Steam and the manipulation of the market.

[Antic2]

I can't help thinking that Valve is doing a magnificent job of blowing smoke up our asses with Steam, and manipulating the marketplace (that's us), considering the fact they haven't as yet, SO close to releasing the game, actually given us an official release date.

Consider the fact that they have released all the code in downloads for the game, to whet our appetite, and have only allowed us to play CS:Source - but ONLY if we buy the game from them directly, online through Steam.

This is a very, very clever way of not only bypassing Vivendi and getting all the sales $ for themselves (which is fine, they deserve it!) but letting us play only CS:Source and keeping us waiting for the main feature, Half-Life 2, is what I'd call manipulation. They didn't need the manipulator gun, just a very clever little piece of software.

They want to lock us into buying HL2 from them before Vivendi release it - but at the SAME TIME, they are going along with publishers' normal delay tactics, used to avoid competing with rival games in the marketplace, releasing near to Christmas, etc. all quite common ways of getting as many sales as possible.

At the SAME TIME, they tease the market with a string of possible, and probably insincere, release dates, not to vex the consumer (although it has), but to confuse their competitors so that games like Doom 3 and Sims 2 are released before they otherwise might have been. This now leaves it wide open for Valve to release (or simply "unlock") their product close to Christmas, an ideal situation, if they want to do that.

Sure, Steam is a revolution in the sale and delivery of games direct to the consumer, and no doubt it will become the norm in time, but I can see it's also very cleverly designed to provide Valve with a number of ways in which to wrest control away from pubishers like Vivendi.

All very clever indeed, but we, the consumers, the gamers, are the unhappy victims in the propoganda war between Valve and Vivendi. Valve is no doubt trying to make it up to us, by giving us as many extras like HL1 Source, etc. but nevertheless, I'm sure they are very aware we have been well and truly jerked around in the process.

That being said, I'm also sure what they are achieving is going to ultimately be very good for the industry, in the same way that music sales direct from the artist is good for the music industry. Apart from anything else, it will certainly bring the cost of games down, which is not a bad thing.

However, with so much flexibility and control over the publishing process, there may be an unfortunate side-effect. A complexity evolving in the games marketplace, which may see consumers stuffed around more often, with more "lock in" strategies like this one, to secure our money prior to release of the actual game, without ANY guarantee whether it's going to be released in the next month, or next year.

This is the situation with us and Valve at the moment. Personally, I'm not paying a cent to them until they guarantee a release date in writing, with a refund policy if it isn't met. Who wants to be waiting until Christmas now, when they said September, and now perhaps November, and god knows what they'll decide if another competing game comes along or Vivendi takes them to court or something, which delays it further.

It's a game, it really is... and we're already playing!

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

All well and good, excpet it's Vivendi that control the release date, not Valve.

 

[7hoR]

Exactly

 

[Antic2]

Yes, but I'm saying when the publisher isn't in the loop anymore, the situation will be quite different.

 

[Peleus]

I think people are reading WAY to much into the situation with Valve and Vivendi. Perhaps believe it or not it could just be that they are developing a great game, and they want it out asap even though it takes a while.

Its not to try and make other games release early etc etc. A multi million dollar company wouldn't release quickly etc just because of half life 2.

 

[7hoR]

Your kidding right...it's done, it was supposed to be released a long time ago, what do you mean they wouldn't release it quickly?

 

[Wild_Ragnar]

Amen brother!

 

[Logic]

Firstly, Valve are not "going along with publishers' normal delay tactics".. Valve simply can not release HL2 until Vivendi does, or else they would be in breach of their contract. Vivendi are in complete control of when the game is released.

Secondly, I fail to see how any of us are "victims", or being "jerked around". We are not being forced into anything, or mislead in any way. When you buy over steam now, you know exactly what you're getting, and what you're not getting. You know that you'll get HL2 as soon as Vivendi release it. If you don't like paying now and not being able to play the game until later, simply buy it when it's out. By allowing us to purchase HL2 now, and play CS:S while we wait for it, Valve are simply giving us more options, none of which we are forced to act on.

