It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionSteam is 'exploiting a lot of small guys', says Gearbox dev(152 posts)(152 posts)
(152 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
This is my favourite topic
Posted October 07, 2009
An interesting article from Gamasutra,
Full version of the interview here.
Pitchford, who co-founded Gearbox in 1999, told Maximum PC in an interview that while he "personally trust[s] Valve," the Seattle-area company is also a development competitor -- and in that capacity, "as a guy in this industry, I don't trust Valve."
"It would be much better if Steam was its own business," the CEO said. "There’s so much conflict of interest there that it’s horrid. It’s actually really, really dangerous for the rest of the industry to allow Valve to win."
In addition to the dangers of a potential monopoly, Pitchford warned that the company is already taking advantage of developers smaller than Gearbox, although he did not provide specific details. "Valve is taking a larger share than it should for the service its providing. It’s exploiting a lot of small guys," he said, adding, "For us big guys, we’re going to sell the units and it will be fine."

Sorry if I made yet-another-steam-bashing thread, but I find this one particularly interesting, especially the 'horrid conflict of interest' part. I wonder what is that...
Posted October 07, 2009
Read this article in MaxPC a while ago, interesting stuff.
They should just spinoff Steam as its own company (like Gamersgate is a spinoff of Paradox), just like he says. I totally agree. Maybe then they'll have better service and support.
Posted October 07, 2009
avatar
Catshade: Sorry if I made yet-another-steam-bashing thread, but I find this one particularly interesting, especially the 'horrid conflict of interest' part. I wonder what is that...

What do you mean you wonder what the conflict of interest is? Valve also makes games, they're not just a store that sells games.
Posted October 07, 2009
avatar
michaelleung: Read this article in MaxPC a while ago, interesting stuff.
They should just spinoff Steam as its own company (like Gamersgate is a spinoff of Paradox), just like he says. I totally agree. Maybe then they'll have better service and support.

I don't understand the intricacies of DD industry, so...what is exactly the difference between Valve:Steam and Paradox:Gamersgate (or Stardock:Impulse, or CDProjekt:GOG)?
Posted October 07, 2009
avatar
Catshade: Sorry if I made yet-another-steam-bashing thread, but I find this one particularly interesting, especially the 'horrid conflict of interest' part. I wonder what is that...
avatar
honorbuddy: What do you mean you wonder what the conflict of interest is? Valve also makes games, they're not just a store that sells games.

But Valve makes games that compete with the games sold on Steam.
Posted October 07, 2009
avatar
honorbuddy: What do you mean you wonder what the conflict of interest is? Valve also makes games, they're not just a store that sells games.
avatar
michaelleung: But Valve makes games that compete with the games sold on Steam.

And that's a fact.
Posted October 07, 2009
avatar
michaelleung: Read this article in MaxPC a while ago, interesting stuff.
They should just spinoff Steam as its own company (like Gamersgate is a spinoff of Paradox), just like he says. I totally agree. Maybe then they'll have better service and support.
avatar
Catshade: I don't understand the intricacies of DD industry, so...what is exactly the difference between Valve:Steam and Paradox:Gamersgate (or Stardock:Impulse, or CDProjekt:GOG)?

