Debunking the grey market beyond Steam
-
Despite facing increased competition in the space, not least from the Epic Games Store, Valve's platform is synonymous with PC gaming. The service is estimated to have made $10.8 billion in revenue during 2024, a new record for the Half-Life giant. Since it entered the PC distribution space back in 2018, the rival Epic Games Store has been making headway – and $1.09 billion last year – but Steam is still undeniably dominant within the space.
Valve earns a large part of its money from taking a 20-30% cut of sales revenue from developers and publishers. Despite other storefronts opening with lower overheads, Steam has stuck with taking this slice of sales revenue, and in doing so, it has been argued that Valve is unfairly taking a decent chunk of the profits of developers and publishers.
This might change, depending on how an ongoing class-action lawsuit initiated by Wolfire Games goes, but for the time being, Valve is making money hand over fist selling games on Steam. The platform boasts over 132 million users, so it's perfectly reasonable that developers and publishers feel they have to use Steam – and give away a slice of their revenue – in order to reach the largest audience possible.
-
Despite facing increased competition in the space, not least from the Epic Games Store, Valve's platform is synonymous with PC gaming. The service is estimated to have made $10.8 billion in revenue during 2024, a new record for the Half-Life giant. Since it entered the PC distribution space back in 2018, the rival Epic Games Store has been making headway – and $1.09 billion last year – but Steam is still undeniably dominant within the space.
Valve earns a large part of its money from taking a 20-30% cut of sales revenue from developers and publishers. Despite other storefronts opening with lower overheads, Steam has stuck with taking this slice of sales revenue, and in doing so, it has been argued that Valve is unfairly taking a decent chunk of the profits of developers and publishers.
This might change, depending on how an ongoing class-action lawsuit initiated by Wolfire Games goes, but for the time being, Valve is making money hand over fist selling games on Steam. The platform boasts over 132 million users, so it's perfectly reasonable that developers and publishers feel they have to use Steam – and give away a slice of their revenue – in order to reach the largest audience possible.
The wolfire games lawsuit is so damn cringe.
No company is your friend, but there's a reason Steam is number 1. The reinvestment in the platform and breadth of features steam has is unrivaled.
Epic has been trying for nearly a decade now and their store doesn't even have 1/4 the features of steam.
I love GoG though. For me they offer something steam can't, installers for my games.
-
The wolfire games lawsuit is so damn cringe.
No company is your friend, but there's a reason Steam is number 1. The reinvestment in the platform and breadth of features steam has is unrivaled.
Epic has been trying for nearly a decade now and their store doesn't even have 1/4 the features of steam.
I love GoG though. For me they offer something steam can't, installers for my games.
My view is if you don't like a distribution platform taking 20-30% of the sale then don't use that distribution platform. It's a free market and a free internet. Use Epic, GOG, or host it yourself
If I don't like what Comcast charges I don't do a class action lawsuit.
-
My view is if you don't like a distribution platform taking 20-30% of the sale then don't use that distribution platform. It's a free market and a free internet. Use Epic, GOG, or host it yourself
If I don't like what Comcast charges I don't do a class action lawsuit.
If you lose access to a vast majority of the market if you don‘t use a service, it’s a monopoly. Don’t defend monopolists.
-
If you lose access to a vast majority of the market if you don‘t use a service, it’s a monopoly. Don’t defend monopolists.
Steam does nothing to prevent running non-steam games on any platform. Charge 20-30% extra on Steam and call it done.
-
Steam does nothing to prevent running non-steam games on any platform. Charge 20-30% extra on Steam and call it done.
Charge 20-30% extra on Steam and call it done.
Steam doesn't let you do that. This is literally what the lawsuit is about.
-
Despite facing increased competition in the space, not least from the Epic Games Store, Valve's platform is synonymous with PC gaming. The service is estimated to have made $10.8 billion in revenue during 2024, a new record for the Half-Life giant. Since it entered the PC distribution space back in 2018, the rival Epic Games Store has been making headway – and $1.09 billion last year – but Steam is still undeniably dominant within the space.
Valve earns a large part of its money from taking a 20-30% cut of sales revenue from developers and publishers. Despite other storefronts opening with lower overheads, Steam has stuck with taking this slice of sales revenue, and in doing so, it has been argued that Valve is unfairly taking a decent chunk of the profits of developers and publishers.
This might change, depending on how an ongoing class-action lawsuit initiated by Wolfire Games goes, but for the time being, Valve is making money hand over fist selling games on Steam. The platform boasts over 132 million users, so it's perfectly reasonable that developers and publishers feel they have to use Steam – and give away a slice of their revenue – in order to reach the largest audience possible.
So is the issue that Valve kicks you off the platform if you sell your game cheaper somewhere else? That does seem a little troublesome. I don't think Apple or Sony has those restrictions? Apple takes 30% as well, right?
-
Charge 20-30% extra on Steam and call it done.
