• SuperSpruce@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    So why can’t they sell their game for $56 on Epic and $70 on Steam? They’d make about the same money per sale on each?

    • joel_feila@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Most likely reason, contracts.

      Example Nike sales shoes directly at the same price as footlocker. Why dont they under cut footlocker? They have a contracts that says they won’t under cut footlocker

      There could br an issue like that but well you can make new contracts

    • Rose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Valve prohibit that, according to the lawsuit filed by Wolfire Games.

      • SuperSpruce@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s no way that can be legal. I generally support Valve but that is monopolistic as hell.

      • Voyajer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That only applies to the steam keys valve supplies to developers that have a 0% cut. Also doing regional pricing would be a massive headache if that were true due to different stores having different recommended price conversions.

        • Rose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The claim specifically mentions Epic and quotes a Valve employee who made statements to the effect of it being prohibited, irrespective of whether a Steam key is involved. Read from page 47 and pay attention to the last paragraphs of page 55.

    • Knightfox@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If the developer chooses to do so themselves then it’s likely ok, but forcing the developer to do so likely violates some sort of law.

      I imagine that when Epic instituted it’s lower percentage they hoped that developers would sell exclusively on their platform for higher profits. Instead the developers decided to sell on both platforms and just make a larger percentage on the Epic sales. From the developer perspective it would have been wise in the long run to lower prices so that Epic could grow, but that hurts their short term profits and also stymied Epic’s potential.

      If Epic’s store grew to truly rival Steam more developers might have jumped ship, but to do so prematurely would be losing a large portion of the potential customers.

      Ultimately Epic had to develop a full Steam clone quickly while all Steam had to do was not suck for the end user.