Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2024]

[arandomguy]

On the flip side if Steam is adding little value while charging exorbitant fees then there should be ample margin for competitors to enter the market and steal share. When those efforts fail miserably (see Epic, GoG) then it adds credibility to the idea that Steam is actually worth the premium.

This isn't a Steam specific thing but the overarching issue is really how these tech platforms effectively create massive barriers of entry by virtue of how they work. The idea of competition is great and all, but in practice it's problematic when it's fixed barriers that need to be overcome while per unit costs are a relatively trivial aspect of the business (and in many cases relatively homogenous).

Given the thread topic though we can look at Steam specific and PC game distribution. What a new entrant is competiting with, and the massive barrier, is that inbuilt interia of the incumbent platform. You can't compete with Steam even if you were to have an identical feature set, because why? Because the userbase is already invested into the platform not just emotionally but practically. That's where their library is and that's where their social circle/community already is. That feature set also has very insignficant costs to deliver and the fixed deployment costs are already amortized. Since ultimate you're suppliers are identical (in terms of content and content delivery) there is very little you can do to differentiate their as well.

Well not exactly. The only option, as we've seen being tried, in general is basically content differentiation to fight for user interest. Content differentiation basically by investing into exclusive content.

By the way I'm not sure if you're aware but Steam does not allow sellers on their store to undercut Steam. So the seller even if they were to take less fees from another store front cannot just split the difference with the customer. I think this also something that people might need to keep in mind that these distrubtion platforms have 2 customers, the gamer (content consumer) and the game developer (content provider).

I have zero loyalty to Steam as a platform. I use it because it’s the best one. Build me a better mouse trap and I’ll come.

Do you really have zero loyalty to Steam? Zero loyalty would imply something like say hypothetically if a competitor was identical to Steam your purchase decision would be 50/50 or at least based on first access/convienence. But I'm guessing that woudn't be the case no? I'll be honest myself for me it certainly wouldn't. I might like the idea of say competitors trying unseat Steam and disrupting the PC gaming space but I'm just going to say my inherent loyalty to Steam from a pragmatic stand point over rides that in terms of actual purchasing decisions.

And let's let's be honest that platform monetary/time investment for many also leads to a strong emotional investment and attachment as well. For instance there's some people who proudly show off their Steam collection much like people would their physical hobby collections. Also let's just say Valve knew what they were doing in building out essentially social functionality into Steam.

 

[trinibwoy]

Do you really have zero loyalty to Steam? Zero loyalty would imply something like say hypothetically if a competitor was identical to Steam your purchase decision would be 50/50 or at least based on first access/convienence. But I'm guessing that woudn't be the case no? I'll be honest myself for me it certainly wouldn't. I might like the idea of say competitors trying unseat Steam and disrupting the PC gaming space but I'm just going to say my inherent loyalty to Steam from a pragmatic stand point over rides that in terms of actual purchasing decisions.

Yeah I’m pretty sure. Of course if the competition was identical then Steam wins by default. Hence the need for a better mouse trap. I already skip Steam when possible if it’s more convenient. e.g. if a game requires a publisher’s launcher I prefer to get the game from that publisher’s store because I find it incredibly stupid to need two launchers running to access a game. My preference would be to have everything on Steam and not need a separate launcher but that’s not possible today.

That mess on the PC is exactly what MS needs to avoid on their console.

 

[Seanspeed]

I'd argue it's middle-aged adults that grew up with those platforms since the early days. Yes, these kids will grow up... in an ever increasingly open platform world where the games they buy, follow them regardless of the device they want to play on.

I never said anything about Fortnite and Roblox being the only games younger people play. They will increasingly get attaching to having their games with them because all the ecosystems will be everywhere. Let me ask you a question... what do you think will happen when Sony, MS, or Nintendo have to cut off backwards compatibility in the future at some point due to incompatibilities with future hardware?

It's not overreacting... just look at how much the industry has changed in the past 10 years alone. You would have laughed if someone told you that Sony would be releasing their games on PC back then.. just like you're laughing at the idea of consoles becoming open platforms now...

Kids these days simply do not have the same attachment to these platforms that the older gamers do. You're simply lying to yourself if you believe so.

You can argue it's middle aged adults, but it's really not. I've been in enough discussions online to know that the people most hyper attached to certain ecosystems are younger, immature people(not that older folks cant also be immature at times).

