with it?
Anyway, yeah, I think hte big problem gaming subs have is that unless you have first party ownership over every game in existence you can’t do the Netflix thing of pretending to be selling the only expense you’re ever gonna need. The way games work you engage with them too long and they cycle around too fast, so even if there is a big pool of games they offer it’s just a big fat pit of FOMO and feeling bad for seeing that game you’re mildly interested in come and go without actually having played it. I already have a stressful backlog without adding the pain point of monetizing my not getting around to all the games I’d like to play.
Kinda. This is the exact opposite of that, in that they control the IP and went out to find an external dev with lots of subject matter expertise to make it.
On paper I’d say that’s better than them buying Relic off of Sega, but then Sega fired a bunch of people at Relic this year, like everybody else, so what would have been better is very much up for debate.
I’m not sure who “they” is in this scenario. If it’s Microsoft Games Studios… well, yeah, they’re a publisher. You just described what a publisher is.
I think if we’re talking about their recent publishing strategy they’ve certainly been on a bit of a rut. There’s still some interesting stuff happening with their IP. They got Relic to make a surprsiingly faithful Age of Empires, people do like Microsoft Flight Sim, that type of thing. But still, yeah, they’ve made a lot of purchases and we haven’t seen new games coming out from most of those to justify those purchases, which does speak to a bit of a struggle to find a direction. That Hellblade sequel looks intriguing, but for a publisher with a lot of fully owned studios that has been fighting claims of monopolistic practices for their high profile acquisitions their output from that stable hasn’t picked up pace yet.
I get it, games take forever to make now. That Hellblade game has been marketed for as long as the Xbox Series has, and that came out in 2020. Still, that itself is a problem. If the big oil tanker is hard to steer you have to plan your turns before you get to the icebergs. I do genuinely hope they get it together, though. That’s a lot of talent, IP and potential to let run on idle for too long. Or worse, to fail in the context of a major corporation and stop getting support.
OK, but that’s not how reality works, you’re making up offenses that nobody has committed because you’ve decided a particular brand is “bad” while ignoring actual offenses from brands you like and so have decided are “good”.
So no, I’m gonna have to say your hypotheticals don’t make their offerings any worse (or better) than Microsoft’s or Valve’s. Now, the pricing and lack of content? Yeah, we can talk about those. But those don’t have anything to do with preservation concerns, lack of ownership or content churn, which are all legit issues with all digital distribution and subscriptions.
There are valid criticisms, for sure. I was not in the original thread, though, so I don’t know how willing to address those he is, but it’s a valid point that it’s not an all or nothing proposition. You can point out that subs aren’t overtaking the market in gaming without implying that they should.
I’d be more interesting in debating whether subs are additive or not. I do know of anecdotal mentions of stunted sales on sub-forward releases, but I’d love to see more data about it (and what that means about revenue eventually, too).
But none of that influences the concerns on preservation one way or the other.
Honestly, I don’t think you’re right about the reasons growth has flatlined. I think the sub model just doesn’t fit gaming best. The content just doesn’t work well with the rotating carrousel of new and new-ish games most subscriptions have. I think Nintendo could be onto something, in the way Netflix was early on, in that you may be more willing to pay a fee to just have access to every single game before a certain point and from the beginning of time, but nobody is gonna figure that one out anytime soon.
Sure, it has its uses. So do the subscriptions from Ubisoft or EA, though.
All I’m saying is that the digital distribution outlets that people like and have a good reputation (Game Pass, Steam) still have all the downsides that people love to get mad about in the alternatives they dislike. That doesn’t mean you should refuse to use the ones you like, but you should probably keep an eye on the effects it has on the art form and the industry.
I mean… yeah. Turns out that having models and looking at the actual data and analyzing the market tends to land on lukewarm takes. The hot takes are for the press and the trolls.
FWIW, I don’t have visibility on subscription growth at all, so I’ll have to take his word for it, but none of that sounds unreasonable… except maybe for the fact that the hype may make people make bad moves and double down in ways that are harmful. A degree of fearmongering can be useful, if only as a deterrent.
Admittedly, that’s helped by them doing terribly at selling hardware.
But also, screw gamepass and the subscription model overall. If we’re gonna crap on Ubisoft for their recent foot-in-mouth episode let’s be consistent and call all of it out. I’m cool with this as long as I can keep buying these in boxes.
Both of those things can be true at once. I don’t know how much the marketing is “stupidity”, ideally marketing makes you money. Execs being overpaid is absoutely a thing.
But even if you took those out games would be very expensive to make. When you have hundreds of people working on something for years numbers start to get very high. Scale is a bitch.
If it was all contract work it’d be better, probably. Devs would have representation, like actors or film directors, and they’d sign up for a project at a premium in the understanding that they’re getting paid for the downtime after the project ends.
The kinda shitty part is that everybody is a full time employee but you still get frequent layoffs after projects end. That’s the worst of both worlds, especially in the US where there are basically zero mandatory protections. In places with actual labor regulations it’s… kinda expensive and self-defeating.
