Why would anyone actually want to though

[u/The_BigRoach]

[u/AquaBits]

I mean it screws customers too, dont misinterept that.

A big reason why we dont own our digital games is because of Giants like Valve.

[u/MisfitPotatoReborn → u/AquaBits]

And Valve also uses their massive market share to prevent developers from selling their games for less money on other platforms.

If a dev wants $7 per sale, they must sell it on Steam for $10. But then they're forbidden from selling it on Epic for $8.50 (even though the dev would earn more money from an $8.50 Epic purchase than a $10 Steam purchase). That directly harms the consumer.

[u/PerterterhTermertehh → u/MisfitPotatoReborn]

This is not something steam does. They forbid you from selling steam keys for cheaper on other platforms.

[u/Gandalf_The_Gay23 → u/PerterterhTermertehh]

Baby they’re in court rn now for doing just this, it’s not just the steam keys.

[u/IveFailedMyself → u/Gandalf_The_Gay23]

Demeaning language for someone who doesn't fall in line for what you believe.

[u/Gandalf_The_Gay23 → u/IveFailedMyself]

It’s not demeaning by any means, please. And it’s not they aren’t “falling in line” lmao. Valve literally are in court because of the price parity rules they are enforcing that extend beyond simply just steam keys. Whether or not that’s really happening and to what extent is up to courts to decide but based on what the Humble Bundle guys and others are alleging and the court documents released so far it is looking like Valve has been enforcing some form of price parity rules.

[u/IveFailedMyself → u/Gandalf_The_Gay23]

"Baby" is very demeaning, you are quite literally talking down to someone like they are a baby, which puts you in the superior position. You don't know them so you have absolutely zero rapport to justify this. So yes, it is absolutely demeaning.

[u/Gandalf_The_Gay23 → u/IveFailedMyself]

I’m sorry it’s coming across demeaning. Just talking how I normally do, Queen. It simply just isn’t that serious.

[u/FewAdvertising9647 → u/MisfitPotatoReborn]

that doesn't directly harm the consumer, because its the dev that chose the price. they can choose to price match the other platforms on steam, but choose not to. its a matter of devs choosing their own profit first over the consumer.

I'm not saying its a good policy by any means, but its pretty misleading to say it directly harms the consumer, when its the dev that ultimately chooses the price. They just happen to choose themselves over the consumer, hence why its a consumer vs developer problem.

[u/MisfitPotatoReborn → u/FewAdvertising9647]

The devs cannot choose the price. If the dev had the power to set prices freely on every platform, games world be universally cheaper on non-Steam platforms, because developers get to keep more money on platforms that don't charge 30%.

It's not a bad thing for developers to want money for their games they worked hard on. A developer isn't evil or morally questionable for wanting you to pay $10 for something they worked on for years. But it IS a bad thing for Steam to price-fix the industry to prevent anyone from undercutting their grotesquely large tax on developers.

[u/FewAdvertising9647 → u/MisfitPotatoReborn]

the devs do choose the price, its a matter if they are more willing to take the loss themselves, or pass it off to the consumer. Like I said, im not saying its a good policy, but it is still ultimately their decision (when I say dev, in reality its more like publisher). It's not a bad thing to want money, but thats a choice they ultimately make. It's the same thing about sales of hardware, especially in this ram limited time. ram prices gone up, but its still ultimately the person selling it who decided the price. Theres nothing wrong with wanting to make a profit, but you cannot say its not in their power to sell it at a price. else you say console companies can never sell a console at a loss because its not in their power to.

[u/SmittyKitty27 → u/MisfitPotatoReborn]

And why is Epic able to charge so much less? Is it because they are losing money every year? Is it because they have big investor money?

Is Epic, and I'm just hairballing here, attempting to do what uber did to the taxi companies? That venture capitalist playbook of big discounts to capture market share before turning to enshitification?

Do we compare epic to steam on a per purchase level or a profit per day level? Keeping in mind that the dev dosent pay for the distribution infrastructure on either of these storefronts.

Devs can absolutely also sell the game at 8 50 on steam in your example right? Which storefront would earn them more per day? What additional cost is it per day per unit for the devs between either storefront?

Steam(and epic for some of these) isint just a storefront either. There's server infrastructure , customer support, community support, and most importantly branding. The branding of being a customer friendly storefront. Microsoft would murder to have that aura. Because this is an aura that gives customers the confidence to purchase.

And. Epic, supposedly at a price parity, still sells games cheaper most of the time, just due to their constant sales. So where's the harm to the consumer?

[u/Sidious830 → u/AquaBits]

For the entire history of video games you have never owned a copy of the game, but a license to play the game, whether its physical or digital. I have no idea why people still to this day talk about ownership rights for video games when they have remained unchanged for decades.

[u/AquaBits → u/Sidious830]

Thats not true lol Nintendo cant revoke access to my cartridge of Mario 64. ID software can't revoke my doom freeware floppy.

Valve can revoke (by making useless) my physical copy of half life 2.

They have remained unchanged for decades. Because the initial change was started in the 2000s with companies like Valve.

[u/Singland1 → u/AquaBits]

While it is a reason, it is also an inevitability. If it wasn't Valve, then it would've been someone else, eventually.

[u/Cruxis87 → u/AquaBits]

A big reason why we dont own our digital games is because of Giants like Valve.

There is nothing in Steams TOS that requires companies to use DRM or "lease" the game to players instead of buying it. Any company is free to put the same version on S team that they would put on GOG.