Leaderboard: What do you think about Steam’s new revenue sharing plan?

    
26
Page through.

At the tail end of last week, Valve announced a new revenue sharing plan for publishers on Steam that simmered all weekend. In a nutshell, the company is reducing its own cut of the sales of games that perform exceptionally well.

“When a game makes over $10 million on Steam, the revenue share for that application will adjust to 75%/25% on earnings beyond $10M. At $50 million, the revenue share will adjust to 80%/20% on earnings beyond $50M. Revenue includes game packages, DLC, in-game sales, and Community Marketplace game fees. Our hope is this change will reward the positive network effects generated by developers of big games, further aligning their interests with Steam and the community.”

Games that earn less than $10 million will continue serving up nearly a third of their revenue to Valve for the privilege of being on Steam. The general consensus is that Valve considers the big games more valuable and is willing to cut them a better deal to entice them to the platform, which presumably increases Valve’s revenue and marketshare overall or Valve wouldn’t do it. On the other hand, it’s easy to see why smaller studios would be a bit miffed by the rich-get-richer scenario.

What do you think about Steam’s new revenue sharing plan?

Leaderboard: What do you think about Steam's new revenue sharing plan? (Multiple responses possible.)

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

26
LEAVE A COMMENT

Please Login to comment
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most liked
Subscribe to:
Reader
Patreon Donor
Kickstarter Donor
Loyal Patron
agemyth 😩

Just looks like Valve trying to stay competitive.

I support different “stores” (GOG and Itch in particular) when it makes sense to, but the Steam client still offers me the most features as a user in a broad sense. I’m not going anywhere near the Epic Games, Bethesda.net, or Origin clients for the foreseeable. Those are literally just shooting to be like Steam and will forever hindered by the companies that own them.

Maybe Valve could try promoting small games too instead of burying them in favor of blockbusters everyone’s already heard of. (28%, 115 Votes)

Common Steam complaint: I see too much crap (aka things I don’t recognize as important) on the store these days

Most popular poll choice: Why doesn’t Valve promote the indie games??

Reader
Bruno Brito

I think Valve is a pathetic company that lives from reselling games they didn’t make, while forgetting their own playerbases to an extent. It took them YEARS to get back to TF2, and we’re still living in a world where TF2 gets a major patch every year. It’s pathetic.

I can say they’re better with Dota, but well, Dota has Icefrog for that. TF2 has 6 developers. G r e a t.

Nothing like a gaming company that sells games they didn’t make. Valve is a store. Pure and simple. And for a store, is actually funny how predatory they are.

Reader
Patreon Donor
Kickstarter Donor
Loyal Patron
agemyth 😩

…we’re still living in a world where TF2 gets a major patch every year.

I had to re-read the first paragraph a few times to understand you were saying that an 11 year old game that still gets regular updates is “pathetic” on Valve’s part.

Most other developers would release a sequel and abandon the old one by now.

Reader
holyavengerone

Another pretty disconnected move from a publisher that doesn’t seem to understand its own value and market place and/or is trying to milk the cow before it collapses. Kinda sad considering valves origins and what they could have done with those revenue streams they’ve been sitting on.

Another step in the wrong direction, imho.

Polyanna
Reader
Patreon Donor
Kickstarter Donor
Loyal Patron
Polyanna

Steam’s revenue model is hot garbage any way you slice it. Small developers have no other option. Big ones certainly do. This minor rollback on the obscene haircut that Valve takes is not going to stop more major publishers from abandoning Steam in favor of their own platforms, regardless of how much that annoys customers who play more than one game.

Steam also is doing zero in the way of innovation and hasn’t done anything interesting as a platform in ages. Meanwhile others like Origin, despite their own issues, are busy trying new things that are working pretty damn well.

Basic Origin Access, for thirty bucks a year, has become by far the best deal in gaming today, at least for someone who doesn’t already own all of the 150+ titles they have on tap in the Access Vault. And they’ve been adding interesting stuff at a rapid pace all this year, more than doubling the size of the vault since last year. At this rate they’re going to be the Spotify of gaming before long, at which point Steam starts to look pretty obsolete.

Steam has had an entrenched advantage for a long time now, and they’ll continue to be the only real option for a lot of indie developers for a while. But if they keep heading down the road they’re on now, then the free money firehose is going to dry up real quick as soon as any other major player decides to do something interesting in this space.

Reader
Robert Mann

Steam takes too much to begin with. Cut down everyone to 15% at most. Then we can talk about other issues.

Also, taking the time to highlight smaller games up front on the store, including maybe a “Smaller games like those you like” link…

PurpleCopper
Reader
PurpleCopper

That is such an unfair regressive tax. So basically Valve is only doing this because other big publishers are selling their games on their own digital distribution platforms instead of Valve?

Reader
socontrariwise

So who gets 80%, the developer? If “better deals for developer of big games” means 80/20 is better than 75/25 … that would mean Steam takes a quarter of the sales price for cheap games??
That is cutthroat for the small developers who try to survive and drown in the thousands and thousands of cheap and ridiculous games with very wrong tags – because Steam is NOT a marketing service at all. o.O
I mean has anyone looked at the tags “MMO” or “simulation”? Everyone and their dog have that added to their game and it means the search function is plain useless.

Reader
Denice J. Cook

Too little, too late, Valve! The biggies like EA/Origin and Activision/Battlenet etc. already have their own digital download services where they’re paying you zero. ;) Others aren’t going to be persuaded not to follow suit over 5% or 10% in the unlikely scenario that they manage to push out a game of the year.

Reader
thirtymil

There are plenty of big companies with well known IPs prepared to take their chances without Steam these days – Activision (Destiny, Call of Duty), Microsoft (Gears of War, Forza), Epic (Fortnite), and Bethesda (Fallout).

This is just Valve trying to persuade them to come back/sign up before its de facto monopoly collapses and people end up saying ‘Oh Steam, that’s just that bargain basement store – there’s probably some good indie games in there but I can’t be bothered to wade through all the asset flips and achievement trash’.

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
hugmonster

Steam has had quite an image problem over the past few years with the flood of asset flips, achievement spam games and generally crappy “games” made solely to capitalize on trading cards while big publishers started moving to their own digital download platforms.

I think the Black Ops 4 (no, I will not use their alternative roman numerals) not coming to Steam hurt their bottom line quite significantly so this added to the pressure and now they’re trying to get some of the big games back or at least keep the big publishers happy so that they continue to release their games on Steam.