@Razor Steam has done some good for the industry, but they do plenty of damage as well. Like most things in life you take the good with the bad. I don't care much for Steam, but I do see a place for it in the ecosystem and hope BG:EE releases there and at GOG in the future.
But there are a few people at Blizzard who might disagree with your last statement. They've made a few bucks on PC content without Steam...
@Treyolen: I'am talking indies and developers who need support. Not sharks like blizzard, of course that anyone that can be successful without being on Steam will do it. Notch is a good example of this but I still think he might end up there, or not, considering how thousands of old customers would ask for a Steam key.
Do you know what Greenlight is? It's not selling a mmo that is hard, hard is selling a single player indie. Or do you consider WoW/Diablo 3 The gaming industry?
@Razor I certainly consider Blizzard to be a part of the gaming industry. They represent a part of the industry that I hate. But they do carry a lot of weight and they set the tone for a lot of others. Nothing would make me happier than to see Torchlight continue to grow and show up the Diablo franchise.
I have an idea of what Greenlight is about. But I think you're familiar with my feelings on DRM and Steam has DRM deep in its DNA. I have never installed Steam and I never will. I'm not trying to hate on it and I still hope that BG:EE releases there eventually. But I would like to see Beamdog maximize their revenue and I think that means an independent release for now. I adore GOG and think they should wait before releasing there too. But both of those channels should absolutely be in their future.
@Treyolen As I said I never wanted anyone here to use Steam, You dont use it and I think you do very well to stand for what you believe. But what I've been reading here is pure unjustified badmouthing. I dont know how old you are, but I too was anti-steam @ half-life2 release. Problem is that their services+prices are irresistible. (And no they are not conspiring to raise prices once competition is down... because if they did, people would stop buying, Again).
Torchlight, now thats a great game, "the true diablo3". They are supported by perfect world and also (choosed) Steam because they sell alot there. Anyway for your sake I hope Torch2 is not Steam exclusive, *apparently only the pre-order is.
Don't act like because someone doesn't like Steam they just aren't aware of it. I've been a Steam member since 2005 and am fairly active, but it is far from perfect. And as far as their benevolence to PC gaming, you have nothing but anecdotal evidence since they don't release sales figures, they are fiscally a 'black box' and you really have no clue how much developers make from Steam. They release some nice free add-ons for their own games which creates 'sticky eyes' on the Steam service. They have massive sales which drives this community love, but what are the impacts of these massive discounts? Who eats the discounts during Steam sales? I'll bet it's not Valve, but I can't prove it because they don't release financial data and devs/publishers are subject to a brutally restrictive NDA. Judging by EA (and several other puhblishers distaste) I'm going to bet the publisher eats the cost.
And while I don't like it, PC gaming is still in decline, take out the burst of Diablo III and the next WoW expansion and it's another flat year of me-too shooters and MMOs. Steam hasn't saved PC gaming, it's just stopped the massive blood loss for now.
There is no argument Steam and Valve have been good for PC gaming, but they are far from perfect an we will be better off if competing services arrive and thrive. @Razor your insistence that all they do is good and benevolent is amazingly unrealistic. If you really care about PC gaming as much as you say you do, you'd want a diverse ecosystem, monocultures always die. Valve cares first and foremost about Valve's profits (which they should) which is why they cast about wildly loving then hating in turn the 360, the PS3, Apple and now Linux. They see desktop gaming is still in decline and want to be part of the next big thing and so far they can't make anything stick. They are threatened by the Mac App Store, they are terrified of the store in Windows 8 (which probably won't matter much until Windows 9) and are locked out (mostly) of the console ecosystems.
Most of your arguments are based on service and prices and things that directly impact you right this minute, but the long term economic impact of monopoly distribution has been proven bad over and over. Be a fanboy for games, not some corporate digital distribution system.
@bobsageek Every company fights for its profits. But valve was the first to take in indies and make sales that actualy have fair prices for the customer. You keep saying Steam is bad for developers but you dont seem to understand that, even with discounts, a developer makes 1000% more on Steam!
I dont think PC gaming is dying anymore. PC Sales increase - Joystick, a huge number of console games are being ported to the PC and that means something. Means that developers recognize that if they release on Steam there is a good chance that sales overcome piracy and that IS something.
"but the long term economic impact of monopoly distribution has been proven bad over and over." its true, but so what? when that happens gamers will just start over. with a service that respects them, for now steam does.
