←back to thread

Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

(www.apple.com)
830 points todsacerdoti | 5 comments | 18 Nov 20 11:04 UTC | HN request time: 0.831s | source
Show context
Aissen ◴[18 Nov 20 11:16 UTC] No.25135496[source]▶
Weird how this is the exact opposite of Valve's strategy:

> For all sales between $10 million and $50 million, the split goes to 25 percent. And for every sale after the initial $50 million, Steam will take just a 20 percent cut.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/11/30/18120577/valve-steam-gam...

replies(3): >>25135561 #>>25135611 #>>25145341 #
chrisrhoden ◴[18 Nov 20 11:29 UTC] No.25135611[source]▶
You don't need to distribute on Steam. While it can bring legitimacy to an indie, alternatives exist. Not so with the App Store.

Steam wants to disincentivize big companies making their own distribution, which is why they have the regressive split.

replies(1): >>25135893 #
mewse ◴[18 Nov 20 12:09 UTC] No.25135893[source]▶
> You don't need to distribute on Steam. [...] alternatives exist.

Sure, if you want your business to go bankrupt.

Itch? I love the place but good luck supporting your business with the number of sales you’ll make if you’re only available there. Epic? GoG? Humble? Those are curated stores; you have to be invited in; you can’t just choose to sell there. And even if you could, they still don’t have anything even remotely remotely remotely like the number of shoppers on Steam.

As a practical matter, today, Steam is the only realistic option for mainstream non-hobbyist digital PC game publishing. You can do other stores plus Steam, but Steam has to be in the mix if you’re hoping to support yourself by your sales. (and yes, you can point to a small handful of digital games which were highly financially successful without primarily selling through Steam, but those are the hyper-viral one-in-a-million exceptions, not representative business cases that you should be betting your business on replicating)

(Exception: if one of the other stores is going to pay you to be exclusive to their store (preferably only for a certain duration so that you can get onto Steam right after that period), then that can absolutely make up for losing out on the early Steam sales. But again, that sort of deal isn’t available to everybody)

replies(2): >>25136448 #>>25144511 #
1. whywhywhywhy ◴[18 Nov 20 13:24 UTC] No.25136448[source]▶
Minecraft didn’t distribute on Steam, they managed just fine.

Neither does Fortnite come to think of it.

replies(2): >>25137278 #>>25142316 #
2. TillE ◴[18 Nov 20 14:45 UTC] No.25137278[source]▶
You're talking about a once-in-a-generation indie hit (which arguably started before Steam was omnipresent), and a game which was made and published by a big company. This is not the norm.
replies(1): >>25139222 #
3. whywhywhywhy ◴[18 Nov 20 17:02 UTC] No.25139222[source]▶
> (which arguably started before Steam was omnipresent)

This just isn't true, Steam had almost no competition in 2008. Microsoft didn't even have an app store till 2012, Epic certainly didn't, EA Origin is 2011.

replies(1): >>25143657 #
4. mewse ◴[18 Nov 20 20:54 UTC] No.25142316[source]▶
I had already addressed your comment in the post you replied to:

> and yes, you can point to a small handful of digital games which were highly financially successful without primarily selling through Steam, but those are the hyper-viral one-in-a-million exceptions, not representative business cases that you should be betting your business on replicating

5. 0xffff2 ◴[18 Nov 20 22:50 UTC] No.25143657{3}[source]▶
Steam lacking competition doesn't imply that it was omnipresent. I remember a long period where Steam existed but the overwhelmingly most common method of distribution was a box with CD(s) in it (or, since I was a poor student at the time, illicit download).