Valve back in 2013 on 3rd-party exclusives: "Put your games everywhere"

[Alexandros]

Since there has been a lot of discussion lately on third-party exclusivity and competition, I thought it would be interesting to remember what Valve itself had to say on the matter back in 2013. This was a time when Valve was preparing to launch a new platform, SteamOS, and Valve people were asked whether or not Valve would make SteamOS-exclusive games to try and convince its customers to use the new operating system and the hardware it would run on. The following quotes are from an IGN interview on the subject.

https://www.ign.com/articles/2013/11/04/valve-will-not-make-exclusive-games-for-steamos

On first-party SteamOS-exclusive games:

Speaking to IGN, Valve's Greg Comer said, "you won't see an exclusive killer app for SteamOS from us. We're not going to be doing that kind of thing."

Click to shrink...

On third-party exclusivity:

This will also apply to third-party titles, Valve's Anna Sweet told us. "Whenever we talk to third-party partners, we encourage them to put their games in as many places as possible, including not on our platforms," she said. "Because we think that customers are everywhere, and they want to put their games wherever customers are.

Click to shrink...

On content barriers and platform agnosticism:

"Or to drive customers there artificially," Coomer continued. "Because if it can run in both places, we don't like to create those artificial barriers to accessing content. We believe that, in maybe five years from now, folks will find it a quite antiquated notion that you should assume that when you change devices or platforms, that you lose all of your other games and friends. We're hoping to unify, to get Steam to be as platform- and context-agnostic as possible. You shouldn't have to shed that every generation, or even slightly shed it."

Click to shrink...

I think this shows the stark difference in philosophy and practices between a company like Valve, which aims to convice customers to use a platform by providing a good service, and companies like Epic or Bethesda which aim to convince customers to use a platform by removing content from other services and limiting customer choice. I find the sort of competition that Bethesda and Epic are engaging in to be against the interests of the end customer and I believe that PC gamers should make their voices heard in opposition to a type of competition that has no place on an open platform that features user choice as its main element.

 

[dex3108]

It is simple, Valve thinks that customer is center of everything, other stores think that publishers/developers are center.

 

[Deleted member 11093]

I know that Bethesda's launcher is terrible, but isn't what they do more or less the same as EA and Blizzard? i.e only lock their very own games to their respective launchers?

I feel that Epic is the only outlier here.

 

[Ge0force]

Thanks for making this thread Alexandros. Valve is doing the right thing imo. I really hate Epic's decision to moneyhat 3rd party devs to keep their games away from competing stores. It's a disgusting practice that should stay away from pc gaming.

I will not support any devs or companies taking part of this.

 

[Pryme]

Serious question: So why aren't their own games on other platforms?
Afterall, if customers are everywhere and features are the main differentiator, they should really have no qualms with launching their own games day and date on other storefronts.

Based on that quote, they should absolutely have no store exclusives...even with their own games.

 

[signal]

The focus on SteamOS specifically seems weird for this thread. Valve has Steam exclusive games, just not SteamOS exclusive ones. Having SteamOS exclusive titles probably doesn't make much sense, even for Valve.

 

[gcwy]

Thanks for making this thread Alexandros. Valve is doing the right thing imo. I really hate Epic's decision to moneyhat 3rd party devs to keep their games away from competing stores. It's a disgusting practice that should stay away from pc gaming.

I will not support any devs or companies taking part of this.

Click to shrink...

Monopoly is good, mmkay?

 

[Alexandros]

I know that Bethesda's launcher is terrible, but isn't what they do more or less the same as EA and Blizzard? i.e only lock their very own games to their respective launchers?

Click to shrink...

Yes. I think Blizzard is more of an outlier because Battle.net as a service predates Steam by several years, so Blizzard never really tried to force customers to give up one option in favor of another.

 

[dex3108]

Serious question: So why aren't their own games on other platforms?
Afterall, if customers are everywhere and features are the main differentiator, they should really have no qualms with launching their own games day and date on other storefronts.

Based on that quote, they should absolutely have no store exclusives...even with their own games.

Click to shrink...

They were selling their games outside Steam. But these days their games are MP games built on their infrastructure that no other launcher can match. On top of that they moved most of their MP games to F2P.

 

[Madjoki]

Monopoly is good, mmkay?

