Microsoft Microsoft reduces its cut of PC game revenue on the Windows Store to 12%

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

"Microsoft shakes up PC gaming by reducing Windows store cut to just 12 percent - The Verge"

Microsoft shakes up PC gaming by reducing Windows store cut to just 12 percent - The Verge

WWW.THEVERGE.COM

 

 

Your move, Valve.

Most game devs don't think Steam earns its 30% revenue cut | PC Gamer

WWW.PCGAMER.COM

---

Only 6% of developers say game stores are justified in taking a cut of 30% or higher.

 

[Keyser_Soze]

Maybe that will mean fewer Epic exclusives.

[Xbob42]

How does this "shake up the PC industry?" No one gives a shit about the Windows store. Like actually nobody. Not exactly a high stakes move when they sell 12 copies a year.

[Keyser_Soze]

Yeah, Windows store is still pretty trash.

[Greatoneshere]

Why does Microsoft have a Windows store for games when they have Game Pass? Aren't they basically the same thing? Or is Game Pass subscription only whereas you can buy individual games on the Windows store?

[Keyser_Soze]

29 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

Why does Microsoft have a Windows store for games when they have Game Pass? Aren't they basically the same thing? Or is Game Pass subscription only whereas you can buy individual games on the Windows store?

 

Game pass is a separate app and it downloads games through the windows store. You launch the games through the game pass app. 

Everything patches through the windows store too.

[Greatoneshere]

16 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

Game pass is a separate app and it downloads games through the windows store. You launch the games through the game pass app. 

Everything patches through the windows store too.

 

Then it seems to be pretty integral to Game Pass it sounds like?

[Keyser_Soze]

5 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

Then it seems to be pretty integral to Game Pass it sounds like?

 

No, because you can search the store and as long as you have game pass you can install it from the store.

 

Also, I should issue a correction here it's not the "game pass app" it's the Xbox app, that replaced the Xbox console companion app.

[stepee]

3 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

Then it seems to be pretty integral to Game Pass it sounds like?

 

Yes, it’s tied together, you can actually say download a game on game pass from the ms store and it’ll show as installing in the xbox game pass app.

 

They are both terrible in mostly the same way, installing and removing games is prone to errors, or just general bad design. For instance, if you reinstall windows and any of your drives have MS Store games, they will not load after, and you can’t delete them through any normal method. Unless you take the time to figure it out, you are just stuck with that wasted space.

 

And yeah, the idea is the MS store is to buy games, Xbox app is more of a launcher and for game pass.

[TwinIon]

The MS store needs a serious overhaul, and I wouldn't buy anything on that store until they do. Especially with Gamepass I've had so many issues installing and launching games that in at least one case I bought the game on Steam to get out of the MS store hell.

 

Good on them for reducing their cut, but it's not something that would make me use the store again.

[JPDunks4]

I think the main purpose of this is for more PC games to also be made for the Windows Store integration.  Game Pass on PC is only for games that are also listed on the WIndows Store.  Something like Outriders wasn't on PC Game Pass, possibly because it simply wasn't on the W10 Storefront and couldn't be integrated into PC Game Pass.  

 

The more Publishers willing to list games on the W10 store, the more games Microsoft can easily work deals for and add into PC Game Pass so it doesn't feel like its missing out on some big games.

 

Of course this is speculation, and I don't know how easy or hard it is to simply add a game to a W10 store for a developer/publisher. But I did see the fact Outriders wasn't being sold on the W10 store as a possible reason it may not have been included.

[Xbob42]

What they should instead of trying to integrate games onto the store (from a technical standpoint) is demolish their awful fucking store and just let people download a normal exe like everyone else. Windows Store apps are so terrible and closed off and despite it being their own fucking OS they seem to have more trouble than anyone just getting things working properly.

[crispy4000]

I don't care so much about where I buy a PC game these days.  MS already walked back some of their worst storefront decisions.  Not sure about modding these days though.

Steam-partnered storefronts are still the cheapest legitimate option to own games.  Microsoft/Epic have to illustrate they can compete with them if they want my business.  DLC too.

