conciselyverbose

It gives me strong Woodland Critter Christmas vibes lol

Removed by mod

The fact that using their services and paying them their cut is more profitable than not doing so absolutely, in and of itself, proves beyond discussion that their cut is fair.

Yes, sales should cost money. Moving units is a fucking massive value add. Valve deserves every penny they take and more. They’re the best thing that ever happened to PC gaming and nothing else is remotely close.

Because they knew it didn’t exist when they bought it.

You would win your example lawsuit, too, unless you had a contract explicitly promising future services. Talking about future plans when they’re clearly future plans isn’t legally false advertising or any kind of legal obligation.

And every one of them comes back because paying Steam 30% is by far the most profitable way to do business. They absolutely deserve every single penny of it.

30% commission on an all margin product is not even sort of unusual or unfair.

Laughable horseshit.

They make far more than 50% more because of steam.

Quality control is another word for “high barrier to entry”, and especially with their market position, being rejected by Steam for some arbitrary reason would effectively kill your project.

Not only should they not restrict the ability to sell your games there without a concrete reason; they shouldn’t be permitted to do so. A company with that much influence shouldn’t be allowed to be a gatekeeper of what constitutes a “good” game.

Their review system and strong return policy are more than enough.

Epic can’t make a dent because their product is dogshit.

Customers don’t care that Valve takes a well earned cut (that only applies buying directly from Steam); they care that their games are on a platform that’s actually fucking useful. If Epic didn’t insult gamers shipping that piece of trash and had put work into actually providing a product that could possibly be considered acceptable, they might have been able to make a dent.

You’re not going to take market share with shitty gimmicks if your actual product is a crime against humanity no one wants.

But not every rpg from Japan is a JRPG. Not all JRPGs are from Japan.

If you don’t want to be put into the JRPG box, make something that isn’t a JRPG. They’re in a box for a reason, and it’s because they’re markedly different from other RPG formats.

A publisher only distributing through Steam when it does things others don’t isn’t forcing usage.

Forcing usage is requiring developers to only distribute through Steam.

There is no scenario where the first is wrong, and there is no scenario where the second is OK.

They’re a distribution mechanism. If you buy a Steam game you need Steam. Allowing developers to require Steam to play their game is not anticompetitive or in any way unethical.

They didn’t force any developer who wanted to sell games on Steam to only sell games on Steam. That’s what would be anticompetitive and abusing their market position. Games choosing to only distribute through Steam because there’s no other storefront that wouldn’t be a worse value if it was free isn’t Steam doing something wrong.

But they haven’t crushed any other competitor through any mechanism but having a dramatically better product.

They don’t force you to be exclusive to be on steam. They don’t force you to implement any of their Steam stuff. They are very permissive unless you do shit that potentially exposes them to liability down the road, like the NFT nonsense.

And they let you generate keys for literally free to sell on other stores.

All their stuff companies use is because it’s things customers value.

Still, there are a few things getting in the way of the plaintiffs being successful here. For starters, games and in-game content are often cancelled - an unfortunate reality of the industry. Furthermore, even if refunds weren’t granted, Aspyr did offer affected fans a copy of KOTOR 2 on Steam - where the mod can be played for free - or another Star Wars game altogether.

How is this relevant in any way?

I don’t think they’re legally entitled to a refund for buying a game with content that didn’t exist, but neither of those are even sort of substitutes for the content or a refund.

I wonder if Nintendo would consider removing the engine version requirement if enough developers make it clear it’s a dealbreaker and cancel ports or stop maintenance.

JRPGs are a very distinct genre, and either you like it or you don’t. The idea that it shouldn’t get its own descriptor when it’s clearly different from a crpg or other approaches to RPGs is nonsense.

Even the basics of movement and combat are super janky. It’s very obviously a very old game.

That actually sounds really awesome.

I never quite got into it, because it was just too old mechanically by the time I heard of it, but it did feel like there was potential.

“Selling shares before the announcement” was a pretty egregious misrepresentation. He has scheduled pre-registered sales on a regular basis because he gets paid partly in stock.

It was always going to be relatively soon after a sale of stock.

You got it for $200 because you’re paying with your privacy. It’s an absolute dumpster fire of a deal that’s not remotely worth it. They could pay you $100/hour to play it and requiring an account with them, in and of itself, makes it the worst possible theoretical version of VR.

Facebook is absolutely the reason VR is fucking terrible. Their involvement, in and of itself, completely destroyed the community, many of whom abandoned the space entirely when they took away viable options to replace with privacy invading crimes against humanity. Turning enthusiasts from advocates into activists against their product is the reason there’s no money left.

lol at choosing to present it in a way that implied there was no way to avoid the retroactive license change (which you explicitly said you wanted to apply retroactively, charging fees based on activity prior to your license change), then blaming the community for interpreting it how you told us it works.