Yes, Valve are trying to manipulate the market with steam, and good for them. Trying to get people to buy your product is what business is all about. It's not doing us ANY harm whatsoever. We won't get the game any later than we would have otherwise. The only difference is that we have more options.

 

[zul]

Your theory is similar to mine except for a few details - i DO think valve is manipulating the marketplace by releasing CSS early, but i DONT think its just to screw the customers and fans. I think only HL2 specifically, not CSS or DOD:S or any of the other stuff, is under the agreement with VU. HL2 alone must be released simultaneously online as it is in the stores. CSS, even though it is packed and sold with HL2, isnt specifically under the agreement. Doing the pre-order thing where you get CSS immediately is a way to rope people into buying one of the packages from steam instead of waiting for retail where VU gets the money. It is a (legal) slap in the face to Vivendi, as well as assurance that the game will be OK'd and released by VU ASAP. (think about it, the longer VU holds the game back, the more Steam buyers there will be, therefore less retail buyers)

But i dont think this is just to make everyone buy from them instead of at retail solely because they want the money. It looks much more like a ploy to put pressure on VU not to screw HL2's release up to me. I personally am going to buy games from a real store as long as they are offered through them, and Valve must realize there are people like me out there. I am going to love HL2, i can tell, and i believe Valve will be happy that i bought it whether it be from retail or steam.

 

[Crassus]

Steam, and the Publishers manipulation of the Consumer

A tongue in cheek, rather truncated, version of gaming history

[Multi-angled rant alert!)

Note: This does not take in to account minorities, people who have queued up for weeks to get food vouchers swapped for supplies, the insane, people who think their a minority when in fact their the majority. People, that are not really people but small mushroom shaped aliens with no head for business ...

1. Us, the gamers, we came about due to low end kit, Spectrums, Commodores, you name it, in the early 80's. Lots also came in from the Console world too.

2. Real Games took form, games began to move from the covers of magazines to tapes (more happenend here but hey, this is the truncated version!)

3. Publishers in the Computer Gaming market where needed, and thus materialised prooving that if a vacuum exists for too long it will be filled with s***

4. Shareware came about as the Publishers learnt they could squeeze someone out if they didn't agree to their demands and developers reacted (apogee et al)

5. The world was kinda of well, balanced, and all where, kinda, happy

6. Games became more advanced, games became serious intellectual property due to demand for followups. Publishers realised this, as the rackets they are, and slowly increased the game prices and disconnected the markets in to distinct hemisphers, Europe, America, Asia Pacific. This gave them the ability to control prices world-wide and have pissing contests with other publishers about timed releases, and also matched other textbook publishing models from other industries "101 ways to milk a consumer" (Circa 1950's hehe)

7. The internet was born, and technically publishers are no longer needed by the majority of online gamers

8. Electronic content delivery mechanisms appeared, some small developer outfits used the web to promote and sell their game, without involving a publisher. A defining moment in gaming history was reached. Consumer no longer needs to visit a store to pickup a game, and incur the cost of A) The artist(s) who designed the box cover B) the company that makes the boxes C) the company that presses the CD's. D) the company that delivers the merchandise

9. Steam, buy the game online, have it cached on your machine ready for activation. Perfect. This is the SILVER BULLET when it comes to delivery of content. And ALL the money SHOULD be heading towards the developers. Remember boys and girls, the two most important groups here are A) The Developers and B) The Consumers, and Publishers don't really fit in at all. They are now, becoming, redundant. Also remember, when something in a game captures our imagination do we say "Cor those publishers sure know what their doing!" ??? No didn't think so.

As some have already said, why do we need boxes ? Its like, we needed the publishers for years as the world lacked broadband, fair enough we actually really did need them !

But now, the Internet and Broadband is here, and we no longer need a Publisher. Once the material is unboxed, the CD inserted and the game installed YOU DO NOT NEED THE BOX ! Seriously that box can be binned, canned, burnt, used to make Xmas decorations, anything other than clogging up your shelves ! The average gamers shelf must carry at least ten of these useless boxes, pointless.

