Valve runs its massive PC gaming ecosystem with only about 350 employees
Ars' leak analysis shows a large "Games" department and a very well-paid "Admin" team.
You're viewing a single thread.
8500 million in revenue and 350 employees.
Gaben owns 6 yatchs and spends 70 to 100 million maintaining them.
There is absolutely nothing that differentiates valve from the other stores front to justify this. The whole store front industry should be tightly regulated. No billionaire should exist and if you find yourself defending one, it just means they have a good marketing team.
This is having a negative impact on the industry and the only ones benefiting are Gaben, Nintendo, Microsoft, Epic, etc. it's clear collusion.
Can't wait for all the downvotes and simps coming to defend him because "Gaben isn't your average billionaire".
There is absolutely nothing that differentiates valve from the other stores front to justify this.
The "justification" is that Steam is a good storefront and others kind of blows. There's nothing stopping other companies from making good software....they just haven't.
it's clear collusion.
That's not what collusion is.... Steam doesn't sell Nintendo games and is Epic/Microsoft's rival.
Can't wait for all the downvotes and simps coming to defend him
To be clear, I'm not defending billionaires. Your talking points are just kind of baseless.
I mean they have tried, but than they get in shit for doing something different to get their foot in the door(epics free games). Valves marketing and fan base is top notch and defends them voraciously with their rose coloured glasses.
They have buggy games, they don’t update them, they are currently over run with griefers making some unplayable to any fun degree.
What’s with the passes they keep getting? As you said they get “justification” lmfao, what a fucking joke. Its capitalists defending despite you claiming you aren’t what a joke. Does musk get a pass for his space ventures? No, so why does gaben? Please explain in detail, I would love a legit answer to this.
Because people dont want free games, they want a useful service with features. EGS is a piece of shit that leaks users data often.
You seem to think they can just create a copycat store of steam at release. That’s pretty foolish, they are constantly updating their store with new features, it takes time to develop stuff.
And I’ve not heard of a data leak, let alone multiple, sources please, because not even Google is bringing up any meaningful results. Maybe you’re thinking of developers and not them themselves…?
L O L "doing something different"
Epic tried to pull an Amazon.
Get VC money and chinese money and subsidize and undercut competition using anticompetitive practices to gain market share before the rug pull where they jack up their margins to the industry standard. (Everyone uses 30%, even brick and mortars except humble which is 25)
The difference is Amazon actually made a good software experience in the beginning few years and Epic spent literal years with very few feature updates and whining and burning money suing about "unfair market practices" when they were the only ones actually engaging in anti-consumer practices like paying off developers to be Epic-exclusive and buying developers and removing their games from steam. The other "different" thing that they did I guess is their CEO is an outspoken objective asshole.
They never got to the rug pull part because their actual software sucked balls and they refused to improve it so much so that someone else actually made a better launcher than them for their own products...
Humble’s is 12% and all the others charge 30% because that’s what steam set as an arbitrary standard.
They can all operate with lower, but go off on this conspiracy theory.
See blindly defended, can’t even have a discussion without it being derailed by conspiracy theories. Who’s voting up this bullshit? They tried something different, they get shit on, of course you can find an angle with anything a company does, that shouldn’t stop people from having a discussion. They asked what others tore fronts are doing, b the eh are trying, than people like you come and shit all over them because it’s not immediately identical or better than steam.
We get it, nothing can be better, that doesn’t mean people shouldn’t try and we should shit all over their attempt. Yeah that’ll make them try harder. You’re the reason why they stop trying, because it’s not worth the effort since they know it’ll never meet peoples quite frankly impossible standards.
So can we please have an actual discussion on this topic for a change? Or are fanboys just always going derail actual conversations with their stupid bullshit?
Nowhere did I say Gaben gets a pass, I'm saying Steam is a great service.
But is it? It’s maintained by its users and customers.
Gabe reaps all the benefits and who else gains your justification is what?
Nobody shit on epic for giving away free games. You can't just make a completely false statement like that.
People don't like epic because they bought games and made them exclusive to their store.
Nobody shit on epic for giving away free games
Uhh go check the internet maybe? Epics gets bashed for everything, including the free games dude lol.
Provide one example if it's so ubiquitous. I have been following the EGS discourse for years and never seen anyone complain about the free games.
Maybe complaints about how the games aren't worth it because you have to use EGS, sure. I've made that joke myself. That's a different complaint though.
Ah so you’re just a troll. You understand the hate, participate, but claim it isn’t. Thats what racists and other type of people justify their hate.
Blocked.
Well, that sure took a turn I wasn't expecting.
This dude has got to be bipolar or something. Dudes comments go 0-60 faster than a the NASA X-43.
You mean the part when they realized they were backed into a corner and were about to lose an argument so they tried pulling the escape lever of "Blocked"?
The product stays the same if we bring down their revenue to 1 billion, they aren't close to bankruptcy. If they took 0.5 %, Gaben would still be able to afford a yatch or two, just not 6.
Having a competitors product on your platform doesn't have anything to do with collusion. They are rivals but they don't actually compete or strive to give their customers any kind of competitive prices.