It is true that the layoffs get reported but the hires do not, so a lot of devs get rehired fairly quickly or start new projects and studios, so it always seems like there are devs getting kicked to the curb when there’s a baseline of churn and cycling. That said, 2023 has been a very, very, very shitty year for the games industry for a number of reasons. Which sucks, because it’s been a great year for games themselves.
I mean… yeah, retailer gut checks were a major driver for the industry for ages. The entire myth of the videogame crash in the early eighties, blown out of proportion as it is, comes down to retailers having a bad feeling about gaming after Atari. I’m big on preservation and physical media, but don’t downplay the schadenfreude caused by the absolutely toxic videogame retail industry entirely collapsing after digital distribution became a thing. I’ll buy direct to consumer from boutique retailers all day before I go back to buckets of games stolen from little kids and retailers keeping shelf space hostage based on how some rep’s E3’s afterparties went.
That said, those guys really did flood the market with cookie cutter games in a very short time there for a while. There were a LOT of these.
Weirdly, Neverwinter Nights must have done extremely well for how much credit Bioware gives it for redefining the genre, but at the time I remember being frustrated by it. It looked worse than the 2D stuff, the user generated content stuff was fun to mess with it didn’t create the huge endless content mill you’d expect from something like that today.
I should go look up if there’s any data about how commercially successful it really was somewhere. Any pointers?
It means people wanted a way to separate JRPGs from western fantasy RPGs and tabletop or pen-and-paper RPGs.
Off the top of my head I’m struggling to remember if the term caught up per opposition to pen and paper being the default RPG or to JRPG first, because JRPGs didn’t get popular everywhere at once, but CRPGs were big in all Western territories pretty much right away.
You know what? You guys keep making the same argument, I guess I’ll just have to keep giving the same answer.
How many is many? PC Gaming Wiki lists 1000 DRM free games in Steam’s library. That is 2.6% of the service, by their count.
And all you get from those is the ability to rip loose game files, which is not the same as having an installer or a portable installation. GOG will let you download a backup installer of every game on the service. Not the same thing.
I am losing my mind.
Have you guys never even tried any PC storefront that isn’t Steam? And if so, why are you arguing about easily verifable facts? Go check it out, see if it’s for you.
GOG does have a launcher, it’s called GOG Galaxy. It’s… fine to good, depending on what you want to do with it. That will download, install and patch games for you, just like Steam does.
The launcher is optional, though. If you don’t want to use it, you can download installer files from the GOG site or from the launcher itself. Those are yours to store as backups. This also allows you to snapshot earlier patches and do other goo preservation stuff if that’s your thing. Steam has none of those features.
You can either take my word for it or go check it out, but seriously, I’m not lying to you. Why is this an argument every time? Why are there fanboys for digital distribution services? None of this makes sense.
Alright, so you’re telling me I should invest year 2 of a Backblaze sub in having a second NAS set up off-site?
That still pays off pretty quickly.
Alright, look, in all honesty, what you want is to mix and match. I’m not gonna sit here and break down my entire data storage strategy, but you do want multiple solutions in parallel. The point of NAS is that you get mass storage you fully control, so it’s most cost effective for things that are huge and that you want on hand. Like, say, backing up your physical media or your digital purchases. That’s pretty close to good enough, since you probably retain access to your disks or your subscriptions and the NAS acts as a backup anyway.
Sure, despite my UPS protection and data redundancies my NAS could be nuked froom orbit and all of the stuff in it could die. And Google Drive could at some point decide to just poof six months of user data into the ether. What you really want is two separate backup solutions. Just don’t go nuts and acknowledge that your source media is also a copy of your media. This is an expensive rabbit hole. I still wouldn’t pay thousands of dollars a year for somebody else to run my mass storage. It’s more cost effective to keep the huge stuff in a NAS and perhaps a backup in a DAS box somewhere. Unless you’re curating a museum or doing life and death research that’s probably more than enough security for your media files.
I don’t think people get what I’m saying.
On Steam you can back up game files only in the tiny fraction of games that ship with no DRM. Cases where you have to break DRM to make a backup are not “making a backup”. If that’s your standard you may as well just download a cracked copy later.
On GOG you specifically get an option to download a stand-alone installer for every game in the service.
Not the same.
How could I possibly have it backwards? I manually backed up my installers. I don’t even know what you think “having it backwards” means. You think I’m misremembering downloading the installer files and backing them up? You think I did that on Steam and somehow forgot?
No, I don’t have it backwards, that’s how it works. There are terabytes of data on my backup drives to account for it.
Nobody is shilling? This entire post is called “Steam keeps on winning”, sharing a link to an article about how other competitors are becoming less relevant. The shilling is gleeful at this point.
