(Im posting this in the forums since I can't post it like an article in the blog section.)
I remember the old days of gaming. That long gone era called 2008. Back when games were provided with their own custom installers, and were self-contained products that installed themselves separatedly on the computer you instaleld them. I like to call this era the "Installshield Era" of gaming. Back when game media only contained asset and binaries, and a registration window, when dialog box wizards ruled the gaming land, and when there weren't any remote validation hooks attached to executables. That is why, with increasing concern, I am watching nowadays the way our most amazing form of entertainment is rearranging itself, how market forces and anti-consumer tendencies are beggining to shape the new landscape of gaming, at the expense of the average gamer.
Big game releases nowadays are abandoning these old, anticuated components such as autorun main menus, install wizards, or dedicated servers, and have moved to the all encapsulating remote delivery methods of popular DRM schemes, such as Steam. By itself, Steam is convenient, fast if you have good internet connection, and easy to deploy. Many games were released in normal "retail" form, and were offered in Steam's store shortly after. Those instances however, are nowadays mostly the case with PC only releases from eastern european studios it seems. Steam's "next step" in gaming convenience is anything but that, and could mark the beggining of a new mandatory requirement for gaming in the future. More and more games are now announcing their complete deployment based around Valve's new Steamworks framework, touted as the "least intrusive" DRM scheme, "convenient" to gaemers and publishers alike, which takes care of formerly manual tasks like patching. They claim it isn't intrusive when compared to the likes of Securom or Tages. But I would like to point out that it is more than that. It's not only indeed intrusive, it's THE most intrusive DRM scheme to come along yet. The game is not at all installed or even located completely in your computer when you realize it. At least Securom installed itself after it let the installer copy YOUR game to YOUR hard drive. Steamworks' remote always-on cloud network remotely controls one of ITS game's installation, patching, running. When you start the game, you send a signal to the autenticathion servers situatied remotely from your location, and the order is sent back before you are able to game. You are asked for an authorization each time to play the games you paid a hefty premium to be allowed some few hours of playimte. It's the arcade coin-up model. We've gone back full circle, to the arcade machins of old times. It may as well place a coin slot in your computer. It's like trying the games you paid for thru a remote terminal. A service that, much like an arcade place, can close up in after hours, or at the discretion of their owners. The access to the games you are allowed to try remotely can be switched off at any moment without any explanation from the providers, and you are effectively out. Cloud based gaming, and software as a service don't look like a good idea afterall under these terms.
"Blah blah, who cares, I don't have to deal with DVDs anymore!" Maybe this is really making mountains out of molehills. Steam does have it's merits, which mostly come from giving smaller indie developers a storefront to showcase their creations without needing a traditional expensive distribution contract. Companies like Tripwire and 2d boy have been the most vocal about their praise for steam, with Tripwire saying they wouldn't be around without Steam. This piece is not an anti-steam call to arms, it's just an informational soundbyte, just to express concern about the trend Steamworks is creating, which isn't 100% in reality as advertised in the package. A steamworks game instantly becomes a steam exclusive game. That situation could become the beggining of a monopoly. Maybe this is a good time for competitors to shine.
You can't expect a small company to offer 24/7/365 support. Stardock is VERY responsive during business hours, especially if you get on IRC , but email too.
I've been very impressed by their service. Gamersgate and Steam can both be unresponsive- Steam especially.
I just noticed that GamersGate also started selling Steamworks games (for example Empire: Total War).
So from original Steamworks (COD:MW2) boycott, D2D and GG gave up and only Impulse dont sell any Steamworks game.
it's inevitable......STEAM will be the digital distribution platform in the future.....there can only be one! (nice little highlander reference...hehe)
EDIT:
Nothing and I mean nothing out there comes even remotely close to the AWESOME STEAM sales that have become a staple of doing business with them. Until another platform out there can manage to compete with their SALES and their CATALOGUE there just isn't any competition. It's really that simple.
EDIT EDIT:
My prediction. For the near future it will always be "STEAM and their competition". Then at some point in the future it'll just become "STEAM"......... nuff said.
Indeed, I've noticed Shogun 2 is available for preorder on GG, too. That and the fact Impulse::Reactor is apparently getting utterly ignored by publishers (or isn't it formally "ready for release" yet?) leads me to believe Stardock are fighting a losing battle here.
It seems like the less than stellar release of Elemental War on Magic didnt help Reactor's launch.