[AbsolutSurgen]

The MS store is not relevant -- it's a terrible experience, and I've had tons of technical issues with it.

 

It's easy to reduce it's cut on the store that nobody uses, yet leave it at 30% on the one that has a relatively high amount of revenue.

[JPDunks4]

I do believe they are doing a pretty huge overhaul of the store, but I honestly haven't been following it.  I hardly use their store even though I am a Game Pass Ultimate Sub.

[crispy4000]

In related news

 

 

Let's see someone grow a pair and take on the console manufacturers for once.  Devs smell blood in the water with the Apple/Epic shenanigans.  But the royalties on consoles are untouchable because... MS/Nintendo/Sony are all in it together?

It's strange to think some developers get a 18% bigger cut from a purchase from the Windows store, but not on Xbox.

[AbsolutSurgen]

1 hour ago, crispy4000 said:

In related news

 

 

Let's see someone grow a pair and take on the console manufacturers for once.  Devs smell blood in the water with the Apple/Epic shenanigans.  But the royalties on consoles are untouchable because... MS/Nintendo/Sony are all in it together?

It's strange to think some developers get a 18% bigger cut from a purchase from the Windows store, but not on Xbox.

Valve’s pricing restrictions should be a big antitrust concern. 

[crispy4000]

1 hour ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

Valve’s pricing restrictions should be a big antitrust concern. 

Still stands that the console manufacturers are charging the same cut, if not more in some cases.
 

[Fizzzzle]

That was a disingenuous part of this whole debate. Valve does not take any more from publishers than Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo.

 

I do think it would be good if Epic started a kind of race to the bottom. Both Epic and Valve have more money than God at this point, so I'm sure they can afford it.

 

Though I also wonder how long Epic will keep their low cut of sales once they are publicly traded.

[stepee]

Wow that’s awesome that games will be 18% cheaper now, great for devs too since their games will be cheaper and probably sell better than ever!

[crispy4000]

24 minutes ago, stepee said:

Wow that’s awesome that games will be 18% cheaper now, great for devs too since their games will be cheaper and probably sell better than ever!

Yup.  Epic’s best sales have been when they fronted $10 coupons price themselves.

 

Publishers aren’t really charging less there.  The real deals are Steam keys off Valve’s storefront.  Makes an even better case for Steam in court.

 

I wonder what the dev cut is like in those places.  (The legit ones, like Humble, GMG, Fanatical)

[stepee]

3 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

Yup.  Epic’s best sales have been when they fronted $10 coupons price themselves.

 

Publishers aren’t really charging less there.  The real deals are Steam keys off Valve’s storefront.  Makes an even better case for Steam in court.

 

I wonder what the dev cut is like in those places.  (The legit ones, like Humble, GMG, Fanatical)

 

It’s honestly just money changing hands as far as the publishers will give all the extra money to about 5 people in the company and that’ll be that. The big difference is of course indies where there is a really positive change with this ratio switch because if I’m not going to be getting the savings either way I’d rather the indie devs get it than valve/sony/ms/epic/etc

[Ghost_MH]

4 hours ago, Fizzzzle said:

That was a disingenuous part of this whole debate. Valve does not take any more from publishers than Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo.

 

I do think it would be good if Epic started a kind of race to the bottom. Both Epic and Valve have more money than God at this point, so I'm sure they can afford it.

 

Though I also wonder how long Epic will keep their low cut of sales once they are publicly traded.

 

The console manufacturers have an easier argument against antitrust than Steam. They'll argue that they sell hardware at a loss to make up for it on the backend with their 30% cut that they use to fund R&D for their next console while doing everything else Steam does. There's no way anyone can argue that Steam does more than any console manufacturer does. Maybe Nintendo normally selling their hardware at profit eats into that argument, but Nintendo likely gets away with saying that their market strategy is focused on exclusives, including their own self published games as their primary market strategy. Consoles are just much more complicated beasts, especially once we bring retail into the mix. Even Nintendo can argue that they try to keep retail and digital prices in parity to appease retailers and that cutting into their profits there makes the already stained relationship with retailers worse.

