Companies charging what they can to make a profit is how the ayawten is supposed to work,.ideally folks would juat move away, especailly with a want and not a need. The tech soace in particular ia rife with this, it’s why I stoped uaing; Sony, Nintendo, Apple, Microsoft and Adobe etal products.
Countless times I can buy an older game on Steam for like $5 on sale and like $40 on Playstation sale.
Fucking idiotic.
do Nintendo next
Yes do them all. But starting with those who started this whole mess is correct.
Wait, i thought nintendo set the precedent for 80 dollar games… oh, that must have just been some bullshit thats been going round because people like drama.
Ive been saying it from the date of the switch 2 reveal. Games have cost 80 dollars or more for a very long time.
“But not steam cause that’s MY corporation and Gabe is MY billionaire”
They’re all taking advantage of you
I didn’t know valve sells you hardware that locks you to steam
There it is, defending corporations and billionaires. Pathetic
Defending them from what? You haven’t brought up any real arguments for why Steam is relevant in this scenario. You’re just lashing out for no reason.
Just want to say fuck yeah for saying this. Fuck steam/gabe. They may have been at the forefront of popularizing Pc gaming but they also were and are actively influential in the worst parts of the hobby. Gabe made billions off teaching children to gamble and loot boxes. Gabe made billions ensuring people are ok not owning their games.
It’s crap that steam has a positive reputation at all.
Hey that’s me there, and I say do Valve too. They are special but that kind of public discussion through court won’t hurt anyone.
Im curious, what do you want to file a case on Valve/Gabe for?
Same as every game company, except steam is all digital so you never own your games. Steam will take them away one day. Steam is run by a billionaire, which by default makes him a wage thief and leech. I would say steam has good PR, except they don’t, you steam boys heel them off for free.
The trillion dollar corporation isn’t your friend, and neither is Gabe. If you have an ethical dilemma with game companies, stop gaming
Not owning digital content isn’t a Valve problem, it’s a “government is deeply corrupt” problem. You can thank the DMCA and laws like it for the loss of ownership. Want change? Run for office, call and harass politicians until they repeal anti-consumer laws like the DMCA and enshrine digital ownership as law.
I agree that people glaze up Gabe way too much (the dude has a fuckin mega yacht for Christ’s sake), but in the specific area of games pricing I don’t think Steam is much of a problem from a consumer standpoint. I still think they should give more of the sale share to the actual devs though.
To correct you, he has many mega yachts.
Truly a man of the people
Yeah. It’s definitely a net good to introduce children to gambling to fund your mega yacht hobby.
This isn’t adding up. I’m all for consumer protections and I love European countries forcing global countries to behave, but this reads more like a console-war fanboy hit piece than legitimate criticism.
According to the article, Sony “is enjoying the position of a monopolist with 80% of the Dutch console market”. That number does not pass the smell test, and there’s no further details provided or sources given. I know Xbox sales are considerably worse in Europe, but the only way I can imagine Sony hitting 80% markets are is if we ignore the Switch and Switch 2 as “handhelds”, and also ignore gaming PC’s and the Steam Deck. Which seems like a bad faith argument to use when evaluating software markets.
The article also claims that “Sony can easily control game pricing in its digital store”. So is this lawsuit exclusively discussing Sony-published titles, or are they just ignoring the role of the publisher in this?
It looks like the goal of this lawsuit is… To force Sony to allow 3rd party platforms to sell download keys that can be redeemed on the Sony store. Which… Is fine I suppose but I don’t expect that to really help the consumer or have an impact on competition. The article doesn’t provide any data on that and I’m not sure whether any actual research has been done there, but in my anecdotal experience those kinds of sites either just follow the MSRP and sales, or are doing shenanigans with different regional price rates or FX rate arbitrage, which can occasionally lead to issues for users depending on how the game works and how important the region is to it. There might be some reduced fees from Sony in the transaction, but I expect that to be made for by similar fees from the 3rd party, or the publisher pocketing the difference. It doesn’t seem material enough to change the price consumers see. Digital “goods” don’t have supply restrictions, so this won’t increase the supply and I don’t see how it changes demand.
