so i can take it choices will now only have epic games from now on = don't bothered
update: i could only see one site called mickey? even mention something similar to this from jan - https://micky.com.au/valve-lawsuit-calls-steam-a-monopoly/
it is a joke anyway it says stuff like:
steam keeps prices high (when people set their own price when putting games on the store)
and
makes games must have (when loads of people only get games when free or in bundles maybe years after they first come out)
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, there's two cases on going
First one by consumers
Second one (this) is by developers.
(I think in first one, Valve's answer is due this week or so)
Comment has been collapsed.
so i can take it choices will now only have epic games from now on = don't bothered
Doesn't mean anything in that regard, since IGN owns Humble for a while now.
Comment has been collapsed.
>monopoly
>Origin, gog, Epic, itchio, piracy, Microsoft Store, Big Fish Games, Uplay
good luck with the case, lol
Comment has been collapsed.
The legal term monopoly doesn't imply a 100% market share.
https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/single-firm-conduct/monopolization-defined
Comment has been collapsed.
They claim that Valve has over 75% market share.
Of those sales, approximately 75% flow through the online storefront of a single company, Valve.
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah its true, valve has 75% market share of all pc game sales
Comment has been collapsed.
all digital pc game sales maybe plus with all subscriptions services, the actual market share is not as easy to determine now so it's probably way less than that.
Comment has been collapsed.
its not entirely accurate but it's an estimated figure
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah yes, piracy, one of the leading causes of not having a monopoly.
"Your honor, our company doesn't have a monopoly, most people steal instead."
(I understand where you're coming from I just found that really funny)
Comment has been collapsed.
They might say: "Your honor, our Co made this market big by luring millions of ppl out from piracy. All the others would have had their 25% market by now altogether if there were no Steam." )
Comment has been collapsed.
I like how the lawsuit says that Valve uses Steam to remove competition. In my humble opinion Valve couldn't take a more hands off approach to their business. When Epic started handing out freebies Valve didn't start doing the same. It would be quite obvious to outspend Epic and to sign even more exclusives to remove the competition, but Valve has done neither. If anything Valve seems to be fine with Epic entering the market (only removing games from Steam to make them Epic exclusives seems to bother Valve, but I guess we can all agree that isn't an overreaction ;)).
Comment has been collapsed.
Specifically Valve was upset when a game which was promised to come to valve, and for which Valve, in turn. had sunk significant advert money, was pulled last minute to become Epic-exclusive.
Comment has been collapsed.
well, that is something i can understand.
They invested money and were left out on the revenue generated during the initial launch...
Comment has been collapsed.
Coverage of Epic's platform peaked this past week, when Epic managed to lure the latest iteration of the Metro game franchise to being an Epic exclusive for a year, even after pre-orders were available for the game on Steam's store for the past several weeks.
https://www.polygon.com/2019/1/28/18201004/valve-metro-exodus-epic-games-store includes Valve's statement.
Comment has been collapsed.
i probably should have been more precise ;)
i can understand valve for being grumpy for that short term exclusivity crap that was pulled off.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh, I agree 100% with what you'd previously said, I was just giving my sauces because some people like original sources.
乁( ◔ ౪◔)ㄏ
Comment has been collapsed.
Will Valve in retribution kick the developers from Steam?
Comment has been collapsed.
if Humble hate Steam and Valve why not just remove their games if they are so sure Epic is better and much more of a great company
Comment has been collapsed.
I wonder if that's what they are trying to find out by giving people the option to pick between Epic and Steam keys for some games in Choice.... Gauging if switching to Epic completely will lose them too many customers? I for one have no desire to participate in Epic games, for whatever reason the downloads take longer on their launcher than on Steam, and I already have terrible internet speeds
Comment has been collapsed.
i don't even take the free games from Epic anymore because i never used them - i certainly am not going to start paying for them
Comment has been collapsed.
Big balls when they want to take as much default cut as Steam (30%), while distributing keys that Steam generates for free.
