looks like Steam has gone the way of other Greedy Corporates in the last few years.
a Monopoly for too long , Good thing that EPIC has step in to atleast put some competition.

30% cut from developers(not good for smaller devs & they get hidden in the deepest pit of game dumps), and gone are the Golden Days of STEAM SALES.

Why hasn't there been any class action lawsuits against Microshaft for their decades long monopoly?

80251Why hasn't there been any class action lawsuits against Microshaft for their decades long monopoly?

What monopoly? And they have been the target of those on several occasions iirc, in late 90's/2000's.

Either the judge is a clown or he's setting Wolfire & Co. to land face first in the dirt.

Steam's key policy prohibits the sale of Steam keys at a lower price point than what the product costs on Steam. This has no effect whatsoever on Epic or GOG versions of these products simply because they're not Steam keys, meaning that the Steam key price parity policy doesn't extend to those sales.

Steam store's progressive sale % cut is irrelevant to key sales because Steam doesn't charge a fee to generate keys, nor does it get a cut of the key sales, at all. 100% of the key sales go to the publisher.

You can read Steam's policies yourself here.

Fatalfurylooks like Steam has gone the way of other Greedy Corporates in the last few years.
a Monopoly for too long , Good thing that EPIC has step in to atleast put some competition.

30% cut from developers(not good for smaller devs & they get hidden in the deepest pit of game dumps), and gone are the Golden Days of STEAM SALES.

Zeppman217 also mentions it. but 30% isn't correct. It's progressive
Steam keys have no cut of the sales, and for the dev's are completly free

Hydroneer is solo dev(or was atleast, I don't know their current state) and is on the front page. I've attached steam, from private session. So no cookies and no login, as to show the standard view.
"We were here", "Astronner" and "Foundation" should be considered indie. And I know GTFO have been on the frontpage before, and they are indie (9 person at the time they were frontpage)
Statista gives 10'000+ games released in 2021 (it probably includes dlc's, packs, season pass, etc also) How would you determine which beloved indie game should be on the front page?
www.statista.com/statistics/552623/number-games-released-steam/


Have EGS started to cover for transaction cut, or is that one still on the customers over there?

Oh great, I can't wait for antitrust to ruin another market.

ZeppMan217Either the judge is a clown or he's setting Wolfire & Co. to land face first in the dirt.

Steam's key policy prohibits the sale of Steam keys at a lower price point than what the product costs on Steam. This has no effect whatsoever on Epic or GOG versions of these products simply because they're not Steam keys, meaning that the Steam key price parity policy doesn't extend to those sales.

Steam store's progressive sale % cut is irrelevant to key sales because Steam doesn't charge a fee to generate keys, nor does it get a cut of the key sales, at all. 100% of the key sales go to the publisher.

You can read Steam's policies yourself here.

Man what you wrote makes no sense at all. Steam keys can be priced lower, in fact it's really easy to find LEGIT places selling steam keys at a lower price than the steam price of the same key, fanatical for example.

One example
www.fanatical.com/en/game/rim-world
store.steampowered.com/app/294100/RimWorld/

The policy states that someone that has a game on Steam can't sell it cheaper on other stores like GOG or EGS, that's what they are contesting.

F Steam and their greed. I hope this changes. Stop shilling for Billionaires and companies.

Epic broke open the market for digital distribution, and its huge - every gatekeeper online is now under strict supervision and anyone can build a case. Eyes have been opened. This was never about Steam or Valve's monopoly or the 30% cut. This was and is about redistribution of power and halting Big Tech in their power grab. Is Epic the second coming of Christ now? Of course not, they're rats like everyone else. But a useful rat, quite the same as how Valve's Steam was a useful rat accelerating digital game distribution.

These class actions are just the tip of the iceberg. In the EU, legislation is underway to create more equal opportunity on the digital markets, and it will happen, and it will find itself copied by other Western countries and likely a few more.

Those still in denial and rock steady trust in 'free markets to fix this' will hear reality knocking on the door soon. We could (and likely will) let corporate control escalate further before true shit hits the fan, or put differently, before they identify it as the shit it has already been for the past ten-twenty years.

