Quarter machines and Pokémon cards are gambling, too. Parents are shitty. Their kids shouldn’t even be on steam until older and then why do they have credit cards? Parents are crap.
Apart from running gambling for children (pretty hefty thing to put aside, but still), what do you mean?
architect@thelemmy.club 5 weeks ago
Nalivai@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Parents have nothing to do with a company that designed and implemented a gambling machine into your kid’s favourite game about killing people.
Yerbouti@sh.itjust.works 5 weeks ago
They basically take away most of the profit margin of games created by studios. 30% is a huge cut for a virtual storefront. A single medium studios usually employ more people than steam as a whole.
deus@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Don’t Sony, MS and Nintendo take the same 30% cut from third-party games sold on their platforms?
ClamDrinker@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
It doesn’t really seem to be publicly verifiable, but if this article is to be believed, then yes. Would be kind of weird if they wouldn’t either, since selling games is their business too, and they have to compete with PC.
Yerbouti@sh.itjust.works 5 weeks ago
Whataboutism. The fact that someone is a POS doesn’t justify you being one. But if you really want to compare, they all have major studios under their wing and thousands of employees (sub 300 for steam). Epic also only takes 12%, and GOG let’s you actually own your games, DRM free (your steam library dies with you). I’m not defending any of these stores, just pointing out that steam isn’t the good guy gamers think they are. They care about profit, that’s it, yet any critisism is met with an army of gamers ready to give their life for capitalist selfish business.
Katana314@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
That is not a whataboutism. The claim was “30% is a huge cut for a virtual storefront”. The only way to qualify that comparison is to look at other virtual storefronts for games. If you have other cases of comparison to give apart from Sony, MS, and Nintendo, I’m open to look at them. Epic, so far, is a bit of a standout with its pricing.
architect@thelemmy.club 5 weeks ago
They’d be public if they only cared about profit. It might be 99.9% of what they care about but private businesses do have things they do that aren’t as profitable but they do them to make something better. Or because they want to see it in the world.
ClamDrinker@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
This isn’t really a problem though, more a consideration or trade off. If Valve’s services are worth that 30% cut, because you reach more people or don’t have to make other costs that would dwarf the cut, it’s worth it. Nobody’s forcing companies to sign up with Steam, other than indirectly because it turns out doing so is a sensible deal.