 

Either way, Sony can very easily argue in court that the PS5 will have to be sold for like $200 more if they don't continue getting their larger cut and that the market can't sustain a console that expensive. Valve can make no such argument in defense of their 30%.

 

3 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

Yup.  Epic’s best sales have been when they fronted $10 coupons price themselves.

 

Publishers aren’t really charging less there.  The real deals are Steam keys off Valve’s storefront.  Makes an even better case for Steam in court.

 

I wonder what the dev cut is like in those places.  (The legit ones, like Humble, GMG, Fanatical)

 

That's why the Humble guy is suing Valve. He's arguing that Valve's most favored nation clause puts devs in a bind. If you're on Steam, you need to sell the game the same price everywhere else. You can't just sell it for $5 cheaper on Microsoft's or Epic's storefronts. I mean, you could go exclusive to EGS but there's a sizable chunk of the market that will skip even games they want just because it's not on their favored storefront. Steam's most favored nation clause does nothing but hinder competition and hurt developers according the the Humble guy's lawsuit.

 

Didn't someone else sure Valve for this very same reason earlier this year or maybe last year?

[Keyser_Soze]

5 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

There's no way anyone can argue that Steam does more than any console manufacturer does.

 

Steam does more than any other storefront does, in fact they are so big and offer so many features they are practically their own platform.

[Xbob42]

Yeah are we using the same platform? Valve has done so much more for devs and consumers both than any of the console manufacturers. They've had better, more reliable features for FREE for years before any console adopted them (and charged for them to boot) -- Steam has been the storefront making the most advancements over the last decade by a country fuckin' mile and the consoles still lag behind by years in many regards.

[Ghost_MH]

11 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

Steam does more than any other storefront does, in fact they are so big and offer so many features they are practically their own platform.

 

Steam has a more feature rich storefront, but they also aren't dealing with the manufacturing and distribution challenges the console manufacturers are. The gulf between them in vast. Valve doesn't even sell their Index in retail and even then, they're only moving headsets numbered in the low 100,000 a year. Sony is moving more hardware than that every month, at a loss.

 

Valve doesn't do more for consumers and developers than Sony and Microsoft do. Valve isn't selling graphics cards at a loss to get you playing games on PC. The service they provide is very different than the one the console manufacturers do. Do I like the service console manufacturers offer? Not entirely. That's why I do the vast majority of my gaming on PC. However, I can plainly see that they're doing a lot more to make games accessible to folks than Valve is.

[Ghost_MH]

11 minutes ago, Xbob42 said:

Yeah are we using the same platform? Valve has done so much more for devs and consumers both than any of the console manufacturers. They've had better, more reliable features for FREE for years before any console adopted them (and charged for them to boot) -- Steam has been the storefront making the most advancements over the last decade by a country fuckin' mile and the consoles still lag behind by years in many regards.

 

Free for us, but 30% for developers. They weren't doing it for the goodness of their hearts, but yes, it was a major offer back when they first started. I mean, I've had my Steam account since 2005. I remember what the 80s and 90s were like for PC gaming. It sucked, but those days are behind us. Bandwidth and cloud storage is a commodity and Valve is doing nobody but themselves any favors by blocking games from being discounted on other storefronts, even if it has nothing to do with Steam or any Steam keys.

 

Either way, I'm trying to argue why complaining about Sony and Microsoft's 30% against Valve's is silly because the console manufacturers offer more to consumers and developers alike. They sell hardware at a loss to create a market for selling games in an environment where not everyone is interested in PC gaming. Epic has their own PC and Android storefronts and even for them, the VAST majority of they're money comes from sales on Playstation and Xbox.

 

I've never owned an Xbox and the last time I gave Sony money was for Horizon Zero Dawn on EGS, but before that it was for the PS2. I have no horse in this race, but the difference in what they offer to consumers is plain as day and makes the argument for their 30% cut FAR easier than Valve.

[crispy4000]

14 hours ago, Ghost_MH said:

That's why the Humble guy is suing Valve. He's arguing that Valve's most favored nation clause puts devs in a bind. If you're on Steam, you need to sell the game the same price everywhere else. You can't just sell it for $5 cheaper on Microsoft's or Epic's storefronts. I mean, you could go exclusive to EGS but there's a sizable chunk of the market that will skip even games they want just because it's not on their favored storefront. Steam's most favored nation clause does nothing but hinder competition and hurt developers according the the Humble guy's lawsuit.