The gist / TL DR here is 'don't tie yourself or your opinion to companies, they don't work for you'. In practice that means all those idiots harping on about muh fantastic Steam featureset completely glossed over the fact they tied themselves to a distribution platform that serves as a cash machine for a select few. The main purpose isn't to be nice to you, its to make money off you and make you dependant on them. Those people with their Reddit feature-compare lists literally said 'I'm your Slave, Gabe' and were proud of it. How deluded can you get, and how blind for not seeing that. The power of social media.

Bomby569Man what you wrote makes no sense at all. Steam keys can be priced lower, in fact it's really easy to find LEGIT places selling steam keys at a lower price than the steam price of the same key, fanatical for example.

One example
www.fanatical.com/en/game/rim-world
store.steampowered.com/app/294100/RimWorld/

The policy states that someone that has a game on Steam can't sell it cheaper on other stores like GOG or EGS, that's what they are contesting.

F Steam and their greed. I hope this changes. Stop shilling for Billionaires and companies.

Could you quote the exact part from the Steamworks Docs that explicitly prohibits you from selling a product you've released on Steam for a lower price than what you've set on Steam? There is such a rule for Steam keys,

which would have no effect on Epic or GOG versions of your products because they are not sold in the form of Steam keys, they are store specific versions that are in no way connected with Steam. For example, there's an Epic version of Borderlands 3 on Amazon and a Steam version of Borderlands 3. Guess which one comes in the form of a Steam key?

Vayra86These class actions are just the tip of the iceberg. In the EU, legislation is underway to create more equal opportunity on the digital markets, and it will happen, and it will find itself copied by other Western countries and likely a few more.

Is that why the EU forbade country specific product pricing within the EU, forcing poorer countries, like Romania, to pay the same prices as the wealthier ones, like Germany?

FrickWhat monopoly? And they have been the target of those on several occasions iirc, in late 90's/2000's.

MS must be dying after seeing what Google, Amazon, Apple and others have been getting away with these days compared to how frequently they were under fire in 90s and early 00s. It seems like FCC, and other agencies have turned into *imps.

ZeppMan217Is that why the EU forbade country specific product pricing within the EU, forcing poorer countries, like Romania, to pay the same prices as the wealthier ones, like Germany?

Yes. And for similar reasons there are initiatives to reward citizens of the EU in the same way, so that we're not abusing, for example, Polish (seasonal) workers by paying below minimum wage for our own country. And to support the transitional periods, there are absolutely massive EU budgets available.

Change means something's going to have to give, and giving is always painful. But after giving, comes give & take. A good market is built up of equals that are interdependant, not just dependant one-way. Good deals are made of win-win situations.

Bomby569Man what you wrote makes no sense at all. Steam keys can be priced lower, in fact it's really easy to find LEGIT places selling steam keys at a lower price than the steam price of the same key, fanatical for example.

Can't really judge from one sample at one point of time. Heck, your example might actually be of one dev/publisher breaking the said policy in some way. "Can" =\= "legal" or "acceptable."
Also, from the same, linked policy: "It's OK to run a discount 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."

Bomby569The policy states that someone that has a game on Steam can't sell it cheaper on other stores like GOG or EGS, that's what they are contesting.

Nope. This policy is only about "Steam" keys, it's literally the title of the page! And the first section explicitly refers to the purchase of "steam keys."

Edit:

ZeppMan217Could you quote the exact part from the Steamworks Docs that explicitly prohibits you from selling a product you've released on Steam for a lower price than what you've set on Steam? There is such a rule for Steam keys,

Surprisingly, not even Wolfire's own case claims otherwise. But amusingly, they used Origin, GFWL(XBL/MS store?) and EGS' failure to reach Steam's popularity as evidence to the effects of this policy. Go figure...

Vayra86Yes. And for similar reasons there are initiatives to reward citizens of the EU in the same way, so that we're not abusing, for example, Polish (seasonal) workers by paying below minimum wage for our own country.