Comment has been collapsed.
Small correction, they take 25%, unless you use the widget to purchase in which case they only take 5%.
Comment has been collapsed.
25 on the store but 30 in bundles, that's the new rate
Comment has been collapsed.
I am pretty sure bundles have a separate price agreement, the price of games there is significantly lower. Or is it just a fix calculation based on how much a game costs nonbundled?
Comment has been collapsed.
You can go look now at their cut across bundles. For instance, that photoshop bundle had humble getting 50%
Comment has been collapsed.
The plaintiff is Wolfire Games, not the Humble Bundle company. The headline is a bit misleading.
Comment has been collapsed.
I have my own issues with Valve, but Steam is my favorite digital game store by far, and it still is not a monopoly. There are enough alternatives, like gog, Uplay, Origin etc. They don't quell competition directly, or buy other storefronts out. That would be Disney, who just aquire every competitor, and now hold a third of the entire entertainment industry. Which is still not monopoly, but dangerously close to.
Comment has been collapsed.
I get why Apple gets sued, with their closed ecosystem. Google already makes less sense, though the alternative is somewhat complicated. But thinking that someone should have access to Steam without being forced to pay Steam, is pretty rich.
And just the existence of Steam keys already makes their argument obsolete. They absolutely can sell their games, have access to Steam and receive 100% of the revenue. If they manage to sell these on their alternative stores.
I agree though that keyless should at least be an option, even if this is an unpopular idea for Steamgifts. ;) It makes sense that it resulted in HB becoming less attractive for publishers and in conclusion for their customers, us.
Comment has been collapsed.
Personally I don't get why Apple gets sued. This is their own platform, no? Epic Games are not OK with Apple 30% cut but OK with Microsoft/Nintendo/Sony 30% cut. Smh.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm sure this is just the first step. They go for the smallest source of revenue to create a precedence, in case this works in their favor: go for the rest.
If they fail, it doesn't matter to them since it's their smallest source of income.
Also: Didn't they already fail with Google PlayStore since Android can sideload by default?
Comment has been collapsed.
Doubt it. Why risking both platforms at the same time? Either iOS or Android should've been enough for experiment.
Not sure about Android, also not sure about revenue split between platforms, but back in September 2020 there was an article saying that of all 350m Fortnite players 116m are playing on iOS.
Comment has been collapsed.
Good ol' Humble Bundle always up to something new...
Comment has been collapsed.
I’m surprised that complaint was drafted by Quinn Emmanuel. The quality of writing made me think it’s be a second rate lawyer, not one of the top law firms in the country.
There are huge holes in the complaint, and a well-drafted response might be able to support a motion doe summary judgment
Comment has been collapsed.
Haha my lawyer girlfriend said the same thing. She thought this was a fake complaint drafted for Reddit or something.
Comment has been collapsed.
As an attorney, I’m offended by how bad the complaint is.
Especially considering that attorneys at Quinn Emmanuel make over $200k per year
Comment has been collapsed.
As an attorney, I’m offended by how bad the complaint is.
Especially considering that attorneys at Quinn Emmanuel make over $200k per year
Comment has been collapsed.
Heh the bigger ones always have a slave army or junior and interns doing the menial work so I guess that's it.
Still, my gf thinks they poked enough holes in their own case to make the work of the Valve litigators way too easy so that's money not exactly well spent.
Comment has been collapsed.
is this legit? i can't find this news through google search
Comment has been collapsed.
techraptor has an article now. https://techraptor.net/gaming/news/humble-bundle-creator-suing-valve-anti-trust-suit
Comment has been collapsed.
So, they are suing Valve for being successful? By my understanding Valve in no way demands them to sell their products on their platform. And even provides free hosting.
EDIT: Actually read it and it's idiotic. They consider Steam Gaming and Steam store to be separate. And imply that Steam Gaming should be a free service to them... Or at least they should be able to use it however they want. That is very expensive and large scale content-distribution network...
