this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2025
42 points (67.8% liked)

Games

22525 readers
297 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works
42
"It's extremely frustrating and also f*cked up" - one of the world's best indie studios is facing shock closure following confounding Steam ban (www.eurogamer.net)
submitted 1 month ago by woelkchen@lemmy.world to c/games@sh.itjust.works
78 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Valve kills studios by saying 'no thank you.'

Back to your earlier point: why wasn't Alan Wake 2 on Steam? Did Steam say 'no thank you'?

The mere possibility shapes the entire industry.

If it's such a wide reaching and well known issue, why would any studio choose not to release on Steam? Do you know something they don't?

Games want to feature nudity and intimacy

They they do. Steam has full on porn games on it.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

why would any studio choose not to release on Steam?

Epic gave Remedy a shitload of money, up-front. All exclusivity these days works like that. Nobody wants to reach fewer customers. Some of them are convinced to - some of them are forced to. Alan Wake exemplifies the former, and there's a good chance Remedy regrets the decision.

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Some of them are convinced to

So not being on Steam isn't widely known as dooming the game? If everyone knows not being on Steam will force your studio to shut down how could you possibly convince anyone to choose to do so?

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

'But if not being on Steam means they can't get enough money, how would more money help?'

You cannot be serious.

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You've been saying everyone in the industry knows not being on Steam means your game won't be successful and it warps the industry around it.

You've also been saying that Alan Wake 2 was guaranteed to make a lot of money if they released on Steam.

So given these two arguments you've been making, why would a company choose to make less money by not releasing on Steam?

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Epic... funded... the game.

Remedy took money up-front, expecting it to be more money than they would make later.

Being on Steam means access to customers, and more sales. You said so. So Epic, to promote the Epic Game Store, estimated how much revenue Alan Wake 2 would lose by not being on Steam, doubled it, and wrote that on a check.