Team Filler
Member
Why are people okay with apple taking 30% but steam doing it is somehow excessive?
Notch speaks again about Minecraft not being on Steam
- Thread starter Omikaru
- Start date
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Except it isn't. As others have said, it is MUCH lower than retail AND it includes much more than putting it on the storefront.
Unlike a lot of indie games, Minecraft does not need Steam to get recognized. It sells very well all on its own, which is a testament to how good it is. I'd still buy a copy of Minecraft on Steam if it had achievements and integration with the mods toolkit (which i'm sure it would, if it were to happen). It makes discovering new mods very fun and easy, and enabling/disabling them, too.
Any chance you could detail on this? Always love to hear dev interation with Steam. Also what game did you work on?
Minecraft with Workshop integration would be amazing. Hate having to extract the jar folder and drag/drop files.
What if Gabe dies and Bobby Kotick buys steam from the new owner?
WHAT WOULD HAPPEN THEN?
Speedymanic
Banned
1. What's your source for claiming they do? The quote from Schafer where he was talking about how much patching costs on both PS3 and 360?
2. hahaha. what?
Hellsing321
Member
Really it just comes down to options. The only way Notch can sell Minecraft on iPhones is through the App Store. The only way he can sell it on 360 is through Microsoft. On PC he can sell it on his website and that is working great for him right now.
Who said people are OK with Apple's cut? The difference is that they don't really have a choice if they want to sell their game on iOS. If they want to sell their game on PC, they do have the choice to avoid Steam.
Given Minecraft's position, not having it on Steam is probably a somewhat easy decision. I feel like Notch likes Valve (and their games) a lot, so it's not because he has a grudge against them as far as I know.
If Minecraft sales ever tapered down for some reason, selling it on Steam as well (assuming Valve is fine with it) might also be a pretty easy decisions since it could be an extra revenue boost like when the 360 Minecraft sales started.
I don't feel like Steam will become a monopoly though, since things currently seem somewhat headed in the direction of EA with companies trying to do their own stores. I'm not sure how long that sort of thing will last though.
If Minecraft sales ever tapered down for some reason, selling it on Steam as well (assuming Valve is fine with it) might also be a pretty easy decisions since it could be an extra revenue boost like when the 360 Minecraft sales started.
I don't feel like Steam will become a monopoly though, since things currently seem somewhat headed in the direction of EA with companies trying to do their own stores. I'm not sure how long that sort of thing will last though.
They're probably taking a lot more than 30%, but they bankrolled the development of the console version. Regardless Microsoft was one of the only options for Minecraft to get on consoles, Notch has better options on PC so he doesn't need Steam.
FlutterPuffs
Member
The only reason I haven't bought Minecraft yet is because it isn't on Steam.
Then again, that might just mean I make too much impulsive buys on it, so it's cool.
Then again, that might just mean I make too much impulsive buys on it, so it's cool.
Speedymanic
Banned
I see. So it's basically like the Live. You pay a fee to MS so they do the above. That's pretty neat.
Fair enough, I wrongly assumed they only hosted the content and didn't do anything else. If they do do the above, that moer than justifies the 30% charge.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Not sure if serious but what happens if you die tomorrow? What happens if tomorrow Kim Jung Un buys Valve? OMG!
For one, every single game on Steam can be found through other means and many here, including mods, agree that if the day came where we lost access to our games that we PURCHASED, it wouldn't be problematic to get those games again. Also, Gabe has chosen people at Valve who share his view in being pro consumer, pro customer. In fact, Valve has become MORE lenient regarding accounts recently.
Barkley's Justice
Member
I think in Minecraft's position: Who gives a shit.
Not entirely true. Minecraft is getting a certain number of patches for free, but after that it will be charged like every other game. Notch didn't say how many freebies he got, but he did say there was a limit.
To be honest, yes. As long as a game isn't on hyper-sale (like 50% off or more) I don't buy games on steam, it's just so much cheaper to buy it in any given physical store and then activate on steam if possible. Case in point: I bought Skyrim for 449 SEK at launch. It has now gone down to 399 SEK, while it is still 49,99 EUR on steam (which at the time roughly translated into 500 SEK).
There's Desura too, which is centered around indie development. And if you want to count in social platforms like FB there are those as well. Ubisoft will have their own service pretty soon. It's hardly a Steam monopoly out there if you ask me, those fears are completely unfounded. Going forward there are only going to be more options, not less.
pants
Member
I cant see valve letting this fly.
chickdigger802
Banned
So pretty much minecraft won't be on steam until all sales dried up.
Personally, I think Steam's 30% cut is pretty good value. The increase in sales for most games, even those with pretty big marketing budgets, is worth Valve taking their slice of the pie. And Valve has made the platform so compelling to end users with sales, social features, and so on.
But there will be games that are an exception when the developer/publisher thinks they can go it alone. Nothing wrong with that. In that case, you just have to hope that gamers trust you to not screw them over, and that if they do give you their trust, you work to keep it. On both counts, I think Mojang has done very well, and they got a sale from me because of that. I see nothing wrong with Minecraft not being on Steam, and I've never understood people who exclusively buy PC games either on Steam, or which plug into Steam with a key.
But there will be games that are an exception when the developer/publisher thinks they can go it alone. Nothing wrong with that. In that case, you just have to hope that gamers trust you to not screw them over, and that if they do give you their trust, you work to keep it. On both counts, I think Mojang has done very well, and they got a sale from me because of that. I see nothing wrong with Minecraft not being on Steam, and I've never understood people who exclusively buy PC games either on Steam, or which plug into Steam with a key.
It was half in jest.
