Notch speaks again about Minecraft not being on Steam

O

Omikaru

Member
Source: PC Gamer

Basically, it boils down to:

- Concerns about a possible Valve monopoly/having too much power over PC gaming.
- Doesn't want them taking 30% of Minecraft's revenue.
- Wanting to stay as independent as possible.
- Thinking about their future strategy in regards to bringing Minecraft to Steam.

Here's Notch's statement in full, so you can interpret it yourself.

Yeah, it seems like pretty much all the things we wanted to do are possible on Steam now, which is brilliant! Since I made that blog post, Minecraft has kept growing very fast (and it selling faster than ever), which combined with us not being on Steam leads to some potentially interesting strategic positions. I’m not quite sure what those are, but we’re a bit wary to submit Minecraft to Steam without knowing more about what we want to do.

As much as I love Steam, I do somewhat worry about the PC as a gaming platform becoming owned by a single entity that takes 30% of all PC games sold. I’m hoping for a future where more games can self-publish and use social media and friends to market their games. Perhaps there’s something we could do to help out there? I don’t know. If nothing else, we might work as an inspiration for people to self-publish.

It’s probably obvious from this reply, but we’re trying to figure out what we want to do long term with the position we have now. We only recently decided to stay as independent as possible and cancelled an unannounced project that we were doing in collaboration with someone else. It’s going to be an interesting future.
Click to expand...

All fair points, but I think it's easy for Notch to say these things on top of Minecraft's success. If you're in a position to sell your game without any other DD partners (Minecraft for PC/Mac/Linux can only be bought from Minecraft.net), then why would you sacrifice 30% to a third party? That said, I can understand where they're coming from: Mojang wants to sell their game exclusively on their store. And it's not like they're doing an EA and explicitly snubbing Steam; they're not on any DD stores for PC games.

Honestly, Minecraft has enough momentum for them to never have to sell it on a third party store, so I don't expect that to change. But what I'd be interested to see is how Mojang sells games which aren't Minecraft. Maybe they'll find that they need Steam, Origin, GMG and whatever to get Scrolls or 0x10c to sell.
 
I think it's within his right to not want to give up 30% when the title is selling fine where it is. I think his product is so good that he'll be able to come up with a way to sell the product on steam. MS made a deal for the 360 version that made financial sense for Notch so maybe he can do the same with Valve.
 
Why go to another storefront when they obviously don't need to? You go to one if you desperately need to cover all bases when you've spent too much making it, like most bigger budget games. You go to one if you're not sure you can sell enough on your own, like most new titles. If these don't figure in, why give someone else money for no reason?
 
It's probably happening. I bet that once the sales start lowering quite a bit.

Exuro said:
Minecraft is huge. Notch has no need to sell his game at any other store, let alone Steam.
Click to expand...

There will be a point where the game wont sell so hot anymore. Why not put it on Steam to keep making a profit for it thanks to the big sales/etc?

people who already own it would probably buy it on steam again
 
I really wonder if there's much of any of the market that would be waiting for a title like this to go to Steam before they buy. Were I in his position I'm not sure I'd put it on the platform either.
 
electroshockwave said:
Giving up 30% off his revenue when Minecraft is selling great already is probably the only reason that matters.
Click to expand...
Except he already did that to sell to another market, the 360. There are people on Steam that won't buy games anywhere else. I know this is stupid, but I think in the long run he would get more sales and bigger profits by hitching to Valve's wagon.

Seik said:
Wow, I didn't knew Steam was taking such percentages on a game's revenue, that's huge, I mean...its at almost a third of the revenues.
Click to expand...
No, it's incredibly small cut for a distributor / retailer.
 
As a Minecraft lover and a rabid Steam consumer, it seems sound to me. It wouldn't be if the game was sold on other digital platforms but if he can afford to stay independent, all the more power to him.
 
I think Steam will survive without Minecraft

- Doesn't want them taking 30% of Minecraft's revenue.
Enjoy your 40K patch system. And this is the only reason.

- Wanting to stay as independent as possible.
Make a deal with Microsoft
 
alphaNoid said:
Valid concerns if you ask me, PC gaming should never revolve around Steam.

Its just a store, one of many.
Click to expand...

Steam is way, way more than a store. It's a convenient consumer oriented DRM system with a sophisticated social networking system

Valve cannot have a monopoly on PC games. It can't happen without them sacrificing key advantages of Steam.

You realize when people say "Doesn't register on Steam = no buy" that there's 0 exchange of money there for Valve. That even if the person buys the game, the very concept that it registers on Steam means Valve gets no direct profit from it.

Seik said:
Wow, I didn't knew Steam was taking such percentages on a game's revenue, that's huge, I mean...its at almost a third of the revenues.
Click to expand...

30% is the rate every major online publisher takes.
 
SalsaShark said:
It's probably happening. I bet that once the sales start lowering quite a bit.



There will be a point where the game wont sell so hot anymore. Why not put it on Steam to keep making a profit for it thanks to the big sales/etc?

people who already own it would probably buy it on steam again
Click to expand...


He has previously said at that point he'll release the source.
 
On topic: Good decision on Notch. Steam needs more competition/shouldn't be the "only" one out there.

alphaNoid said:
Its just a store, one of many.
Click to expand...

No, not really.

The only two "stores" that are more about services is Steam and Origin. Other stores you just buy the game on a browser and download it without some type of friend/achievement/library system, which Valve started to champion in the beginning, followed by EA

Only reason people prefer Steam over Origin is because "lol EA", which IMO is a pretty bad copout of an answer.

