By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC - Steam exceeds 30 million accounts; grows by 200% year on year

Kasz216 said:
Scoobes said:
Squilliam said:

The way things seem to be going, Steam looks to be as much a gaming platform as any console. Arguably they have one of the soundest business model as they only have to keep people coming back and buying from them and they don't have to worry about things like hardware generations because their customers figure that out for themselves.

I think Gabe Newell made this point a year or two ago. It's highly profitable for them as they've effectively got the userbase and community of any of the consoles but as you say none of the hardware costs. Furthermore, they receive a fee for being the platform holders and get more profit per sale on each of their first-party software as they're also effectively the retailer and have no packaging costs. And now they're now actually expanding the hardware they're on with Mac and cross platform play via Steamworks.

Valve must be rolling in money...

And to think they're a private company.  That means the owners could be rolling in dough if they want.

True, but do you really think they'd let someone buy them?



Rockstar: Announce Bully 2 already and make gamers proud!

Kojima: Come out with Project S already!

Around the Network
huaxiong90 said:
Kasz216 said:
Scoobes said:
Squilliam said:

The way things seem to be going, Steam looks to be as much a gaming platform as any console. Arguably they have one of the soundest business model as they only have to keep people coming back and buying from them and they don't have to worry about things like hardware generations because their customers figure that out for themselves.

I think Gabe Newell made this point a year or two ago. It's highly profitable for them as they've effectively got the userbase and community of any of the consoles but as you say none of the hardware costs. Furthermore, they receive a fee for being the platform holders and get more profit per sale on each of their first-party software as they're also effectively the retailer and have no packaging costs. And now they're now actually expanding the hardware they're on with Mac and cross platform play via Steamworks.

Valve must be rolling in money...

And to think they're a private company.  That means the owners could be rolling in dough if they want.

True, but do you really think they'd let someone buy them?

Why would they need to let someone buy them?  Being a private company means they can do whatever they want with their profts since they don't have any shareholders to please.

They can take whatever percentage of the money they want from the company to make a rocket to the moon fueled by cash if they want.



Kasz216 said:
huaxiong90 said:
Kasz216 said:
Scoobes said:
Squilliam said:

The way things seem to be going, Steam looks to be as much a gaming platform as any console. Arguably they have one of the soundest business model as they only have to keep people coming back and buying from them and they don't have to worry about things like hardware generations because their customers figure that out for themselves.

I think Gabe Newell made this point a year or two ago. It's highly profitable for them as they've effectively got the userbase and community of any of the consoles but as you say none of the hardware costs. Furthermore, they receive a fee for being the platform holders and get more profit per sale on each of their first-party software as they're also effectively the retailer and have no packaging costs. And now they're now actually expanding the hardware they're on with Mac and cross platform play via Steamworks.

Valve must be rolling in money...

And to think they're a private company.  That means the owners could be rolling in dough if they want.

True, but do you really think they'd let someone buy them?

Why would they need to let someone buy them?  Being a private company means they can do whatever they want with their profts since they don't have any shareholders to please.

They can take whatever percentage of the money they want from the company to make a rocket to the moon fueled by cash if they want.

Could be that I'm tired or that I'm not very educated when it comes to business, but who are you referring to when you say "owners"?



Rockstar: Announce Bully 2 already and make gamers proud!

Kojima: Come out with Project S already!

Scoobes said:
Squilliam said:

The way things seem to be going, Steam looks to be as much a gaming platform as any console. Arguably they have one of the soundest business model as they only have to keep people coming back and buying from them and they don't have to worry about things like hardware generations because their customers figure that out for themselves.

I think Gabe Newell made this point a year or two ago. It's highly profitable for them as they've effectively got the userbase and community of any of the consoles but as you say none of the hardware costs. Furthermore, they receive a fee for being the platform holders and get more profit per sale on each of their first-party software as they're also effectively the retailer and have no packaging costs. And now they're now actually expanding the hardware they're on with Mac and cross platform play via Steamworks.

Valve must be rolling in money...

Yep they must be, although their network infrastructure expenditure must be extremely high. Within a year or two they might be bigger than any one console if their active accounts keep growing at this rapid pace. They are also certainly helped by the rollout of ultra fast broadband worldwide.



Tease.

huaxiong90 said:
Kasz216 said:
huaxiong90 said:
Kasz216 said:
Scoobes said:
Squilliam said:

The way things seem to be going, Steam looks to be as much a gaming platform as any console. Arguably they have one of the soundest business model as they only have to keep people coming back and buying from them and they don't have to worry about things like hardware generations because their customers figure that out for themselves.

