Will I get around to playing my whole library? God no, but do i want to give this indie Dev my money? God yes!

As with almost everything. Cheap is subjective. And not even just as in “I have more money so everything is cheaper for me” but also like “The value I derive from this thing for my specific use-case makes the cost feel cheap. To me.”

This just sounds like sour grapes whining paid for by Epic games who actually just want that to be them rather than Steam, despite Steam having provided the same service for free, consistently, for multiple decades now. The real offense here is PC Gamer attacking its primary consumer base (try to tell me the majority of PC gamers aren’t Steam users), so you KNOW Epic is paying a shit-ton for this manufactured consent and wish-casting. Counterpoint to this article: having more games that you want to play than you have time for, without breaking the bank, is GOOD actually, and other launch platforms only seek to enshittify YOUR experience for their own gain. Thanks!

Edit: grammar

The perfect south park clip to illustrate this story:

Randy explains how stupid other people are with their money.

“Technically, if your computer breaks and you can’t recover those games after Valve decides to close its doors, those games are gone forever.” Yeah, and? Is there a storefront that doesn’t apply to? Just how long do you think CDs and floppy disks (and the hardware to access them) last, if you haven’t lost them already? Is it more or less than Valve’s lifespan so far?

Vintage Story is one I have played a lot of, got it a long time ago before they even had seasons or food spoilage.

I was thinking of developments in the industry as a whole. Valve themselves have been the only beacon of hope, but for how long.

Sorry I wasn’t clear, I’m a big fan of Valve’s efforts, it’s just that they are the only ones right now and I’m wondering how long until they too fall like the rest of the industry.

Heh as if I wasn’t an idiot and bloated my own steam library with fanatical mystery bundles and all those developers didn’t walk away with a completely random dollar and a chance to actually have a game get noticed and steam got zilch.

It honestly just sounds like a productive economy that’s constantly moving and giving opportunities to developers even if they aren’t getting nothing but ravid fans. Like how busking might work in a wealthy thriving city compared to a poor one.

No, it’s that Valve reinvests their cut into improving the platform. Wild that devs can’t figure that out.

Yeeeeeh Gaben!

Giving 30% for Steamworks Multiplayer servers and matchmaking, player inventory and trading, modding support w/ workshop, forums, cloud saves:

Giving 30% because players ‘spend irresponsibly’:

devs aren’t smart people. talented, yes. smart, no.

I worked with many devs making $100-200k a year and could barely afford their apartments because they were so spread thin financially. spending $100+ a day eating 3 meals a day out. “investment” in crypto scams. girlfriends(yes plural). $4k a month rent for apartments that are way too extravagant for someone who spends 80% of their time at the office. driving nice cars with monthly leases in the $2-3k range. living on credit cards.

the only time I saw most of these guys get their shit together was when they got married.

I always wait 3 years to play a game. Its less expensive, my gpu is up to date and the game is patched.

Another complaint about the 30% cut on PCGamer? This reeks.