Erveon

IT'S HERE 🤩 The date and prize for the Slapshot European Championships have been announced! 📅 19th - 25th August 🏆 240k Pux + more prizes 📺 Twitch.tv/slapshoteuros You can get involved in all the actions here ⬇️ discord.com/invite/ektBfjw…

@CodeRed_dev Most days between 12 and 14 hours. I try to work a bit less on the weekends; about 6-8 hours those days. I take the day off every other Saturday for family. May sound extreme, but I genuinely enjoy this and wouldn't trade it for a 9 to 5.

How many hours in a day do you work on your game?

@zazuch1 @TrashTripp @PirateSoftware There is definitely value in their 30%, we agree on that. However, Steam does not promote the game for you. It amplifies what you put in yourself which eats into your budget too. The days of "build it and they will come" are long gone.

@Erveon @TrashTripp @PirateSoftware Then they need to be better at game making? Because if they didn’t pay the 30% would they even have nearly as many game sales? Probaly not. There is value given for that 30%

This video and the claim it's referencing are absurd. 1. Steams Pricing restriction is only for Steam Key pricing off-platform. Meaning you cannot use Steam as a distribution hub and sell Steam keys off-platform for cheaper. This prevents Valve from getting ripped off and is absolutely fine. They do not dictate the lowest price your game can be sold for unless you are using Steam Keys. 2. Of course Valve doesn't let you buy DLC for Steam Games from rival platforms. That would mean Steam would then have to distribute this DLC despite not making a sale. They have to pay for this bandwidth. For those that think you can do this through Humble Bundle or the like... you are buying a Steam Key there. Don't make me get the stick. 3. The Steam 30% cut is not actually 30%. It's 30% for all sales made on the Steam Platform. If you sell Steam Keys, Valve takes a 0% cut of that transaction. They also don't charge for generating steam keys. The claim that the 30% is egregious is also a subjective opinion as many developers (myself included) find that the value brought by steam is well worth it. You can read everything about Steams partner agreement and more in the Steamworks Documentation. It's public information. partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/k…

@ElkiSmalls @TrashTripp @PirateSoftware There's plenty of examples of studios that made several games, sometimes dozens, and after many failures finally make it big. It's a creative and iterative process and the success of a game is not always directly correlated with the talent of the team making it.

@Erveon @TrashTripp @PirateSoftware If a 30% cut makes or breaks a company they weren't going to make it long term anyways lol

@MatthewAbelArts @TrashTripp @PirateSoftware The difference is you are negotiating a price for your work, games rely on predicting the right amount of sales. If they come in under their prediction then they're in trouble. Nowadays not even always through any fault of their own. Meanwhile, Valve always profits.

@Erveon @TrashTripp @PirateSoftware You work the numbers, factor in that 30%. When I sell work & I know about commission pricing, what the gallery takes, what an agent will take, whatever else. I factor all that in to my sell price. For you I imagine you'd need to sell x units at this price to enter the green.

@MatthewAbelArts @TrashTripp @PirateSoftware For a solo developer, sure. When you scale your studio and all the numbers involved get bigger, that 30% starts to become painful. Valve has made a lot more money off my game than I have personally.

@TrashTripp @PirateSoftware 30% is very low.

@TrashTripp @PirateSoftware The 30% can make the difference between a studio making another game or having to close down. I like how legislative pressure made mobile platforms use a 15% fee on the first million dollars for small businesses. Would be a gamechanger on Steam (Pun intended)

@PirateSoftware I think 30% is a *little* high but I definitely agree they do provide a lot of value and more importantly publicity. 70% of $1,000 is way better than 100% of $10.

@DearIndieGames @DominicTarason I agree with your point that checking all the boxes isn't a 100% guarantee, but I do want to point out that huge marketing does not equal good marketing. It's VERY easy to spend tens if not hundreds of thousands, get a lot of views, but barely have it seen by your target audience

As amazing as it is to see so many games launching this month, it seems like for indie devs, it's a massacre. A huge number of games on my wishlist from February/March/April have under 100 user reviews. Many under 50. I fear for many, this will be their last commercial release.