To say we don't need publishers at this time and we can dispose of them is a bit premature. This does mark their depature from the gaming industry though. I just hope to god we don't allow them to morph in to another shape and insert themselves on to the net between us and the developers ... Steam might be the Publishers prototype, who knows, maybe the smart money is on the Publishers now doing a Super-Steam that will move them from the archaic forms of physical delivery to the world of 0's and 1' and rescue them from their demise.

Take a ganders at the music industry, aggressively destroy internet trading, shut down legitimate online music stores unless their called "ITunes" or the M$ equiv, then slowly release your powerful control of the distribution and allow some of your business to move to the net and then look like your providing the cure and not the bane. This is TACTICAL and is designed to move us from our Music Stores, to the online shop BUT pay roughly the SAME FRIGGIN PRICE ! You'll see how costly music will be once the Music Industry have their fangs fully in to the pie !

Sure, Tear it apart, add, detract, call my momma names ... Really don't mind any feedback on this !

:smoking:

Secret Agent for Publishers World-wide

 

[Antic2]

Valve didn't develop Steam purely for our benefit. They REALLY want it to work, and they want to make money from it. They want the industry to adopt it.

If nothing else, it's an alternative source of revenue for Valve, above and beyond games revenue. Politically, though, it's much more significant than that.

 

[Mr-Fusion]

Yes yes...to Crassus you listen!

 

[Antic2]

I also hope publishers don't release a "super-steam" and things turn the way of the music industry as Crassus just described. Technically, publishers aren't needed, but practically speaking, maybe there should be two avenues for purchasing games - online, which is cheaper because you don't get the box and paraphernalia that comes with it, and through the stores.

Actually, wouldn't it be great if this meant that publishers put MORE effort into providing the goodies that used to come with games years ago? Remember all the maps, mini-stories, etc. that used to come with games? That made buying the full kit worthwhile. Now you sometimes don't even get a book to read through, just a cheap leaflet.

Then again, with all the info you need online, is there any need for the full kit anymore? No more Zork maps with coffee stains keeping you company on your desk while you play? There was a certain value to that, which you'd only get from a store shelf.

 

[Crassus]

I also hope publishers don't release a "super-steam" and things turn the way of the music industry as Crassus just described. Technically, publishers aren't needed, but practically speaking, maybe there should be two avenues for purchasing games - online, which is cheaper because you don't get the box and paraphernalia that comes with it, and through the stores.

yeh well there will always be 1 poor unfortunate soul with no dsl\net conn who will need boxed distribution so we cannot go in and strike at the heart of the publishing industry and tear it out while it still beats ... sounds like a good game plot though, Valve want to buy the IP rights from me ? hehe

Actually, wouldn't it be great if this meant that publishers put MORE effort into providing the goodies that used to come with games years ago? Remember all the maps, mini-stories, etc. that used to come with games? That made buying the full kit worthwhile. Now you sometimes don't even get a book to read through, just a cheap leaflet.

agreed

Then again, with all the info you need online, is there any need for the full kit anymore? No more Zork maps with coffee stains keeping you company on your desk while you play? There was a certain value to that, which you'd only get from a store shelf.

Digital coffee stains ?

 

[Raziaar]

I dont know about you guys, but my game boxes are composed of 60% cardboard, 10% ink, 10% plastic and 20% ads.

I don't need em.

 

[Crassus]

I dont know about you guys, but my game boxes are composed of 60% cardboard, 10% ink, 10% plastic and 20% ads.

I don't need em.

100% not required for me,

majority think that way ? wonder if this can be polled ?

 

[smacky]

i think steam is bad for business, its nice that we get a cheaper game, but stores who's core business is selling video games will get hurt by it. maybe in 10 years you can only buy video games online, i dont think people will like that, not everyone trusts paying online or can pay online. publishers might not be needed, but for some smaller development companies it is needed, a small group of programmers can create a great game , but how are they gonna market it, and how are they gonna pay for the distribution.. they need a publisher for that, doing it online only would require them to create something like steam wich will take years to make.