And yes, you are defending a billionaire.
The product stays the same if we bring down their revenue to 1 billion, they aren't close to bankruptcy. If they took 0.5 %
So? I don't care if they're forced to lower his salary. You said nothing differentiates Steam enough and I'm saying it does so by being good.
They are rivals but they don't actually compete or strive to give their customers any kind of competitive prices.
The majority of customers on all storefronts are fine with the pricing as-is. Steam's competitive advantage comes from being the best storefront with an amazing library and . That's why it's the top dog
And yes, you are defending a billionaire.
I'm clearly not. I'm defending the service itself
The majority of customers on all storefronts are fine with the pricing as-is. Steam's competitive advantage comes from being the best storefront with an amazing library and . That's why it's the top dog
Pricing has nothing to do with Steam dude…. that’s publisher/developer controlled. And they have a quite a lot of stink to say about the cut they take for nothing. They need to curate and moderate all their own store page, Steam does what and takes 30%?
It’s no wonder some take epics deals, the cut they take is 12%, that’s significant. And if epic can operate by taking that much with their employee count, clearly valve could be doing a far better job of what they do, but they do what again…? Line Gabe’s pocket and what else?
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.
With a 30% cut they make enough surplus that the owner is a billionaire that can afford 6 yacht, there's no reason why you or anyone should defend Valve's decision to be so profitable instead of making games cheaper and that applies to any company where the owner is rich.
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"?
That's exactly what people should say, billionaires shouldn't exist, it's that simple. 80% of US citizens live paycheck to paycheck, people have a hard time affording to pay for basic needs, meanwhile you've got companies that take a big enough cut on everything they sell that their owner can afford to spend in a day more than the average person will make in their whole life without having to even think about the impact that will have on their ability to pay their bills.
The wealth they accumulate comes directly from our pockets, stop defending them, they exist because we pay more for things than they're truly worth.
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?
Doesn't need to be communism, just need a system in place to limit profits. Everyone but the most wealthy would end up with more money in their pockets if companies didn't make billions in profit that goes to their owners and investors.
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.
If steam took a smaller cut game prices wouldn't budge a single goddamn cent and you know it
It's not just about Steam taking a smaller cut, the whole distribution chain makes it so the people developing the product are the poorest ones in the development to consumer process.
If publishers and distributors took a smaller cut and prices stayed the same instead of going down, it would mean that developers would get more money for their work, developers are people like you and me.
To be clear, I'm not listening to anyone. I think the government should step in and force a maximum of 5% on all stores, or something similar.
The fact that they all take the same percentage is exactly the reason why I'm saying there's collusion going on.
I'm sure you came up with that 5% number after careful research and didn't just pull some low round number out of your ass.
/s
I did say something similar, it's clearly just to give an idea.
I'm basing it on the fact that it would still be insanely profitable with such a percentage, personally I would rather see it much lower.
An utterly meaningless challenge just to defend daddy Gaben. Why don't you talk about my actual points instead of spitting out useless dribble. Stop defending billionaires.
Government of which country or countries? You wouldn't think they would stay in the US if what you said will happen, would you?
Their propaganda machine works so well, you're proving it by bringing up all the usual talking points.
"They offer a good product so they deserve it."
"They would leave if they were forced to reduce their profits."
You know what countries can do? Get together and impose the same kind of rules to all companies no matter where they're established. They can also decide to force companies to pay taxes based on where the revenue came from under the threat that they won't be able to do business in their territory anymore.
It's funny how in a previous conversation you were saying that people should be able to make donations to devs and you never thought "Hey, maybe it's not normal that only 50% of what I pay ends up in the pockets of the people doing the actual work..." and you even suggest that art should be encouraged via tax redistribution. Well guess what, that wouldn't be necessary if multimillionaires and billionaires didn't exist in the first place.
People all around you are struggling and you're defending the 1%, wake the fuck up.
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.
It's not that they deserve the money, it's that most others are being hugely ineffective, which creates this disparity.
What disparity? All these companies generation millions and billions in profits with the boss making hundreds of times what the average employee makes in a year.
It's funny how you suggest that adding any part of those 30% to the pocket of actual devs would solve any problems.
It would put the money in the hands of workers instead of in the hands of the elite that already has enough money that the only way it can spend it is by wasting it on millions dollars toys while devs need to camp in their office parking lot.
Your boss must truly love you very much if you believe that they deserve all the profits they generate off your work.
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.
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.
Epics 12% and they operate with how many more employees?
So what is valve doing with all this extra money than on Gabe?
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%.
Epic tried to pull an Amazon.
Get VC money and subsidize and undercut competition using anticompetitive practices to gain market share before the rug pull where they jack up their margins to the industry standard.
The difference is Amazon actually made a good software experience in the beginning few years and Epic spent literal years with very few feature updates and whining about "unfair market practices" when they were the only ones actually engaging in anti-consumer passes like paying off developers to be Epic-exclusive and buying developers and removing their games from steam.
