安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文(繁体中文)
日本語(日语)
한국어(韩语)
ไทย(泰语)
български(保加利亚语)
Čeština(捷克语)
Dansk(丹麦语)
Deutsch(德语)
English(英语)
Español-España(西班牙语 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希腊语)
Français(法语)
Italiano(意大利语)
Bahasa Indonesia(印度尼西亚语)
Magyar(匈牙利语)
Nederlands(荷兰语)
Norsk(挪威语)
Polski(波兰语)
Português(葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙)
Português-Brasil(葡萄牙语 - 巴西)
Română(罗马尼亚语)
Русский(俄语)
Suomi(芬兰语)
Svenska(瑞典语)
Türkçe(土耳其语)
Tiếng Việt(越南语)
Українська(乌克兰语)
报告翻译问题



They wont get more money cause instead of getting 70-80% of a 60€ Game (for dev/pub) it would be a split 30€ (50%) or 18 (30%) between Valve, Dev/Pub and you. So how would it benefit anyone?
Oh and forget sales especially the the good ones above 50%.
Also, not up to Valve / Steam to make this choice as they also do NOT own the Games or Software...
And people who are incapable of distinguishing between the medium of delivery and the content contained within are always going to make these stupid demands and be gobsmacked that people who know better ain't gonna play along with some know-nothings weak grasp of language and laws.
Frankly everyone who's obsessed with "ownership", needs to stick to classic consoles and physical media. Not because you own the content on those systems and media, but because product owners simply had no way to enforce license terms back then. Product owners being able to enforce their rights isn't a problem that needs to be solved.
As things are now it's not a possibility. As digital services as Steam is the solution to solve the problem of digital licenses being items in infinite supply and zero generationa and transfer friction. Online services anchoring your digital purchases are the way to not open the Pandora box... for now.
I'm kind of amazed to see people still trying to sell that old and battered car...
*Slaps the side of the block chain* This baby can fit so many broken promises in it
Why would any other platforms want to allow Valve's blockchain to determine what licenses are being handed out on their platform, using Epic's bandwith to serve games or w/e?
What about regional pricing? Its very common to have some regions with lower prices than the US due to differences in economic strength. This creates an immediate market of buying in impoverished regions and selling to wealthier at a discount - with third parties pocketing the difference. Valve and devs lose a ton of money by creating this.
What about regional restrictions? If Germany bans a game, does this blockchain idea bypass it? What happens when Germany bans reselling games on blockchains in response?
Blockchains and smart contracts fail all the time. Malicious smart contracts exist on many chains that cause problems regularly or are used to scam people. What happens when that hits this system?
What you're proposing is expensive, complicated, will lead to decreases in revenue for people making and selling games while also increasing scams. There is no upside to building this system, it just sounds good on paper if you've never had to deal with any of the complexities of building or running a marketplace.
That’s not how licensing works, William. As has been explained, devs very much can own the specific code and intellectual property involved in the product they have made. While you may not AGREE with it, it doesn’t make it any less true that this is how licensing works. You can’t just deny facts because they are inconvenient to you.