 

Didn't someone else sure Valve for this very same reason earlier this year or maybe last year?

Could you source that?  Games with Steam keys frequently hit historical lows first on Humble, Fanatical, GMG, etc.  Even pre-orders can be that way.

 

[Ghost_MH]

40 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

Could you source that?  Games with Steam keys frequently hit historical lows first on Humble, Fanatical, GMG, etc.  Even pre-orders can be that way.

 

A source for Steam's most favored nation clause?

 

Lawsuit claims Valve is abusing its market dominance to keep prices high | PC Gamer

WWW.PCGAMER.COM

---

The lawsuit also names developers including Ubisoft, CD Projekt, and Devolver Digital.

 

Steam's rules only apply once the game is up on Steam. If a dev is taking pre-orders on their own sites prior to its launch on Steam then that wouldn't run counter to Steam contracts.

 

Humble's lawsuit against Steam is a little more nuanced. They're arguing that even Steam keys should be allowed to be sold at a lower price than on Steam, itself. That is, Steam allows devs to sell they're own Steam keys without Valve's 30% cut on there own site. However, they aren't allowed to cut they're prices by, say, 20% to entice gamers to their own storefront even if their game doesn't use Steam for anything more than distribution. That leaves 90% of gamers going directly to Steam since it's already they're platform of choice rather than go to a dev's own site or service to pick up games. Like I said, it's more nuanced than the suit from earlier this year.

 

Humble Bundle creator brings antitrust lawsuit against Valve over Steam

ARSTECHNICA.COM

---

"At bottom, Valve’s scheme imposes a massive tax on the PC Desktop Gaming industry."

 

[crispy4000]

7 hours ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

A source for Steam's most favored nation clause?

 

Lawsuit claims Valve is abusing its market dominance to keep prices high | PC Gamer

WWW.PCGAMER.COM

---

The lawsuit also names developers including Ubisoft, CD Projekt, and Devolver Digital.

 

Steam's rules only apply once the game is up on Steam. If a dev is taking pre-orders on their own sites prior to its launch on Steam then that wouldn't run counter to Steam contracts.

 

Humble's lawsuit against Steam is a little more nuanced. They're arguing that even Steam keys should be allowed to be sold at a lower price than on Steam, itself. That is, Steam allows devs to sell they're own Steam keys without Valve's 30% cut on there own site. However, they aren't allowed to cut they're prices by, say, 20% to entice gamers to their own storefront even if their game doesn't use Steam for anything more than distribution.

But this literally happens everyday.  I check PC game sales daily without fail.  It’s almost surprising if the Steam version is ever within 20% of the historical low introduced on other storefronts.

 

This is the main reason why Steam sales sorta suck nowadays.  Other storefronts are undercutting them beforehand, even with Valve’s keys and publishers’ blessings. Why would you buy direct from Valve when you can save money elsewhere and the right people still get their cut?

 

Maybe it’s just that Valve’s enforcement is toothless.  Either way, it’s resulted in cheaper games if you shop around.

 

GMG and Fanatical in particular would be out of business if this wasn’t a thing.  GMG even gives you discounts based on how much you buy from them.  

[Guest]

Microsoft wants to reduce its Xbox store cut and shake up console gaming

WWW.THEVERGE.COM

---

Microsoft had wanted to cut fees to just 12 percent

Apparently the plan was to do the same on Xbox, with the real goal of gaining xCloud streaming rights in exchange for the larger cut to publishers.

[crispy4000]

I’d be totally be for it.

 

But a reality check, plans might have changed when price hiking Gold backfired.

[Brian]

 

[crispy4000]

Yep.  They’re no stranger to having different pricing structures for console and PC.

 

I wonder developers can charge less on PC if they choose, to reflect the cut.  Probably not.  That’s a bummer, because them dropping the PC cut doesn’t really help consumers.

 

It does put more pressure on Valve to drop theirs however.