Everything has been pretty much explained by other users already. Steam takes a huge chunk of your income and essentially forces you to offer deep discounts to compete with everyone else. It‘s way too big to not release your game for. Unless you have a huge publisher and go console only (and believe me developers are gamers too and not too fond of exclusivity anyway) you‘re forced to release on Steam where you will make your most sales.
But to add to that Steam also does not offer any support. If you have questions or need help you have to look someplace else which can be pretty infuriating.
You made a specific claim that Steam is overall unpopular among developers. I’m asking you to back up that claim with actual data, not provide your own justification why you think so.
I’m sure it stings to have Steam take a 30% cut (or whatever it is currently). I also think that developers have not fully factored the costs of keeping their own distribution infrastructure. They are free to do it, why don’t they? There are other platforms out there, why pick on Steam?
I see it said here and on Reddit all the time: “if it’s not on steam, I won’t buy it”. Gamers are the reason why devs can’t release elsewhere because so many gamers care where a game is purchased. And then at the same time, the gamers say the same thing you do in that devs can just release wherever they want, why are they crying?
And why do gamers say that? Is it because Steam is holding a gun to gamers head? Or is it because Steam is the most feature rich and most gamer friendly storefront?
Allow me to summarize my below ramblings. Steam is a de facto monopoly, yes. But it is one cuz it treats gamers better than any other storefront. Its not because they are evil, at least in my opinion.
I’m hesitant to believe steam’s 30% cut is really that awful for devs, or too big of a cut. I’ve read multiple stories about how indie devs make way more money on steam than off it.
If steam took a smaller cut, I don’t think we should assume the extra money would go to the devs outside of maybe indie titles, most of the extra money would go to the owners.
If the 30% cut Steam takes is so insanely high, why doesn’t someone make a rival storefront and offer even steeper discounts?
To be clear, I’m not going to pretend there isn’t some “fat” in that 30% cut. Gabe is a goddamn billionaire after 21 years of Steam. Tho some of that billion could have come from reinvesting some of his money and getting lucky, or from the success of the valve games.
As much as I despise billionaires, Gabe is probably one of the least evil billionaires when it comes to how he acquired his wealth. Steam filled a niche in the video game world and earned its huge monopolyish marketshare by doing right by the customer. If we consider Steam a monopoly, it’s a monopoly became no one has tried to really compete against Steam by offering great valvue to gamers.
I don’t know of any anti competitive bullshit steam has pulled like other companies. I can fairly easily install gog games on my steam deck. If that was a Xbox deck or a PlayStation deck, I’d bet money they’d lock down the software to prevent you from installing games that didnt come from their store.
Ultimately I think Gabe would be a better person for donating lot’s more of his money/not being a billionaire.
Ultimately, I worry about when Gabe is no longer the head of Steam. They are effectively a monopoly cuz no one else treats gamers as well. When Gabe is gone/if enshittification comes to steam, then I’ll think we’ll see a new storefront start to take over and an end to the steam “monopoly”. But that end will be, hopefully, because some other storefront is treating games better.
Going back to the original thread topic of devs not getting enough money. If steam suddenly changed to a 15% cut, there is no guarantee that extra revenue would go to the devs. Maybe some would, but if a studio is already underpaying treating devs shitty I’m betting most of that 15% will go to the owners/managers.
The majority of the game studios and storefronts are out there actively shooting themselves in the foot, while Steam is there just being decent. It ain’t the devs fault that their bosses decided to make a shit game, but it ain’t steam’s either.
I agree Steam is the best client feature wise, not arguing that. I’m arguing the point of “devs can just release elsewhere”. They can’t because people treat Steam like it’s the one true god.
I personally prefer GOG first because it’s DRM free but outside of that I don’t care, I click play and the launcher doesn’t matter. I just play the game.
Nah, I think it’s more like Stockholm syndrome. Or like a biker gang acting kind. If you don’t pay them their share you don’t get to do much business at all.
I’m doubtful there is like a ‘study’ on this but steam takes a 30% cut, which is absolutely massive considering its no secret plenty of developers say they really don’t justify it by having poor communication.
Unfortunately however, more importantly if you are a developer or create a project that is an easy target for bigotry you will see absolutely no help from the platform in protecting you. Which is crazy that you would be required to participate in the platform in order to succeed, then be abused on it and have the people profiting ignore you.
(https://www.theguardian.com/games/2026/feb/16/bigotry-steam-pc-moderation-developers-speak-out)
Unfortunately however, more importantly if you are a developer or create a project that is an easy target for bigotry you will see absolutely no help from the platform in protecting you. Which is crazy that you would be required to participate in the platform in order to succeed, then be abused on it and have the people profiting ignore you. (https://www.theguardian.com/games/2026/feb/16/bigotry-steam-pc-moderation-developers-speak-out)
They could turn off the forums and run their own community, but they chose not to. That’s a conscious decision on their part.
I’m doubtful there is like a ‘study’ on this <…> its no secret plenty of developers say they really don’t justify it by having poor communication.
The claim parent was making is that the majority of devs feel that way. I doubt that, and would like to see some hard data else it’s just unsubstantiated claims.
Any hard data on this? Everything I’ve ever heard says otherwise.
