Steam is a bad home for FOSS projects
Steam is a bad home for FOSS projects
Let me preface everything by stating that the titles doesn't try to be sensationalist. It's just my opinion based on my own experience publishing on Steam.
However, I feel pretty comfortable making this statement because I do not believe that I have been, in any way, singled out during the entire process. Instead, it's general policies which negatively affect FOSS projects and small developers specifically. The policies that lead to frustration and leave you feel punished.
So, at the start of this year I decided to publish a free and open-source project on Steam...
# The project
To better understand why the experience was such heartache for myself, I should set up the context. Bosca Ceoil: The Blue Album is a free and open-source (FOSS) tool for creating music. While tools are not something that Steam is famous for providing, creative applications are allowed on the platform. You can find anything from image editors to game engines in the Software section of the Steam storefront.
Bosca Ceoil Blue is decidedly FOSS. The source code is available in its entirety, under an MIT license. You can do whatever you want with it, use it commercially, change it, integrate into your own software. It's available for free, including precompiled binaries for Linux, macOS, and Windows, as well as its web version. You can get it on GitHub or on itch.io with no strings attached, and for its Steam release I wasn't going to change any of these truths.
It is ultimately my decision to maintain the project as FOSS with no compromises. And it's my prerogative to find this important. So you may disagree with my conclusions later on and find my take to be exaggerated or too dramatic. That is absolutely fine, but please understand that this is important to me.
# The donations
Chronologically, this wasn't the first major problem I had encountered. But it's the one that is the most important to discuss before everyone loses their interest in this article.
FOSS projects live and die with the people who are driven to support and improve them. But motivation is not the only factor that keeps the wheels turning. While projects often appear out of someone's hobby or necessity, and are shared just for the sake of sharing, when they start to firmly stand on their own two legs it quickly turns from a hobby to a full-time occupation. And when this time comes, you often have to make a decision whether you can dedicate as much time as the project requires to its well-being.
Donations to open source are a good way to ensure that the maintainer, which is often just one person, can commit to the project in the long run. And donations are my way of asking for support as I share Bosca Ceoil Blue for free.
I would identify 3 common ways of setting up donations for any given project:
- A one-time donation. Just a simple transaction that can be done at any time. It is often asked for via a call to action, but is not forced on you when you download and use a piece of free software. Can be a post-download popup, a note at the end of release notes, a special menu somewhere inside of the app, etc.
- A pay-what-you-want model. This is similar to the one-time donation option, however there is a stronger push for a payment ahead of the download. As a user you are asked if you'd like to provide monetary compensation as you try to download something, with a suggested value that you can ignore or accept, or edit to be something else. It can be viewed as a tip on top of a 0 currency purchase.
- A recurring donation. It's mostly presented with the same kind of call to action as the one-time option. Unlike the one-time donation, it is a more sustainable option, but also asks for a bigger commitment from the user. Often a service like ko-fi or Patreon is used with some extra incentives set up to people who sign up.
My experience prior to coming to Steam was publishing on itch.io. There, I use their pay-what-you-want option with the recommended amount of 5 USD. I think it's an effective thing that is not too aggressive (with the way it is implemented on itch.io that is). Most people who decided to offer money simply choose the default 5 bucks. Some outliers offer less or more.
I also have a Patreon page and link to it here and there asking for support. It's not directly linked to the development of Bosca Ceoil Blue, but at this time that development and me are one and the same.
# Donations and Steam
Steam doesn't have any of convenient options for donations. There are DLCs and in-app purchases, but no pay-what-you-want and no recurring payments built-in. Steam is also very restrictive with what you can and cannot link to on your store page. And this restrictive nature continues into what you can display within your games and apps published on Steam as well. Now, I can believe that there is a very good reason to be so demanding and full of constraints when you're the biggest digital marketplace for PC games on the planet. But it's still an incredibly powerful wakeup call compared to how relaxed and friendly itch.io is.
