Steam is a product, Valve is a company.

https://github.com/philipl/pifs

Retail stores.

why would they have any need or business sense to charge less?

Because their business is different from steam? Or maybe because they are more experienced in business and could show the world how it’s done? Wait, why do we even assume that Steam had such huge influence around the time when other digital stores popped up (some of which also didn’t live very long)? The pc gaming was massively considered niche for a very long time, only until recent years. I can’t imagine Apple going “oh right, we are creating our own digital store mostly for mobile devices so we need to check how that PC gaming company does their business, to copy their practices”.

for your original claims

Everything is fine with them.

What disparity?

The disparity between a good quality product and useless crap? The disparity between the %% of profits that roughly goes to single employee in different companies? The disparity between 1 yacht and 6 yachts? You choose.

It would put the money in the hands of workers

You can put it in their hands right now. Sell your game in your own store and get 100% profits.

Good luck with that? I don’t know how much far this reality is, but I’d guess it’s not current century. Not that I wouldn’t support it, it just doesn’t seem realistic and positive st the same time right now.

No, prove that what you said is correct. It’s historical data in your case, about how Steam started the 30% trend, allegedly.

My claim was that 30% was a standard before Steam, not at all about how much less profitable it would be for them if it was different.

Also putting the blame on Steam for others allegedly following its model is not logical if your point is about how obvious it always was that 30% is excessive.

You realize the others only charge that much since steam set the standard… yeah?

I’ll wait for you to prove this.

Those are not my points, you made them up. My point is, there are no rules that prevent it from happening. No competition to make it seem fair at least for some other companies who are not Valve.

I have complains about Steam but financial part is hardly one of them. It’s not that they deserve the money, it’s that most others are being hugely ineffective, which creates this disparity.

It’s funny how you suggest that adding any part of those 30% to the pocket of actual devs would solve any problems.

My other points in other threads remain valid. I think you just misunderstood them.

I’m not defending anyone. It’s you who’s attacking people, for questionable reasons.

I don’t get what you want. Propose a reality where it’ll be impossible to become a billionaire? Would it be like communism or something?

Epics are posers at this point, or one could say a fake platform. Remove Fortnite from them and it will shut down immediately, especially at 12%.

Yachts. This can’t be more silly. And what would you say if he didn’t own those yachts? “Look at the bank account of that guy who owns almost a whole gaming platform because others are not qualified enough to compete with his company”?

Government of which country or countries? You wouldn’t think they would stay in the US if what you said will happen, would you?

If they took 0.5 %,

Took from what? Is this about the revenue share again? Stop listening to that idiot Timmy.

We know that many others take the same %% so I could say even if they took 50% they wouldn’t deliver a product as good as Steam.

Valve just takes 10% more than everyone else

What do you mean? 30% is used by almost every digital store.

Because that leads to the degradation of the software? Or because they provide most of the valid feedback? Or because that would help more users become more advanced?

I don’t know what do you think I wanted. I wanted to understand what American people think. If they like to avoid hard answers, it seems very similar to avoiding necessary solutions (at this point it may seem I support violence but I don’t). The scenario is becoming bad but everyone seems fine just doing nothing, as if people lost the right to affect anything.

That didn’t answer my question.

You said there are too many stupid users, then you said the software has to suit them. I see this as a problem when software targets stupid users because then the rest suffer from it being less convenient for them.

Also I think it’s hilarious how things become more complex for developers who should actually have the power to fork things in order to make them more suitable for advanced users. And apple is a good example of that. I would be a huge iphone fan if it wasn’t a walled garden in software terms.

Just wondering would it be any better if he was shot dead?