top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 166 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Revenue. Revenue is not profit.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 69 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Correct. The article is discussing revenue.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 37 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    The headline is misleading, it was worth mentioning.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 59 points 8 months ago

    The business hive mind cannot comprehend a company making so much money without shareholders demanding line go up every hour

  • source
  • [–] 51 points 8 months ago* (6 children)

    I wonder if they're also getting paid more or does greedy Gabe just take it all to fund his mega yachts.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 95 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    Did a little digging, apparently in a 2021 lawsuit, documents were released with bad redactions (they blacked out over the data, but the underlying information was still able to be highlighted and copied/pasted. Very common error when redacting PDFs)

    I haven’t checked the data myself but according one user this was the breakdown:

    “Total staff as of 2021: 336 people

    Administration: 35 people making an average of 4.5 million a year

    Game Developers: 181 people making an average of 1 million a year

    Steam Developers: 79 people making an average of 960k a year

    Hardware Developers: 41 people making average of 430k a year”

    Normally I would guess that “average” here probably means a few people making a ton of money while others get shafted. But I think “admin” probably accounts for that. We have no official way of knowing the true breakdown since this info is not supposed to be public

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 64 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    This actually seems like not a terrible spread. The average for the top earners is a little more than 10x the average for the lowest earners... Obviously outliers could be skewing that data (there could be one hardware developer making 30 million while the others work for poverty wages) but from the data we have, this isn't nearly as wide a gap as I would have expected.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Valve moved into hardware long after its other ventures, so it's not surprising the hardware devs make less -- they're newer. Still, $430k/yr is an enviable salary...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 8 months ago

    This was from 2021, so prior to the Steam Deck... that was really their break-out moment, I think, with regards to hardware. The Steam Link and Steam Controller were neat but didn't really capture their respective markets, and the Index was widely considered one of the best VR headsets on the market but that's a relatively small market, and it priced out all but the enthusiast tier consumers. The Steam Deck on the other hand had mass appeal and basically ushered in a golden age of handheld PC gaming... not to mention the immense hype around their recent hardware announcements. Could be that their hardware team is making more now.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 31 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Not hard, if you don't have 20k employees.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 13 points 8 months ago* (1 child)

    To be fair, Valve only has around 350 employees. The other companies have thousands more.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 10 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Do they have any kind of profit sharing program?

    I'd be kind of pissed if I worked there and made like $70k or whatever, only to read this shit.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›