Change means something's going to have to give, and giving is always painful. But after giving, comes give & take.

Ah, yes. And when will those initiatives go into effect? Because the citizens of the less affluent members of the EU are forced to pay out the ass now, today, and tomorrow, and the day after, and so on.

ZeppMan217Could you quote the exact part from the Steamworks Docs that explicitly prohibits you from selling a product you've released on Steam for a lower price than what you've set on Steam? There is such a rule for Steam keys,

it's on the article if you read it: "Key Price Parity Provision". I assume it's a provision on the contract they have to agree/sign. And even beyond that because according to the judge's rulling i assume it's also an unspoken rule, so i guess you do you and we remove your game from our store.

The company “allegedly enforces this regime through a combination of written and unwritten rules” imposing its own conditions on how even “non-Steam-enabled games are sold and priced,” Coughenour wrote. “These allegations are sufficient to plausibly allege unlawful conduct.”
news.bloomberglaw.com/class-action/valve-loses-bid-to-end-antitrust-case-over-steam-gaming-platform

ShihabyoooCan't really judge from one sample at one point of time. Heck, your example might actually be of one dev/publisher breaking the said policy in some way. "Can" =\= "legal" or "acceptable."
Also, from the same, linked policy: "It's OK to run a discount 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."


Nope. This policy is only about "Steam" keys, it's literally the title of the page! And the first section explicitly refers to the purchase of "steam keys."

are you a pirate? i can't believe you're talking about steam and don't know it's a common pratice for 3rd party stores to sell steam keys at a lower price then on steam.

What page? the one quoted by someone here? that has nothing to do with the rulling.

Bomby569it's on the article if you read it: "Key Price Parity Provision". I assume it's a provision on the contract they have to agree/sign. And even beyond that because according to the judge's rulling i assume it's also an unspoken rule, so i guess you do you and we remove your game from our store.

The company “allegedly enforces this regime through a combination of written and unwritten rules” imposing its own conditions on how even “non-Steam-enabled games are sold and priced,” Coughenour wrote. “These allegations are sufficient to plausibly allege unlawful conduct.”
news.bloomberglaw.com/class-action/valve-loses-bid-to-end-antitrust-case-over-steam-gaming-platform

I've read the article in full, and the only relevant part is the Steam key price parity which, as I've explained before, would have no effect on non-Steam key versions of products. The rest is hearsay.

I'm really eager to see Wolfire's evidence, cause they've got a lot of shit to back up.

ZeppMan217I've read the article in full, and the only relevant part is the Steam key price parity which, as I've explained before, would have no effect on non-Steam key versions of products. The rest is hearsay.

I'm really eager to see Wolfire's evidence, cause they've got a lot of shit to back up.

what you explained makes no sense and you're still insisting on it. Like i said before are you all pirating games that don't know places like Fanatical, Humble, Indiegala, etc... sell steam keys at a discount from the steam price for the same game ALL THE TIME

Someone that regular buys game can't be saying something so absurd with this much conviction

ZeppMan217Ah, yes. And when will those initiatives go into effect? Because the citizens of the less affluent members of the EU are forced to pay out the ass now, today, and tomorrow, and the day after, and so on.

When political and civilian hearts and minds are ready, as such things go in democracies ;)

Vayra86When political and civilian hearts and minds are ready, as such things go in democracies ;)

The Bastille is a long drive for the Polish and Romanian EUers though. ;)

ShihabyoooNope. This policy is only about "Steam" keys, it's literally the title of the page! And the first section explicitly refers to the purchase of "steam keys."

Surprisingly, not even Wolfire's own case claims otherwise. But amusingly, they used Origin, GFWL(XBL/MS store?) and EGS' failure to reach Steam's popularity as evidence to the effects of this policy. Go figure...

Obviously. The cases of Origin and EGS underline that Valve has a chokehold on the digital distribution market, and the underlying reasons are limitations on access to the market because of Steam's dominant position. How explicit the policies of Steam really are, is irrelevant, if the result of policy is that market access is problematic for companies in the actual practice, you have a possible case.