I also dont know where you're getting this idea that younger people will somehow expect or 'be used to' some open ecosystems when that's not what they deal with now. Why would this happen? Based on some hypothetical situation you're imagining? That's not going to happen, and if MS even tries it, it will fail and not take off. Microsoft are not the trend setters in the gaming industry, so I dont know how you're thinking they can somehow not just pull all this off, but make it standardized throughout the whole industry. It's not happening.

I also dont think the industry has changed that wildly in the past 10 years. Sony/Xbox having their games on PC is still a VERY different thing than having completely open ecosystem everywhere as standard. Sony is still very much pushing on their 'traditional console strategy' to great success. So is Nintendo, even moreso. Sony is simply using PC games as extra revenue, not because it's some stepping stone to some bigger-minded push for complete openness. They absolutely do not want that and will send Microsoft a thank you card if MS tries to do so, cuz it's gonna hand the whole AAA console market to Sony.

I think you're hugely out of touch not just with younger players are doing/thinking, but also just in terms of what would actually work in this industry.

 

[trinibwoy]

Yeah kids today aren’t growing up with open ecosystems. They’re still very much closed. Nintendo, PlayStation, iOS, Android. That’s the price you pay for plug-and-play.

 

[rekator]

Yeah kids today aren’t growing up with open ecosystems. They’re still very much closed. Nintendo, PlayStation, iOS, Android. That’s the price you pay for plug-and-play.

Well in my past, kids have very open systems...
Nintendo, Sega, Sony...
Only few are on open systems, Amiga, Atari, ARM, Apple 2 and more few on PC. The first AAAA game market.

 

[pjbliverpool]

I still don't see the issue with using a front end launcher that links in to all the back end stores silently.

Playnite does that and is fricken awesome IMO. I have games from Steam, Epic, Ubisoft, Rockstar, Microsoft, Gog and a ton on emulated games all in the same single catalogue. I don't need to know or care what their native store is, they all launch directly from Playnite.

 

[Cyan]

You can argue it's middle aged adults, but it's really not. I've been in enough discussions online to know that the people most hyper attached to certain ecosystems are younger, immature people(not that older folks cant also be immature at times).

younger people are into streamers, youtubers, tiktokers, who they follow and those are on PC. My 6 y.o. and 4 y.o. nephew uses their tablet -for the 6 y.o- and a locked phone with just youtube -for my 4 y.o.- and since he was 4 to 5 my 6 y.o. nephew watches 15 to 20 something y.o. people on youtube playing some obscure games.

My 4 y.o. when using that locked phone watches kids music songz and some of those youtubers.

This is what younger people are doing nowadays -that's from a random video I found-:

 

[Remij]

You can argue it's middle aged adults, but it's really not. I've been in enough discussions online to know that the people most hyper attached to certain ecosystems are younger, immature people(not that older folks cant also be immature at times).

I also dont know where you're getting this idea that younger people will somehow expect or 'be used to' some open ecosystems when that's not what they deal with now. Why would this happen? Based on some hypothetical situation you're imagining? That's not going to happen, and if MS even tries it, it will fail and not take off. Microsoft are not the trend setters in the gaming industry, so I dont know how you're thinking they can somehow not just pull all this off, but make it standardized throughout the whole industry. It's not happening.

I also dont think the industry has changed that wildly in the past 10 years. Sony/Xbox having their games on PC is still a VERY different thing than having completely open ecosystem everywhere as standard. Sony is still very much pushing on their 'traditional console strategy' to great success. So is Nintendo, even moreso. Sony is simply using PC games as extra revenue, not because it's some stepping stone to some bigger-minded push for complete openness. They absolutely do not want that and will send Microsoft a thank you card if MS tries to do so, cuz it's gonna hand the whole AAA console market to Sony.

I think you're hugely out of touch not just with younger players are doing/thinking, but also just in terms of what would actually work in this industry.

There's no arguing about it. I know for a fact it is. The people in the forefront of all these console war bullshit are in their 30s and 40s. It's a fact. It's the group of people that were hitting their stride as Xbox came onto the scene and all these factions were created and people took their place. I've not seen ANY younger kids warring about platforms... They have no loyalty to Playstation or Xbox.. They pick whoever is the most popular where most of their friends are.

