A forum for discussing and organizing recreational softball and baseball games and leagues in the greater Halifax area.
Gabe Newell caps off Steam Machine week by taking delivery of a new $500 million superyacht with a submarine garage, on-board hospital and 15 gaming PCs
-
I think the underpaying would be not having nearly as many employees as similar sized companies. They could have several divisions producing games while also developing their hardware and software. He has been happy to make changes at a slower pace while their store keeps taking large cuts of each sale.
-
No, I'm explicitly rejecting your point.It can be both, you're rejecting it *because* you fail to understand it. Dude, in a rationally organized world we wouldn't *need* fucking charities, because things would just be funded by reasonable tax structures and governments that care more about taking care of their own people instead of bombing foreign nations. Why would we need charities if things were funded well enough as it is? You're *deliberately* missing the point.
-
Lol yep they're an extremely wealthy company with that 30%. But it seems like almost every other storefront operates under those margins for digital sales (not just in gaming). I do value the cloud saves, I think those would actually add up a bit for their storage requirements as well as hosting all of the game files in presumably many locations globally. 15%, they'd still be a multibillion dollar company> But it seems like almost every other storefront operates under those margins for digital sales (not just in gaming) Notable that Epic Games takes only a 12% cut, and 0% of the first $1 million in sales (effectively 0% for the vast majority of indie games). A cynical take is that they're just doing this to attract developers to their store, which is almost certainly true, but it doesn't necessarily mean they'll take a higher cut if they become dominant. Unfortunately the Epic Games platform is missing the majority of extra features that Steam has (built in streaming, family share, input binding, big picture mode, etc) Tim Sweeney, CEO of Epic Games, is about 80% as wealthy as Gabe Newell, and has done much more philanthropy, although it only represents probably less than one percent of his net worth.
-
Can't remember a single Valve game that is $60 (today $80?) that has a Battle Pass, built in micro transactions that are pay-to-win, half-assed DLCs that should've been in base game, or a game being unfinished mess on release. Valve is not a saint. But even with lootboxes they bring way more good to gaming industry in comparison to literally any other gaming company. ::: spoiler Bonus round! Can you guess a game that has all these 4 points? :::
-
Gabe is a pretty good billionaire. He has made a lot of people happy. He doesn't spend his money trying to manipulate society. I think Gabe deserves a new yacht.
-
30% is too much! Clearly Steam doesn't need that much to operate (the percentage of each sale that go to Valve)
-
Epic only takes 12%, and they too have cloud saves. If they could take 15% while being a multibillion dollar company, then taking 30% is by definition overcharging. And that many others also overcharge doesn't change that fact.I'm not disagreeing. Epic's 12% would still be hugely profitable for Valve.
-
I'm not giving Valve recognition, I'm recognizing that Valve offers good/useful products and services. Maybe I should have said "acknowledge" instead of "recognize", but you're saying something different than me.
-
Can't remember a single Valve game that is $60 (today $80?) that has a Battle Pass, built in micro transactions that are pay-to-win, half-assed DLCs that should've been in base game, or a game being unfinished mess on release. Valve is not a saint. But even with lootboxes they bring way more good to gaming industry in comparison to literally any other gaming company. ::: spoiler Bonus round! Can you guess a game that has all these 4 points? :::
-
For cosmetic only items, and in return they let everyone play for free. It doesn't bother me as a business model.I don't think monetizing gambling addictions so others can play for free is a great argument.
-
It can be both, you're rejecting it *because* you fail to understand it. Dude, in a rationally organized world we wouldn't *need* fucking charities, because things would just be funded by reasonable tax structures and governments that care more about taking care of their own people instead of bombing foreign nations. Why would we need charities if things were funded well enough as it is? You're *deliberately* missing the point.
-
For cosmetic only items, and in return they let everyone play for free. It doesn't bother me as a business model.
-
> But it seems like almost every other storefront operates under those margins for digital sales (not just in gaming) Notable that Epic Games takes only a 12% cut, and 0% of the first $1 million in sales (effectively 0% for the vast majority of indie games). A cynical take is that they're just doing this to attract developers to their store, which is almost certainly true, but it doesn't necessarily mean they'll take a higher cut if they become dominant. Unfortunately the Epic Games platform is missing the majority of extra features that Steam has (built in streaming, family share, input binding, big picture mode, etc) Tim Sweeney, CEO of Epic Games, is about 80% as wealthy as Gabe Newell, and has done much more philanthropy, although it only represents probably less than one percent of his net worth.