If you want to hate on a service so much try GFWL, they could use some more hate to end their misery. And while at it spare some for EA too for raping our favorite studios. I'll add another piece of "anecdotal evidence" for you... I shouldnt even take the time really, you do your own research. http://kotaku.com/5858589/a-rare-glimpse-at-steam-sales-figures.
@Razor No one is hating on Steam. We just hate virtual monopolies and see rampant adoration for one service leading straight to that outcome. You keep saying how great Steam is for developers. I'm sure you are correct, but a citation is still needed. We can't just take your word for it no matter how much you believe. If everything is so perfect, why such ironclad secrecy? Most platforms who make money for all parties want to advertise the success. Steam wants to stay secretive. I'm not saying that means one thing or another, but it does raise a few questions.
Steam is fine. Competition is better.
BG:EE will probaly release on Steam eventually and will hopefully release on others as well. But everyone assumes Beamdog said no to Steam. Do we know for sure that Steam didn't reject a submission?
Yes hate is a too strong word maybe. I accept your doubts and I'am not the one to clarify them, I tried but in the end each one has his own view of things. And yes it could have been refused for some reason, but its not likely, MDK2 HD is there alredy right?
I do know Steam could change in the future, for the worse I mean. But for now they are doing so many nice things that blaming them for future mistakes doesnt make sense to me. Just look at this pre-order, They really know how to get things sold :P (awesome game btw) I'am done with the Steam subject, you guys did raise some nice points too.
@Razor Funny - you say I know nothing of the PC games industry, but you don't know a thing about me. I've been working in the industry for 6 years as a developer for indie and studio projects. I'm a hardcore PC gamer, indie games supporter, and frequent Steam user with at least a thousand dollars of games on Steam. I've been buying, making and playing PC games since the C64.
As I was saying, the attitude of "I only buy games on Steam" is creating a distribution monopoly for Valve. You can't argue this fact - go to your local games store - where's the PC games section? It used to be a lot bigger. Who are Steam's competitors...Origin? Lol.
My assertion is simply: Monopolies = bad. Competition = good.
If you're not at least a little bit worried that a quickly growing monopoly might have an adverse effect on the industry or its pricing, then you, sir, need to do some reading. http://cazort.net/topic/monopoly
Unfortunately, that link to an essay on monopolies leaves a lot to be desired. There is quite a bit of misinformation in it and most of it simply recites ideas that have largely been discredited by distinguished economists but are nonetheless still part of the common perception due to lazy professors and TV personalities masquerading as scholars. I agree with some of the general uneasiness that some have towards Steam but in no way are they anywhere close to a monopoly.
@Razor, both articles you link don't provide anything more than anecdotes again. Yes, one article says Steam sales increase 100% for seven straight years. Yes, Steam only sells PC games, but given the steep discounts they sell at, this provides zero insight into overall sales or, most important to devs and publishers, profits and margins. This doesn't indicate the whole PC games industry has grown at all. Your other article is equally anecdotal. I'm really not trying to pick a fight with you over this, but you really don't grasp the economics of the games (or any software) industry so enjoy your games and let it go.
@vortican, true, they are not a monopoly yet, but in the eyes of developers they have become a de facto monopoly. And there is little doubt Valve likes it that way, hence all his hatred for the Mac App Store and the upcoming Windows Store in Win 8. Steam has already been made mostly moot on the Mac, hence the shoddy state of the client (almost abandoned) and Gabe & co care clearly terrified of the Windows store, hence the latest casting about for Linux support.
@bobsageek you are the anecdote. Developers like to lose money thats why they release on Steam, obvious... just keep your theories to yourself.
The monopoly that you fear so much is here Buying and trashing companies for over 10 years. They wont mess with Gabe though.
edit: @Treyolen I did not say a game must be released on Steam, I said many developers are doing it, with pre-orders like the one I posted above. I support that a game should be release on as many stores as possible, usually they do. But there are some details that sometimes make companies go for Steam exclusive, its not the best solution, but its better than having GFWL glued to it... example dirt series.
@Razor No argument about EA. Through terrible license agreements they are basically a monopoly in the sports game market and it is a very bad thing. The day they bought Bioware was a dark day indeed. But I do respectfully disagree with the thought that a game must release on Steam. I'm fine with a future where every game happens to be released on Steam but terrified of a world where every game must be released on Steam. The difference may seem like splitting hairs, but it is very real to me. Again, Steam has a definite place as a prominent option in the market. I just don't want them to be the market.