You can't understand how younger people expect their games to follow them and be wherever they are today? I mean, that's literally what's happening, simply because publishers can no longer afford to target just one platform/ecosystem. This isn't hypothetical... this is literally the direction the industry is heading in. Cross play has grown SIGNIFICANTLY since previous generations... have you not seen that? Do you know how hard Epic and companies like MS fought to get Sony to play along with them? And they caved... because in the end their consumers will demand it from them. Publishers too... They need the community to be together for the survival of many of their games. It's happening.. the industry is moving towards it. You're blind if you can't see it.

Other things that were "not happening" was Microsoft releasing their Xbox games day and date on PC... Sony releasing their games day and date on PC... Japanese developers releasing PC versions of their games.. Xbox games on Playstation and Nintendo... and so on and so forth. And I'd argue that Microsoft VERY MUCH are trendsetters in this industry... Have you heard of Xbox live? The Xbox marketplace? Achievements? Hell... the modern console is COMPLETELY derived from things that MS made popular... Hell, you have to pay for PSN because MS made it popular lol..

I'm going to be straight with you.. you sound like someone upset at the idea that Microsoft might have some advantage over Sony and Nintendo in the future. You're not coming from this at a neutral place.. You're threatened at the idea that your traditional console model will no longer exist in the future.

Calling me out of touch isn't going to change anything.

 

[Cyan]

The people in the forefront of all these console war bullshit are in their 30s and 40s. It's a fact. It's the group of people that were hitting their stride as Xbox came onto the scene and all these factions were created and people took their place. I've not seen ANY younger kids warring about platforms... They have no loyalty to Playstation or Xbox.. They pick whoever is the most popular where most of their friends are.

very true that! This is what happens when you go around handing out identity cards to those who are console gamers and who aren't, to indicate which is which.

 

[QPlayer]

I do not think so. Fanboys and trolls also exist in the younger generation. Just look at the trolling comments on Neogaf or Resetera... Do you think they all come from older people? Or the many crappy childish blows at each other on the Xbox and PS interfaces...

This fanboyism is a debilitating human habit, it is about exalting the product you own, nothing more. The problem is when this turns into trolling and not accepting the other person's opinion. And I don't think it depends on age, it depends on maturity and awareness.

 

[Seanspeed]

There's no arguing about it. I know for a fact it is.

Yea, I cant take discussion like this seriously. You're literally just escalating the argument with more and more hyperbole since you've not actually got anything to back up what you're saying.

How can you state something as a 'fact' based on nothing but your own personal anecdotal observation, while I have literally the entire opposite anecdotal observations while having been online absolutely plenty for it not to be some small little sample? It is more than arguable, and suggesting otherwise does not make for a constructive dialogue.

You can't understand how younger people expect their games to follow them and be wherever they are today?

No, because that's not happening now and I genuinely have no idea what you're talking about acting as if that's the norm for anybody today. Cross-play is certainly a thing, but it's not normal at all for people's accounts and game files to be applicable between completely different ecosystems, no. It exists, but it's absolutely not the norm.

You seem like you're falling for a slippery slope fallacy here. Because cross-play exists(which is not the same thing as above, by the way), it means we're absolutely gonna have completely open ecosystems soon? That really doesn't follow at all.

And I'd argue that Microsoft VERY MUCH are trendsetters in this industry... Have you heard of Xbox live? The Xbox marketplace? Achievements? Hell... the modern console is COMPLETELY derived from things that MS made popular...

Oh, they had influence in the X360 era no doubt. I've talked at length about how well Microsoft did in that generation and all the great things they accomplished. We're quite far away from that now, though.

Crossplay is probably one of the things you could attribute to them in more recent times, but that's also not something that really hurt anybody to implement. What you're talking about is well, well beyond something like this.

I'm going to be straight with you.. you sound like someone upset at the idea that Microsoft might have some advantage over Sony and Nintendo in the future.

Well that's utter nonsense and shows again your ability to read other people and what they think is just downright poor. If anything, I'm incredibly eager for Microsoft to actually regain form again. I'm simply not optimistic of this at the moment, and I feel implementing these propositions of a wide open ecosystem would be one of the worst things they could do. I've explained in detail why elsewhere.