And hey, no, I don’t claim that CDPR is “the holy grail”. You want me to give them crap? I have multiple active grudges. Why is Galaxy so slow when fully packed? Why can’t I cull games imported from integrations if they’re not gonna bother to cache the DB and insist on auditing on load? Why is the browser in their launcher slower than opening their own store on Firefox? Will they ever stop with the surveys about the Discovery view? It’s bad enough that you started inserting ads in the launcher, you don’t need to pester me about it every time I open the thing.
I don’t need GOG to be perfect to tell you Valve isn’t your friend. GOG is, though, actually DRM free. Steam is not. They will let you upload a DRM free game if you want, but they don’t recommend it, they actively want you to use Steamworks, and even when you do that, they recommend you add a second layer of DRM to your game.
That sucks.
They also overmonetize their games aggressively, insist on rather toxic MTX and aggressively crowdsource as many parts of their business as they can, just like any other tech startup.
And they have the most feature-rich launcher, great controller support and it’s cool that they want to safeguard against Windows having a monopoly on PC gaming.
Neither of those big companies is my firend or yours and if they want either of us to sell their product they should pay us for it.
Not misinformation. GOG requires games to be DRM free to sell there, Steam provides first party DRM (being crackable doesn’t make it not DRM) and it actively encourages developers publishing on Steam to double down with more GaaS features and secondary DRM in their instructions to developers.
Why do people feel the need to shill for billionaires? I don’t get it.
I think you’re misunderstanding what sorts of roles a brand, sales, PR and community management teams actually have, beyond… I’m guessing you’re thinking traditional advertising stuff. But also what sort of role they would have under Valve’s extremely opaque strategy.
At the absolute least Valve has a ton of third party relations to handle, which I know for a fact they do because I’ve physically seen the people doing it. So there’s that.
They also run one of the biggest esports organizations in the business, or at least they manage it, which is effectively its own standalone thing on the side. They fully run The International, as far as I can tell, and they at the very least fund and organize the CS majors circuit.
They run one of the world’s biggest digital service platforms, with an absolutely insane amount of third parties involved worldwide. They have comarketing deals all over the place. Every time you see a game show up on a Steam banner somebody had to have a conversation about that, sign deals, source art, get it cleared… it’s a whole mess.
They run everry bit of branding, marketing and community management on Steam. Every sale, every ad, every bit of written copy you see on Steam that is not uploaded directly by a game maker? Somebody made those.
They ship and sell games and hardware. All those Steam Deck OLED reviews and previews you saw? Somebody went and set those up, signed NDAs and embargos, shipped test units, provided review guides, handled questions from the press, got the right info to the right places.
Every campaign, loot box, piece of cosmetics, seasonal event in CS2 or DOTA 2 or any other Valve game? Somebody put those together. Not just the content, the in-store materials, copy, go-to-market plan, the whole deal.
Valve are intentionally obtuse about what they do. They don’t put roles next to names on credits. They don’t put in credits at all, sometimes. They don’t advertise job positions or share what the jobs actually are. They don’t easily provide points of contact or names or have roles or tell anybody what they do or how, with very few exceptions. Because it helps their image. It helps sell that one of the biggest online marketplaces in the world (we’re talking Netflix big. Amazon big) is somehow an upstart of engineers coming up with ideas on the spot. And that is what we call “a carefully cultivated image”.
I absolutely believe that they run lean and flexible. I have no question. But I’d be less suprised to find out that Valve has no cleaning staff than to find they have nobody working on brand, comms or event organization.
Hey! Somebody brought up the “leaked” employee manual, I think I have bingo now.
The guys they have doing dev relations aren’t talking development, they’re talking business.
And just so I’m clear on how you think this works. You believe that Valve sets up what? Five sales a year? Plus the International. Plus coordinating and financing the CS Majors. Plus actually negotiating all the distribution deals for store placement with third parties. Plus shipping multiple hardware and software products, including setting up preview events and sending out review samples. Plus all the press relations for both games and press queries…
…with zero sales/PR/community management staff.
Am I getting that wrong?
Man, messed up as it is to refuse to put proper credits in games, you certainly see how that feeds into their, again, very carefully curated public image.
EDIT: To be clear, it’s hard to know what anybody does at Valve if you don’t work at Valve, or at least routinely with Valve. I’m not gonna stand here and say that all of the guys working on that don’t also… I don’t know go build 3D models or code store features when they’re not doing that. But they absolutely do that. And they absolutely have a PR strategy, which is mostly “shut the hell up, keep the black box a black box”. Again, so much to learn from them about how to handle PR, especially in tech and gaming.
It absolutely does.
I do take issue with the idea that shilling for Valve versus GOG is on the same level, though. CDPR’s entire market valuation is like 20% of Steam’s revenue for one year. Based on best data available CounterStrike loot boxes make more money than all of GOG’s store.
I’m not shilling for GOG. I’m shilling for DRM free stores in general. GOG just happens to be the one that has these EA games, but if you can find what you’re looking for in a different place with a DRM free mandate go for that!