Click to shrink...

So putting your games for sale everywhere is monopoly? how?

Like THQ Nordic releases their games on Steam, steam key resellers, Origin, Epic Store. Explain how that is monopoly and for whom.

They were selling their games outside Steam. But these days their games are MP games built on their infrastructure that no other launcher can match. On top of that they moved most of their MP games to F2P.

Click to shrink...

It's not widely known, but CS:GO and Dota 2 are also on Perfect World in addition to Steam. That leaves only Artifact that's not on any additional platform :P.

 

[Pryme]

They were selling their games outside Steam.

Click to shrink...

You still needed to redeem the games on Steam. That's like saying Sony doesn't have 100% control over digital games on PSN because you can buy the codes off Amazon and code reseller sites.

But these days their games are MP games built on their infrastructure that no other launcher can match. On top of that they moved most of their MP games to F2P.

Click to shrink...

Source on the bolded?
Also, devs/publishers still get their cut from F2P microtransactions. So there's nothing stopping them from launching F2P games on other platforms.

What's your confidence level that any future Half life game gets launched on Origin Store, too?

It's not widely known, but CS:GO and Dota 2 are also on Perfect World in addition to Steam. That leaves only Artifact that's not on any additional platform :P.

Click to shrink...

Only on Perfect World to allow them sell in China. Don't omit that fact.

 

[Bricktop]

10 years after they had a stranglehold on the market they make statements like that...bravo!

Let's get real, they weren't encouraging 2K or Bethesda to sell their games elsewhere back in 2004. They sure as hell weren't thinking about customers when they locked retail copies of games behind their Steam app back then, or when they forced Counter-Strike and the dozens of highly successful Half-life mods/offshoots off of WON and onto Steam.

At some point you become too big to fail and you can say shit like this, but you'd never have caught them saying this stuff back in the early 00's...never. And it's more than a little bit hilarious that people are getting all bent out of shape over other storefronts pulling the same exact shit that Valve used to do back in the day. The only difference is that Steam is huge and you are used to it, so you don't want other storefronts to exist. Otherwise they are playing out of the same fucking playbook.

 

[texhnolyze]

It is simple, Valve thinks that customer is center of everything, other stores and some Era members think that publishers/developers are center.

Click to shrink...

Fixed that for you.

 

[Ge0force]

Monopoly is good, mmkay?

Click to shrink...

What a stupid comment. Not liking moneyhats for store exclusivity doesn't mean I want all games in a single store. On the contrary: I want all games on as many stores as possible. Epic's moneyhats are factually preventing this.

 

[Madjoki]

10 years after they had a stranglehold on the market they make statements like that...bravo!

Let's get real, they weren't encouraging 2K or Bethesda to sell their games elsewhere back in 2004.

Click to shrink...

Well 2K and Bethesda weren't even on Steam in 2004. So I guess that's technically true. Third parties only started coming to Steam in late 2000's and early 2010's.

And Bethesda's first Steam game, Rogue Warrior (disc version) has option to install non-steam version or steam version.
How awesome is that.

 

[Alexandros]

Serious question: So why aren't their own games on other platforms?

Click to shrink...

They don't like working with walled gardens.

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/...lve-doesnt-have-any-current-gen-console-games

"We get really frustrated working in walled gardens," Valve founder Gabe Newell said at a media roundtable at Valve's offices attended by Eurogamer.

Click to shrink...

 

[GrrImAFridge]

At some point you become too big to fail and you can say shit like this, but you'd never have caught them saying this stuff back in the early 00's...never. And it's more than a little bit hilarious that people are getting all bent out of shape over other storefronts pulling the same exact shit that Valve used to do back in the day. The only difference is that Steam is huge and you are used to it, so you don't want other storefronts to exist. Otherwise they are playing out of the same fucking playbook.

Click to shrink...

The implicit argument being made when someone speaks out against Epic's moneyhats or whatever isn't "Publishers should not release their games outside of Steam." It's "Publishers should not release their games elsewhere at the expense of Steam." In other words, those who prefer Steam, well, prefer Steam. You don't see anybody kicking up a fuss about there being Origin and GOG versions of Darksiders 3, for instance, because their existence didn't come at the cost of the game being on Steam, too.

