Valve are in the legal spotlight again following the EU Commission Fine with a few more Steam troubles, as a new lawsuit has emerged with a claim about an "abuse" of their market power.
First picked up by the Hollywood Reporter, which has the full document showing the lawsuit was filed on January 28, was filed by 5 people together and doesn't appear to have any major companies backing it. The suit mentions how Valve require developers to sign an agreement that contains a "Most Favored Nations" provision to have developers keep the price of their games the same on Steam as other platforms. To be clear, they're talking about the Steam Distribution Agreement which isn't public and not what we can all see in the Steamworks documentation which talks about keys.
This means (if the claim is actually true) that developers cannot have their game on itch, GOG, Humble or anywhere else at a lower price, and so the lawsuit claims that other platforms are unable to compete on pricing "thereby insulating the Steam platform from competition" and that it "acts as an artificial barrier to entry by potential rival platforms and as higher prices lead to less sales of PC Games".
As part of the lawsuit it also names CD Projekt, Ubisoft, Devolver Digital and others.
It argues that if developers could legitimately set their own prices across different stores, they could lower their prices on stores that take a lower cut and "generate the same or even greater revenue per game as a result of the lower commissions, while lowering prices to consumers". They even directly bring up posts on Twitter from the Epic Games CEO, Tim Sweeney, like this one from 2019:
Steam has veto power over prices, so if a multi-store developer wishes to sell their game for a lower price on the Epic Games store than Steam, then: 1) Valve can simply say “no” 2) Pricing disparity would likely anger Steam users, leading to review bombing, etc
What are your thoughts on this? Should Valve be forced to allow developers to set their own prices, and not require their price to be the same as other stores?
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
Quoting: ZlopezQuoting: MohandevirReally not sure about this one... Nothing forces them to sell on Steam, anyway.
I disagree with this. If you want to hit a bigger audience you need to be on Steam, because it's a #1 platform for most of PC gamers.
Also the EPIC has it's own flaws, like exclusive titles or forcing the devs to drop Linux support for the games if they want to publish on EPIC. (Phoenix Point as an example or their own Unreal Tournament)
I'm using Steam because of what is Valve doing for the Linux community, but there are plenty of things I don't like about the Steam, like vendor lock-in or some of the ethical problems like this one. Next time I will look for something, I will first check the GOG, with minigalaxy it's really easy to manage your games now.
How is this en ethical problem? They don't dictate prices.
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: MohandevirWho is doing what for the customers? Selling on Steam? Not selling on Steam?Quoting: TheSHEEEPQuoting: MohandevirReally not sure about this one... Nothing forces them to sell on Steam, anyway.This is not how the PC gaming industry works, unfortunately.
You either sell on Steam or you can't sell your game because you don't got a large enough audience anywhere else.
It's either that or hoping for some kind of deal with Epic, Stadia, etc.
Sure, there are a handful of devs who managed to make some small profit without Steam, but those are so few and far between, they can be considered the exception that proves the rule.
EA tried to do that - as everyone knows, they failed and came crawling back to Steam.
Maybe, but my main point is that they are not doing this for the customers. This is just a false excuse. This one makes me really cynical.
This said... Blizzard is not on Steam, as far as I know? Overwatch? COD Warzone? WoW? Anybody?
Xbox, Playstation or Switch markets are not dictated by Steam either. Many developers are not publishing their games on PC at all.
Either way, of course not!
You don't develop games "for the customers", you do it either for yourself and/or because you want to make a profit with it - that's just a necessity of living in a world that requires money.
Some are nice enough to put extra effort in "for the customers" or because they feel like it's the right thing to do and those are generally favored by customers.
But when you get the option to earn 20% more just by selling somewhere else, on top of a fixed pile of cash by Epic (if this is what that was about) - you take it if you can. After all, you'll still be able to sell on Steam later. It's just a sound business decision. Wouldn't blame anyone for it, except if they promised not to beforehand.
1 Likes, Who?
That part: "keep the price of their games the same on Steam as other platforms" can be understood in two different manners.
1. Valve doesn't want the game to be available cheaper elsewhere.
2. Valve doesn't want the devs to take advantage of Steam's popularity and price the games higher on that platform.
If there was no such clause, who wants to bet if the games would be cheaper on other stores or just more expensive on Steam?
Last edited by pb on 1 February 2021 at 2:16 pm UTC
1. Valve doesn't want the game to be available cheaper elsewhere.
2. Valve doesn't want the devs to take advantage of Steam's popularity and price the games higher on that platform.
If there was no such clause, who wants to bet if the games would be cheaper on other stores or just more expensive on Steam?
