this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2023
749 points (90.3% liked)

Games

16828 readers
1351 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. 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.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The reason it's the same price on Steam and Epic is that Steam prevents the sale on their platform if the game is sold for cheaper on other platforms...

I would also gladly increase the developer's profit instead of the platform's profit if the price is the same on both as I don't use all the extra crap that Steam comes with...

[–] EveningNewbs@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Games that are Epic exclusive aren't cheaper either. This is a nonsense argument.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Oh if you're talking about exclusives then pricing is all over the place because they have exclusive in all categories (AAA to indie)...

There's also more than them in the balance to determine the price at which games sell, 2K games won't sell the new Borderlands for 60$ while other AAA titles are selling for 70$, they still need to maximise profit and if the market has determined that 70$ is a fair price then so be it.

Anyway I don't understand why you wouldn't want the devs to make more money so they're able to produce more games instead of the launcher company making more money so they can develop "trading cards" as a way to make even more money.

[–] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do you have a source for that claim that doesn’t reference the sale of Steam keys specifically?

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Your best sources are a tweet by a competitor and a 2.5 year old lawsuit filed because of that tweet? Excuse me for maintaining my skepticism.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 2 points 1 year ago

Yes, that's much more credible - thank you for sharing that. This part in particular is concerning:

The ruling makes particular note of "a Steam account manager [who] informed Plaintiff Wolfire that 'it would delist any games available for sale at a lower price elsewhere, whether or not using Steam keys [emphasis in original complaint].'" The amended suit also alleges that "this experience is not unique to Wolfire," which could factor into the developer's proposed class-action complaint.

I wasn't able to find any instances of Steam actually de-listing a game because it was listed cheaper elsewhere, but a credible threat to do so is almost as bad (possibly worse, really, since such a threat hints that Steam might have used other underhanded tactics when dealing with game devs). I wasn't able to find any more recent news on the case, but hopefully we'll learn if the issue was that particular Account Manager + lack of oversight or something more.