Steam doesn't let you do that. This is literally what the lawsuit is about.
Sure. Not being able to sell literal Steam keys on other platforms for less on other platforms for less according to the terms is the same as being prevented from selling on other platforms for less at all, nevermind that Valve gets a 0% cut on Steam Key Sales made like so.
Also, there is no mention of said policy in either the OP article, nor the separate article about the lawsuit it links to.
-
So is the issue that Valve kicks you off the platform if you sell your game cheaper somewhere else? That does seem a little troublesome. I don't think Apple or Sony has those restrictions? Apple takes 30% as well, right?
Only if you are selling a steam key elsewhere, they ask you to treat them equivalently but that doesn't mean you can't do sales for your products on other platforms.
It's a little weird cause it would be like buying an apple app on android to use on apple but apple doesn't get the 30% anymore so they ask you to at least price it about the same so people don't avoid buying from them completely.
-
Sure. Not being able to sell literal Steam keys on other platforms for less on other platforms for less according to the terms is the same as being prevented from selling on other platforms for less at all, nevermind that Valve gets a 0% cut on Steam Key Sales made like so.
Also, there is no mention of said policy in either the OP article, nor the separate article about the lawsuit it links to.
Nobody said anything about Steam keys. They don't let you sell games at lower prices, period.
Also, there is no mention of said policy in either the OP article, nor the separate article about the lawsuit it links to.
Are you being serious, right now? The source isn't 2 clicks away so therefore it doesn't exist? Lawsuits are literally public knowledge. You should inform yourself about a topic before you get into a conversation about it.
Here. Perhaps you can stop defending the billion dollar company now.
-
Only if you are selling a steam key elsewhere, they ask you to treat them equivalently but that doesn't mean you can't do sales for your products on other platforms.
It's a little weird cause it would be like buying an apple app on android to use on apple but apple doesn't get the 30% anymore so they ask you to at least price it about the same so people don't avoid buying from them completely.
Only if you are selling a steam key elsewhere
No. That's not true. You're spreading misinformation. Read the fucking lawsuit.
-
Only if you are selling a steam key elsewhere
No. That's not true. You're spreading misinformation. Read the fucking lawsuit.
https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/keys
That's the policy on steam keys. If you are not using their steam keys it's not covered by their contract agreement at least.
The lawsuit is not yet finished and while we can take their complaints into account we can't take them for fact.
The case was already dismissed once because they argued the 30% was controlling the market but it's been there since day 1 of their storefront and has not changed to force game price changes. Beyond that they argue that Valve bought servers to take them offline to push players to them but... That's not really on this point of price controlling or the ability sell non steam keys.Literally RuneScape does this by offering memberships not available on steam.
If you see something I am missing from the lawsuit please let me know, preferably without the hostility if you can manage.
-
Only if you are selling a steam key elsewhere
No. That's not true. You're spreading misinformation. Read the fucking lawsuit.
It is true. Valve does not enforce price parity for non Steam keys. Here is an example where the dev says that they are offering a better price on EGS because of the better cut:
https://twitter.com/HeardOfTheStory/status/1700066610302603405
https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/p/heard-of-the-story-ff3758
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1881940/Heard_of_the_Story/
Pretty clear example of the same game having a lower base price on Epic than on Steam.
Wolfire claiming Valve does this is something different from Valve actually doing it, and that's where the dispute lies. According to Valve, Wolfire's explanation of the price parity policy is incorrect.
Here's the policy itself: https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/keys#3
You should use Steam Keys to sell your game on other stores in a similar way to how you sell your game on Steam. **It is important that you don’t give Steam customers a worse deal than Steam Key purchasers. **
The policy is pretty leanient regarding the "worse deal" aspect. You're allowed to have a sale on one platform but not on Steam, as long as you offer "something similar" at a different moment to Steam users too.
It's OK to run a discount for Steam Keys on different stores at different times as long as you plan to give a comparable offer to Steam customers within a reasonable amount of time.
Even if you violate this policy, Valve will still sell your game, they may just stop providing you with Steam keys to sell.
I don't see Wolfire winning this tbh.
-
So is the issue that Valve kicks you off the platform if you sell your game cheaper somewhere else? That does seem a little troublesome. I don't think Apple or Sony has those restrictions? Apple takes 30% as well, right?
Yes. That is exactly the issue. It's not only Steam Keys either as some of the cultists would have you believe. Valve does require you to offer Steam Keys on other stores at the same price that you offer the game on Steam but that's not all. Now, while they don't specifically forbid you to offer different prices on stores that have nothing to do with Steam, they do reserve the right (do whatever the hell you want with this one simple trick!) to veto pricing on Steam for any reason. This has been historically used by Valve to block games that offer better pricing on competing stores. It goes something like this:
- I make a game and decide I want to make $7 per sale so I publish it on my site at $7.
- I want the game to be accessible to a wider audience so I publish it on other stores.