I hate saying it, but I'm having doubts myself. We may get stuck with a monopoly , and it's our fault as gamers.
February 3rd, 2011 - As per the Research&Analysis division of analyst firm Forecasting and Analyzing Digital Entertainment, LLC (FADE), Valve's PC distribution platform garnered strong sales, estimated just shy $1 billion USD through the end of the year.
Estimated revenues through the major digital PC retailer were estimated at $970 million USD in 2010, with December capping off the year with an estimated $213 million USD. Valve took a back seat during the year, as it was the 3rd largest publisher on Steam, bringing in an estimated $80 million USD in revenues, mostly from its 2009 release 'Left 4 Dead 2'. However, Valve sold the most titles of all publishers, as Valve published 7 of the top 10 titles when ordered for units sold. Director of Research&Analysis, Benjamin Schlichter, stated, "Steam's growth has been remarkable during the year. Over 180 titles were estimated reaching over $1 million USD in revenue for the year, painting a very healthy market for developers and publishers, with more room for growth in the future."
Call of Duty Dominates 2010
Mirroring its console successes, the 'Call of Duty' franchise saw great sales on the platform, with 'Call of Duty: Black Ops' and 'Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2' taking 1st and 2nd place in terms of gross revenues, respectively. During just 2 months on the market, Black Ops sold an estimated 1.6 million copies for just under $100 million USD. Due to the popularity of the titles and expansion packs, Activision was the #1 publisher on Steam in 2010, selling an estimated $153 million USD of content during the year. Other first person shooters saw great success as well, as 7 of the top 10 games were primarily of the format.
Top Selling Titles, by Estimated Gross Revenues in 2010
Source: http://www.mcvuk.com/press-releases/68286/Steam-revenues
Nice to finally see some hard numbers.
The Steam numbers, which I have no idea if they're correct or not, are indeed very impressive.
Which, as you can imagine, also makes the argument as to why Impulse works so well for us. Sure, Impulse may onlly have a small % of the market but I think we can all see how profitable a market it is.
Last year, Impulse was Stardock's #1 source of revenue, even out stripping the enterprise group (games were a distant #3).
Obviously Steam has a very commanding lead in the market and unless there's a major shake up, I don't see that changing any time soon. But next time you look at your monthly XBox Live bill and wonder why there isn't an equivalent "Steam Premium" bill, you should be thankful there's still viable competition. If Valve started charging a monthly fee to use Steam, a lot of people would leave. Of course, the important thing is that they could leave.
I don't see how Xbox Live and Steam are related. It's true that you need to have Live Gold to play Multiplayer, however the vast majority of Steam's games do not use Valve matchmaking/servers, so that comparison really doesn't hold much water. And it's the only thing Steam has that's worth charging a monthly fee over, unless they slash their shop prices across the board and have membership to be able to buy (basically what warehouse stores like Sam's Club, Costco, etc do - dirt cheap stuff, but you have to pay membership).
It would be smart for Sony's next console to just use Steamworks period. Better then crappy PSN, and they could do it in a way that avoids making PSN pay-to-play possibly.
...and that's precisely why the people begging for a Steam monopoly are fools, because Valve could implement such a fee (or a variety of other nasty things). With no viable competition, PC gamers would have to use Steam or stop playing PC games. Ouch.
Most indie games would probably offer direct downloads themselves, in addition to a Steam version. That said, having Steam's competitors around to keep Steam honest is great for the consumer as a whole.
I think you should put your business hat on a bit more here.
Right now, using Steamworks is an option. If Steam has enough market share, they could easily make it a requirement to be on Steam. Then you start charging $X per month to make use of multiplayer, chat, etc.
IF Steam ever becomes dominant enough perhaps you could save this post so you can refer to it.
The inclusion of steamworks in recent games is the reason why i will not buy them. I love the civilization series and really would like to buy Civ 5 but i wont 50 dollars for it and I don't like HAVING to use a service to play a game. I also want Fallout Vegas but they did the same thing.....
I know that i personally will not be able to stop them from taking over the market, but I know that i will not help them. And heck if they DID start charging for there service i would simply stop playing the games i have bought from them and keep buying games from impulse.
This information from FADE is only estimate - Valve didnt give them with any data
We have gotten a statement from Valve's Marketing Director Doug Lombardi who told us simply, "We do not release our detailed sales. We have never met with FADE."
http://news.bigdownload.com/2011/02/03/study-claims-steam-generated-970-million-in-revenue-in-2010/
The couple games i bought that require steam to start ever time is the biggest pain in the behind.