You realize the others only charge that much since steam set the standard… yeah? All of them can charge less so what’s your point here? You clearly lied in your original comment, and are now making up points to defend it.
You realize the others only charge that much since steam set the standard… yeah?
I'll wait for you to prove this.
Prove that they are profitable at 30% if they couldn’t go lower at least one or two would be near the red every single year, yet it’s climbing profits….?
But you know there is no physical proof of this, yet you claim it? I’m sorry you got to do a little critical thinking on your own. Most can obviously take atleast down to 25% if not significantly more and still be positive.
You made the initial claim, so it’s up to you to prove it’s unprofitable to be less than 30%, balls in your court if you actually want to discuss this.
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.
Others barely tried to compete. GOG has its niche in DRM-free, while Epic engages in REAL monipolistic behaviour(Epic exclusives) and upset gamers with it.
Please cite a source for your claims
Did you read your own article?
In 2021, Microsoft estimated Valve's annual revenue at $6.5 billion, roughly on the same scale as EA's $7.5 billion in 2024 revenue. But Steam achieved those numbers with around 350 employees, compared to well over 13,000 people employed by EA.
The disparity highlights just how much money Valve brings in with a relatively small workforce. And a lot of that is thanks to the chunk of revenue Valve takes from every sale on Steam.
That's the indie industry getting fucked right there, but sure, drink Gabbens sweat.
The actual revenue is difficult because it's all estimation, they clearly don't want us to know and hide it. One website says 13 billion lol, and they brought it an estimated 1 billion just from Counter-strike crates. I got 8.5 from the article that was posted two days ago. Whatever it is, it's too fucking high, stop defending multi billionaires.
Go ask any indie developer if they think the 30% cut valve takes from sales through steam means they're "getting fucked". I can assure you, the vast majority do not.
Serving files, absorbing the costs of credit card payments and charge backs, and maintaining community forums is worth the 30% alone. Hell, just being able to list your product on the most popular store is worth it for some people.
In my industry, physical stores won't even consider stocking your product for less than 40pts of margin and the big guys expect you to absorb the freight costs as well.
30% on storefront sales and you can sell your own keys for 100% profit on your own site is more than fair.
The indie industry is seriously struggling. I'm pretty sure they would rather survive than donate to Gabens coke and prostitute fund.
There's also a huge difference between a physical store and a digital soft monopoly.
Stop defending billionaires.
I can't read the link but if we just gauge the health of the indie game portion of the industry by how many games are released, I think the only conclusion you can make is that it's quite healthy. In no small part due to steam which provides discoverability for smaller titles and handles a lot of the technical stuff (downloads, multi-player, even drm) so indie devs don't have to.
You just seem to have a chip on your shoulder in this department and it's not clear why other than "billionaires are bad".
I'm gauging the health of the industry by the amount of studios that are struggling and closing their doors. The amount of games is meaningless since a lot of those games are that studios last one as well as the amount including all the shovel ware garbage. Anyone can make a game these days with AI, the amount is not a good metric.
Someone being a billionaire is a valid reason for saying they shouldn't be a billionaire. Yes, all billionaires are bad and leeching off society. Though I do have a chip on my shoulder and that's because of seeing people actually defend Gaben as if he was any different than all the other ones. Stop defending billionaires, they actively hate you and probably giggle seeing what they consider peasants coming to their defense.
You can go in incognito mode to avoid the paywall. In any case, here's a gpt summary:
The article discusses the significant challenges faced by indie video game developers amidst widespread industry layoffs and financial troubles. Indie studios, often small and dependent on project-to-project funding, are increasingly forced to shut down due to a lack of financial support. This trend is emphasized by the closure of multiple indie developers and the ominous "survive till ’25" outlook, which captures the desperation and dwindling hope within the indie game development community.
As these smaller studios struggle to secure funding and continue operations, the impact on the gaming landscape is profound. Indie developers are known for their creativity and innovation, often exploring unique, experimental game ideas that larger companies might avoid. The decline of such studios not only reduces the variety and innovation in games available to players but also signifies a potential loss of talent and originality in the industry. This not only diminishes the richness of the gaming world but also impacts the professional growth and development of game creators who lose opportunities to experiment and hone their craft. The broader consequence is a gaming industry less vibrant and diverse, potentially stifling the evolution of video games as a form of artistic and interactive media.
Thing is, even if Steam charged them 0%, they would be struggling all the same. They're struggling because they don't have enough sales.
Steam is taking 30% of their sales, so they are struggling more because steam is greedy. At the end, it's the profit that matter. Selling more copies or selling the same amount but with a better profit margin is the same thing for the bottomline. I'm not trying to be harsh but your point is a bit silly.
Its also not like the whole industry is together and it's one big pass or fail. Some studios that were walking the line and would have survived with a bit more profits don't because of Steam.
Steam cuts into the profit of every sale and forces them to need more than they should to survive.
I mean about the yachts.
https://luxurylaunches.com/transport/gabe-newell-luxury-yachts.php
Here you go. Sorry if I'm being a dick, my hate for billionaires spills out whenever I approach the subject.