 

[Doofus]

I have been wondering if such games as Vampires The Masquerade: Bloodlines, and Twilight War: After The Fall, which both purchased the Source Engine to create their games, are allowed, or are considering using Steam as a form of distribution.

Maybe Valve will gain slight profits from those companies for partially taking the publishers place? (That is, if they even do use Steam)

 

[Raziaar]

i think steam is bad for business, its nice that we get a cheaper game, but stores who's core business is selling video games will get hurt by it. maybe in 10 years you can only buy video games online, i dont think people will like that, not everyone trusts paying online or can pay online. publishers might not be needed, but for some smaller development companies it is needed, a small group of programmers can create a great game , but how are they gonna market it, and how are they gonna pay for the distribution.. they need a publisher for that, doing it online only would require them to create something like steam wich will take years to make.

Why take years to make? You can license the programs that others make, like valve, at an insane fraction of the price of publishing.

 

[Clavius]

Not needing publishers...what a rubbish!
Try to imagine HL2 was Valves first game, without Vivendi they'd have to cough up the teams salary and the marketing of HL2 themselves.
Who has that kinda money? You can bet your mother in law a bank wont loan it to you. The risk is simply to big.

Valve, yeah, Valve might be able to pay the developement of HL2 out of their own pockets because they had a big hit in the past, so they can experiment with Steam without to much trouble.

Also, concerning the super-Steam, I dont see that happening.
What if a Boeing 747 crashes on the Valve HQ somewhere next year, Valve is gone and so is steam. Bye-bye 50 bucks.

Ofcourse that wont happen but you might get the point. Most people want hard copies, just to be sure. Also, a piece of paper with a activating code scribbled on it, wont look as good under the xmas tree as a shiney box. :E

Oh and for I-tunes... paying for a downloaded song? weird. Its like selling sand in the sahara :bonce:

 

[Crassus]

some fair comments, but steam is a publishing platform, therefore it is a paradigm.

The existing publishers will shift to the net pretty quickly, shipping boxes will become a narrow revenue stream compared to online sales. All they need to do is setup a secure front end and link up tons of digital content delivery servers to pour gaming pleasure to our gaming systems, it's such an easy model to adopt and implement !

And even though this looks like a win for the consumer, its actually setting the pattern we'll be locked in to for the next decade of gaming. So, we should all be concerned about it, or at the least, keep an eye on it :thumbs:

I'd much prefer the good guys (it's fair to say Valve are the good guys) getting in early in the hope that they will be reasonable at establishing online game retail prices , that will become the defacto cost of a game.

 

[Crassus]

Not needing publishers...what a rubbish!
Try to imagine HL2 was Valves first game, without Vivendi they'd have to cough up the teams salary and the marketing of HL2 themselves.
Who has that kinda money? You can bet your mother in law a bank wont loan it to you. The risk is simply to big.

Valve, yeah, Valve might be able to pay the developement of HL2 out of their own pockets because they had a big hit in the past, so they can experiment with Steam without to much trouble.

There is no reason why Valve should stick with a publisher now though ... look at how much they make via the publisher, compare that with what they can make from online sales using steam, project forward a bit, look hard at the figures and you see they could exist as they are without a publisher. Might stunt their growth for a year or two, but online sales would be a trickle-feed that would fund the development cycle. This model even accomodates hard-copy, instead the publisher WAITS for the game to be finished, and then gears up to publish. None of that world-wide market delays to squeeze maximum $$/££ potential from a release.

Persistence, if the company goes out of business will we be able to get the game ? Thats a bloody good point ! How could steam future-proof itself ? Perhaps become independant of Valve and exist as just a publishing point for all developers, big and small.

Bear in mind small ... we'll be seeing a LOT more small dev teams making games once the internet gaming publishing mega platform has been up a year or two. We could even position said platform of total destruction above the planet tattoine and threaten to blow it up if the evil Jabba the Hutt publishing corporation doesn't back off and place nice !

