Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community (https://www.overclock.net/forum/)
-   Software News (https://www.overclock.net/forum/226-software-news/)
-   -   [IGN] Report: Steam's 30% Cut Is Actually the Industry Standard (https://www.overclock.net/forum/226-software-news/1734334-ign-report-steams-30-cut-actually-industry-standard.html)

UltraMega 10-07-2019 11:32 PM

[IGN] Report: Steam's 30% Cut Is Actually the Industry Standard
 
Quote:

We reached out to nearly half a dozen sources within the games industry (as well as the game retailers directly) in order to get the actual numbers on what cuts most major retailers take. While many of these sources prefer to remain anonymous, they paint a picture that could be surprising to some players, one where Valve’s now infamous 30% cut isn’t actually out of the norm. In fact, it's pretty much the industry standard.

https://oyster.ignimgs.com/wordpress...ographic-1.png


Source: https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/10...ustry-standard


Pretty interesting article, IGN actually did a little research into this topic.

treetops422 10-08-2019 12:29 AM

Uplay?
Battlnet?
Origin?
GreenManGaming?



Imglidinhere 10-08-2019 01:33 AM

Gotta admit, this is kinda surprising. Good to know Valve isn't as greedy as EGS makes them out to be.

UltraMega 10-08-2019 01:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by treetops422 (Post 28152272)
Uplay?
Battlnet?
Origin?
GreenManGaming?


Uplay only sells Ubisoft games and is owned by Ubisoft.

maltamonk 10-08-2019 01:44 AM

I'm fairly confident once Epic gains more users and becomes standard their cut % will increase.

battlenut 10-08-2019 03:54 AM

But Valve is bad, they take 30%. I remember when people were screaming about this. Now I get to laugh.

ToTheSun! 10-08-2019 04:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by treetops422 (Post 28152272)
Uplay?
Battlnet?
Origin?

All 3 sell their own games exclusively.

Woundingchaney 10-08-2019 04:44 AM

Did anyone actually read the article?

-Not all 30% cuts are created equal either, I’m told. One source explained that although Steam only takes 30%, other fees and deductions mean they are usually collecting closer to 65% on their end, while they say console sales return much closer to the full 70% but are stingier with refunds and the like. Meanwhile, GOG.com also takes a 30% cut, but requires publishers to invoice the site manually for the sales made to actually receive payment, something one source explained was a more time-consuming process than Valve’s regular automatic payouts.

The primary difference here being that Valve operates on an open platform, perhaps one of the last to exist in this scenario. If there was anywhere in the retail industry that we should see an actual challenge to a fee this high it would be in the PC space, yet it exists in large part to one large sized player. The notion that hosting a game sale requires 30% of the sale itself is ridiculous. Literally the only legitimate challenge we have to this is Epics store, yet somehow they are the bad guys here. Everyone is somehow accepting of the notion that hosting a digital transaction requires this tremendous cut of the revenue, yet is up in arms over companies willingly signing exclusivity agreements for a larger portion of the revenue literally generated by the sale of their product.

I dont see how any publisher or developer in the industry can look at these numbers and find them acceptable and given the only legitimate challenge to the "norm" is an aggressive publishing company they seemingly do not. The 30% cut is not new information its simply that the gaming communities are just now taking notice, there has been numerous statements against speaking out against it over the years.

Foxrun 10-08-2019 04:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woundingchaney (Post 28152408)
Did anyone actually read the article?

-Not all 30% cuts are created equal either, I’m told. One source explained that although Steam only takes 30%, other fees and deductions mean they are usually collecting closer to 65% on their end, while they say console sales return much closer to the full 70% but are stingier with refunds and the like. Meanwhile, GOG.com also takes a 30% cut, but requires publishers to invoice the site manually for the sales made to actually receive payment, something one source explained was a more time-consuming process than Valve’s regular automatic payouts.

The primary difference here being that Valve operates on an open platform, perhaps one of the last to exist in this scenario. If there was anywhere in the retail industry that we should see an actual challenge to a fee this high it would be in the PC space, yet it exists in large part to one large sized player. The notion that hosting a game sale requires 30% of the sale itself is ridiculous. Literally the only legitimate challenge we have to this is Epics store, yet somehow they are the bad guys here. Everyone is somehow accepting of the notion that hosting a digital transaction requires this tremendous cut of the revenue, yet is up in arms over companies willingly signing exclusivity agreements for a larger portion of the revenue literally generated by the sale of their product.

I dont see how any publisher or developer in the industry can look at these numbers and find them acceptable and given the only legitimate challenge to the "norm" is an aggressive publishing company they seemingly do not. The 30% cut is not new information its simply that the gaming communities are just now taking notice, there has been numerous statements against speaking out against it over the years.

30% seems reasonable given all of the other features steam offers over damn near every competitor.

Gunderman456 10-08-2019 04:58 AM

Industry standards at 30%? I'm shocked it's not 50/50. Don't make me laugh. So a bunch of scrooge Cyril Sneer types set the industry standards and we must obey?

The smartest thing these companies can do is rent or set up a small server network and sell their own games with a DRM free executable. You download the game and take care to save and back it up somewhere and play it to your heart's content. Even better, go back to selling a boxed game. At least you're spending that 30% on the logistics of the box and not feeding into a soulless enterprise. Heck, it could save jobs and those brick and mortar stores as well.

It's now obvious that the promise of savings from buying digital games never came to fruition because of this parasitic 30%. Go back to boxed games. Oh, for the none hoarders, install the game and throw away the box if you're so inclined.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:28 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.