Comment has been collapsed.
They just doing the american national sport.... suing.
Comment has been collapsed.
They want to use Steam keys for free, but not sell on Steam Store.
Because Valve requires that (1) every Steam-enabled game must be listed in the Steam Store and (2) a game publisher’s use of Steam Keys must be limited to a small percentage of salesat no lower price, Valve effectively mandates that all game publishers sell the vast majority of their Steam-enabled games through the Steam Store. Any publisher that does not abide by this requirement is subject to discipline by Valve.
Through these rules, Valve has economically coerced game publishers into paying Valve excessive 30% commissions on nearly every game sale. Because the Steam Gaming Platform is a must-have, game publishers cannot avoid the Steam Store and therefore must accede to Valve’s demands
Comment has been collapsed.
Hmm I wonder if Valve charged them fee for each copy on their platform, let's say 10% of initial MSRP... Would they be happy?
Comment has been collapsed.
That's awfully presumptive unless there's other sections that support your point about plantiff's motive.
In this context, they are complaining that given Valve's market share, it unfairly stifles competition and harms developers when:
-
Steam TOS says that publishers cannot sell their games on 3rd party stores for less than what they tend to sell them on Steam, AND
-
Keys can only be a small percentage of sales
Neither of those is a request for keys to be free.
I get plantiff's argument - Whether thats enough to rise to the level of antitrust is a different matter.
Comment has been collapsed.
Steam TOS says that publishers cannot sell their games on 3rd party stores for less than what they tend to sell them on Steam
I still don't understand the logic here. Why would a developer even want to sell it cheaper ? If they are ready to sell it for cheaper why would they sell it more expensive on steam ? And if price on steam is what they want - why would they sell it cheaper somewhere else ? This is valid rule for devs not to exploit steams system instead of limiting competition. This is also to protect the end user.
I could agree that the other rule is limiting "competition", but to be honest I don't see how that could be interpreted into "steam bad". How is even reseller considered competition ? They resell a product of steam (keys).
Comment has been collapsed.
Here is an example: You developed a 60 dollar game, after steam takes its cut you get $40. So you might want to sell that game on a store that only take 5% for 50 usd. That way you get $5 more and the product is $10 cheaper.
Comment has been collapsed.
Funny how Epic (which charges 12%) isn't cheaper for new games isn't it? 60$ * 18% (30 - 12) = 10.80$. Would love to see that publishers make games 5$ then given that they earn 5.80$ more still.
Here's an example: https://www.epicgames.com/store/en-US/p/the-dungeon-of-naheulbeuk
https://store.steampowered.com/app/970830/The_Dungeon_Of_Naheulbeuk_The_Amulet_Of_Chaos/
For me the price is exactly the same, but the publisher gets 6.30$ more on the EGS. Don't know if I'd call that pricing pro-consumer.
Comment has been collapsed.
Epic is only 26 EUR in my territory, while Steam's price is 34 EUR....
Comment has been collapsed.
For me it's 34.99 € on both.
Guess the first world doesn't deserve to save money ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
I checked other price differences and Epic was consistently cheaper but not by much 3-8% mostly. (Honestly the AAA steam prices are really expensive compared to how much people make in Eastern Europe, since most of our prices are the same as in the west, we don't get any of the Russian prices, but that's another discussion entirely.)
I kinda wrote this to NazaSekh, but I guess the question is would you rather support the devs or the platform in this case?
Comment has been collapsed.
You don't support the devs. You support the publisher.
Comment has been collapsed.
The minority of games are self-published. Saying that 'indie games' are the ones that benefit from the 12% cut is... optimistic. My point was that for me there's no difference purchasing games at either store and I'm too cynic to believe that anyone actually working on the games will earn more because I buy the game on the EGS.
Comment has been collapsed.
Saying that 'indie games' are the ones that benefit from the 12% cut is... optimistic.