And, yes, ideally, Valve should be leading by example and have its games available on other services. You'd be hard-pressed to find someone who disagrees with the idea that players should be able to play their games on whichever service they choose.

 

[dex3108]

You still needed to redeem the games on Steam. That's like saying Sony doesn't have 100% control over digital games on PSN because you can buy the codes off Amazon and code reseller sites.



Source on the bolded?
Also, devs/publishers still get their cut from F2P microtransactions. So there's nothing stopping them from launching F2P games on other platforms.

What's your confidence level that any future Half life game gets launched on Origin Store, too?

Only on Perfect World to allow them sell in China. Don't omit that fact.

Click to shrink...

It is up to developer if they want to make their game Steamworks. That is why you can have DRM Free games on GOG, Ubisoft sells their games on Origin, Steam, UPlay and many other key selling sites. So no Steam is not mandating Steamworks and you are free to do with your game whatever you want as far as I know. But developers and publishers are choosing to sell Steam keys because they are getting them for free and Valve doesn't take single penny for Steamworks games sold outside Steam.

Source for bolded part is VAC and Steam Community Market, Steam Inventory and Steam Workshop. All of those services are heavily integrated to CSGO, TF2, DOTA2 and especially Artifact. No other store can match that.

 

[GhostTrick]

Serious question: So why aren't their own games on other platforms?
Afterall, if customers are everywhere and features are the main differentiator, they should really have no qualms with launching their own games day and date on other storefronts.

Based on that quote, they should absolutely have no store exclusives...even with their own games.

Click to shrink...

Because other stores may not want to carry their games ?
I mean, it's not like CSGO, Portal 2 and all their stuff were on Uplay.

By the way, they also bought Campo Santo and Valley of the Gods is still releasing everywhere.

 

[Deleted member 27771]

What a stupid comment. Not liking moneyhats for store exclusivity doesn't mean I want all games in a single store. On the contrary: I want all games on as many stores as possible. Epic's moneyhats are factually preventing this.

Click to shrink...

Gotta respect that you still use the term "money hat". You seem permanently stuck in 2013.

 

[Muad'dib]

You still needed to redeem the games on Steam. That's like saying Sony doesn't have 100% control over digital games on PSN because you can buy the codes off Amazon and code reseller sites.



Source on the bolded?
Also, devs/publishers still get their cut from F2P microtransactions. So there's nothing stopping them from launching F2P games on other platforms.

What's your confidence level that any future Half life game gets launched on Origin Store, too?



Only on Perfect World to allow them sell in China. Don't omit that fact.

Click to shrink...

Any developer can use whatever DRM scheme they want on Steam, they can release their games DRM free of Steam if they wish. Valve chose to release HL2 and Portal and all of their games with Steam DRM, since they own, which means even if you bought HL2 on Uplay when they were selling it there, that meant it opened Steam, same way when you AC4 Black Flag on Steam it opens Uplay. Fact is they also sold their games elsewhere.

Now why would they sell a version of HL2, Portal 2, L4D with Origin DRM and another one with Uplay DRM and another one with no DRM, providing update and MP services and infrastructure for all of these different versions when they can just focus on one?

Devs choose Steam and one version instead of multiple variations for this simple fact, ease of updates and MP maintenance, maintaining a game through one infrastructure is cheaper and easier than many.

In the end Valve sells their keys on other sites where it receives no financial gain.

Gotta respect that you still use the term "money hat". You seem permanently stuck in 2013.

Click to shrink...

He's calling it what it is, "financial incentives" if the term vexes you then.

 

[Pixieking]

Gotta respect that you still use the term "money hat". You seem permanently stuck in 2013.

Click to shrink...

What a stupid comment. Not liking throwing money at developers for store exclusivity doesn't mean I want all games in a single store. On the contrary: I want all games on as many stores as possible. Epic's moneyhats are factually preventing this.

Click to shrink...

1) Care to respond to the comment now the offending word has been replaced?
2) Ge0force's comment is literally all we all want. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Shelbyville Milhouse]

Time to "step it up"
That's what people are talking about when they say that, right?

 

[Deleted member 41271]

They don't like working with walled gardens.

Click to shrink...

"We put our games anywhere. EXCEPT THERE! AND THERE!"

The full picture doesn't quite fit the narrative, does it.

