• Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      What does that mean? They take a cut of every game sold, they didn’t make that product. They make the platform the games other people made are sold on.

      It’s a good platform nonetheless, but IDK how much of it is actually “earned” as opposed to just a big cut taken from someone.

        • Asafum@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          I never said those things were free. I did say the platform is good, but their income is from the games sold on the platform that other people made.

          I don’t know what metric would properly capture money/time spent on infrastructure and servers, but I don’t think it’s “money per head” if that money is from games sold and doesn’t strictly relate to how good their platform performs.

          • Kedly@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            If games company’s could make more money by not releasing on Steam, they would. The fact that they accept the 30% cut means that Steam is in fact leading to more sales for those developers and thus earns its cut. No one HAS to sell their product on Steam, PC’s are a completely open marketplace