I don't think you have anything to worry about Treyolen. Monopolies don't just happen because companies get big. Besides, there's plenty of competition for Steam.
@Razor Funny - you say I know nothing of the PC games industry, but you don't know a thing about me. I've been working in the industry for 6 years as a developer for indie and studio projects. I'm a hardcore PC gamer, indie games supporter, and frequent Steam user with at least a thousand dollars of games on Steam. I've been buying, making and playing PC games since the C64.
As I was saying, the attitude of "I only buy games on Steam" is creating a distribution monopoly for Valve. You can't argue this fact - go to your local games store - where's the PC games section? It used to be a lot bigger. Who are Steam's competitors...Origin? Lol.
My assertion is simply: Monopolies = bad. Competition = good.
If you're not at least a little bit worried that a quickly growing monopoly might have an adverse effect on the industry or its pricing, then you, sir, need to do some reading. http://cazort.net/topic/monopoly
This is a point many people make, but I don't see how releasing a game exclusively on one platform creates competition. Only by releasing games on every possible distribution platform, one can encourage healthy competition. If publishers/developers release games on their own exclusive platforms, it doesn't create actual competition between services (better prices, faster servers, etc.), but forces customers to use different distribution platforms for different games.
@Doom972 I see your point and agree with it in a vacuum, but the world doesn't operate in a vacuum. The same thing could be said of consoles. Exclusive titles do encourage competition between the entire ecosystems surrounding the platforms. We did have a virtual monopoly in the NES days since the Master System didn't really sell in this country. By virtue of there only being one real option, all games were available on it. It was not good for the industry. Nintendo enforced many negative policies that found it in court more than once. I like having a three system industry that forces all of them to be competitive in every way. I think the day Sega became truly relevant was a great day for console gaming. It got even better when Sony entered the fray and then Microsoft.
Steam is not my cup of tea, but I'm glad it exists. GOG is my absolute favorite and I'm glad it exists. I HATE anything EA, but I'm still glad they're bringing some competition to the field. And I wish Microsoft the best of luck with their new store. Competition is a great thing and will only force everyone to improve. I'm an Intel guy through and through, but I'm always pulling for AMD to do great things.
@Treyolen the console argument is an interesting one, and one I hadn't thought of before.
It's an interesting evolution; the PC market now has sub-markets within it (Steam, Origin, Beamdog, GOG), and developers have to choose whether to release their games on all or only some of those markets.
I guess the main difference between that and a console is that the distribution clients don't cost $300.
Not only that, but with Windows 8 moving toward becoming X-Box compatible, it's possible we might see some PC games making the port to console without requiring conversion. Imagine an X-BOX game that you can play on your computer with a controller, because it was designed to run on Windows.
It also opens the door to these PC-exclusive distributors selling games for consoles. It's kind of an exciting concept, and one that has the added potential of revitalizing the PC gaming market.
Overhaul is a division of Beamdog (which is a fancy way of saying that they are Beamdog, just with a separate budget). Beamdog is a small digital distribution company. They have their own client that sells and distributes digital computer games, much like Steam or Origin.
The difference with Beamdog's client is that it is only a download and library management service. It doesn't have to be on in order to play your games, there's no "chat" feature, and (speaking from experience) it runs a lot faster than Steam.
Yes BD does load up faster, but downloading is quite slow to me... I can easily see downloads breaking completly when BG is released... I mean Steam downloads at 1.5MB! Anyway that's why I want to pre-load as fast as I can...
Other news: Grimrock editor is in beta, so if any modder is around might like to know this, but you need Steam to use it for now: To participate in the beta you need to have a Steam account and the game installed on Steam. Why only Steam? Steam’s automatic update system allows us to do frequent incremental updates to quickly patch issues that may arise. Also we need to be able to isolate the development in a separate branch during the beta. In short, we can react to the feedback more efficiently and keep the beta as short as possible. After the beta has concluded the Dungeon Editor will be available on all available distribution platforms.
True, the download speed is a bit slower than Steam (Steam can afford bigger servers). I think a big part of this is in Steam's level of success; they can afford the equipment that makes those faster downloads possible.