I think Gabe Newell made this point a year or two ago. It's highly profitable for them as they've effectively got the userbase and community of any of the consoles but as you say none of the hardware costs. Furthermore, they receive a fee for being the platform holders and get more profit per sale on each of their first-party software as they're also effectively the retailer and have no packaging costs. And now they're now actually expanding the hardware they're on with Mac and cross platform play via Steamworks.

Valve must be rolling in money...

And to think they're a private company.  That means the owners could be rolling in dough if they want.

True, but do you really think they'd let someone buy them?

Why would they need to let someone buy them?  Being a private company means they can do whatever they want with their profts since they don't have any shareholders to please.

They can take whatever percentage of the money they want from the company to make a rocket to the moon fueled by cash if they want.

Could be that I'm tired or that I'm not very educated when it comes to business, but who are you referring to when you say "owners"?

The people who own the company.

Say I open up a lemonaid stand.

As long as that lemonaid stand is privately owned by me, I can do whatever I want with the money that comes in.

I can hire more people, I can buy better ingridents, I can buy myself a PSP game.

 

Gabe Newell can basically do whatever he wants with his "lemonaide stand."

Well depending on how many people own the "private" stock.

Most likely Newell owns it all though, since the Harrington split... then again it is "Valve corporation".

Either way, they could eaisly be pocketing a lot of the money, if they wanted to.



Around the Network
Kasz216 said:
huaxiong90 said:
Kasz216 said:
huaxiong90 said:
Kasz216 said:
Scoobes said:
Squilliam said:

The way things seem to be going, Steam looks to be as much a gaming platform as any console. Arguably they have one of the soundest business model as they only have to keep people coming back and buying from them and they don't have to worry about things like hardware generations because their customers figure that out for themselves.

I think Gabe Newell made this point a year or two ago. It's highly profitable for them as they've effectively got the userbase and community of any of the consoles but as you say none of the hardware costs. Furthermore, they receive a fee for being the platform holders and get more profit per sale on each of their first-party software as they're also effectively the retailer and have no packaging costs. And now they're now actually expanding the hardware they're on with Mac and cross platform play via Steamworks.

Valve must be rolling in money...

And to think they're a private company.  That means the owners could be rolling in dough if they want.

True, but do you really think they'd let someone buy them?

Why would they need to let someone buy them?  Being a private company means they can do whatever they want with their profts since they don't have any shareholders to please.

They can take whatever percentage of the money they want from the company to make a rocket to the moon fueled by cash if they want.

Could be that I'm tired or that I'm not very educated when it comes to business, but who are you referring to when you say "owners"?

The people who own the company.

Say I open up a lemonaid stand.

As long as that lemonaid stand is privately owned by me, I can do whatever I want with the money that comes in.

I can hire more people, I can buy better ingridents, I can buy myself a PSP game.

 

Gabe Newell can basically do whatever he wants with his "lemonaide stand."

 

He and Mike Harrington founded Valve, and Harrington left.  Newell likely owns the entirety of valve and could do whatever he wants with it.

Ah, okay, gotcha. To be honest, now that I think about it, it was a rhetorical question.

For some reason, at first I thought you meant someone would move in and buy them to get a piece of the pie. But obviously I should've known you wouldn't suggest such a farfetched idea.



Rockstar: Announce Bully 2 already and make gamers proud!

Kojima: Come out with Project S already!

Steam will continue to grow, because of several reasons. But the two major ones that I think they did this year was to increasingly tie retail releases with steam, meaning people will be creating accounts just to play the games they bought in the store and their release on mac. Which is a platform that may be small, but given Apples fortunes most assuredly is seeing nice growth.

The other thing I've noticed with my friends and this is purely anecdotal, is that despite the fact that we all have had accounts since the release of half-life 2, we're now only coming back to the service to actually buy games.

I've bought more games on steam this year then all other years combined. Why? Because the pc retail sections keep on getting smaller and its hard to find a lot of the small games on the shelves. While I still by the big pc releases at retail stores all my indie and smaller releases are now bought on steam. Games such as the updated Monkey Islands, Machinariam, Aquaria etc.



The most astonishing part is that they're still getting a 200% growth 6 years after launch.



So I joined Steam to get Portal for free, I haven't touched it since then but it automatically logs on every time I turn on my computer. Am I included into that data? If I am, then that's pretty stupid.



Bet with Conegamer and AussieGecko that the PS3 will have more exclusives in 2011 than the Wii or 360... or something.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3879752

I'm one of the new ones

 

Signed up to get portal for free

Friend recommended alien swarm, a cool, free, top down shooter with online co-op

 

Same friend later bought me L4D2 as a birthday present :)

 

Steam seems good from what I've seen