@JonasDigitalArt @knifedemontris @DominicTarason Yeah that's fair, personal success is important too but unfortunately doesn't pay the bills

@Erveon @knifedemontris @DominicTarason Yeah with success I don't really mean financial success, most indie games never reach success financially.

@JonasDigitalArt @knifedemontris @DominicTarason For a hobby game, it would be a success! For an indie studio that's more than a solo developer? It would only work if the game was created in less than 6 months, which they rarely are. The ratio is more like 1:30 and lots of money is lost along the way (platform, sales tax,..)

@knifedemontris @DominicTarason Yeah 100 reviews is a lot for a indie game. I'd say on average 1 in 100 reviews a game they bought, so that would be 10000 sales, which would be a success for many indie games.

@JonasTyroller I would probably love this if I wasn't so tired of staring at code all day already 😆

Oh, oh... addiction mode activated. I think this will be the first idle game to really get me. 😬

@BuckleysPants Do you enjoy watching TM streamers suffer? Because this is just evil

my prediction on what deep dip 3 will look like. Deep Dip 3: Stairway to Heaven

@2_left_thumbs @Steam I'm sure a case can be made for the algorithm to be tuned more but at the end of the day games are games and their business model shouldn't put them in a specific box unless the user specifically filters for it, which is already possible. My two cents but I'm obviously biased :)

@Erveon @Steam I went back to April 11 (the farthest back N&T goes right now). I counted 116 paid and 27 free releases. (manual count, so bound to be rough) Roughly 19% of releases were free, vs 60% of the front page slots. My hope is having 2 tabs would benefit paid & free releases! (2/2)

This is the reality of Steam's front page now. The #1 place where your game can achieve some launch visibility is now most likely going to be reduced down to ~24 hours. @Steam needs to put Free games in a separate tab!

Guys I'm on a valentine's date with this cutie and he's giving me the look. What do I do? 🥺👉👈

@RefractiveENT @unity This is coming from the CEO that called game developers morons. At least they're consistent!

@unity I read this as "calm down, this runtime fee will only effect SUCCESSFUL devs, and as we stated earlier, the majority of Unity's users are NOT that." Daaaaamn what a backhanded statement to the user base haha.

Today we announced a change to our business model which includes new additions to our subscription plans, and the introduction of a Runtime fee. We wanted to provide clarifying answers to the top questions most of you are asking. Yes, this is a price increase and it will only affect a small subset of current Unity Editor users. Today, a large majority of Unity Editor users are currently not paying anything and will not be affected by this change. The Unity Runtime fee will not impact the majority of our developers. The developers who will be impacted are generally those who have successful games and are generating revenue way above the thresholds we outlined in our blog. This means that developers who are still building their business and growing the audience of their games will not pay a fee. The program was designed specifically this way to ensure developers could find success before the install fee takes effect. We want to be clear that the counter for Unity Runtime fee installs starts on January 1, 2024 - it is not retroactive or perpetual. We will charge once for a new install; not an ongoing perpetual license royalty, like revenue share. We looked for ways to lessen the impact on developers, and provide ways to bring the Runtime fee to zero. If you’re using any of our ad products, Unity Gaming Services or cloud services, etc. please contact us to discuss discounts. We are actively listening to and following your questions closely. Please review our FAQ (on.unity.com/3PAiqHH) on today’s announcement. We also invite you to continue to discuss these changes with us on our forums: on.unity.com/3RmyLRx.

Alright @UbisoftConnect, repeat after me: 👏 JUST 👏 BECAUSE👏 SOMEONE 👏 LIVES 👏 IN 👏 BELGIUM 👏 DOESNT 👏 MEAN 👏 THEY 👏 WANT 👏 THEIR 👏 SHIT 👏 IN 👏 FRENCH 👏 Support confirmed there is no way to change it because language is region based. It's been 10 yrs of this merde

Another one bites the dust. I wonder when publishers will realize that GaaS is a marathon, not a sprint and that there is a plateau to every niche Funny how we've outlived most related GaaS titles that launched close to us & are still going strong gamesindustry.biz/where-did-knoc…

We all know there’s only one hero in the SPL… …and that is the @Erveon of the Cowtown Humuhumunukunukuāpua’a