Going gold?

[Kikuchiyo]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

And remember, Steam is not putting games out there to download out of the kindness of their hearts.

They take a cut of the action, just like UBI or EA do, so it's possible that a studio might even take in less total income from a Steam release, as they will also, by and large, have a major publisher (UBI, EA, etc...) as well.

The only issue I take with what you are saying is that Steam sales give the company(s) offering games through them a higher margin of profit (estimated 70% vs 30% for retail) so it is technically more profitable to offer your games solely through steam than through Steam and B&M stores. The downside is a developer/publisher potentially misses out box sales. I imagine a devs profits are about the same (when using a second party publisher) when they also offer their games through a DD like Steam.

Urp I see what you were at Vevster and corrected the miswording.

[Vevster]

Originally Posted by Kikuchiyo

The only issue I take with what you are saying is that Steam sales cost the company(s) offering games through them a higher margin of profit (estimated 70% vs 30% for retail) so it is technically more profitable to offer your games solely through steam than through Steam and B&M stores. .

I don't quite understand your first sentence "Steam sales cost the company(s) offering games through them a higher margin of profit "

Do you mean Steam takes a higher cut? That would be exact but contradictory to what you write further


Steam, as a publisher often take a higher % than a retailer. That's because they act both as publisher & retailer for some games. They can take as much as 80% of price for some indie games....They take the risk with infrastructure as a retailer takes the risk with shelf space.

So when you say "it is technically more profitable to offer your games solely through steam than through Steam and B&M stores. " I'll answer "it depends, and sometimes it's quite the opposite". Each case is different; too many parameters to sum up.

Some people do not like DLing games, via Steam or else.

Best thing today is to offer both DL & boxes, gives a broader audience. That's why publishers like Ubi also offer games on steam.

[JG52Krupi]

I never understand why some ppl refuse to use steam, sure I like to have a physical copy and yes they can make mistakes and have to follow silly release dates but the benefits of steam far out weigh any problems I have had with them.

My only negative comments are the prices and the fact you can't decide on which drive you can install games to. However you can get some sweet deals on good games most weekends, if only the price of new games would drop as quickly as they do in shops but I've never seen a used game on steam

[Therion_Prime]

Originally Posted by JG52Krupi

My only negative comments are the prices and the fact you can't decide on which drive you can install games to.

Just move the steam folder to another drive, delete steam.exe reinstall steam into the new location, run steam.exe.

[JG52Krupi]

You can only have one steam install at any time and I want to have il2 on my SSD and keep the other games on my large drive. You can do this with other download clients I.e. Direct2drive

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by JG52Krupi

I never understand why some ppl refuse to use steam, sure I like to have a physical copy and yes they can make mistakes and have to follow silly release dates but the benefits of steam far out weigh any problems I have had with them.

I fall into that camp... and not because I think Steam/ Game Spy, etc, to be dodgy but because I like to run a clean system. Equally, I don't like DRM's which install drivers, even though I never had any noticeable problems with the first LOCKON Starforce DRM, I did find my system ran better after SF was uninstalled. Reporting home factor plays a part as well.
I very rarely have any software conflicts and like to keep things that way

[zauii]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

I fall into that camp... and not because I think Steam/ Game Spy, etc, to be dodgy but because I like to run a clean system. Equally, I don't like DRM's which install drivers, even though I never had any noticeable problems with the first LOCKON Starforce DRM, I did find my system ran better after SF was uninstalled. Reporting home factor plays a part as well.
I very rarely have any software conflicts and like to keep things that way

Its just in your head, steam does not bog performance unless your system has got other issues.
Infact firefox is more of a resource problem than steam if you're using that.

[JG52Krupi]

Originally Posted by zauii

Its just in your head, steam does not bog performance unless your system has got other issues.
Infact firefox is more of a resource problem than steam if you're using that.

+1 chrome ftw

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by zauii

Its just in your head, steam does not bog performance unless your system has got other issues.
Infact firefox is more of a resource problem than steam if you're using that.

nuh, don't use firefox

regardless of "in your head" or not, I gave my reasons.

[JG52Krupi]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

nuh, don't use firefox

regardless of "in your head" or not, I gave my reasons.

One flew over the cuckoos nest we need a lobotomy here's asap