When I first submitted Bosca Ceoil Blue for a review by the Steam team, it bounced back with a note. It said that the reviewer had found a link inside of the app that was inciting out-of-platform donations to me, the developer. Indeed, earlier I released a new version of the app where a link to my Patreon was added. The link was labeled "Support the project <3", in pink letters, with a clickable Patreon URL printed next to it.
I was told that this was a big no-no, that I was soliciting donations, which was against the rules, and that I should instead set up something for users to pay directly through Steam instead.
Sidenote: they mistyped the URL because they never clicked on it, and the app uses a pixel font that has very similar "v" and "u".
To be completely honest, that left me feel vulnerable and my response was a bit of an emotional appeal to their humanity. I tried to explain what it is like to maintain a FOSS project and how important donations were for developers who choose to do so. I only vaguely mentioned that there were other FOSS projects on the platform which did the same thing as me. But in the hindsight, that should've been my main point. I asked for compassion instead, but compassion is not something the Steam team can offer when they have a script to follow.
So predictably, this didn't work.
Instead they were compelling me to follow the example of all those other devs who have set up a "donation" DLC. Heh... We will come back to it later!
This was where I actually presented a more robust argument. I knew that there had been other FOSS projects on Steam, and I knew for the fact that they were also "soliciting donations" with calls to action in no way different from mine. And I wasn't willing to give up, to remove the donation link from my app. So I laid out a juicy set of examples:
- Godot engine, https://store.steampowered.com/app/404790/Godot_Engine/, a FOSS tool, available on Steam without a price or donation options, has a call to action in the top "Help" menu, "Support Godot Development", which is a direct link to https://godotengine.org/donate/
- Blender, https://store.steampowered.com/app/365670/Blender/, a FOSS tool, available on Steam without a price or donation options, has a call to action in the "About Blender" popup, "Donate", which is a direct link to https://fund.blender.org/
- Krita, https://store.steampowered.com/app/280680/Krita/, a FOSS tool, available on Steam with an upfront purchase, has a mention of its development fund on the main screen, which is a direct link to https://fund.krita.org/; also has a call to action on the main screen, "Support Krita", which is a direct link to https://krita.org/en/donations/
This was what I wrote verbatim, with screenshots provided. I made an argument that there was no difference between these examples, and Bosca Ceoil Blue, and left it there, waiting for the reply.
At the same time, I was trying to anticipate what kind of argument would they make in response. And all I could think of was the fact that it was Patreon, and not some fancy "fund" page on my own website. I did find some mentions on the internet that Steam reviewers did in fact have a prejudice against platforms like Patreon. But I was also pretty sure that Godot, for example, had a Patreon link on its donation page for a long time while being published on Steam, and that didn't seem to be a problem. Granted, a big project like Godot or Blender can get in touch with someone in Valve more directly than a regular developer, but still. A precedent makes a very convincing argument.
So as I was waiting for the Steam team to get back in touch, I decided to go ahead and create a "fund" page for myself, right here on this website. It's there in the sidebar! wink wink At the same time I was also about to release a new patch for Bosca Ceoil Blue, so I updated the app to point to that address instead. To be clear, on that page you have both a Patreon link and an itch.io link, as recommended ways to offer a donation.
A couple of days had passed by the time the builds for the new version were ready. When they were, I uploaded them to Steam and resubmitted my application, to hurry things a bit. To my complete shock, within 30 minutes my builds were approved and everything was green. I received no response to my message, no explanation of what specifically was different then and what specifically is okay now. Their language made it certain that "soliciting donations" was a taboo, but then it wasn't if it wasn't a Patreon link?
Confused, but ultimately happy I then released Bosca Ceoil: The Blue Album on Steam, and decided to look into that donation DLC idea.
# The "donation" DLC
Earlier the ever-helpful support representative offered me a link to this search query for the word "donation", which yielded quite a few DLCs set up to act as a donations. Some were offering bonuses in return, even if superficial ones (like, "your name in the credits, but only you can see it"). But there were also others that offered nothing in return, clearly stating that this is only a donation which you are making willingly to support the devs.