Truth be told, I was leery about the Beamdog client, until I actually used it. I wish Steam was half as quick. I wish their store page loaded correctly and quickly like Beamdog's, and I really wish Steam had the resource usage. And if I had a nickel for every time a download randomly paused in Steam, well, lots of nickels.
I'm fairly certain once BG2:EE is released the two games will make the trip to GOG pretty quickly. Steam though, I wonder. Granted, its sales numbers would be astounding, but I wonder if Overhaul would survive the trip. It would be interesting to see BG wind up in the Workshop, though. I feel like the mod community would explode.
If publishers/developers release games on their own exclusive platforms, it doesn't create actual competition between services (better prices, faster servers, etc.), but forces customers to use different distribution platforms for different games.
Yes, and I also find it annoying having to install multiple platforms. The problem with digital distribution is the tendency for there to be just one platform (hey, it's convenient to go to a single source for everything). This creates the monopoly.
The crux of the problem is this: as long as Steam is the most convenient and widely used platform for players, they have the power to abuse and squeeze maximum profit from developers with outrageous distribution fees. They end up becoming more than just distributors. They become content controllers and profiteers (making money off the hard work of the developers).
This is exactly what happened with EBay ... they automatically refund buyers when they say a package didn't arrive or an item was damaged...they don't give a shit about whether it's true or not, as long as they don't lose buyers. For a distributor, there will always be sellers - buyers are more important.
Steam is the best for a reason, there will always be people to dont like the most popular game in town, and thats okay. Everyone (almost) uses facebook and twitter, and I hate it and dont bother but i recognize it's still the most popular. Steam is just very convenient and consumer friendly with all its sales and fair prices. Still it DOES have competition in the form of EA's Origin, Gamestops conquered Impulse and of course Beamdog. So you cant say it doesnt, the problem is the consumer (Generally speaking) loves steam which makes it seem like a monopoly.
You cant blame Valve and toss monopoly accusations when its the players that religiously use steam, and vehemently defend it.
I think Beamdog's gamble isnt going to do them the good they think it will. They'd see much more profit with a GOG and Steam release. Withholding it isnt going to overcome the supreme fanboyism people feel for Valve and GOG.
@VampQueen31 You make a few points, let me address them from my perspective.
One, I'm not saying they are a monopoly. I'm saying that insisting that all releases occur on Steam will lead to a monopoly.
Two, Windows isn't a monopoly by your standards, and I happen to agree with that standard. But that doesn't change the fact that most people disagree and that Microsoft was convicted in a court of law for abusive monopoly practices. You don't need a perfect definition monopoly to damage a market. More competition is almost always a good thing.
And three, Steam and it's religion is nothing compared to the cult of Steve. The iTunes store is where the majority of the revenue will be generated for this game. The PC release is almost a customer service exercise. I'm sure it will make enough money to be worthwhile, but iTunes will pay the bills. Steam will not be necessary.
All that said, I still think the game should be and will be released on Steam eventually. Just be patient if Steam is the only platform you will use for gaming.
Treyolen, there are reasons that de facto monopolies don't ever exist in an unregulated market, so I don't think we have to worry about that in regards to Steam:
1) It is impossible that every participant in that market will ever congregate to exactly the same product or solution at the same time. 2) Barring any legal barriers (which wouldn't exist in such a market), there will always be competitors, however small, offering the same or similar products or solutions from which consumers can choose. 3) The fact that some competitors are very large and others very small in an unregulated marketplace is a not a failing of the market that would indicate monopolies can be created. Rather, it reflects that large firms have succeeded in giving the most value to their customers in the aggregate. It also doesn't damage a market and does not limit choice.
I agree that more competition is always a good thing. In fact, only an unregulated or very seldom regulated market can offer the environment where that competition can exist. In highly regulated markets, barriers to entry are much higher due to legal requirements and costs, so there is less opportunity for competition, less choices, and higher costs to the consumer. Microsoft is a perfect example of this as the legal ruling which required it to separate browser from OS did absolutely nothing to benefit the consumer. In fact, the market itself made possible the competitors to IE by disseminating the notion that a better browser was needed, which resulted in the various options we have today, all free and competitive with IE. Even the accusations against Microsoft which didn't have to do with browsers all delivered more value to customers and didn't prevent other companies from developing better products or serving different operating systems on their computers.
