next »

[richicon]

This is a copy of Develop/Gamasutra blog post I wrote today - thoughts?



I was more than a little bemused to read about Gabe Newell’s recent attack on ‘closed platforms’ from Apple, Sony, etc.
 
Speaking as a developer who also self-publishes, I have yet to experience a more ‘closed’ marketplace than Steam (except perhaps XBLA).
 
Steam is operated slightly like a strange mystical organisation – I have spoken to lots of developers many of whom have the similar stories to tell; Steam never responds to them, they don’t open discussions with developers, Steam will find you if they want your product, and so on.
 
Incredibly I’ve even heard comments from developers that they try to enter the IGF with the main aim to try and help their chances of getting onto Steam!
 
If you are lucky enough to get a response (many don’t) the evaluation process is completely closed, and if they reject your title you get an email which basically states “Unfortunately, we don’t comment on our decision making process”. No further clarification of any sort will be given, and even if you ask if you could make changes or add additional features you will still get no useful response. This is the ultimate example of a closed distribution platform; we don’t want your game on Steam and no, we won’t tell you why or discuss future developments.
 
Some of Gabe’s choice quotes include:
 

"On the platform side, it’s sort of ominous that the world seems to be moving away from open platforms… They build a shiny sparkling thing that attracts users and then they control people’s access to those things."

Well Gabe – Steam is a really nice shiny PC distribution channel; and you control the access far more than platform holders control their platforms.
 
Every PC developer I have spoken to about Steam says the same thing – Steam sales are many times more than those of even the next biggest portal. If you don’t get onto Steam your PC sales potential will be significantly reduced.

"I consider Apple to be very closed. Let’s say you have a book business and you are charging 5 to 7 per cent gross margins. You can’t exist in an Apple world because they want 30 per cent and they don’t care that you only have 7 per cent to play with."

But Gabe – if I am lucky enough to get onto Steam then you want 30-40% of all my revenue!
 
He then went on to say that if Valve were to build a hardware platform it would be open to other distributors, in the interests of healthy competition.
 
Are you sure Gabe? Really? I’m sorry to say but I don’t really believe that based on how you run Steam!
 
Apparently Gabe is calling on the industry to open its closed games platforms, adding that the current insular approach is hurting business and stifling creativity.
 
Well that is exactly what Steam is doing – its doors are closed to many PC developers, and it hurts those developer’s businesses and absolutely stifles creativity by restricting access to a huge section of PC games buyers.
 
So I would respectfully like to ask Gabe to look at getting his own house in order before weighing in and trying to tackle other inequalities in the industry. Lead by example!

[Falmil]

I think a major difference is that for iOS, the app store is the only game in town, while on PC, you can release your game in a number of different ways. Its just that most of the other ways just won't do as well as a big distributor like Steam. PC is an open platform while iOS is not.

[eclectocrat]

A bunch of economists decided that predictable application of law is one of the most important aspect to economic prosperity.

That is the problem with investing in China, building for iOS, or submitting to Steam. The rules are opaque and subject to change at any time. The gamekeepers can make decisions without justifying them to anyone.

Because of the scale involved it will take a good deal of time for competitors to arise, but once they do, the most predictable and transparent will attract the most developers, because clear consistent rules, even if harsh, are a much better investment than the unknown.

[moi]

Steam would be great if they were playing fair.
They're not playing fair by not releasing their games on other platforms than their own.

They deserve to go down and burn.

[MattG]

Steam is so 2003

Lets embrace a future where everybody gets a shot, and originality is celebrated

vitriol removed

[Fallsburg]

That is the problem with investing in China, building for iOS, or submitting to Steam. The rules are opaque and subject to change at any time. The gamekeepers can make decisions without justifying them to anyone.

That is one of the greatest things I've ever read.  It reminds me very much of "You fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is 'never get involved in a land war in Asia'"

While I don't share MattG's vitriol, I do agree with the sentiment.  I mean, a form letter that says "Sorry, we don't think you are a good fit for us," would take all of 5 seconds to send out, and would be worlds better than *silence*.

[Oddball]

I submitted Hack, Slash, Loot to Steam and received a response from them about an hour later. I was amazed how quickly they were able to assess the suitability of the game for their service.