The Steam Key is often the only way for developers to access the market without creating their whole own ecosystem, infrastructure etc. Steam is the gatekeeper here, but it is inherently much more than that - it also defines how you sell your product. Steam doesn't own your product or your license, they're just supposed to handle digital distribution and take a cut for it. Not influence the way it is priced, either inside or outside the store. That's exactly the inequality that is at stake here. The component 'steam key' is of questionable relevance. Its just a means to an end.

And let's translate this to practice: say you can sell your own game for 40 bucks and make a solid margin. Now Steam takes 30% of the distribution cake. You can't sell your game on Steam for 40 bucks plus 30%. Steam is directly eating into your margins. Say you created an offline-only game ; Steam is nothing more than what you could do with a simple fileserver supported by some cheap ID-based game key security against piracy (effectively, that IS Steam's DRM too), but still eats 30%. Now, as a seller of your own product, you're unable to use the premier distribution channel in the market, that is trusted by consumers and well known, unless you're willing to hand in 30% of product's entire capacity to make buck. That is the equivalent of not being able to get your products 'on shelves' in any physical store but only through your own shitty webshop nobody knows, or by driving to your house in the middle of nowhere. This is where the market alternatives like EGS and Origin come in: do they offer somewhat similar access to the market, a similar 'premier' distribution channel? Of course not, because that is what Steam's dominant position underlines. So its pay the higher price, or die in obscurity.

That's pretty steep. Perpetual in this case is meaningless, because effectively, you're not allowed to price below Steam even though economically, common sense dictates you should because Steam offers comfort of life which can easily cost a bit extra. Games sell over long periods of time. How does Valve measure, and how does it enforce? Its a big black box. And how are you, sad little dev studio, going to fight big Valve based on that? This topic is a good example of the uncertainty related to Steam policies. Also, consider that Valve owns Steam's data. So there is also a power inequality in terms of transparency here, apart from what Valve chooses to offer, and it is the basis of store visibility, product placement, etc.

Its ratty, its filthy, and its exactly how these things work. The epiphany comes after seeing results - and the results are clear. Valve dominated, and it still does, and not just because it is 'better'. Its really not, its f'ing expensive and took its sweet time to present the so called fantastic featureset it has today. Other than that Steam is nothing more than a glorified shopping cart that drives your stuff home for you.

Bomby569are you a pirate? i can't believe you're talking about steam and don't know it's a common pratice for 3rd party stores to sell steam keys at a lower price then on steam.

Not all 3rd party stores sell keys provided by the developer/publisher (Remember the GMG fiasco?). And as I've demonstrated, the policy does not prohibit selling something at a lower price elsewhere while offering it on Steam at a higher price at a single point of time, it only prohibits not providing the same discount for steam users at all.
There's also the very simple scenario that Valve may just elect to not enforce the policy all the time or fail to do so.

Regardless, the text on the policy is clear: The steam keys that valve generates for the dev/publisher for free are not to be sold at a perpetually lower price elsewhere.
What one store or the other has listed doesn't change the implications of this policy, no more than a high count of petty theft does a state's penal code.

Bomby569What page? the one quoted by someone here? that has nothing to do with the rulling.

Paragraphs 127 through 132 of the complaint (linked above) are about this policy. The part concerning the key price parity mentioned in the OP involves this policy. The only part where is not (directly) relevant is the one about the coupling of Steam as a platform and Steam as a store front (which I do agree with. The ruling I mean).

Edit:

Vayra86Obviously. The cases of Origin and EGS underline that Valve has a chokehold on the digital distribution market, and the underlying reasons are limitations on access to the market because of Steam's dominant position. How explicit the policies of Steam really are, is irrelevant, if the result of policy is that market access is problematic for companies in the actual practice, you have a possible case.

That's the thing, Wolfire's complaint doesn't really prove any illegal/anti-competitive activity carried out by Valve to this end. Most of their rhetoric is based on the price parity provisions, which only affect games distributed on Steam. It has zero effect on competing platform/store combos a la EGS and Origin.

