PC Gaming

8615 readers

651 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

Be Respectful.
No Spam or Porn.
No Advertising.
No Memes.
No Tech Support.
No questions about buying/building computers.
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

784

In 2018 a group of Valve staff tried to figure out just how efficient they were being—and found they were making more money per head than Apple, Facebook, and nearly every tech giant out there (www.pcgamer.com)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

223 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] UndercoverUlrikHD 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's well known that server infrastructure and software development is free

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I never said those things were free. I did say the platform is good, but their income is from the games sold on the platform that other people made.

I don't know what metric would properly capture money/time spent on infrastructure and servers, but I don't think it's "money per head" if that money is from games sold and doesn't strictly relate to how good their platform performs.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

If games company's could make more money by not releasing on Steam, they would. The fact that they accept the 30% cut means that Steam is in fact leading to more sales for those developers and thus earns its cut. No one HAS to sell their product on Steam, PC's are a completely open marketplace