Hacker News Reader

Comment by PowerElectronix | Hacker News Reader

I certainly still hold a grudge against tim sweeney for saying piracy made them not release stuff on pc and after a while going back to releasing on pc while whining about valve fees and then launching epic games with similar fees and way worse service for the developers...

View on HN

> similar fees

No? Epic charges 12% (with the first $1m free) vs. Valve’s frankly extortionate (i.e. industry standard) 30%.

As I understand it, epic charges less but also offers less services that a developer can need like the gamehub and steam's 30% i think is tiered and reduces with sales volume? I'm not sure, though, don't take my word for it.

1. Those features aren't a la carte, so the share matters if you're not utilizing those extra services. You're basically paying for the audience.

2. Valve does have tiered shares, but it's based on publisher sales. And it's extremely high. I have to check again, but I believe the threshold was 25m yearly revenue for 25% and 50m for 20%.

Innsome ways it's more frustrating. It's basically a tax cut for the rich.

Steam will also provide publishers with free activation keys that they can sell direct to customer without the 30% charge.

If you are a large game, they will not provide you an appreciable portion of your sales as keys. Sales made this way also likely hurt your organic distribution.

Re: value propositions: Steam's 30% reduces to 25% after $10M made, and 20% after $50M.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com