I am firmly convinced that we're living in an age of low-cost (or even free), reliable, innovative software development precisely because that market is largely unregulated. If we think about the incredible wealth of opportunity that exists in the digital space, it is truly frightening to think what might happen if the notion that we somehow need to protect ourselves from monopolies, especially with government intervention, takes hold. I believe it would be the squandering of incredible opportunities for advancement if that were allowed to happen and this paranoia about Steam is a symptom of the line of thought that big and successful might lead to monopoly. Hardly, as the value we get from many huge corporations providing a product in a sector with tiny competitors is a benefit to all consumers. The fact that they make a lot of money in the process is completely immaterial and we're not getting poorer or have fewer choices because they're getting richer.
You're right, eventually this game will be released on Steam and everyone will be happy. Patience is a virtue.
The problem with partial or virtual monopolies in this case, is its not the company doing this. The only way to stop the likes of Microsoft and Valve and such from having the control over their markets it does would be forcing people to not use the product, as even with Windows 8 and its built in store, I would wager the cult mentality will still have many people actively seeking out steam and downloading it and forgetting about the easier Windows 8 app store.
Of course telling steam or Microsoft users to cut down on this monopoly, 500,00 users can never use steam or windows again and have to go else where would cause major problems and spurn anti consumer arguments. The point being how do you stop this? Its the peoples fault in this situation, rabid fanaticism to a product. Options are there, and can even be more convenient and people will still go for their beloved service of choice. I cant really see how its a companies fault their product is so well loved the people come to it.
I know the Cult of Steve is very large, but I do have to wonder if most of their sales will really come from IOS. People who dont know about Baldur's Gate but are those Casual IOS Gamers would likely find BG 'hardcore' while people like us (Old School Original fans) will likely just buy a Windows copy and the IOS copy. I do however think this game has a real chance by appealing to the Indie PC market, which is popular now. The Hardcore gameplay and old school graphics of Baldur's Gate is right up there alley.
Comments
But there are a few people at Blizzard who might disagree with your last statement. They've made a few bucks on PC content without Steam...
Do you know what Greenlight is?
It's not selling a mmo that is hard, hard is selling a single player indie. Or do you consider WoW/Diablo 3 The gaming industry?
I have an idea of what Greenlight is about. But I think you're familiar with my feelings on DRM and Steam has DRM deep in its DNA. I have never installed Steam and I never will. I'm not trying to hate on it and I still hope that BG:EE releases there eventually. But I would like to see Beamdog maximize their revenue and I think that means an independent release for now. I adore GOG and think they should wait before releasing there too. But both of those channels should absolutely be in their future.
(And no they are not conspiring to raise prices once competition is down... because if they did, people would stop buying, Again).
Torchlight, now thats a great game, "the true diablo3". They are supported by perfect world and also (choosed) Steam because they sell alot there. Anyway for your sake I hope Torch2 is not Steam exclusive, *apparently only the pre-order is.
And while I don't like it, PC gaming is still in decline, take out the burst of Diablo III and the next WoW expansion and it's another flat year of me-too shooters and MMOs. Steam hasn't saved PC gaming, it's just stopped the massive blood loss for now.
There is no argument Steam and Valve have been good for PC gaming, but they are far from perfect an we will be better off if competing services arrive and thrive. @Razor your insistence that all they do is good and benevolent is amazingly unrealistic. If you really care about PC gaming as much as you say you do, you'd want a diverse ecosystem, monocultures always die. Valve cares first and foremost about Valve's profits (which they should) which is why they cast about wildly loving then hating in turn the 360, the PS3, Apple and now Linux. They see desktop gaming is still in decline and want to be part of the next big thing and so far they can't make anything stick. They are threatened by the Mac App Store, they are terrified of the store in Windows 8 (which probably won't matter much until Windows 9) and are locked out (mostly) of the console ecosystems.
Most of your arguments are based on service and prices and things that directly impact you right this minute, but the long term economic impact of monopoly distribution has been proven bad over and over. Be a fanboy for games, not some corporate digital distribution system.
I dont think PC gaming is dying anymore. PC Sales increase - Joystick, a huge number of console games are being ported to the PC and that means something. Means that developers recognize that if they release on Steam there is a good chance that sales overcome piracy and that IS something.
"but the long term economic impact of monopoly distribution has been proven bad over and over." its true, but so what? when that happens gamers will just start over. with a service that respects them, for now steam does.