Did people just get into PC gaming? Pretty sure some of the critics started playing games after Steam started. Boy, those were the days.
 
Valid concerns.

I prefer having all my games in one place though. Being able to reformat my computer, install steam, and have access to everything I've purchased is nice.
 
Understandable. I like to own my games on Steam, but it's not like Notch is forcing some inferior and redundant application down our throats. Whatever happened to the talk of GFWL being slapped over Minecraft? Were those just rumors? Now that would be something to complain about.

Also, sorry for the meta post, but what is it with Steam threads and drive-by troll posts? It's like moths to a flame.
 
Seik said:
Wow, I didn't knew Steam was taking such percentages on a game's revenue, that's huge, I mean...its at almost a third of the revenues.
Click to expand...

Not only is the cut far worse at retail (EA takes 70%, for instance), but that 30% is why developers can put their games on Steam, and use Steamworks, for free -- it covers Steam-based marketing/promotion, bandwidth costs, and whatever else.
 
alphaNoid said:
Valid concerns if you ask me, PC gaming should never revolve around Steam.

Its just a store, one of many.
Click to expand...

Well, it's a Store and a community. I'm reluctant to say "platform", because it's not, but it definitely adds some neat features that PC gamers like.

Personally, I'm not missing it on Steam. Valve have made it super easy to put your non-Steam games onto Steam, and Minecraft can be launched perfectly fine from my games list. That's all I care about as far as non-Steam games go. Though I understand some people do like achievements, and not having to download and install the game outside of the client, or whatever. Personally, none of that bothers me. So long as downloading is easy and convenient, and the game lets me add it to my Library as a non-Steam game, I'm happy to buy my games from any DD provider that I trust. Right now, that's Steam, GMG, Gamersgate and GOG.com, and I'd also buy from the developer's own store on a case-by-case basis.

Personally, I think a neat thing for Valve to do would be to add some sort of API so that third party game installers can put themselves into Steam as a non-Steam game without the user having to do it manually, but I'm straying from the topic at hand here.

Seik said:
Wow, I didn't knew Steam was taking such percentages on a game's revenue, that's huge, I mean...its at almost a third of the revenues.
Click to expand...
I don't think we actually know the precise percentages. And besides, that's pretty bog standard. Anything sold on the consoles' digital stores probably has a similar model, as do games sold for iOS and on Google's official Android store, and the 70% or whatever it is developers/publishers take on Steam is far more than what they'd get from each retail sale, after you factor in manufacturing, shipping, the shop's cut, local taxes, and so on.
 
gabbre said:
I think Steam will survive without Minecraft

- Doesn't want them taking 30% of Minecraft's revenue.
Enjoy your 40K patch system. And this is the only reason.

- Wanting to stay as independent as possible.
Make a deal with Microsoft
Click to expand...

So, so wrong.

1. MS don't charge 40k a patch
2. Notch was able to convince MS to allow him to patch the game for free.
3. lol.
4. hahahaha

Also, 30% seems excessive for just putting a game on their service.
 
I want to rage right now.
 
people still care what Notch thinks?

he hasn't worked on Minecraft for a long time and his new game (0x10c) was something he worked on for 3 weeks before stopping for the last few months out of sheer laziness
 
He would still make more than enough money - i dont get the 30% cut point. Is MS taking less on the XBLA version ?
 
These are fair points, but just integrating it with Steam as well as just having it on their storefront I think would be a major boon to both parties; plus I'm just unlikely to buy it unless I can get a Steam copy - I just want Steam integration is all.

And as others have said, I don't really consider Steam a monopoly - no more than I'd consider Google a monopoly on search engines or Windows a monopoly on OSes. There are others out there, but not nearly as widespread or as good (which is arguable with Windows, but work with me) as Steam. Doesn't make it a monopoly, just the industry leader.
 
Speedymanic said:
Also, 30% seems excessive for just putting a game on their service.
Click to expand...

and patching it, and advertising it, and running their achievements, and maintaining a social network, and

30% is a bargain, honestly. And it's what every other major online publisher charges, most of which do not come with the same features as Steam.
 
Sethos said:
And too many don't give Valve the respect they deserve in being one of the driving forces behind rejuvenating PC gaming.
Click to expand...
And just being good to gaming in general.

I'm a Steam fanboy, but Minecraft is one of the few games I've bought that isn't on Steam. The game currently doesn't need Steam, but if it did get added to it, I'd rebuy it in a heartbeat.
 
balladofwindfishes said:
and patching it, and advertising it, and running their achievements, and maintaining a social network, and

30% is a bargain, honestly. And it's what every other major online publisher charges, most of which do not come with the same features as Steam.
Click to expand...

+1 here. Of all the stores we sell our game on, Steam is the best at really all of these features.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Notch asks: should he make 'minecraft 2' or would his fans want the new IP?
2
59
4K
Griffon replied
Nvidia insider speaks out about RTX 50 series launch – Not even employees can get GPUs
Hardware  2
54
3K
//DEVIL// replied
Notch teases some freecam shots of new game (alpha)
36
3K
Fess replied
Steam now warns about Early Access that have not been updated in months
Platform 
14
1K
poppabk replied
'A Minecraft Movie' | Review Thread
2 3 4
157
7K
LordBritish replied
Top Bottom