The conversation

Business & incomeExperience excerpt · English

I used to buy video games at walmart

… I used to buy video games at walmart. Unlike games I bought at walmart, Valve has done things that retroactively add value to games I bought decades ago , like remote play together, adding internet multiplayer to games that never even thought about it, and a controller system that allows pretty much anything you can think of. Games that had zero controller support for a decade just do now, no extra download, and the required configuration is often the single button press to select whatever configuration someone else made. Valve created an entirely new software platform for games that makes it so even games that are utterly broken on modern systems can work again, and it's just built in. If I buy a game today, I'm pretty confident I can play it in 20 years. An actual system for sharing digital games with other accounts, with large caveats. Refunds, despite Valve only offering them because it's the law in several countries and they were losing court cases, are not a thing for physical game purchases here in the US. Once you take off the shrink wrap, you are fucked. …

Original discussionRockstar employee shares account of the company's union-busting efforts362 source comments · at import
2

What was this responding to?

Parent context · original excerpt

KW

The difference is that the company had to risk manufacturing cartridges, distributing them, etc. If the game didn't sell, you ended up with lots of money lost. Steam is much much easier for Valve. I am not saying it has a value, but 30% seems a lot. Of course, in the end that 30% we end up paying it ourselves.

Full original

Community replies 0

No community replies yet. Add your perspective.

Replies from the source 2

Direct replies available in this import. Original-language excerpts.

PA

Steam can also take away things from games you "bought", like GTA getting replaced with a lower quality remaster and different sound track.

Full original
KW

> No, when you asked Nintendo to manufacture you a run of cartridges, you paid for them whether they sold or not. You took that risk. That was exactly my point. Distributors like EA or Activision will charge you because they took that risk. It wasn't Nintendo or SEGA. Valve is like Activision, not like Nintendo. Nintendo charged you because they lost money on the consoles. Valve looses no money.

Full original
Continue on Hacker News

Respect different perspectives. Share concrete experiences.

Sign in to post, reply, repost, and quote.