 

[Remij]

Yea, I cant take discussion like this seriously. You're literally just escalating the argument with more and more hyperbole since you've not actually got anything to back up what you're saying.

How can you state something as a 'fact' based on nothing but your own personal anecdotal observation, while I have literally the entire opposite anecdotal observations while having been online absolutely plenty for it not to be some small little sample? It is more than arguable, and suggesting otherwise does not make for a constructive dialogue.

You can't understand how younger people expect their games to follow them and be wherever they are today?

No, because that's not happening now and I genuinely have no idea what you're talking about acting as if that's the norm for anybody today. Cross-play is certainly a thing, but it's not normal at all for people's accounts and game files to be applicable between completely different ecosystems, no. It exists, but it's absolutely not the norm.

You seem like you're falling for a slippery slope fallacy here. Because cross-play exists(which is not the same thing as above, by the way), it means we're absolutely gonna have completely open ecosystems soon? That really doesn't follow at all.

And I'd argue that Microsoft VERY MUCH are trendsetters in this industry... Have you heard of Xbox live? The Xbox marketplace? Achievements? Hell... the modern console is COMPLETELY derived from things that MS made popular...

Oh, they had influence in the X360 era no doubt. I've talked at length about how well Microsoft did in that generation and all the great things they accomplished. We're quite far away from that now, though.

Crossplay is probably one of the things you could attribute to them in more recent times, but that's also not something that really hurt anybody to implement. What you're talking about is well, well beyond something like this.

I'm going to be straight with you.. you sound like someone upset at the idea that Microsoft might have some advantage over Sony and Nintendo in the future.

Well that's utter nonsense and shows again your ability to read other people and what they think is just downright poor. If anything, I'm incredibly eager for Microsoft to actually regain form again. I'm simply not optimistic of this at the moment, and I feel implementing these propositions of a wide open ecosystem would be one of the worst things they could do. I've explained in detail why elsewhere.

I'm not escalating anything... I'm countering your anecdotal arguments that the industry isn't changing and evolving when the evidence is right in front of our eyes.

I'm specifically pointing out things that wouldn't have ever existed had the companies involved just followed the status quo... as you expect them to continue to do. It doesn't work that way.

Look how many fanboys are swearing that Sony releasing their games on PC is causing irreparable harm to the Playstation brand... lmao all of these idiots screaming such are middle aged fanboys who are terrified at the idea that their exclusive games day 1 are going away. Let me ask you another question... Do you REALLY BELIEVE that Sony would be releasing their games on PC at all..... if Microsoft wouldn't already have been doing so????

You seem to have this idea in your head that "trend setters" are the successful companies who would LOVE for everything to always stay the same and noone to ever shake things up... like Nintendo and Sony... when the reality is that new trends are set by people that disrupt industries BECAUSE they can't find success without doing so. Make no mistake.. Microsoft's goal is to change the industry to something more suitable to them and their way of business. And you naively don't believe they can set new trends simply because they're in last place compared to their competitors... when the reality is that this particular company is the most powerful company in the world.. they have extreme amounts of influence to change this industry.

Crossplay is but a stepping stone... an obvious one. Remember, Sony was absolutely against it... and yet now they've succumbed to the realities of the market. These things ONLY hurt Sony... if they don't adapt to them and become stronger and better BECAUSE of them. Nobody felt bad for Blockbuster when Netflix came and pulled the rug out from under them... Blockbuster could have adapted and likely thrived.. but they failed to and went the way of the dodo.

Again, you can think whatever you want of me.. but it's easily observable that kids these days have no allegiance to these platforms in the same way that middle aged millennials do.

 

[Below2D]

Nice technical discussion guys.

 

[Remij]

Nice technical discussion guys.

Well, it's technically about something Digital Foundry discussed

 

[Flappy Pannus]

By the way I'm not sure if you're aware but Steam does not allow sellers on their store to undercut Steam. So the seller even if they were to take less fees from another store front cannot just split the difference with the customer. I think this also something that people might need to keep in mind that these distrubtion platforms have 2 customers, the gamer (content consumer) and the game developer (content provider).

Good point.

I still don't see the issue with using a front end launcher that links in to all the back end stores silently.

Playnite does that and is fricken awesome IMO. I have games from Steam, Epic, Ubisoft, Rockstar, Microsoft, Gog and a ton on emulated games all in the same single catalogue. I don't need to know or care what their native store is, they all launch directly from Playnite.