CDP/GOG is different, because for starters, games made by CDP aren't on GOG, and since GOG is about OLD games, you're not going to see The Witcher anytime soon. I think that CDP is likely to make their own DD store for modern games, but I might just be making that up.
Posted October 07, 2009
Honestly, as much as I would like to think this guy isn't a jerk, he comes across as a whiner. What has Valve done that compromised Steam in favor of Valve's games? Say what you will about their technical support, DRM model, goat sacrificing, etc. They provide a damned fine service that, if anything, is too hurt by NOT standing up against developers (games with additional DRM).
Is there a conflict of interest? No. A conflict of interest would arise if they refused to patch a game or allow a game on their service. How would that benefit Valve? If they refuse to patch games, people view Steam as being nonfunctional (moreso than they already do). If they refuse to let a game on their service, then that game goes to a competitor, and the community has one less reason to want to run Steam. And you CAN'T play Valve games without Steam.
And before anyone cites the pricing issues: That bones Valve games too, not just EA or Ubi games.
So yeah, I am more interested in seeing how Valve are exploiting people or showing conlict of interest. Seems to me like he is just complaining for one reason or another. Hopefully this doesn't mean that Borderlands is going to flop as bad as Brothers in Arms did. Hopefully he is just bitter that Gearbox hasn't gotten to make a Half-Life for HL2 (which is a shame, since OpFor was freaking awesome).
And now for another fun metaphor: Lots of cops have families. But they are also tasked with protecting families (from "bad guys"). Is it a conflict of interest? Will Office O'Grady not arrest the guy who stole your TV because he has his own family? Nope. Because he benefits from protecting your family too. He won't have a montage that results in an elderly father figure being shot, and that is good for everyone, because nobody wants to see Officer O'Grady in spandex so tight that we can see if he was circumcised.
And as for "It is okay for CD Projekt ", why? Because they don't directly compete with the games on GoG? Well, what makes you say that? When I am looking for a good RPG, I actually do think about which one I want to play. I might play TWEE tonight, but next week I might be more in the mood for something like M&M. Sure I already own them, but they are competing.
And even if we ignore that: The article states that Steam is "exploiting a lot of small guys". Okay. does Valve compete against the "small guys"? Last I checked, Half-Life 2 and L4D target a demographic different than Darwinia or Uplink.
Post edited October 07, 2009 by Gundato
Posted October 07, 2009
avatar
Gundato: Honestly, as much as I would like to think this guy isn't a jerk, he comes across as a whiner. What has Valve done that compromised Steam in favor of Valve's games? Say what you will about their technical support, DRM model, goat sacrificing, etc. They provide a damned fine service that, if anything, is too hurt by NOT standing up against developers (games with additional DRM).
Is there a conflict of interest? No. A conflict of interest would arise if they refused to patch a game or allow a game on their service. How would that benefit Valve? If they refuse to patch games, people view Steam as being nonfunctional (moreso than they already do). If they refuse to let a game on their service, then that game goes to a competitor, and the community has one less reason to want to run Steam. And you CAN'T play Valve games without Steam.
And before anyone cites the pricing issues: That bones Valve games too, not just EA or Ubi games.
So yeah, I am more interested in seeing how Valve are exploiting people or showing conlict of interest. Seems to me like he is just complaining for one reason or another. Hopefully this doesn't mean that Borderlands is going to flop as bad as Brothers in Arms did. Hopefully he is just bitter that Gearbox hasn't gotten to make a Half-Life for HL2 (which is a shame, since OpFor was freaking awesome).
And now for another fun metaphor: Lots of cops have families. But they are also tasked with protecting families (from "bad guys"). Is it a conflict of interest? Will Office O'Grady not arrest the guy who stole your TV because he has his own family? Nope. Because he benefits from protecting your family too. He won't have a montage that results in an elderly father figure being shot, and that is good for everyone, because nobody wants to see Officer O'Grady in spandex so tight that we can see if he was circumcised.
And as for "It is okay for CD Projekt ", why? Because they don't directly compete with the games on GoG? Well, what makes you say that? When I am looking for a good RPG, I actually do think about which one I want to play. I might play TWEE tonight, but next week I might be more in the mood for something like M&M. Sure I already own them, but they are competing.
And even if we ignore that: The article states that Steam is "exploiting a lot of small guys". Okay. does Valve compete against the "small guys"? Last I checked, Half-Life 2 and L4D target a demographic different than Darwinia or Uplink.

Doesn't conflict of interest have nothing to do with whether it happens or not? I thought that it was just 2 opposing interests that conflicted with each other, so regardless of what path the cop or Valve follow, the conflicting interests are still there.
And I took the exploiting the small guy as taking too big a cut from the sale price.
Post edited October 07, 2009 by honorbuddy
Posted October 07, 2009
While there are some problems with steam, it's been a massive boon for the indie/small guy developers.
Can't comment on whether their share is "too big", but without steam most of those small guys wouldn't be selling anything, so it's got to be better than nothing.
Maybe i just missed it, and i'm sure there were lots of indie games out there before steam, but it seems to me that the success of darwinia on steam, which then triggered a lot of other indie games on that service (and other services) was a turning point in the PC industry.
Before that the only games we could (easily) get were from the big publishers, now we can pick up dozens of indie download-only games from obscure russian developers, one-man-bands, etc..
Of course, competition is a good thing and will keep things fair, but from what i've heard Steam accounts for 95% of sales of that kind of game... so it's not like they aren't giving a huge benefit to the developers.
Posted October 07, 2009
avatar
soulgrindr: While there are some problems with steam, it's been a massive boon for the indie/small guy developers.
Can't comment on whether their share is "too big", but without steam most of those small guys wouldn't be selling anything, so it's got to be better than nothing.
Maybe i just missed it, and i'm sure there were lots of indie games out there before steam, but it seems to me that the success of darwinia on steam, which then triggered a lot of other indie games on that service (and other services) was a turning point in the PC industry.
Before that the only games we could (easily) get were from the big publishers, now we can pick up dozens of indie download-only games from obscure russian developers, one-man-bands, etc..
Of course, competition is a good thing and will keep things fair, but from what i've heard Steam accounts for 95% of sales of that kind of game... so it's not like they aren't giving a huge benefit to the developers.