[jeffrobot]

I don't know. Isn't there a difference between an open platform and an open portal? He's not telling anyone they can't make PC games. What he's doing is ensuring all the games he sells achieve some certain level of quality that he's satisfied with.

Are you taking issue with how exclusive Steam is, or that they don't tell people how they could improve?

Because it's his right, and it makes sense, for him to be as exclusive as he wants. As far as not telling people how to improve... we may not have all the information. How do we know that half the games on Steam weren't given ways for them to improve an earlier build to make it acceptable?

[Falmil]

I've always kind of wondered why Valve/Apple haven't implemented a tiered approach to handle this. Good applications and games get a seal of approval from the company and more exposure while other games and applications end up in a separate area so search results and browsing are muddled so quality is maintained. The lower tier has a lot more competition as well as garbage which would have to be filtered by the community more or less via ratings.
Even though developers wouldn't get to be in THE store they wanted (or not right away without modifications suggested/required by the company), you're still basically next door where a great deal of people will still be looking for software. Even in the worst of circumstances surrounded by horrible games and broken apps, I would think it would be better than just having no decent distribution option at all.

[Zaphos]

Personally I think Gabe's open hardware + closed portal approach is logical -- Games require some amount of vetting to be allowed on a platform (moreso than books and movies), and it's better in some sense if stores only have to vet the products that they can profit on.  Letting alternative stores compete on the same hardware, on the other hand, is not costly to the platform holder -- they can make it clear they only vet products on their official storefront.

The amazon margin thing is not as silly as the op made it out to be, since it's about quashing competing storefronts -- you're comparing valve taking 30-40% of what you make per purchase to apple trying to take ~400% (er, 30%/7%?) of what amazon would make per purchase.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

I've always kind of wondered why Valve/Apple haven't implemented a tiered approach to handle this.

i suspect this is because they don't actually care about quality -- they care more about how much a game is expected to sell (they're a business, that's to be expected), and wouldn't want to waste their time adding games that they feel wouldn't sell enough to justify the time and expense it'd take them to add the game

anyway i don't think he's being hypocritical *unless* he was referring to steam as an open platform. if he was referring to pc games as an open platform, he's correct, anyone can sell a pc game without anyone's permission

[Falmil]

Well, having a lower tier would not mean they could not charge for listing on it or have other costs since it would actually cost money to host and manage each game even if the system were automated. They could charge a modest fee to cover costs, make a profit, and support independent developers in the process.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

the costs are actually very high for them; let's assume the guy who handles getting your game on steam is paid 20$ an hour. it often takes dozens of hours to get a game on steam; let's say 50 hours is average (that includes playing your game, working out a contract with you, handling the paperwork, testing your game, answering your questions, entering your data in the database, going through everything to make sure it's all in order, and so on). so unless they charge like $1000 they'd be losing money, and that isn't a modest fee

[moi]

OPEN PLATFORM MY ASS!

You can't play valve's games (HL2,TF2, etc..) anywhere elses than on steam.
Basically what they've done is that they've created a console on the PC.
They're killing the PC games market, they're ruining it for everybody devellopers and other publishers with anti-competitive practices.

[Falmil]

Basically what they've done is that they've created a console on the PC.

I wish Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft would do this instead of having consoles.

[jeffrobot]

How are they ruining it for other developers? Would other developers be better off if Steam didn't exist? They've created an excellent place to distribute your game. Yes, you have to pay them money, but if they didn't exist, what? You would just struggle to market your game through less effective channels, right? Are they actually hurting you by existing?

I don't really have an opinion on this yet, I'm just trying to understand.

[PompiPompi]

I would be worried if steam would get on other platforms, because then the PC will completely dissappear as a gaming platform and all other platforms will have their own "over lords".
Maybe this steam guy just want a piece of the (apple) pie and don't really care about open platforms. He is acting like a busniess so why would he care about healthy competition?

[MattG]

they arent hurting anyone. steam is so overrated. I think indie guys are actually the only ones on earth who give a fuck about steam. blah blah blah inset vitriol here

My impression is that gabe is the only one pulling in big bucks from steam

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

there are a lot of people who do not buy pc games unless they're on steam. there are especially a lot of people who told me they'd buy my game if it were on steam (i don't see how that matters, but whatever)

[Falmil]

The top selling products don't need Steam as much...because they are top selling.