If you want to hate on a service so much try GFWL, they could use some more hate to end their misery. And while at it spare some for EA too for raping our favorite studios.
I'll add another piece of "anecdotal evidence" for you... I shouldnt even take the time really, you do your own research. http://kotaku.com/5858589/a-rare-glimpse-at-steam-sales-figures.
Steam is fine. Competition is better.
BG:EE will probaly release on Steam eventually and will hopefully release on others as well. But everyone assumes Beamdog said no to Steam. Do we know for sure that Steam didn't reject a submission?
I accept your doubts and I'am not the one to clarify them, I tried but in the end each one has his own view of things. And yes it could have been refused for some reason, but its not likely, MDK2 HD is there alredy right?
I do know Steam could change in the future, for the worse I mean. But for now they are doing so many nice things that blaming them for future mistakes doesnt make sense to me.
Just look at this pre-order, They really know how to get things sold :P (awesome game btw) I'am done with the Steam subject, you guys did raise some nice points too.
Funny - you say I know nothing of the PC games industry, but you don't know a thing about me. I've been working in the industry for 6 years as a developer for indie and studio projects. I'm a hardcore PC gamer, indie games supporter, and frequent Steam user with at least a thousand dollars of games on Steam. I've been buying, making and playing PC games since the C64.
As I was saying, the attitude of "I only buy games on Steam" is creating a distribution monopoly for Valve. You can't argue this fact - go to your local games store - where's the PC games section? It used to be a lot bigger. Who are Steam's competitors...Origin? Lol.
My assertion is simply: Monopolies = bad. Competition = good.
If you're not at least a little bit worried that a quickly growing monopoly might have an adverse effect on the industry or its pricing, then you, sir, need to do some reading.
http://cazort.net/topic/monopoly
@vortican, true, they are not a monopoly yet, but in the eyes of developers they have become a de facto monopoly. And there is little doubt Valve likes it that way, hence all his hatred for the Mac App Store and the upcoming Windows Store in Win 8. Steam has already been made mostly moot on the Mac, hence the shoddy state of the client (almost abandoned) and Gabe & co care clearly terrified of the Windows store, hence the latest casting about for Linux support.
The monopoly that you fear so much is here Buying and trashing companies for over 10 years. They wont mess with Gabe though.
edit: @Treyolen I did not say a game must be released on Steam, I said many developers are doing it, with pre-orders like the one I posted above. I support that a game should be release on as many stores as possible, usually they do.
But there are some details that sometimes make companies go for Steam exclusive, its not the best solution, but its better than having GFWL glued to it... example dirt series.
Never thought I'd say that...
Steam is not my cup of tea, but I'm glad it exists. GOG is my absolute favorite and I'm glad it exists. I HATE anything EA, but I'm still glad they're bringing some competition to the field. And I wish Microsoft the best of luck with their new store. Competition is a great thing and will only force everyone to improve. I'm an Intel guy through and through, but I'm always pulling for AMD to do great things.
It's an interesting evolution; the PC market now has sub-markets within it (Steam, Origin, Beamdog, GOG), and developers have to choose whether to release their games on all or only some of those markets.
I guess the main difference between that and a console is that the distribution clients don't cost $300.
It also opens the door to these PC-exclusive distributors selling games for consoles. It's kind of an exciting concept, and one that has the added potential of revitalizing the PC gaming market.
The difference with Beamdog's client is that it is only a download and library management service. It doesn't have to be on in order to play your games, there's no "chat" feature, and (speaking from experience) it runs a lot faster than Steam.
Anyway that's why I want to pre-load as fast as I can...
Other news: Grimrock editor is in beta, so if any modder is around might like to know this, but you need Steam to use it for now:
To participate in the beta you need to have a Steam account and the game installed on Steam. Why only Steam? Steam’s automatic update system allows us to do frequent incremental updates to quickly patch issues that may arise. Also we need to be able to isolate the development in a separate branch during the beta. In short, we can react to the feedback more efficiently and keep the beta as short as possible. After the beta has concluded the Dungeon Editor will be available on all available distribution platforms.
I'm fairly certain once BG2:EE is released the two games will make the trip to GOG pretty quickly. Steam though, I wonder. Granted, its sales numbers would be astounding, but I wonder if Overhaul would survive the trip. It would be interesting to see BG wind up in the Workshop, though. I feel like the mod community would explode.