We can't really say how massive the benefits are without figures. A guy who's actually a developer in the industry probably knows a lot more about it than we do. That doesn't mean he's not lying, but just because someone has a contract doesn't mean he's making good money. Or as much money as he used to. It's been pretty standard for publishers to take the majority of money made, whether it be movie distributors, publishing houses, or the record industry. The record industry is pretty notorious for that, but it happens with other publishers too.
Posted October 07, 2009
Catshade: There is no difference, the only one that isn't a game developer out there is http://www.GameStreamer.net which powers http://www.pcgamestore.com and other game stores. They're relatively new though, not up to Steam yet.
Posted October 07, 2009
avatar
soulgrindr: While there are some problems with steam, it's been a massive boon for the indie/small guy developers.
Can't comment on whether their share is "too big", but without steam most of those small guys wouldn't be selling anything, so it's got to be better than nothing.
Maybe i just missed it, and i'm sure there were lots of indie games out there before steam, but it seems to me that the success of darwinia on steam, which then triggered a lot of other indie games on that service (and other services) was a turning point in the PC industry.
Before that the only games we could (easily) get were from the big publishers, now we can pick up dozens of indie download-only games from obscure russian developers, one-man-bands, etc..
Of course, competition is a good thing and will keep things fair, but from what i've heard Steam accounts for 95% of sales of that kind of game... so it's not like they aren't giving a huge benefit to the developers.

Yeah, this seems like a single voice among a significantly larger crowd of developers who love what Steam has done for them. While I'm not the biggest fan of Steam, I have to say I've gotten significantly more indie games through it than I ever did before, simply because it exposed me to them. The biggest hurdle indie games face is expose (you're not likely to find them unless you're actively looking for them), and yet Steam frequently has them on its front page, and has sales promoting them with relative frequency.
Posted October 07, 2009
avatar
Gundato: Honestly, as much as I would like to think this guy isn't a jerk, he comes across as a whiner. What has Valve done that compromised Steam in favor of Valve's games? Say what you will about their technical support, DRM model, goat sacrificing, etc. They provide a damned fine service that, if anything, is too hurt by NOT standing up against developers (games with additional DRM).
Is there a conflict of interest? No. A conflict of interest would arise if they refused to patch a game or allow a game on their service. How would that benefit Valve? If they refuse to patch games, people view Steam as being nonfunctional (moreso than they already do). If they refuse to let a game on their service, then that game goes to a competitor, and the community has one less reason to want to run Steam. And you CAN'T play Valve games without Steam.

Actually just today I noticed Steam pushed out an Pop-up that asked users to vote for Gordon Freeman in the Gamespot competition thing. They only did that for their character, they didn't do it for Duke Nukem or anybody else's character.
Not a huge problem, but you can see what I mean. Valve heavily favors their own games over other games on Steam.
Posted October 07, 2009
avatar
Gundato: And now for another fun metaphor: Lots of cops have families. But they are also tasked with protecting families (from "bad guys"). Is it a conflict of interest? Will Office O'Grady not arrest the guy who stole your TV because he has his own family? Nope. Because he benefits from protecting your family too. He won't have a montage that results in an elderly father figure being shot, and that is good for everyone, because nobody wants to see Officer O'Grady in spandex so tight that we can see if he was circumcised.

While I agree with pretty much everything you've said, your analogy is flawed. There's no conflict of interest there re cops and families. BUT if there were a reason to investigate the cop's family, or if an incident occurred involving the cop's family, then there WOULD be a conflict of interest if that cop worked on the file.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionSteam is 'exploiting a lot of small guys', says Gearbox dev(152 posts)(152 posts)
(152 posts)
Facebook
Twitter
Google +1
YoutubeWatch trailers
RSS FeedSubscribe to news
Help us improve GOG.comRequest Games & Site features
Looking for more?Redeem giftContact usOur thanksWork for us
GOG.com © 2013.Terms of UsePrivacy PolicyCookies