Diversity will rule :afro:

 

[Logic]

As far as publishers go, I just have one point to make..

Publishers are the reason we see the same types of games released over and over and over and over again. Publishers are the reason few genuinely artistic or creative games ever get a chance. Their extremely conservative approach to anything different, and their unwillingness to take risks, have caused the game industry to become more and more stale, repetitive and boring over the years. The sooner developers have a practical means to publish their own games to mass audiences, the sooner we will see new, innovative and amazing things turning up left right and center.

Steam is such a means, and with broadband being so common (and becoming moreso) now is exactly the right time for it.

Yes, so far publishers have been the only way for developers to make it big, but perhaps with steam and similar systems popping up, the game industry will see a much greater variety of titles in the spotlight, rather than the same 30 titles in EVERY store. Publishers are the corporate machines that are choking the game industry. Online distribution will set it free.

 

[NB.]

^what he said

 

[Antic2]

Wow, this is sounding so much like the music industry debate over online music, it's uncanny.

1. More $ for the artists / software houses.
2. Less (hopefully) manipulation of the marketplace in terms of prices and release dates.
3. Lower (hopefully again) cost of the end product.
4. More in-roads for smaller artists = more diversity for the consumer.
5. Discussion of a universal delivery platform (eg. iTunes) coming along to enslave the community.

hmm, I wonder if The Combine could be a metaphor for game publishers?

 

[hunter-killer25]

Not needing publishers...what a rubbish!
Try to imagine HL2 was Valves first game, without Vivendi they'd have to cough up the teams salary and the marketing of HL2 themselves.
Who has that kinda money? You can bet your mother in law a bank wont loan it to you. The risk is simply to big.

Valve, yeah, Valve might be able to pay the developement of HL2 out of their own pockets because they had a big hit in the past, so they can experiment with Steam without to much trouble.

Also, concerning the super-Steam, I dont see that happening.
What if a Boeing 747 crashes on the Valve HQ somewhere next year, Valve is gone and so is steam. Bye-bye 50 bucks.

Ofcourse that wont happen but you might get the point. Most people want hard copies, just to be sure. Also, a piece of paper with a activating code scribbled on it, wont look as good under the xmas tree as a shiney box. :E

Oh and for I-tunes... paying for a downloaded song? weird. Its like selling sand in the sahara :bonce:

dude there would have to be a hell of a lot of boein 747 crashes in multiple countrys and states once steam is fully settup to take it down.

 

[Clavius]

dude there would have to be a hell of a lot of boein 747 crashes in multiple countrys and states once steam is fully settup to take it down.

I said you might get the point, so if you dont, please dont say anything.

 

[Wildhound]

Not needing publishers...what a rubbish!
Try to imagine HL2 was Valves first game, without Vivendi they'd have to cough up the teams salary and the marketing of HL2 themselves.
Who has that kinda money? You can bet your mother in law a bank wont loan it to you. The risk is simply to big.

Valve, yeah, Valve might be able to pay the developement of HL2 out of their own pockets because they had a big hit in the past, so they can experiment with Steam without to much trouble.

Also, concerning the super-Steam, I dont see that happening.
What if a Boeing 747 crashes on the Valve HQ somewhere next year, Valve is gone and so is steam. Bye-bye 50 bucks.

Ofcourse that wont happen but you might get the point. Most people want hard copies, just to be sure. Also, a piece of paper with a activating code scribbled on it, wont look as good under the xmas tree as a shiney box. :E

Oh and for I-tunes... paying for a downloaded song? weird. Its like selling sand in the sahara :bonce:

I have to laugh at this because instead of imagining HL2 is Valve's first game, we can just go back to their actual first game. You remember that right? It was funded completely by a man you might be familiar with. Goes by the name of Gabe Newell.

 

[Mr-Fusion]

Publishers of all forms have a reputation of restricting and inhibiting so many fantastic ideas.

