Quote:
Originally Posted by Vevster
OK, here we go again .You cannot even admit you have been wrong on your previous statement?
Wow, you're the one who said:
So it seems you thought there clearly is a difference. If not, why make this post?
This post is clearly in contradiction with the quote from Forbes. That is easy for all to see, but hey, I am pedantic...
Also:
If you are a publisher you are not cutting a middle man by using Steam. You are replacing a retailer by Steam.
End of story, you guys can now play with yourselves.
|
Hey, quit being a jack ass. I made the $ comment because you said I should study harder, which is hard to take serious when you are talking about money and dont know even know where the $ sign goes.
In any case the discussion/argument was about using a publisher versus NO publisher. I stated they could choose their publisher, and that they could choose NOT to use one and instead go straight to steam as the retailer and make a LARGER profit then if they published with ubisoft and then sold on steam. You said that was not true, and still have not provided ANY evidence that says steam charges variable rates for different games (excluding use of valve's engine).
So in conclusion you should stop acting like an idiot, you yourself said that gross margin on steam using those numbers does not count devs, but publishers - therefore if there is NO publisher that gross profit goes directly to the devs and does not get split/reduced by the publisher taking the cash. Especially on a platform like steam where the publisher does little if not nothing for promotion or sales.