,
8 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
There is a point to discuss on this front regarding the importance of distribution selection to the end consumer. Yes, it is more than just a "delivery medium". Distribution plays a key role in consumer cost and experience. Let's break this down: 
First, the choice of distribution has the greatest impact on consumer cost/value consideration. In the context of Steam versus EGS, the first example is the distribution costs leading to higher product costs versus the value that the product *and* distribution provides.
Distribution costs in this context could be reflected both by Steam's higher distribution fee or by Epic's exclusivity agreement payments to publishers. Both inflate costs on the supply side that prevent any consumer cost savings. But what does that mean in the big picture?
That means, since cost savings are not able to be provided to consumers, the onus then falls entirely on the developer in order to deliver increasing levels of value to justify the price, which, when paired with the decreasing budgets that publishers offer, is insanely difficult.
Secondly, without providing a means to offer cost savings to consumers, the only way to avoid overburdening developers is for the distribution to offer ad hoc value-added features. Examples are features like cloud saves, modding frameworks, and consumer communications tools.
The value-added features like the ability to have your save games backed up, convenient and consistent access to modding, or even having a clear channel for publishers to communicate with consumers are all things that directly lead to higher consumer satisfaction and loyalty.
In closing, when someone tells you that a distribution platform like Steam or EGS is "just another icon" or "just a delivery medium", know that is only intended to mislead you into unduly placing less value on the distributor and more on the already-overburdened developer.
@threadreaderapp unroll