Can you believe Miramax rejected Peter Jackson's idea for the LOTR trilogy. They wanted him to do the entire story in 1 film, Jackson said no they said get out and cancelled contracts immediately. Jackson then presented the 2 film idea to New Line Cinema and they said "2 films are you crazy? This needs to be 3 films!!" Consequently New Line are now rolling in piles of money because of the success of LOTR. New Line took a risk and it paid off.

There aren't enough publishers willing to take risks in all creative industries! Be it for books, movies, games or music. We're in a situation where there's so much unoriginal generic media being marketed to us we're turning elsewhere to find things that interest us, namely the internet.

But the real problem is that most (probably all) games developers have to start out with a publisher. Who is going to fund them? Who is going to market their product? Unless a company with no reputation can borrow $20 million to start working on their new original idea they don't have much of an option.

Somehow the power has to be given to the creators from the onset, someone has to set up some way to fund these companies but have zero creative power over what they do. Perhaps Valve themselves could create some bank type division to serve that very purpose. Though there's many potential problems. If the developer creates a game that is a failure how to they recoup their losses? Jail time? Which brings us back to SQUARE bloody one. Someone has to decide which projects deserve funding maybe the publisher is necessary? Perhaps all we need is for companies like EA to sack all the people in charge of where the money goes to?

How it worked yesterday!
Developer: "I have an idea for a new MOHAA game, it's set in ww2, you're an American soldier and you shoot Germans!!"

EA games:"Brilliant! Here's your contracts, here's your money!"

How it's working now
Developer: "I have an idea for a game, it's set in ww2, you're an American soldier and you shoot Germans!!"

EA games: "No. This has been done a thousand times before...but if you replace the Germans .....with Japanese!!! YES!! We're on to something here! Here's your contract"

Developer: "I have an idea for a MOHAA game, it's set in ww2, you're an American soldier and you shoot Germans!!"

EA games: "No. This has been done a thousand times before. There's too many MOHAA Games.....but if we called it...CALL OF DUTY we might be able to get away with it!! Here's your contracts!!"

How it should work
Developer: "I have an idea for a MOHAA game, it's set in ww2, you're an American soldier and you shoot Germans!!"

EA games: "No, this has been done a thousand times before! There's too many WW2 games GTFO."

Hmmm

 

[Pjotr]

Your kidding right...it's done, it was supposed to be released a long time ago, what do you mean they wouldn't release it quickly?

BS. Vivendi is taking exactly as much time with every game, as with publishers of Doom III, Unreal Tournamt NNNN etc. You are ONLY benefiting from Valve using Steam to sell games. Without Steam, you not be playing CS:S and you would be so happy the day HL2 comes out and you wouldn't whine about having CS:S and not having HL2.

 

[Parasite]

A tongue in cheek, rather truncated, version of gaming history

[Multi-angled rant alert!)

Note: This does not take in to account minorities, people who have queued up for weeks to get food vouchers swapped for supplies, the insane, people who think their a minority when in fact their the majority. People, that are not really people but small mushroom shaped aliens with no head for business ...

1. Us, the gamers, we came about due to low end kit, Spectrums, Commodores, you name it, in the early 80's. Lots also came in from the Console world too.

2. Real Games took form, games began to move from the covers of magazines to tapes (more happenend here but hey, this is the truncated version!)

3. Publishers in the Computer Gaming market where needed, and thus materialised prooving that if a vacuum exists for too long it will be filled with s***

4. Shareware came about as the Publishers learnt they could squeeze someone out if they didn't agree to their demands and developers reacted (apogee et al)

5. The world was kinda of well, balanced, and all where, kinda, happy

6. Games became more advanced, games became serious intellectual property due to demand for followups. Publishers realised this, as the rackets they are, and slowly increased the game prices and disconnected the markets in to distinct hemisphers, Europe, America, Asia Pacific. This gave them the ability to control prices world-wide and have pissing contests with other publishers about timed releases, and also matched other textbook publishing models from other industries "101 ways to milk a consumer" (Circa 1950's hehe)