- Epic takes 12% so I price it at $8 there in order to keep making $7 per sale
- Steam takes 30% so I price it at $10 there for the same reason.
- Valve says $10 isn't a fair price and refuses to elaborate why, reminding me that they reserve the right to veto any price on Steam for any reason.
- I make my game $10 on all other stores
- Valve magically decides $10 was actually a fair price all along and finally publishes the game on Steam.
-
It is true. Valve does not enforce price parity for non Steam keys. Here is an example where the dev says that they are offering a better price on EGS because of the better cut:
https://twitter.com/HeardOfTheStory/status/1700066610302603405
https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/p/heard-of-the-story-ff3758
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1881940/Heard_of_the_Story/
Pretty clear example of the same game having a lower base price on Epic than on Steam.
Wolfire claiming Valve does this is something different from Valve actually doing it, and that's where the dispute lies. According to Valve, Wolfire's explanation of the price parity policy is incorrect.
Here's the policy itself: https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/keys#3
You should use Steam Keys to sell your game on other stores in a similar way to how you sell your game on Steam. **It is important that you don’t give Steam customers a worse deal than Steam Key purchasers. **
The policy is pretty leanient regarding the "worse deal" aspect. You're allowed to have a sale on one platform but not on Steam, as long as you offer "something similar" at a different moment to Steam users too.
It's OK to run a discount for Steam Keys on different stores at different times as long as you plan to give a comparable offer to Steam customers within a reasonable amount of time.
Even if you violate this policy, Valve will still sell your game, they may just stop providing you with Steam keys to sell.
I don't see Wolfire winning this tbh.
Yes, Valve enforcing price parity only when it's convenient for them is also addressed in the lawsuit.
The rest of your comment refers to Steam Keys. That's literally not what we're talking about.
-
https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/keys
That's the policy on steam keys. If you are not using their steam keys it's not covered by their contract agreement at least.
The lawsuit is not yet finished and while we can take their complaints into account we can't take them for fact.
The case was already dismissed once because they argued the 30% was controlling the market but it's been there since day 1 of their storefront and has not changed to force game price changes. Beyond that they argue that Valve bought servers to take them offline to push players to them but... That's not really on this point of price controlling or the ability sell non steam keys.Literally RuneScape does this by offering memberships not available on steam.
If you see something I am missing from the lawsuit please let me know, preferably without the hostility if you can manage.
Again, this is not about Steam Keys, it's about Steam using shady contracts to bully developers into price parity on completely unrelated stores. Yes, runescape is cheaper on Epic, the incredibly broad nature of these rules that allows for selective wishy-washy enforcing is also part of the lawsuit.
If you see something I am missing from the lawsuit please let me know, preferably without the hostility if you can manage.
The whole thing because you didn't read it and, given that you keep bringing up Steam Keys, which is not what we're talking about, I'm skeptical that you can read at all.
-
Again, this is not about Steam Keys, it's about Steam using shady contracts to bully developers into price parity on completely unrelated stores. Yes, runescape is cheaper on Epic, the incredibly broad nature of these rules that allows for selective wishy-washy enforcing is also part of the lawsuit.
If you see something I am missing from the lawsuit please let me know, preferably without the hostility if you can manage.
The whole thing because you didn't read it and, given that you keep bringing up Steam Keys, which is not what we're talking about, I'm skeptical that you can read at all.
So, you think a good way to correct someone is to directly insult them because you find their points unrelated but yours perfect? Rude.
And the only thing steam controls via contract is the ability to sell your games via steam keys for price parity.And you misunderstood my point. RuneScape isn't even on the epic game store so you aren't reading my words carefully. You are projecting your own hypocrisy.
-
Yes, Valve enforcing price parity only when it's convenient for them is also addressed in the lawsuit.
The rest of your comment refers to Steam Keys. That's literally not what we're talking about.
But that is what the policy is about. Steam doesn't have a price parity policy regarding general game sales.
-
So, you think a good way to correct someone is to directly insult them because you find their points unrelated but yours perfect? Rude.
And the only thing steam controls via contract is the ability to sell your games via steam keys for price parity.And you misunderstood my point. RuneScape isn't even on the epic game store so you aren't reading my words carefully. You are projecting your own hypocrisy.
No, I think you deserve to be insulted because you are talking out of your ass about something you didn't read. Again, this is about the price veto policy. This is not about Steam Keys (here's me hoping italics help with your dyslexia).
And yeah, I thought you meant runescape on the EGS not on their site. It doesn't matter because it has zero bearing on the discussion, I only addressed it because you didn't read the thing you're talking about.
-
But that is what the policy is about. Steam doesn't have a price parity policy regarding general game sales.
No, it's not. That's an entirely different policy that you keep bringing up for no reason. That policy is also anti-consumer bullshit but I digress. What I'm referring to is the following shady wording:
Initial pricing as well as proposed pricing adjustments will be reviewed by Valve
