Game Development: Magnifying Cook

[MagicManICT]

Microsoft, EA, others are moving to subscription models for their game catalogs.
Although I acknowledge the counter argument that these are large providers giving value access to a large variety of games, and that they are also sophisticated enough to have localized pricing.

I highlighted the big thing with these services. Sony paved the way with it with SOE (though the games overall weren't as popular--you only had EQ2, Planetfall 2, and later DC Universe) and Playstation Plus. Others are following up with the same type of services. Anyone remember a couple of the older subscription services that were basically the same thing from 10-15 years ago but died because ... whatever reasons? (It wasn't due to financial viability. I believe it was more lack of expected volume in relation to certain fixed costs that should have made the service viable at a specific threshold.)

Steam as a distribution platform is probably going to have to happen eventually, regardless.

Activision has used Steam as a digital distribution platform for about a decade now, but recently they've started using their partnership with Blizzard and expanding Activision games such as Destiny 2 and the new CoD game through Battle.net. Most of the EA games for PC aren't available through Steam. No, it doesn't have to happen. There's a lot of games out there that don't use Steam. Some publishers use their own distribution platform (Stardock, Trion, NCSoft) as well as their own. Some use alternate distributors like GOG.com and don't even publish to Steam.

Steam is great if you have a game that is showing overall popularity as an easy way to distribute and spread news. If you have a niche game... it's a buzzkiller.

[Robben_DuMarsch]

Steam is hit or miss, there's no denying that. I'd argue that most of the examples you used of publishers using their own platforms is to avoid the necessary % cut that steam takes out of their sales.
Specifically when you say Activison is now publishing to battle.net, it's worth pointing out that they aren't just a partnership, but rather a single company formed in a merger back in 2008. Battle.net is their online distribution platform that is a competitor to Steam, much like Uplay.

But that said, unlike arguments for and against a subscription model, I don't think there's much in the way of argument that steam isn't the right move. Firstly, it's basically an open platform now. You can get your game on it, it's simply a matter of linking up to steam distribution. Secondly, the potential for additional publicity and viral attention is very real. Games have exploded on steam and been very successful. See even niche games, like Sunless Sea (200k-500k purchases), Kenshi (200k-500k purchases), Faster than Light (2 million - 5 million purchases), Domina (200k-500k purchases), Reigns (200k-500k purchases), Space Pirates and Zombies (500k-1mil purchases), Papers, Please (2mil - 5mil purchases), Undertale (2mil - 5mil owners), etc.

I mean come on, Papers Please is a pixel-ish game where you spend 30 days as a border agent in a fictional communist soviet-bloc nation, and the gameplay exists almost entirely of stamping papers approved or disapproved after checking for rules violations. It was designed by one developer with help from his wife. How much more niche do you get? Hahahha

Almost all of those games had extremely small development teams, some were solo projects, many are pixel art or low graphic equivalents. For each of these games, steam was their primary distribution platform.
That said, it's absolutely true that releasing to steam doesn't guarantee you success. One of my favorite roguelikes is on Steam, and hasn't even cracked 20k owners.

The upside is real however. I think the only question insofar as it relates to steam is WHEN, rather than IF.
I'll admit to real bias, however. There's no question in my mind I'd come back playing here if steam released - Playing with a bunch of people in a messy, disorganized, newbish cluster fuck, made this game fun for me.

[maze]

complete smooth out the game to a point.
call the game "Haven and hearth world 12"
sell to steam. profit .

come back here and keep working on the game.

or make a stand alone single player version of HnH and sell that one steam and promote this game.

[MagicManICT]

Specifically when you say Activison is now publishing to battle.net, it's worth pointing out that they aren't just a partnership, but rather a single company formed in a merger back in 2008. Battle.net is their online distribution platform that is a competitor to Steam, much like Uplay.

Whatever the papers might say, they work as a partnership. It was a merger, but the two have operated completely separately. So far the only "Activision" games are Destiny 2 and CoD:BO 4. Nothing else. Blizzard doesn't publish as Activision. They publish under their own name. And worth noting that I'm not aware of anything from Ubisoft that isn't also distributed through Steam, but I boycott Ubisoft on principle, so can't say I'm familiar with everything on Uplay.

Secondly, the potential for additional publicity and viral attention is very real. Games have exploded on steam and been very successful.

How much of this is due to A) type of game; B) the amount of live streaming of these games by famous streamers; C) solid game design and reasonable price point? Look at the games that didn't meat these, especially B and C. They've floundered on Steam and haven't, in general, done well. Maybe they've done ok through other platforms, such as one of the Flash game sites, but Steam is another deal all together.

And you seem surprised that Papers, Please has done so well. I'm not. The game found an area for some rich story telling and came up with a simple puzzle/strategy design around the story. It feels more like playing any of the old Carmen Sandiego games from the 80s/90s without the need for encyclopedic knowledge: everything is right at hand to play. The reviewers and streamers have all loved it because it's that thing you can't put down. You just have to know what happens next... and let's not forget poor Timmy. We can't let him get hungry or cold or sick. (And Minecraft proved you don't need fancy, high-end graphics to make a huge success of a game. Why the major developers haven't taken a clue from this, I've no idea.)

There's no question in my mind I'd come back playing here if steam released - Playing with a bunch of people in a messy, disorganized, newbish cluster fuck, made this game fun for me.

It's fun for a little bit, that's all. To me, it's too disorganized, but I get the appeal... and then there are the "social predators." It's like a school of herring, and then here come the sharks. Except a school of herring know how to move in an organized manner to escape and keep it to the minimum number of casualties necessary to feed the shark.

[Robben_DuMarsch]

It's fun for a little bit, that's all. To me, it's too disorganized, but I get the appeal... and then there are the "social predators." It's like a school of herring, and then here come the sharks. Except a school of herring know how to move in an organized manner to escape and keep it to the minimum number of casualties necessary to feed the shark.

Sometimes the herring can bite back.

[iamahh]

unbaked goods are not doubling output