7. The internet was born, and technically publishers are no longer needed by the majority of online gamers

8. Electronic content delivery mechanisms appeared, some small developer outfits used the web to promote and sell their game, without involving a publisher. A defining moment in gaming history was reached. Consumer no longer needs to visit a store to pickup a game, and incur the cost of A) The artist(s) who designed the box cover B) the company that makes the boxes C) the company that presses the CD's. D) the company that delivers the merchandise

9. Steam, buy the game online, have it cached on your machine ready for activation. Perfect. This is the SILVER BULLET when it comes to delivery of content. And ALL the money SHOULD be heading towards the developers. Remember boys and girls, the two most important groups here are A) The Developers and B) The Consumers, and Publishers don't really fit in at all. They are now, becoming, redundant. Also remember, when something in a game captures our imagination do we say "Cor those publishers sure know what their doing!" ??? No didn't think so.

As some have already said, why do we need boxes ? Its like, we needed the publishers for years as the world lacked broadband, fair enough we actually really did need them !

But now, the Internet and Broadband is here, and we no longer need a Publisher. Once the material is unboxed, the CD inserted and the game installed YOU DO NOT NEED THE BOX ! Seriously that box can be binned, canned, burnt, used to make Xmas decorations, anything other than clogging up your shelves ! The average gamers shelf must carry at least ten of these useless boxes, pointless.

To say we don't need publishers at this time and we can dispose of them is a bit premature. This does mark their depature from the gaming industry though. I just hope to god we don't allow them to morph in to another shape and insert themselves on to the net between us and the developers ... Steam might be the Publishers prototype, who knows, maybe the smart money is on the Publishers now doing a Super-Steam that will move them from the archaic forms of physical delivery to the world of 0's and 1' and rescue them from their demise.

Take a ganders at the music industry, aggressively destroy internet trading, shut down legitimate online music stores unless their called "ITunes" or the M$ equiv, then slowly release your powerful control of the distribution and allow some of your business to move to the net and then look like your providing the cure and not the bane. This is TACTICAL and is designed to move us from our Music Stores, to the online shop BUT pay roughly the SAME FRIGGIN PRICE ! You'll see how costly music will be once the Music Industry have their fangs fully in to the pie !

Sure, Tear it apart, add, detract, call my momma names ... Really don't mind any feedback on this !

:smoking:

Secret Agent for Publishers World-wide

You forget the whole part about publishers paying the developers salaries and development costs for the years that the games are being developed. Yes theyre a racket, but they serve thier purpose. Quality games cost millions of dollars to produce, and most developers arent independently wealthy...Valve are probably the only ones who could float a $40 million budget on thier own.
And venture capital/ private investors are rarely interested in high risk, high cost artistic endevours. Especially after the dot com implosion. And after what is happening with Horizons financial difficulties, I seriously doubt many are willing to take that risk on games...considering thier investors have yet to make a profit...or even break even.

//I replied to this post after I read it, but after browsing through the entire thread, i see someone already made this point

 

[Reaperman]

i dont know why you guys hate vivendi so much....


what about the guy that works 15 hours shrink-wrapping hl2 boxes for $6.50 an hour, are you telling me he doesnt deserve to be paid?


vivendi isnt this evil buisness, they are a publisher, they work just as hard as valve....

 

[zul]

I think 2 major factors are missing from this thread: 1) It is a cold hard fact that the majority of game sales dont come from the hardcore gamers, (i.e. people who talk about the game on forums and wait for it to be released) they come from casual buyers. You'd be surprised at just how many people there are in the world who will buy a game every few months or so or as gifts for their children/siblings/whatever. So if what everyone was saying (publishers die, game stores die, online distribution becomes mainstream) happened right now, we would see the downfall of the industry, it would go from a 7 billion a year industry to a 700 million a year industry.

The second factor is one of the reasons publishers came about in the first place: big games need lots of money to fund, and if you think every development house is lucky enough to be founded by millionares (*cough* Valve *cough*) then we will see a drastic decline in well-made and well-developed games. Goodbye FEAR, STALKER, Brothers in Arms, 'insert-future-game-here'. Instead of 3-4 major high-end games coming out each year, we would get 1 or 2 every few years.