Everything has been pretty much explained by other users already. Steam takes a huge chunk of your income and essentially forces you to offer deep discounts to compete with everyone else. It‘s way too big to not release your game for. Unless you have a huge publisher and go console only (and believe me developers are gamers too and not too fond of exclusivity anyway) you‘re forced to release on Steam where you will make your most sales.
But to add to that Steam also does not offer any support. If you have questions or need help you have to look someplace else which can be pretty infuriating.
You made a specific claim that Steam is overall unpopular among developers. I’m asking you to back up that claim with actual data, not provide your own justification why you think so.
I’m sure it stings to have Steam take a 30% cut (or whatever it is currently). I also think that developers have not fully factored the costs of keeping their own distribution infrastructure. They are free to do it, why don’t they? There are other platforms out there, why pick on Steam?
I see it said here and on Reddit all the time: “if it’s not on steam, I won’t buy it”. Gamers are the reason why devs can’t release elsewhere because so many gamers care where a game is purchased. And then at the same time, the gamers say the same thing you do in that devs can just release wherever they want, why are they crying?
And why do gamers say that? Is it because Steam is holding a gun to gamers head? Or is it because Steam is the most feature rich and most gamer friendly storefront?
Allow me to summarize my below ramblings. Steam is a de facto monopoly, yes. But it is one cuz it treats gamers better than any other storefront. Its not because they are evil, at least in my opinion.
I’m hesitant to believe steam’s 30% cut is really that awful for devs, or too big of a cut. I’ve read multiple stories about how indie devs make way more money on steam than off it.
If steam took a smaller cut, I don’t think we should assume the extra money would go to the devs outside of maybe indie titles, most of the extra money would go to the owners.
If the 30% cut Steam takes is so insanely high, why doesn’t someone make a rival storefront and offer even steeper discounts?
To be clear, I’m not going to pretend there isn’t some “fat” in that 30% cut. Gabe is a goddamn billionaire after 21 years of Steam. Tho some of that billion could have come from reinvesting some of his money and getting lucky, or from the success of the valve games.
As much as I despise billionaires, Gabe is probably one of the least evil billionaires when it comes to how he acquired his wealth. Steam filled a niche in the video game world and earned its huge monopolyish marketshare by doing right by the customer. If we consider Steam a monopoly, it’s a monopoly became no one has tried to really compete against Steam by offering great valvue to gamers.
I don’t know of any anti competitive bullshit steam has pulled like other companies. I can fairly easily install gog games on my steam deck. If that was a Xbox deck or a PlayStation deck, I’d bet money they’d lock down the software to prevent you from installing games that didnt come from their store.
Ultimately I think Gabe would be a better person for donating lot’s more of his money/not being a billionaire.
Ultimately, I worry about when Gabe is no longer the head of Steam. They are effectively a monopoly cuz no one else treats gamers as well. When Gabe is gone/if enshittification comes to steam, then I’ll think we’ll see a new storefront start to take over and an end to the steam “monopoly”. But that end will be, hopefully, because some other storefront is treating games better.
Going back to the original thread topic of devs not getting enough money. If steam suddenly changed to a 15% cut, there is no guarantee that extra revenue would go to the devs. Maybe some would, but if a studio is already underpaying treating devs shitty I’m betting most of that 15% will go to the owners/managers.
The majority of the game studios and storefronts are out there actively shooting themselves in the foot, while Steam is there just being decent. It ain’t the devs fault that their bosses decided to make a shit game, but it ain’t steam’s either.
I agree Steam is the best client feature wise, not arguing that. I’m arguing the point of “devs can just release elsewhere”. They can’t because people treat Steam like it’s the one true god.
I personally prefer GOG first because it’s DRM free but outside of that I don’t care, I click play and the launcher doesn’t matter. I just play the game.
Because Steam is by far the biggest, with the longest reach. If you don’t chose Steam you will most likely automatically sell less.
So the cost of using Steam is worth it for the benefits of steam?
Nah, I think it’s more like Stockholm syndrome. Or like a biker gang acting kind. If you don’t pay them their share you don’t get to do much business at all.
I’m doubtful there is like a ‘study’ on this but steam takes a 30% cut, which is absolutely massive considering its no secret plenty of developers say they really don’t justify it by having poor communication.
Unfortunately however, more importantly if you are a developer or create a project that is an easy target for bigotry you will see absolutely no help from the platform in protecting you. Which is crazy that you would be required to participate in the platform in order to succeed, then be abused on it and have the people profiting ignore you. (https://www.theguardian.com/games/2026/feb/16/bigotry-steam-pc-moderation-developers-speak-out)
They could turn off the forums and run their own community, but they chose not to. That’s a conscious decision on their part.
The claim parent was making is that the majority of devs feel that way. I doubt that, and would like to see some hard data else it’s just unsubstantiated claims.
Yes, they could just shoot themselves in the foot I guess and exclude themselves from features and put yourself at a disadvantage.
“Well if minorities want to stop being made so sit in the back of the bus, maybe they should start their own bus!” type argument
It’s the fucking hell hole of steam forums, what ‘disadvantage’ is there?
I’ll wait for the hard data to substantiate the claim that steam forums are a hell hole first, of course