Steam options Pre-order and Season Pass
- Thread starter dorimi
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
I was under the impression Paradox as a business was successful and growing, if so, why the need to shut out support for the dirty peasants who don't have/want steam?
Because, as stated numerous times, the amount of sales on the non-steam platforms did not yield a return. This choice was made not out of spite for the other platforms, but based on a conclusion made by accountants: the support for other platforms does not yield a profit. Rarely any corporation will support something that yields no profit.
We're working on multiple projects/dlcs at the same time, so to test all of those with different installers, uploading to different sales platforms etc is a big chore and gives us a lot of extra headache for very little return.
The point i'm making is that since their profits are, as far as I'm aware, not in any danger and they continue to grow, the rationale that any and all practices that don't yield maximum monies must be abandonned is a bit concerning. Given the direction a lot of other games companies and publishers have gone it usually means you pay more and get less.
Keyword.
Also why is it concerning? To me at least, it seems that it's a pretty obvious business decision. Let's say you are running a company. You have one product line that is:
a.) small market share (you have a similar product that is similar and sells way better)
b.) not profitable
Also,
a.) Steam is free.
b.) You can buy Steam games from different sources. You can build up a pretty impressive Steam library without having to spend a single cent on the Steam store.
c.) With Paradox games (since I assume this is your main concern), you can launch the game without Steam. The only time you ever even need Steam is the initial download of the game, patch the game (although I think this can even be done without Steam), and to activate/download DLCs.
If Paradox say they're in deep financial trouble and will have to close up shop without taking this measure then fine. Is that actually the case?
As I said, cost cutting usually means customers pay more and get less. That may not be the case initially, but the list of other companies going that way is nearly endless.
If I was running a company I wouldn't mind not making a good return or even a small loss in one area in order to keep some customers happy and on board aslong as I was making a healthy profit overall.
I have steam, I have paradox games on steam, I know how it works. This doesn't effect me. I do worry that eventually paradox will cease other things that become "inconvenient" in future. I see a lot of developper comments(or the same one over and over again) about developping for tablets. I dont want a tablet, it will be a long, long time before I get one, if ever. If their PC market share decreases to 5% will they axe PC support?
Interestingly, despite all the developper comments, I've not seen one confirming that this will be the case for EUIV yet...
My problem is that people have had their accounts closed for things they said on the forums (the Steam forums, that is). They should instead just be banned from using the forums, but have your entire Steam library blocked from you for being an idiot? That's just not cool.
I believe you will find it hard to find investors with that kind of attitude, because if this is the attitude of a company without any good reason (only valid reason is that it could potentially lead to more profits in some way) your shares will be abandoned by its holders.
Not when it falls below a certain percentage. when it doesn't yield a break-even situation it will most likely be forsaken at a point in the future.
Mmm, I didn't know that this happened. If this were to happen to me, I would delve into their terms of use and, if unless this is clrearly stated, I would sue them for this.
You can't be serious?! Every monopoly has abused its power, every monopoly will abuse its power. Granted some tend to be more egregious than others, but that's usually a function of how able they are to protect their monopoly. Unless... did I miss some fundamental change in human nature or corporate behavior?
The thing that might prevent Steam from doing so, will be the threat that another player will come in. Entrenched practices and other barriers to entry would probably make it impossible for another Gamersgate type company to enter the market at that point, but your Amazons, Apples, Googles, Microsofts are eye-ing the space, already, and will make a bigger play when/if they perceive enough money in it. Then, those of us who are bemoaning the current consolidation will really have something to worry about.
I'm just surprised that any gaming company finds it in their interest to encourage this consolidation, rather than try to delay it. I seriously doubt the Gamersgate sales are actually money losing, the Powers That Be have simply said that they aren't as profitable as the Steam distribution channel, and that they're gambling that most of the Gamersgate fans are willing to grit their teeth and go with Steam, rather than boycott the game. If they can cut some distribution costs and keep most of that revenue, it may make short term sense. But I suspect they'll regret the disappearance of a perfectly good (and probably profitable) distribution channel down the road, if it comes to that.
For me, this will, indeed, mean no pre-order, at least. I've enough bad experiences with Steam to be highly skeptical. If I just need Steam to download, I may buy later. But I'll need to see how it's handled. If I can't run it without having Steam active, I'd most definitely pass.
If Paradox is losing money by supporting non-Steam games, then they will most likely stop supporting it. (Sounds cruel, but that's how you run things in the real world.)
I dislike being forced to have Steam just to download a game, so no pre-order or full price purchase this time. (Thankfully, the internet still allows us to play a game before buying it, for now.)
I dislike being forced to have Steam just to download a game, so no pre-order or full price purchase this time. (Thankfully, the internet still allows us to play a game before buying it, for now.)
Last edited:
Luckily and since I'm making a healthy profit and this enables me to keep doing what I love I'm not looking to sell any amount of control of my non-existant company to anymous stock market investors
And apparantly neither is paradox since they aren't publically traded.
Luckily and since I'm making a healthy profit and this enables me to keep doing what I love I'm not looking to sell any amount of control of my non-existant company to anymous stock market investors
And apparantly neither is paradox since they aren't publically traded.
It's not just publicly traded companies that need investors. How do you think start-ups get funding? Hence the point of kickstarters. Technically, contributing to a kickstarter makes you an investor. People turn to kickstarter because it's easier to gain investors that way instead of pitching your idea to the traditional investors.
True, this is purely going off track record.
This has never happened before. The steam accounts are completely separate from the forum accounts. I think it's EA and Origin you're thinking about.
I hope you are telling the truth. My source is a Steam critic, so it may not be that reliable, I admit.
I will admit I love Steam so I may be a bit biased too. But it is fact that the Steam account and Steam forums are separate accounts. You can be a Steam user and never touch the Steam forums. Or participate in the forums and not even be a Steam user.
Spending 50% of our QA time on something that stands for 5% of sales is just not very good business. And that's just QA, it adds a lot of extra work for almost everyone else as well. That our QA department can fully focus on one release means that you get a better game for your money - not less.
You asked what I would do. I told you. If you don't like the answer, tough.
Also regarding kickstarter: I've backed Project Eternity, if they develop and then release the game and don't sell a single copy will I really care? I get my copy as a reward for backing and as long as it's good I'll back their next project also, I imagine most other backers would aswell. Therefore aslong as their costs don't exceed their backer total, and they make games good enough to keep backers coming then at no point does Obsidian have to actually make a profit.
However accounts have still been banned and thus access to their game libraries revoked.
As I keep explaining, business arguments aren't going to sway me when your business is no where near being in trouble.
You guys managed extremely well with CK2, one of the best releases ever and continues to get better and better as far as I can tell. So if what you say about better QA is going to work out, then EUIV had better be something really special.
As I keep explaining, business arguments aren't going to sway me when your business is no where near being in trouble.
They are not arguments. They are explanations.
- Status