What also doesn't fit is that it is very easy for Steam to grandstand after already getting a quasi monopoly. When there is no serious competitor, statements like this have no cost, and there is no need to follow up on it. If any other platform ever actually rivals steam, we'll see the actual truth of this statement. I suspect we'll see more excuses like the "walled garden" one to crop up then.

Steam is not crowded by saints regardless how much gamers deify them. They make good and bad choices, and are only slowly improving. Mind, their recent actions are very big improvements close to even sway me, so it's not as if they're doing that badly. But come on, this deification is really, really bad. It's a platform, not your friend.

 

[Sandersson]

It is simple, Valve thinks that customer is center of everything, other stores think that publishers/developers are center.

Click to shrink...

This. Here is to hoping that money hatting exclusives to extract value and lesson consumer choice wont work.

 

[Sandersson]

What also doesn't fit is that it is very easy for Steam to grandstand after already getting a quasi monopoly.

.

Click to shrink...

You need to educate yourself so you dont embarrass yourself like this again.

 

[Alexandros]

The focus on SteamOS specifically seems weird for this thread.

Click to shrink...

It's the focus of the article, not mine. I simply provided the background.

 

[Deleted member 27771]

1) Care to respond to the comment now the offending word has been replaced?
2) Ge0force's comment is literally all we all want. Nothing more, nothing less.

Click to shrink...

Not really. It honestly feels like weird territorial fanboy stuff - even when you replace the phrase.

 

[Ge0force]

Gotta respect that you still use the term "money hat". You seem permanently stuck in 2013.

Click to shrink...

English is not my native language. What words should I use when a platform owners pays 3rd party developers to keep their games away from competing platforms?

 

[Principate]

They don't like working with walled gardens.

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/...lve-doesnt-have-any-current-gen-console-games

Click to shrink...

Is that just being hypocritical then? If you don't like third party platform exclusives that's a very valid view point but complaining about other companies not putting their games everywhere when you yourself have stopped putting your games everywhere is just nonsense.

 

[CommodoreKong]

"We put our games anywhere. EXCEPT THERE! AND THERE!"

The full picture doesn't quite fit the narrative, does it.

What also doesn't fit is that it is very easy for Steam to grandstand after already getting a quasi monopoly. When there is no serious competitor, statements like this have no cost, and there is no need to follow up on it. If any other platform ever actually rivals steam, we'll see the actual truth of this statement. I suspect we'll see more excuses like the "walled garden" one to crop up then.

Steam is not crowded by saints regardless how much gamers deify them. They make good and bad choices, and are only slowly improving. Mind, their recent actions are very big improvements close to even sway me, so it's not as if they're doing that badly. But come on, this deification is really, really bad. It's a platform, not your friend.

Click to shrink...

Of all of Valve's currently supported games TF2, DOTA2, CSGO and Artifact they're all F2P besides Artifact and all pretty heavily hook into the steam platform features that they built that don't exist anywhere else.

 

[Deleted member 41271]

You need to educate yourself so you dont embarrass yourself like this again.

Click to shrink...

Gamer rage doesn't make me feel any emotion other than amusement, so nah. But by all means keep it up.

Artifact and all pretty heavily hook into the steam platform

Click to shrink...

Artifact really is the one that would likely never work outside of it, yeah. The whole card economy is too fundamental to its design.

 

[Mabec]

Different times, different people. Also, they would have said anything to get the publishers to choose them

 

[starfox]

Would NEVER buy jack shit on a betshida or Epic Store or Origin, if they offer is their problem. Unlike them, Steam is the main store where i buy stuff for my library.

 

[Muad'dib]

I'm really hoping Valve starts acquiring 3rd party Steam only exclusives just to see the hypocritical backlash from the people defending Epic.

 

[Madjoki]

"We put our games anywhere. EXCEPT THERE! AND THERE!"

The full picture doesn't quite fit the narrative, does it.

What also doesn't fit is that it is very easy for Steam to grandstand after already getting a quasi monopoly. When there is no serious competitor, statements like this have no cost, and there is no need to follow up on it. If any other platform ever actually rivals steam, we'll see the actual truth of this statement. I suspect we'll see more excuses like the "walled garden" one to crop up then.