The crux of the problem is this: as long as Steam is the most convenient and widely used platform for players, they have the power to abuse and squeeze maximum profit from developers with outrageous distribution fees. They end up becoming more than just distributors. They become content controllers and profiteers (making money off the hard work of the developers).
This is exactly what happened with EBay ... they automatically refund buyers when they say a package didn't arrive or an item was damaged...they don't give a shit about whether it's true or not, as long as they don't lose buyers. For a distributor, there will always be sellers - buyers are more important.
I don't know what the solution is BTW.
You cant blame Valve and toss monopoly accusations when its the players that religiously use steam, and vehemently defend it.
I think Beamdog's gamble isnt going to do them the good they think it will. They'd see much more profit with a GOG and Steam release. Withholding it isnt going to overcome the supreme fanboyism people feel for Valve and GOG.
One, I'm not saying they are a monopoly. I'm saying that insisting that all releases occur on Steam will lead to a monopoly.
Two, Windows isn't a monopoly by your standards, and I happen to agree with that standard. But that doesn't change the fact that most people disagree and that Microsoft was convicted in a court of law for abusive monopoly practices. You don't need a perfect definition monopoly to damage a market. More competition is almost always a good thing.
And three, Steam and it's religion is nothing compared to the cult of Steve. The iTunes store is where the majority of the revenue will be generated for this game. The PC release is almost a customer service exercise. I'm sure it will make enough money to be worthwhile, but iTunes will pay the bills. Steam will not be necessary.
All that said, I still think the game should be and will be released on Steam eventually. Just be patient if Steam is the only platform you will use for gaming.
1) It is impossible that every participant in that market will ever congregate to exactly the same product or solution at the same time.
2) Barring any legal barriers (which wouldn't exist in such a market), there will always be competitors, however small, offering the same or similar products or solutions from which consumers can choose.
3) The fact that some competitors are very large and others very small in an unregulated marketplace is a not a failing of the market that would indicate monopolies can be created. Rather, it reflects that large firms have succeeded in giving the most value to their customers in the aggregate. It also doesn't damage a market and does not limit choice.
I agree that more competition is always a good thing. In fact, only an unregulated or very seldom regulated market can offer the environment where that competition can exist. In highly regulated markets, barriers to entry are much higher due to legal requirements and costs, so there is less opportunity for competition, less choices, and higher costs to the consumer. Microsoft is a perfect example of this as the legal ruling which required it to separate browser from OS did absolutely nothing to benefit the consumer. In fact, the market itself made possible the competitors to IE by disseminating the notion that a better browser was needed, which resulted in the various options we have today, all free and competitive with IE. Even the accusations against Microsoft which didn't have to do with browsers all delivered more value to customers and didn't prevent other companies from developing better products or serving different operating systems on their computers.
I am firmly convinced that we're living in an age of low-cost (or even free), reliable, innovative software development precisely because that market is largely unregulated. If we think about the incredible wealth of opportunity that exists in the digital space, it is truly frightening to think what might happen if the notion that we somehow need to protect ourselves from monopolies, especially with government intervention, takes hold. I believe it would be the squandering of incredible opportunities for advancement if that were allowed to happen and this paranoia about Steam is a symptom of the line of thought that big and successful might lead to monopoly. Hardly, as the value we get from many huge corporations providing a product in a sector with tiny competitors is a benefit to all consumers. The fact that they make a lot of money in the process is completely immaterial and we're not getting poorer or have fewer choices because they're getting richer.
You're right, eventually this game will be released on Steam and everyone will be happy. Patience is a virtue.
Of course telling steam or Microsoft users to cut down on this monopoly, 500,00 users can never use steam or windows again and have to go else where would cause major problems and spurn anti consumer arguments. The point being how do you stop this? Its the peoples fault in this situation, rabid fanaticism to a product. Options are there, and can even be more convenient and people will still go for their beloved service of choice. I cant really see how its a companies fault their product is so well loved the people come to it.
I know the Cult of Steve is very large, but I do have to wonder if most of their sales will really come from IOS. People who dont know about Baldur's Gate but are those Casual IOS Gamers would likely find BG 'hardcore' while people like us (Old School Original fans) will likely just buy a Windows copy and the IOS copy. I do however think this game has a real chance by appealing to the Indie PC market, which is popular now. The Hardcore gameplay and old school graphics of Baldur's Gate is right up there alley.