BL3 for example. Still 60 dollars even though its cheaper to publish it on EGS. Because all that's happening is the publishers pocketing the extra cash. We're still paying the same price as before.
-
-
Replying to @ReticulatingSp1 @TimSweeneyEpic and
And yes people are angry. Where is the benefit to the people?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TheDORIANGRAE @ReticulatingSp1 and
That’s the crux of the store situation: the benefits of 12/88 start immediately for all devs and pubs who participate. The benefits for gamers take time, as better economics lead to some combination of reinvestment in development, lower prices, and profits.
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @TimSweeneyEpic @TheDORIANGRAE and
Over time, competition between games and between stores leads to a better status quo. But progress is not instant and not even (and we’ve complicated it by launching without full regional pricing support and guidance.)
8 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @TimSweeneyEpic @TheDORIANGRAE and
A better staus quo for whom?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @MrAngryBates @TheDORIANGRAE and
A better status quo for gamers and developers. When the store tax declines, the whole system is rebalanced and the benefits accrue to both.
5 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @TimSweeneyEpic @MrAngryBates and
Honest answer. Why does it seem you have a personal issue with Steam
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @TheDORIANGRAE @MrAngryBates and
I have only goodwill towards the people at Valve. My criticism of the 70/30 business model is simply that digital downloads have grown into a $100 billion annual business with enormous economies of scale, and the savings haven’t been passed on to developers.
5 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @TimSweeneyEpic @TheDORIANGRAE and
What about Sony, MS, Nintendo, Apple, Google, GoG etc.? How in the world the games industry managed to survive their standard 30% share, and even lower shares from physical distribution channels. But only the Steam shares of 30/25/20% are killing them?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MrAngryBates @TheDORIANGRAE and
Console economics are different, because the platform makers often subsidize the hardware and recoup the cost through game sales. If a game developer made their own console, they’d likely do the same, because it’s a sound strategy.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
But the “30% is too high” argument absolutely holds on Android (where we distribute Fortnite directly rather than through Google Play) and iOS (which I have argued should open up.)
-
-
Replying to @TimSweeneyEpic @MrAngryBates and
Wait, you defend consoles because of R&D costs (even though it's AMD that does the hard work these days), but you forget the fact that Google/Apple also have R&D costs? Hell, Apple makes the fastest ARM cores in the market! Why shouldn't PC-based consoles open up as well?
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.