Steam is not crowded by saints regardless how much gamers deify them. They make good and bad choices, and are only slowly improving. Mind, their recent actions are very big improvements close to even sway me, so it's not as if they're doing that badly. But come on, this deification is really, really bad. It's a platform, not your friend.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, Valve has a lot to improve that's true, but when competitor that's much worse.

Just this year Valve has open sourced their multiplayer code to help port non-steam versions of games.

 

[spineduke]

Valve have a very forward thinking approach to the whole platform. They were market leaders because they cared and believed in this ecosystem.

I really hope their Linux efforts grow and people respond in kind.

 

[Pryme]

You need to educate yourself so you dont embarrass yourself like this again.

Click to shrink...

Keep personal attacks out of this thread, please.

 

[Deleted member 27771]

English is not my native language. What words should I use when a platform owners pays 3rd party developers to keep their games away from competing platforms?

Click to shrink...

I'm sorry. Didn't know that - wasn't trying to give you shit if that's the case. Maybe "paid exclusive" so it's less loaded.

 

[Teamocil]

I'm really hoping Valve starts acquiring 3rd party Steam only exclusives just to see the hypocritical backlash from the people defending Epic.

Click to shrink...

I truly wouldn't give a fuck then either. The game is still accessible on the same machine, so it doesn't make a difference to me.

 

[SephiZack]

I'm really hoping Valve starts acquiring 3rd party Steam only exclusives just to see the hypocritical backlash from the people defending Epic.

Click to shrink...

But then those people would say stuff like "I told you that Valve is a monopoly" (without actually knowing how monopolies work) or "SteamToo"

 

[Ge0force]

I'm sorry. Didn't know that - wasn't trying to give you shit if that's the case. Maybe "paid exclusive" so it's less loaded.

Click to shrink...

No problem m8. I actually thought that "moneyhat" was the correct word to use for paid exclusives. Thanks for educating me :)

 

[Sandersson]

Gamer rage doesn't make me feel any emotion other than amusement, so nah. But by all means keep it up.



Artifact really is the one that would likely never work outside of it, yeah. The whole card economy is too fundamental to its design.

Click to shrink...

Yikes, thats a hot take. But yeah, I suggest you read a bit more about the Steam platform before screaming around this topic.

 

[Alexandros]

"We put our games anywhere. EXCEPT THERE! AND THERE!"

The full picture doesn't quite fit the narrative, does it.

Click to shrink...

It actually does, if you've been following Valve news and know about the company's philosophy.

https://www.pcgamer.com/valves-newe...are-less-popular-apple-wrong-philosophically/

"I'm worried that the things that traditionally have been the source of a lot of innovation are going - there's going to be an attempt to close those off so somebody will say 'I'm tired of competing with Google, I'm tired of competing with Facebook, I'll apply a console model and exclude the competitors I don't like from my world.'"

Click to shrink...

 

[Sandersson]

Keep personal attacks out of this thread, please.

Click to shrink...

Pointing out someones ingnorance is not a personal attack, it is a fact. No one in their right mind would classify Steam as a monopoly, especially when we are discussing forming actual monopolies.

 

[Muad'dib]

I truly wouldn't give a fuck then either. The game is still accessible on the same machine, so it doesn't make a difference to me.

Click to shrink...

Maybe you, but not the very people who have been painting Valve as an evil monopoly with its thralls choking PC gaming or whatever.

 

[Alexandros]

Is that just being hypocritical then?

Click to shrink...

Only if you consider Steam a walled garden, as that is cited as the main motivation.

 

[sredgrin]

Thread about third parties, the usual suspects show up to concern troll about like 11 first party games.

 

[ry-dog]

I guess I don't understand what the big deal is around being forced to buy from a different app. I've been "forced" to use steam for years. Of course it would be nice if the game was on everything, but the indie scene is rough and closures are common. If deals like this can help a studio financially and provide them with a larger safety net, I think it's a good thing.

Doesn't seem much different than Amazon or Netflix picking a film up from a festival

 

[Principate]

Only if you consider Steam a walled garden, as that is cited as the main motivation.

Click to shrink...

Nah wall garden is just PR speak. Valve used to release games on both steam and those so called walled gardens. You can't tell me with a straight face they suddenly stopped because one day they woke and decided they didn't like walled gardens.

This is prime time corporate bullshit.