I can't ever see myself buying another game that uses steam i hate it with a passion.
In fact i am off to uninstall steam right now.
ps I can't stand logging into steam each time i want to play and even worse is the popups at the end trying to sell me more games. The popups at the end when you log off is what killed it for me.
pss Uninstalled done which means i can't play Civ V or Fallout:New Vegas anymore but Civ V was dead anyways with the lame lack of stacking armies and i have beat New Vegas once already.
No, they can't. The PC is an open platform, no one can force a publisher to use Steam. Look at Minecraft, it sold one million copies without even beeing on Steam. If Valve would ever take a step which pisses of both players and publishers, everyone would just stop using it. It's that simple. That's why your comparison with Xbox Live is flawed. If you don't comply with Microsoft's rules, you just can't release your game and make any money. They have the last word on every single game on their platform. On the PC, Valve doesn't.
PS: I'm absolutely pro competition, that's why i'm happy D2D and GamersGate ended their Steamworks boycott. Right now Civ 5 is 14 pounds off on Direct2Drive (UK). That's great for us consumers. If no one but Steam would carry the game (like if you had your way) i would have to wait for a Steam sale or just spend more money.
Why not just disable them?http://slayer00.net/img/steam-news-promos.png
Personally i hate really HATE unwanted ads in any form. Mail,Phone,Email,Fax or Web Popup.
It is way too pervasive in so many forms that i figure i will do more to "vote" with my money instead of putting up with that junk for the sake of a game.
And there's nothing stopping Impulse from doing the same thing, if it ever dominated the market.
Brad admit
Brad's admitted as much. This is why competition is a good thing, even if you like the monopolist.
I havent played Minecraft myself, but that game shows that Steam is not needed to reach to a big audience. I know, it's probably a rarity, but here this game is sold to people from the developer himself, without any middle man. This middle man that brings the game to people is the reason touted as to why devlopers "need a DD service" like Steam. I'm really interested into seeing when technologies like html5 become a standard tool in every indie game maker and we start seeing them offering their games entirely from their own websites.
Many indie games already do offer direct from websites. Many of those folks actually prefer you buy from them directly over using a DD service such as Steam or Impulse, due to getting a better cut of the revenue. I wish Impulse let us attach games to it and receive updates that way. I know Brad has mentioned allowing certain devs to do this, but no one took him up on the offer.
For every game like Minecraft that manages to garner a lot of publicity on its own and get big, there's dozens (or even hundreds) that don't. Something like Recettear was from an unknown company and was basically an unknown game until it appeared on Steam's front page. It caught enough eyeballs there that people gave it a look, and then it being a great game got word of mouth going.
Similarly, I first bought AI War because I saw it on sale on Impulse. I'd never heard of it before, and it's not like Arcen has a marketing budget to push it on people who aren't paying attention. I mention it because it just reappeared in the Impulse top 10 this week (due to a new expansion and a sale). How many of the people buying the base game this week would have bought it directly vs how many saw it on Impulse like I did?
DD services bring eyeballs, and for an indie game company 70% of a $20 sale (and 3 expansions on top of that...) is a lot better then 100% of $0 in sales because people don't know the game exists. It's a good deal for everybody involved.
Yep. Oh, you can be sure I'd insist on harvesting organs if that happened. There's no such thing as a good monopolist.
People have short memories.
In the 90s, Microsoft was the darling and they could do no wrong. Lots of people just hoped OS/2 died off so that we could all "standardize" on Windows.
When people like me pointed out that if OS/2 died Microsoft would probably stop charging only $6 for Windows for workgroups 3.11 to OEMs but instead drastically raise their prices the Windows fans said "If they tried that, people would switch to something else."
Today, the OEM price for Windows 7 is over $70. It's non trivial to try to create a competing platform once competition has been killed off in the first place. You want alternatives.
As both a game developer AND someone familiar with digital distribution, I can tell you that one of the biggest expense suckers on digital distribution is putting up updates to existing games. Right now, Steam and Impulse do this for developers for free because, if they didn't, developers would go to the other platform.
Ask an Xbox developer how many free updates they're allowed to put up. Or maybe a PS3 developer.
You definitely don't want there to be only one choice in a given market. You always want an alternative to keep the other guy honest.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