Also there’s a lot more questions I have about their methodology. Maybe things are different in the US than Europe, but Nintendo is famous for having fewer sales with shallower discounts than anyone else, with multiplatform games (both physical and digital) being more expensive. The phrases “Switch tax” and “Nintendo tax” have been around the Switch for almost its entire life. Is the Switch just being excluded as a “handheld”? And when they are looking at disc prices, does that include used copies too, or perhaps include a factor for resale value that is reducing the cost?
Maybe they are right, but this article leaves a lot more questions than answers, and I can’t find those answers from a quick Internet search.
I mean… if Apple has to allow side-loading and alternative app stores then I think Sony should have to as well. It wouldn’t make sense to say that only Apple has dominion over the devices it makes and no other manufacturers operate the same.
I get your point but you are comparing phones with consoles. I don’t think that apple’s case can be used as precedent here.
Well, this isn’t about side-loading or alternative app stores though. The lawsuit is looking to force Sony to allow 3rd party key sellers. So you would have to use a different device like your phone or PC to go to another website, process your payment and get a code, then go to the PlayStation store and redeem that code to have the game added to your account and available for download. Just like there are 3rd party sellers for Steam keys. I know Nintendo allowed that for the 3DS, because there was a period of time where you couldn’t process payments on the 3DS’s eShop, but you could still redeem those codes.
What you’re suggesting would be akin to allowing Ubisoft, EA, or Rockstar to have their own stores on consoles where you could bypass the PlayStation Store/Xbox store/ Nintendo eShop if you want. Potentially 3rd parties like GOG, Steam, or Epic, but certainly there would be restrictions there. For examples, Steam would probably just be the Store without all the other platform features Steam offers. GOG’s anti-DRM stance probably would not fly.
Another key difference is that consoles have physical media. As far as I know, you’ve never been able to go to an Apple store or any other electronics store and buy a physical copy of an app. Even the digital edition of the PS5 now has an optical disc drive available for purchase.
Baby steps. Epic originally sued Apple because they couldn’t sell access to Fortnight outside of the App Store.
My main point was that Sony shouldn’t get special treatment.
But dude,
aPPLE bADdER!!!
Yes, digital games are by and large more expensive than their disc counterparts a while after release, but digital games also regularly get put on significant sale, which often makes them cheaper than the disc versions. If you’re not waiting for sales to buy them, I’m not sure why you’re buying them at all.
Physical copies are almost always cheaper, especially if you buy used. You cannot currently buy used digital games, and the sales they go on are rarely lower than their physical copy counterparts.
I remember about a month after Destiny 1 launched the Rise of Iron expansion, I went to buy my brother the digital edition on Xbox 360 and it was like $100 USD, but there was a disx only used copy on ebay for $7. You can guess which copy I went with lol.
Yes, a physical copy that is not on sale is often cheaper than a digital copy that is not on sale, but a digital copy that is on sale is often significantly cheaper than a physical copy that is on sale.
The example you gave is a poor one as you’re talking about a digital edition with DLC included vs a used physical edition with none of it. Comparing apples to oranges does not help your argument.
How often do consoles get the kind of deep discounts that games get on PC, though? Or even the base price drops over time? It’s not really a great deal when a $60 title drops to $30 on PSN, but the same game costs $30 as its base price on Steam and is currently discounted to $8.
And let’s not even get into Nintendo’s pricing…
Honestly most multi platform games I look at end up massively cheaper on sale on PlayStation than Steam. They have big(many games) weekly sales and even bigger “event” sales. Like your 60/30 example isn’t Sonys doing that’s the publisher. But the same thing happens the other way some games stay high priced way longer than you’d expect on Steam.
Frankly Steam quit being the biggest discounts and such years ago just riding on the coattails of their reputation on how great their big sales used to be.
The thing is that that has nothing to do with Sony, though. Sony gets a 30% cut on game sales. That’s the same amount that Valve takes. You can sell your game for however much you want. Sony isn’t enforcing high base game prices like Nintendo. I fully support this type of lawsuit against Nintendo. Fuck them.