It would have to have much deeper integration that just what Playnite does though. The problem of multiple launchers is more than just the differing UI, it's stuff like cloud saves and game update mechanisms not engaging until you launch the game.

You also have to wonder what's in it for the publishers if the very nature of this hypothetical PC-xbox hybrid is that is obscures their storefront. They don't want that, and will likely fight to ensure their launcher is more prominent, not less.

 

[Cyan]

Microsoft's goal is to change the industry to something more suitable to them and their way of business

it was about time though. They could go as far as creating a console like experience on a Chromebook, Windows, Mac, Linux, etc....

it's easily observable that kids these days have no allegiance to these platforms in the same way that middle aged millennials do.

from my experience in this forum and others, younger people nowadays don't use forums. In fact, when I read the word EXCLUSIVE in a videogames forum or article, I know it's a 30 something, 40 something, 50 something person writing that.

I only participate in two forums, discord channels aside, one of them being this, and the other is like a Phoenix reborn from the ashes of one of the most popular forums that existed -which died 3 years ago-.

In that very forum, after 3 years not only we are the same old guard, but there aren't new people registering (they tried with raffles and so on) and also so many people that was recovered from the original forum stopped participating long time ago.

To sum it up, there is literally just a handful of people actively writing posts there, and of those that are, you always end up bickering and discussing about the same arguments: 60fps, this machine is more powerful, exclusives exclusives exclusives, Jim Ryan has petunias in his garden, etc etc, but no 20 years old participate, I know those guys from the early 2000s.... Younger people is too busy on tik tok and youtube.

Those youtubers focused on xbox and exclusives, or sony, etc, are most of them on their 40s or late 30s. Given how diverse is gaming now, younger people really don't care about that single system, 'cos for every GT or Forza, you get many other comparable games that can be even better in some ways.

 

[Remij]

Good point.



It would have to have much deeper integration that just what Playnite does though. The problem of multiple launchers is more than just the differing UI, it's stuff like cloud saves and game update mechanisms not engaging until you launch the game.

You also have to wonder what's in it for the publishers if the very nature of this hypothetical PC-xbox hybrid is that is obscures their storefront. They don't want that, and will likely fight to ensure their launcher is more prominent, not less.

Microsoft could do easily do better than what Playnite does. Publishers could also update their clients to more seamlessly integrate into MS' frontend. If Microsoft is doing it officially.. there's far more incentive for them to do so.

What's in it for publishers is to be in control of their products and increased revenue share. Why do you think Epic is fighting with Apple over their monopoly. How is that any different for publishers than their content on any other stores already? They have to fight to ensure their games are prominent on the PS Store, Xbox Store, and eShop already..

 

[Seanspeed]

younger people are into streamers, youtubers, tiktokers, who they follow and those are on PC. My 6 y.o. and 4 y.o. nephew uses their tablet -for the 6 y.o- and a locked phone with just youtube -for my 4 y.o.- and since he was 4 to 5 my 6 y.o. nephew watches 15 to 20 something y.o. people on youtube playing some obscure games.

My 4 y.o. when using that locked phone watches kids music songz and some of those youtubers.

This is what younger people are doing nowadays -that's from a random video I found-:

Again, if we're talking phones, Apple is by far the most popular/most desirable brand for younger people. That's as locked down and walled garden an ecosystem gets. So this idea that younger people aren't used to this is a bizarre claim.

Watching streamers is not at all the same as what people are actually themselves playing games on. It might surprise you to learn that 6 year olds dont have jobs and rely on their parents to buy them games and gaming hardware. And that's more often than not gonna mean a console, not a pricey gaming PC. Not that people really care what hardware streamers are using in general, they aren't watching for that, especially not young kids.

 

[Boss]

it was about time though. They could go as far as creating a console like experience on a Chromebook, Windows, Mac, Linux, etc....

Yea no thanks. The only way Microsoft innovates is to find ways to continually pull money out of your pocket. Their way of business has added nothing of value to gaming and is not one that is to be emulated.

 

[Davros]

Microsoft could do easily do better than what Playnite does.

They sort of tried before anyone remember Microsoft Games Explorer, It was not great and broke when you hit 512 games