Last edited by pb on 1 February 2021 at 2:16 pm UTC
3 Likes, Who?
Mohandevir Feb 1, 2021
Quoting: ZlopezAlso the EPIC has it's own flaws
You said it. Instead of working on a better store, let's bring down the dominent platform? Maybe if Epic wanted to offer a better service, they would realize that the 12% cut is unsustainable too?
9 Likes, Who?
Quoting: kuhpunktQuoting: ZlopezQuoting: MohandevirReally not sure about this one... Nothing forces them to sell on Steam, anyway.
I disagree with this. If you want to hit a bigger audience you need to be on Steam, because it's a #1 platform for most of PC gamers.
Also the EPIC has it's own flaws, like exclusive titles or forcing the devs to drop Linux support for the games if they want to publish on EPIC. (Phoenix Point as an example or their own Unreal Tournament)
I'm using Steam because of what is Valve doing for the Linux community, but there are plenty of things I don't like about the Steam, like vendor lock-in or some of the ethical problems like this one. Next time I will look for something, I will first check the GOG, with minigalaxy it's really easy to manage your games now.
How is this en ethical problem? They don't dictate prices.
They are saying that you can't have different prices on different platforms. So they actually dictate the price you need to have elsewhere. So if you have a game on Steam and GOG and there is GOG sale going on, you need to lower price on Steam too.
0 Likes
Quoting: TheSHEEEPWho is doing what for the customers? Selling on Steam? Not selling on Steam?
Either way, of course not!
You don't develop games "for the customers", you do it either for yourself and/or because you want to make a profit with it - that's just a necessity of living in a world that requires money.
Some are nice enough to put extra effort in "for the customers" or because they feel like it's the right thing to do and those are generally favored by customers.
But when you get the option to earn 20% more just by selling somewhere else, on top of a fixed pile of cash by Epic (if this is what that was about) - you take it if you can. After all, you'll still be able to sell on Steam later. It's just a sound business decision. Wouldn't blame anyone for it, except if they promised not to beforehand.
I don't get your point. You seem to minimize other practices because "business" but also get mad at Steam with this practice because affects customers (which is debatable as there are examples of lower prices in other platforms).
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: kuhpunktLiam linked the Tweet from Sweeney (which is what the lawsuit refers to, not the contract!) and people called him out already back in 2019.The lawsuit does not only link to that, as is made clear from the article it is talking about the Steam agreement. The Tweet was just mentioned as an example of it.
0 Likes
Quoting: Liam DaweQuoting: kuhpunktLiam linked the Tweet from Sweeney (which is what the lawsuit refers to, not the contract!) and people called him out already back in 2019.The lawsuit does not only link to that, as is made clear from the article it is talking about the Steam agreement. The Tweet was just mentioned as an example of it.
Without citing the contract and while making other false claims. So much of the lawsuit is about the 30% share and how Epic is so much better - which is not the point of the lawsuit at all.
3 Likes, Who?
Quoting: ZlopezQuoting: kuhpunktQuoting: ZlopezQuoting: MohandevirReally not sure about this one... Nothing forces them to sell on Steam, anyway.
I disagree with this. If you want to hit a bigger audience you need to be on Steam, because it's a #1 platform for most of PC gamers.
Also the EPIC has it's own flaws, like exclusive titles or forcing the devs to drop Linux support for the games if they want to publish on EPIC. (Phoenix Point as an example or their own Unreal Tournament)
I'm using Steam because of what is Valve doing for the Linux community, but there are plenty of things I don't like about the Steam, like vendor lock-in or some of the ethical problems like this one. Next time I will look for something, I will first check the GOG, with minigalaxy it's really easy to manage your games now.
How is this en ethical problem? They don't dictate prices.
They are saying that you can't have different prices on different platforms. So they actually dictate the price you need to have elsewhere. So if you have a game on Steam and GOG and there is GOG sale going on, you need to lower price on Steam too.
There is no evidence that this is true. That's the problem.
3 Likes, Who?
Quoting: kuhpunktYou're making a bunch of baseless claims. The lawsuit clearly talks about the Steam agreement and MFN, as quoted in the article. They can't link directly to the agreement, as Valve (like most companies) keep their actual agreements private. This is basic business stuff.Quoting: Liam DaweQuoting: kuhpunktLiam linked the Tweet from Sweeney (which is what the lawsuit refers to, not the contract!) and people called him out already back in 2019.The lawsuit does not only link to that, as is made clear from the article it is talking about the Steam agreement. The Tweet was just mentioned as an example of it.
Without citing the contract and while making other false claims. So much of the lawsuit is about the 30% share and how Epic is so much better - which is not the point of the lawsuit at all.
3 Likes, Who?
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me