 

[Crassus]

I think 2 major factors are missing from this thread: 1) It is a cold hard fact that the majority of game sales dont come from the hardcore gamers, (i.e. people who talk about the game on forums and wait for it to be released) they come from casual buyers. You'd be surprised at just how many people there are in the world who will buy a game every few months or so or as gifts for their children/siblings/whatever. So if what everyone was saying (publishers die, game stores die, online distribution becomes mainstream) happened right now, we would see the downfall of the industry, it would go from a 7 billion a year industry to a 700 million a year industry.

The second factor is one of the reasons publishers came about in the first place: big games need lots of money to fund, and if you think every development house is lucky enough to be founded by millionares (*cough* Valve *cough*) then we will see a drastic decline in well-made and well-developed games. Goodbye FEAR, STALKER, Brothers in Arms, 'insert-future-game-here'. Instead of 3-4 major high-end games coming out each year, we would get 1 or 2 every few years.

Sure you'll need to pump out boxes and ship them out to the stores that cater for the "opportunistic customer", those that shop not for themselves but for their granchildren et al ... or random game collector man, he who blindly reaches out to the shelf, mulls over a game title then walks towards the check-out :dork:

We're actually the minority with box-buyers being the majority :naughty:

Things will certainly change though, no reason why half of us need to buy a box (is this bad ?) when we can download. And as for hard-copy, you can always burn to DVD\CD the Steam repository so your games are to hand and don't need to be on the net to obtain

As for employees facing the chop because technology has provided an alternate :sniper: it's business ... ask McDonalds or some other suitably fat corporate to not axe jobs to push more money up the tree to the shareholder. Such is life. And if I was one of those guys that boxed games I would be doing evening classes to buff up my skillset and revise my CV haha

 

[PlagueX]

Not needing publishers...what a rubbish!
Try to imagine HL2 was Valves first game, without Vivendi they'd have to cough up the teams salary and the marketing of HL2 themselves.
Who has that kinda money? You can bet your mother in law a bank wont loan it to you. The risk is simply to big.

Valve, yeah, Valve might be able to pay the developement of HL2 out of their own pockets because they had a big hit in the past, so they can experiment with Steam without to much trouble.

Also, concerning the super-Steam, I dont see that happening.
What if a Boeing 747 crashes on the Valve HQ somewhere next year, Valve is gone and so is steam. Bye-bye 50 bucks.

Ofcourse that wont happen but you might get the point. Most people want hard copies, just to be sure. Also, a piece of paper with a activating code scribbled on it, wont look as good under the xmas tree as a shiney box. :E

Oh and for I-tunes... paying for a downloaded song? weird. Its like selling sand in the sahara :bonce:

You forget one thing.
Even with HL VALVe had a decent amount of money.
Gabe used to work for microsoft, where he picked up a good load of cash.

 

[Crassus]

You forget one thing.
Even with HL VALVe had a decent amount of money.
Gabe used to work for microsoft, where he picked up a good load of cash.

12 odd years at M$ chocking his technical chicken :afro:

 

[House]

I think that Valve made a deal with Vivendi to hold the release date until enough orders of HL2 are purchased thru Steam. Once Valve's quota is met, Vivendi will release the retail version to the public.

 

[Logic]

I think that Valve made a deal with Vivendi to hold the release date until enough orders of HL2 are purchased thru Steam. Once Valve's quota is met, Vivendi will release the retail version to the public.

I doubt that.. Vivendi hates that Valve are selling HL2 through steam, since they don't get any money out of it. That's what much of the legal battling is all about.. Vivendi is trying to "win" the intellectual property (basically part ownership) of HL2 so that Valve is forced to pay them for each steam sale. If anyone is holding release back, it's Vivendi. Valve is just using that as an opportunity to get steam sales, which puts the pressure on Vivendi to release anyway.