I'd say it's the only absolute statement here, considering you can only be sure - but you can be sure - that the ones benefiting from the 12% cut are indie developers.They might be the minority, but that doesn't really change the fact. If anything, it could mean buy indies mostly on EGS, the rest whereever you want.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's a very vague statement. Some publishers take a 30% cut, some only 5%, some take everything in the first year and nothing later. In general, more money will be going to the devs, even if it's just small margin.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's funny knowing that Randy Pitchford, having promised big bonuses for his team before the release of Borderlands 3 on EGS, gave them much smaller bonuses and a slight cut in their salaries after the release of Borderlands 3, even though the game outperformed everyone's expectations and continued to make money after the incident.
And to add to the problem he also took a bigger bonus for himself at the same time. That was the proof we needed to say that most developers still don't get any real profit from going on EGS, while greedy publishers sure do almost every time.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's not proof, that's one example of corporate greed. Gearbox is a developer not the publisher. 2k is the publisher.
Comment has been collapsed.
Still, there are numerous publishers like that, at least rumoured (which seems plausible), and even though Pitchford is the head of Gearbox, he is said to have strong ties in 2k and some privileges from them as well.
I don't want to really stir the argument, just find it irrelevant to talk about how developers have benefits, with all of the articles detailing this which say that most of them unfortunately don't.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, the thing is, corporate greed is sadly something, that does not go away with one small change.
I think what I said applies more to smaller studios, who negotiate a deal with a publisher. Like for example the Untitled Goose Game devs. An agreement is not a promise, I don't think you can compare it to the Pitchford situation.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, in this case it makes sense, I agree. Probably, it was just one example with big mismanagement and a little abuse of one person's rights, but it's a shame that the developers themselves get ripped off despite all the claims that it's for their own good.
Comment has been collapsed.
That doesn't mean it's the case for everyone. I'm from Canada and from what I've seen, buying from Epic would be just as expensive. The only way to have games being cheaper on EGS for me would be if they were already on sale and if I also had one of those 10$ off coupon that Epic has given in the past.
Comment has been collapsed.
I never said that's the case, mate. I wager, most of the newer, bigger games cost the same for me as well on both platforms. The question is who would you rather give more money to, the devs or the platform?
Comment has been collapsed.
Both? I mean, I prefer playing on Steam, that I admit. It's much more than a store and a launcher. No other platform offers what Steam has and I personally like the community stuff. Epic is so barebone, even as a store. It still doesn't even have a shopping cart. If Epic wants to get anywhere near the level of Steam, that would take money and I'm not sure they could keep on asking only a 12% cut. But maybe I'm wrong. I have no idea how much money it takes to operate something as big as Steam. I do think though that Steam could lower its cut for smaller devs, perhaps be more flexible like GOG apparently is.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is valid rule for devs not to exploit steams system instead of limiting competition.
Its easy to defend Valve by saying that devs would just pocket the increased profits elsewhere and wouldn't pass savings off to us gamers by citing what's happened with games on Epic Store, and therefore its okay for Valve to have their pricing policy for selling games to 3rd party stores. But who are we to say that preventing Steam policy abuse matter more than the harm it can have in manipulating pricing, market, competition, etc? I'm fine with letting a judge weigh that if there's even legal merit to the antitrust claims.
In any case, that is not what has happened with many different indie games and even some large publisher games that have historic lows - Many lower prices happen on 3rd party stores despite Steam's policy cited in the lawsuit. I guess the lawsuit is just afraid that Steam will actually enforce their policy, and if/when enforced then that policy manipulates market prices and such.
Comment has been collapsed.
Two years and four months after its inception on December 4, 2018, the Epic Games Store hasn’t done much for its parent company aside from being one of its biggest money losers.
Comment has been collapsed.
lol next they'll sue Epic for not being successful enough as a competitor.
Comment has been collapsed.
how to make sure humble bundle gets nothing with this little hack
Comment has been collapsed.
probably need some edit to mention that they didn't own humble bundle anymore, seems some people thinking they still are
Comment has been collapsed.