That said, I do believe that Valve should decouple the platform from the store and be regulated so as not to have dominance in one be used to prop the other, same as any other digital store. But using the key policy to prove this necessity is illogical. At least, so long as they are provided at no cost to the dev while Valve is left covering all the hosting/servicing costs.

ShihabyoooNot all 3rd party stores sell keys provided by the developer/publisher (Remember the GMG fiasco?). And as I've demonstrated, the policy does not prohibit selling something at a lower price elsewhere while offering it on Steam at a higher price at a single point of time, it only prohibits not providing the same discount for steam users at all.
There's also the very simple scenario that Valve may just elect to not enforce the policy all the time or fail to do so.

Regardless, the text on the policy is clear: The steam keys that valve generates for the dev/publisher for free are not to be sold at a perpetually lower price elsewhere.
What one store or the other has listed doesn't change the implications of this policy, no more than a high count of petty theft does a state's penal code.


Paragraphs 127 through 132 of the complaint (linked above) are about this policy. The part concerning the key price parity mentioned in the OP involves this policy. The only part where is not (directly) relevant is the one about the coupling of Steam as a platform and Steam as a store front (which I do agree with. The ruling I mean).

We all now there are grey market stores, that's obviusly not what i was talking about, i even mentioned the stores by name. Saying there are no stores selling STEAM KEYS at a discount or that it is a one off case is absurd.

The policy in question doesn't allow someone selling the same game at Steam and EGS or GOG at different prices, it has nothing to do with steam key pricing, EGS and GOG don't deal with steam keys . You continusly quote "steam keys" when this obviously has nothing to do with steam keys, and their pricing is not enforced, not in one off cases, but ALL THE TIME, not on grey market stores but LEGIT STORES.

Yeah, you read the ToS in your contract. Then you sign it. Then - *surprised Pikachu face*

Bomby569The policy in question doesn't allow someone selling the same game at Steam and EGS or GOG at different prices, it has nothing to do with steam key pricing, EGS and GOG don't deal with steam keys .

I keep quoting what's in the complaint, which refers to the same linked policy.
Please note: 1) The "Steam-Key-enabled games" wording, and 2) The cited policy and link at the footnote.



I honestly don't know of any policy that prohibits selling a game on EGS or GOG at different pricing, nor do I see one being cited to in this text. Care to point us at one?

ShihabyoooI keep quoting what's in the complaint, which refers to the same linked policy.
Please note: 1) The "Steam-Key-enabled games" wording, and 2) The cited policy and link at the footnote.



I honestly don't know of any policy that prohibits selling a game on EGS or GOG at different pricing, nor do I see one being cited to in this text. Care to point us at one?

OP's post, the 1st post:
"The Key Price Parity Provision is a policy that prohibits game developers from pricing their games cheaper on competing storefronts such as the Epic Games Store even if they offer lower fees"

EGS DOESN'T SELL STEAM KEYS.


edit (the rest of the quotes, i had to get away for a sec to do life stuff):

The judge noted that Valve "relies on provisions within Steamworks Documentation to impose conditions on how non-Steam-enabled games are sold and priced." and that "Valve also threatens game publishers with punitive action, including removal of their Steam-enabled games, if they sell non-Steam-enabled versions of those games at lower prices,"

ShihabyoooI keep quoting what's in the complaint, which refers to the same linked policy.
Please note: 1) The "Steam-Key-enabled games" wording, and 2) The cited policy and link at the footnote.



I honestly don't know of any policy that prohibits selling a game on EGS or GOG at different pricing, nor do I see one being cited to in this text. Care to point us at one?

Any game distributed through Steam. Ergo, that humble deal needs to pop up somewhere in time on Steam Store too. That's rather strange though isn't it, when you're already forking a cut to Steam for distribution to begin with? When you consider humble bundle is a charity fund deal? Or any other myriad of reasons that would want you to promote your product somewhere.

The relevance though as I tried to explain earlier, is questionable. Steam-key-enabled or not, this is about market access and the freedom to determine your own price as a product owner. The distributor has no say in this, its ridiculous, because it only serves to further their own market share at the expense of customers that are already paying for a service.