But I personally I don't have a problem with big established games who don't need help with exposure choosing to remain off of Steam.
Philthy
Member
30% is a lot for anyone to take. However, with Apple, anyone can literally pay $100 to become a iOS developer and release anything they want on the Apple store that doesn't violate their ToS. Steam is different in that they get to pick and choose who is let into their storefront, often times not letting good games to be released. If you're going to be that picky AND take a 30% cut, that's a punch to the gut.
That said, I don't see Steam as a monopoly for selling games. A lot of the hardcore wargames (War in the East, John Tiller's series, etc) and such wont use Steam.
Speedymanic
Banned
It's the biggest selling game on LA, I'm sure he'll be able to convince them to allow him more free patches when he uses up his free slots.
Anyway, his claim was that it was 40k a patch which isn't true at all.
Delusibeta
Banned
Especially considering that if you sell Steam codes, Valve don't get a cut. The 30% only applies to sales direct from the Steam store. (Might be a bit different if you're a major publisher and are about to release an AAA game in retail, but for indies Steamworks is free, selling Steam codes on other stores is free AFAIK).
He has a point, why give up 30% of sale revenue if you don't have to. That doesn't make Steam bad or even unfair to independent developers, for most the exposure and infrastructure is a blessing. It's just not a great fit for Mojang who have already established their runaway hit on their own terms on the PC. Great work if you can get it.
At this point, Minecraft has sold better than anything on Steam. The PC version is getting close to 7m copies sold, and the XBLA version sold another 3M copies. All of that for little to no discounts other than the alpha/beta version deals. I don't see how Steam will benefit Notch all that much. If anything, having it on Steam will just discourage people from buying it for 20 euros off his own site, and have them wait for sales if they have already waited this long.
D
Deleted member 102362
Unconfirmed Member
Ha. Steam. Boils.
I understand his position, but then again, he had no issue putting it on XBLA. Isn't that detrimental to independence/revenue (I know it's the only option for Xbox)? Or is he focusing solely on PC with these thoughts?
The only reason to put it on Steam is to potentially reach MORE people. Even if many PC gamers are aware of its existence, seeing it on the store, especially were it sold at any number of Steam sales, would increase the likelihood of more people buying it.
Its a reasonable concern, should they care to sell even more than they already have.
Valve has already claimed they give developers this as an option.
CrAzYLeGzLU
Member
I think even with them taking 30% off the top it would still be worth it for him to try and get it on there. Due to the fact that quite a few people that already own the game will double dip just to have it on Steam and those are sales they would have never been able to get just having it on their website.
Whilst I think Origin is fucking terrible, and I'll never trust EA enough to use it, I don't think that's entirely true. EA particularly snubbed Steam. They still sell their games on other storefronts, who probably take a cut of the sales.
I think EA spinning it as "restrictive terms of service" is bullshit, but what it boils down to is they want people to buy games from Steam and plug them into Origin, so EA can sell you DLC through their storefront. I don't think they have an issue with the seller taking a 30% cut, because they actively participate on other DD services, provided said DD service let's EA do things EA's way. Valve obviously wants you to buy DLC for Steam games from Steam, and patch games through Steam, so as such there's a deadlock, with neither side wanting to budge.
thiscoldblack
Unconfirmed Member
As much as I like Steam, Minecraft is fine as it is. It doesn't need Steam.
XeroSauce
Member
That is a lot of money you are asking someone to hand over when he has no problems with his current set-up.
It's an entirely different market. Exactly zero Xbox 360 exclusive users would have bought Minecraft if it were not put on XBLA (or a retail disc), whereas PC gamers are still very likely to buy Minecraft on PC if it is not on Steam. They have incentive to sell copies through their own means rather than do it on Steam in that market, so they are.
Delusibeta
Banned
He's probably focusing on PC, since it traditionally had no gatekeeper. On 360, you have to deal with Microsoft, on PC you don't. However, it seems that Valve has wound up effectively having a gatekeeper role with Steam (although that doesn't mean you have to deal with them to release a game on PC, see also the bunch of indies that only deal with Desura or Gamersgate or indeed solely sells their game direct. Hell, Minecraft has proved it's possible to be massively successful and not be on Steam).
Postal 3 says otherwise.
Diprosalic
Banned
He would be stupid to put it on steam.
Metalmurphy
Member
Thank god Notch is here to save us from the evil Gaben... what would the world be without him...
Lol, seriously, just simply say you want to keep the 30% everyone already knows it.
Lol, seriously, just simply say you want to keep the 30% everyone already knows it.
Sentenza
Member
That's not the point, quit the strawman argument.
It's not just a store. Being a store is just one of the things it does as a service.
I wish he would just say it's about the money then. Don't try to spin some stupid bullshit about some insane fear that Steam will rule the world and wanting to stay independent like Steam tries to take over your company. Just admit you want all of your money.
He certainly doesn't need it to be on Steam considering how much it has sold so far. No reason to give up 30% of that revenue (well, likely a bit less since he's paying for servers/bandwidth on top of that).
That being said, I, as a customer, would love this to be on Steam. Steam Workshop would be great for Minecraft.
That being said, I, as a customer, would love this to be on Steam. Steam Workshop would be great for Minecraft.
That's the whole problem. It's supposed to be just a store.
Just speculating, but it kind of sounds like he may have or is mulling over the idea of creating some kind of steam-like service, but for indies. Maybe he doesn't take a cut and just gives them the api/tools to bring their app into the 'storefront' or whatever it is or maybe he does. Dude does have a pile of cash and could do it if he felt like it, not sure what I would think about that though if it did end up happening.