Humble going every news more to a dickhead site.
If they remove Steam, then I never will buy there.
Comment has been collapsed.
If they remove Steam, then I never will buy there.
^^ this
Comment has been collapsed.
It isn't Humble bringing the suit. It is an independent game developer. They organised the original Humble Bundle event but no longer have anything to do with Humble Bundle.
Comment has been collapsed.
Removing the keyless activation was a dick move, that was a fair method to avoid grey market, it's like steam wants grey market to discourage publishers to be in bundles, and it works great.
Comment has been collapsed.
The law suit goes on about the 30% and how even stores that have tried 8-12% commission have failed to break the monopoly.
So whilst it's true, Valve do make obscene amounts of money and probably should reduce their cut, doing so would actually make it even harder for those other stores to compete.
Yet - instead of trying to compete with all of Steams features including proper regional pricing, they have tried giveaways, exclusives and now law suits.
Steam stands way ahead of any other platform but it has taken them years to develop. Anyone trying to get a slice of that market should start with a decent platform - not all this other nonsense. I think Epic would be doing a whole lot better if they'd ploughed resources into their platform, rather than pissing off a good chunk of potential customers with paid exclusives.
Overall though - this might not be a bad development and could result in better days ahead for gamers if Valve were less greedy and were restricted on some of their anti-competitive behaviour.
Comment has been collapsed.
So whilst it's true, Valve do make obscene amounts of money and probably should reduce their cut, doing so would actually make it even harder for those other stores to compete.
Well, they're a business so making money is not a reason for them to go into the charity business but I do think that their cut should be more flexible depending on several factors including the size of the files, server costs, and also the number of games sold. It makes no sense for small indie devs to pay the same cut big AAA studios are paying. And while big devs also have big costs (although most of them are paying their employees haphazardly and whenever they want), it would make sense for them to pay a lesser cut if they sell less.
Overall though - this might not be a bad development and could result in better days ahead for gamers if Valve were less greedy and were restricted on some of their anti-competitive behaviour.
Agreed. Unfortunately EGS's anti-competitive behavior now makes Valve's look great.
Comment has been collapsed.
Is this thread title correct though? "Humble Bundle creator sues..."
Although it is a class action suit and HB are mentioned plenty of times - I can't find HB or it's creators amongst the plaintiffs?
Comment has been collapsed.
Bunch of alternatives other than Steam, I just like it more than the others for the profiles/achievements etc.
Comment has been collapsed.
I had no idea about the Steam Key Price Parity Provision and the Price Veto Provision! That is some rather unfair stuff.
Our backlash right here is actually discussed in the lawsuit rather insightfully on pp. 17-19. Because of how monopolistic Steam is and how it doesn't interoperate with competitors, it forces gamers to become attached to Steam since they've sunk a lot of time and money into the platform. When anything anti-Steam shows up, Steam users react negatively because they've invested so much in the platform and don't want to lose those benefits that have locked them into Steam.
Comment has been collapsed.
i agree, but i like steam because of many things
i would like devs to receive more money- yes, but as i see many games went for 12% cut to epic> does it made games cheaper for me? no so why would i care if ubisoft will get more money to print more ac creed.
i like service so i paying for that.
Comment has been collapsed.
i see many games went for 12% cut to epic> does it made games cheaper for me? no so why would i care if ubisoft will get more money to print more ac creed.
That is part of what the litigants take issue with! If they want to sell it at $30 on Epic and $35 on Steam, Steam can veto it and force them to sell at $30 to match Epic.
Comment has been collapsed.
ubisoft games are not now on steam, so they are free
do i see difference for me? no ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
Valve lets devs generate Steam keys for free. The least they can ask is that if you're using Steam to distribute your game you don't undercut them when you sell your free Steam keys. Plus I don't think they actually enforce that. As an anecdote/example, Firaxis's DLC content for Civ VI has gone on sale far more often and with deeper discounts on other stores than on Steam.
