I don't think customers can have many gripes about Steam, but I think any publisher should rightly be worried about a monopoly on digital distribution.

The industry didn't allow Valve to win the industry was just so largely incompetent that Valve were the only duckling that could walk straight and make it across the road here. I get what he's saying that as a game developer themselves Valve has a complete advantage over others who don't own parts of Steam. And other companies do this too such as Stardock with Impulse and CDProjekt with GOG.

But here's the deal, Valve, CDP and Stardock have so far done excellently and fairly. If you want to encourage more neutral digital distribution services for PC gamers, Mr Pitchford, I can support that as I would love more competition. But really until it actually happens don't go off spouting crap and swinging your sword at monsters that aren't there.

"It’s exploiting a lot of small guys."

Mr Pitchford, with all due respect, shut up. I'd like to introduce you to the success Tripwire has enjoyed along with Aquaria and Audiosurf.

@Yehat

But those games all did not have any retail release. The profits from retail just surpass those from Steam

Sounds like he knows what he is talking about.

I made it sound like I was talking about Gearbox by saying "his", oh grammar.

Sadly I do agree with him. Steam and Valve should be two separate companies. Never will happen, but the whole thing is that the pc game is either online with GFWL or Steam. People don't like GFWL, but are willing to pay for Steam.

I'm curious how much of a cut Valve is taking and what exactly they're offering in exchange for that cut. Regardless of that every write up of this interview has taken a disturbingly negative, sensationalist spin to what Randy Pitchford is saying. Reading the whole interview I'm not sure how any reasonable person could have more than minor disagreements with him.

Of course I could be biased because Randy Pitchford is one of the industry figures I respect the most and Gabe Newell is a big fat idiot.

@damchini Then who's gonna criticize Valve? People who are also developers/storeowners? Then they'd be hypocrites. he's perfectly within his realm to critique here.

hint hint as to "reasonable person."

It is not that ludicrous to be worried about one company dominating a space. We have all seen that, time and time again, competition is of utmost importance for the sake of consumers. And while Valve rides a wave of fanboyism quite unlike an other company in the industry, a healthy amount of logical concern is nothing to mock.

However, I do take umbrage with his assertion that the "little guys" are being screwed. Is that based on what he has heard or seen? Was that information reliable? I hope that point is clarified with actual examples.

Given that many indie developers owe no small amount of their success to the service it seems a bit ridiculous to claim they're getting screwed. I also don't understand how having Steam be a separate entity ensures any larger amount of profit fairness. If they weren't owned by a gaming company suddenly they wouldn't be trying to take as much money from their service as possible? Any company lives to maximize profits and Steam being a separate entity wouldn't change that. The reason Steam can afford to screw developers and publishers (if this is indeed the case, which I don't entirely doubt) it's not because they're owned by a competing game company, it's because they provide a distribution platform that no one can match.

iTunes was in the same position as Steam when it first started and there were complaints about them from the music industry as well. It took other services like Amazon, eMusic, Rhapsody, etc. providing a competitive environment to force iTunes into being more reasonable and the story with Steam won't be any different.

Borderlands is almost the anti-Fallout 3. I kinda liked fallout, but sometimes I just want to shoot stuff and level up, which Borderlands, whether it's good or bad, will definitely provide.

yet another story about a developer giving his two cents about something he has no control over.

in other news romero is still disgusted.

http://www.destructoid.com/romero-zenimax-id-buyout-is-disgusting--137368.phtml

Of course he doesn't trust Valve. That's completely fair and if he's willing to admit it, a genuinely hoest thing to say. A business is a business is a business. Business aren't about making friends or playing nice. Businesses are about making money - that is their job, that is their goal, that is why they exist. Does anyone really think Valve is a "nice" company? They treat their customers pretty well, but that's just solid business sense - treating a customer well allows you to get REPEAT BUSINESS! Valve doesn't treat customers nice because they really, in the depths of their hearts, want to. They don't care about ANY of us personally, and how could they? They've never met us. And that's fine, that's okay, that's the exact same way I, or any other sane individual with more than a double digit I.Q, would run a business.

As for his complaints that Valve are "taking more" than they "deserve to", it's a bloody free market mate. Talk to some other industry types and design your own content/game distribution service that can challenge Steam. No one is making you use steam.

If there has to be a monopoly, I'd rather it be Valve than someone like Microsoft.

I think Randy Pitchford is a very smart man.

I'm glad I play my games on a console. The one Valve hates. So screw them.

If he doesn't like Steam, then he doesn't have to use it. DirectDrive, Impulse, and GamersGate represent the most obvious (and respected) alternatives. There are also plenty of others that specialize in specific kinds of games.


Valve is nowhere near a monopoly. As long as it makes sense to use Steam, companies will use it.

You'd figure a company that started by making HL expansions would be a little slower to criticize....

Gotta give him credit though- Boringlands looked mediocre and dull before. Now he adds a lick of cell shading - er , I mean ''concept art style'' or whatever today's buzz word is- and it has some people creaming in their pants despite the fact the gameplay still looks mediocre.

@Ariolander

I don't think that eBay represents a proper comparison point. The nature of auctioning is a lot different than digital video game distribution. The former deals with finite (physical) sales (for the most part), while the latter deals with something that, essentially, can be sold in a number of different ways without creating significant difficulties. For example, if I want to sell a physical game, I NEED to use the service that would provide me with the most potential customers. I only have one thing to sell. I can't put it on multiple sites simultaneously. If I have a digital product, however, there is nothing to stop me from listing it everywhere. On the consumer end, this means that I don't just want to check eBay for a certain kind of item. I'm free to check out alternatives because there ARE realistic alternatives. This creates a further incentive for producers to exploit alternative digital distribution resources, which creates further incentives for customers to seek them out, etc. etc.

This is a huge distinction, which really impacts any potential monopoly. I'd also argue that the alternatives are not as niche as you imply. DirectDrive, for example, has a pretty solid selection, and they tend to have a lot of sweet sales. I tend to think the process I laid out above has led to the growth of DD. It started as a small competitor, but why wouldn't everyone want their games listed on it? There are really no reasons to utilize all available channels.

This all ignores the fact that non-digital distribution is still available, that other device-specific digital distribution networks are available (Xbox Live!, PSN, WiiWare, iTunes, etc.), and that we are still in the early days of all of this. Valve is nowhere near the hegemonic force that Pitchford seems to be arguing.

Met him at PAX. Cool guy.