I am curious as to how the 'Price Veto' provision works and what Valve actually uses it for in practice though. It could bit as nefarious as Tim Sweeney claims, or it could be as minor as trying to avoid the Steam Sale price errors of past years, or something in-between.
Comment has been collapsed.
A lot of these things probably only ever get used at the top echelon of games. I'm not aware of any specific uses, but it would explain why you often see the same prices across storefronts even though one store is taking 30% and another is only taking 10%.
Comment has been collapsed.
So because steam user react bad to anti-steam remarks, he is saying steam is a monopoly? So basically he wants valve to ban people for saying anything bad against there company, kinda like how digital homicide tried to sue users for bad reviews.
Comment has been collapsed.
No I think he's saying Steam itself should be more interoperative with other storefronts and distribution channels. I don't think any of the remarks were targeted at users, only using them as an example of how bad things had gotten.
Comment has been collapsed.
When anything anti-Steam shows up, Steam users react negatively because they've invested so much in the platform and don't want to lose those benefits that have locked them into Steam.
Nothing stops people from having several launchers on the same computer. So it's not like Valve are holding us prisoners.
Comment has been collapsed.
Why this kind of stupid things only happen in USA? Are the laws/lawyers there just a joke to bother people and get benefit for it?
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, it's not like any legal shenanigans ever happen in Spain...
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, but i mean... There is at least one new a month because some completly unknown company sues one big company over really shady patent infrigments, like ones who sued Netflix for add the Download option...
Comment has been collapsed.
I can assure you that in Spain all companies (that can) at the moment are ramping up their legal departments and pursue revenues by claims.
Comment has been collapsed.
That largely sums up how these types of lawyers operate. There are two reasons they file suits like this, and both are based on greed.
Reason #1 - they are hoping whoever they are suing will settle out of court so they can get a quick payout. It is very expensive to fight any type of lawsuit here in the US, and for large companies it is often easier and cheaper to agree to a settlement in exchange for the suit not being decided by a judge. The law firm bringing the case typically takes a HUGE percentage of the total settlement amount for themselves.
Reason #2 - For many of these lawyers, there is no such thing as bad publicity. Getting mentioned in articles and news reports is free advertising for them. They know that very few people ever follow these cases long enough to see how they turn out, but they are likely to remember a high profile case that made headlines. The lawyers here can now say, "Yeah, we were the ones that filed that class action suit against Valve for being a monopoly", and it will impress people and get them more clients regardless of where the case goes from here.
Comment has been collapsed.
All well and good, but the law firm of the plaintiffs Quinn Emanuel seems to have a serious track record winning law suits and not for settling out of court.
Comment has been collapsed.
The US is a very litigious country. It has its upsides and downsides.
Comment has been collapsed.
Do keep in mind that the USA is far larger than Spain, and so has more people, more companies and more lawyers.
Comment has been collapsed.
Gonna be honest, I thought this would cause a major issue with Humble Bundle, but idk if this lawsuit even has anything to do with Humble Bundle, unless Wolfire games wins this and something happens to steam keys or whatever.
Comment has been collapsed.
The lawsuit has absolutely nothing to do with Humble Bundle.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, I realized that unless something happens with steam as a result, humble wouldn't be affected. I suppose what I meant to say is that I came in here thinking this was a major issue only to realize after reading the comments that this wasn't even related
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes I think including Humble Bundle in the title is very confusing.
Comment has been collapsed.
The issue actually is about the Most Favored Nation clause. Basically, steam forces publishers to sell games at the same prices or more on other sites. This makes it so that people won't just buy keys on Fanatical or HB if the game is sold for like $2 on those sites (without sales). I'm not condoning it, I'm just saying that this is where a lot of the issues about them being a monopoly stem from.
Comment has been collapsed.
https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wawd.298754/gov.uscourts.wawd.298754.1.0_1.pdf
(As a reminder, creators no longer own Humble Bundle, as it was sold to IGN in 2017)
Comment has been collapsed.