That looked like the perfect fit for what I would want to have. As Bosca Ceoil Blue is a FOSS app, I don't have and don't plan to have any associated content that would be pay-gated. That's just a matter of principle. It doesn't mean that pay-gating your FOSS app isn't a valid option, of course. Krita, for example, is a free tool created by people behind the KDE project. You can't get any more open-source than that! But on Steam it is offered as a paid-for app. Aseprite, another good example, is provided for free only as source code. If you want to get a runnable binary, you can compile it yourself, or pay for it, both on and off Steam.
But that was not what I had decided for my project. So a pure donation DLC it had to be. Which I quickly set up and submitted for the closest release date available. And in about a day I received a rejection.
I argued back, but this time me linking a bunch of other projects didn't help. The support representative pointed out that this was an old practice which is no longer accepted. Even though those DLCs still exist on the platform and can be purchased, new DLCs must include some "value" for the customer. Why exactly old DLCs didn't need to be updated to introduce the same value I was not informed. Quite a disadvantage, huh?
And then there was one more thing that hit me straight to the heart. Their closing sentence. "It's important to reward your supporters with a little something". It is perhaps hard to appreciate how this can deeply hurt a FOSS developer. But try to imagine that you're creating something on your own, over the course of weeks and months and years, with one single goal — to let people have it, for free, with no obligations, no requirements or restrictions. You make something that anyone can enjoy, simply download and use. And just to offset the time investment a bit you ask if anyone willing would donate, but a person at a gate tells you that you still need to produce some kind of value for money to exchange hands.
Like the tool that you're offering isn't already in itself a value, provided for free. Like donation itself isn't an act of kindness and generosity that doesn't imply anything in return. It was really hard to let these words from a support representative to pass. I understand that they don't mean them like that. But they really shouldn't say that to anyone ever, going through this same process. Nobody deserves to read how important it is to reward supporters with something.
So in my response I had to dedicate a few paragraphs to how inappropriate that line was. They did apologize.
A curious example of a donation DLC for a game from a very recent time. The description says it's a pure donation, but there is a depot associated with it that looks like this. Huh.
But more crucially I made an inquiry into specific rules for content. Are there any specific rules? Do you have a link, and if this was a recent change, any announcement? Are there any thresholds for "contentness"? I mentioned the example with the username in credits. I also asked if it would count for me to include a "thank you" note in a text document. Or, if not, a "thank you" poem? Would an icon, 32x32 pixels large, count as artwork?
Basically, what are these very specific hoops for me to jump through? Alas, there is nothing concrete that they can link to or describe. I am alone in charge of defining the content, the amount and the quality, and as long as the product page is clear and honest about it, it should be fine. But it cannot be nothing. They continued to call it a "donation" DLC throughout, even though it is at this point by no means a donation.
So I opted for a poem. A genuine 4-line poem of appreciation for whoever decides to donate. It's not much, but here, I'm releasing it in public domain for everyone to use:
No deed too small to help a stranger —
We push as one to tip the scales!
Our humble thanks for gift that made you.
Your heart inspires us for days!
I can confirm that this does count as content, the "donation" DLC is currently live! I did get one last excitement before that, though.
When I submitted this change, the DLC was once again rejected, with the same canned description of the issue. I asked what for, and thankfully it was just a minor screw up which they fixed without any further confrontation. I guess the reviewer didn't notice the change. But you have to consider that every time you get a response from the support, it's going to be another day or more before they'll be able to talk to you again. Even if you yourself reply within 5-10 minutes of receiving their message. Your ticket drops to the bottom of the pile once it is processed. So you have to sit with this confusion, uncertainty, and stress for the next 24 hours.
# Steam can do better
I didn't make my life easier trying to publish a FOSS application on a gaming marketplace. But it's also not an unprecedented situation. It just doesn't seem like Valve has any workflow that understands the realities of FOSS development, the needs of open-source developers. There is also no clarity about some of the rules applied, no documentation or guidelines for some of the requirements which the Steam team enforces adamantly. You can never be sure if it's not just an overzealous worker, and not an actual rule. If it's not just an mistake, and not a normal practice.
And some of the canned language can definitely benefit from a humanizing pass. Still, Valve's communication is way better than Tax Identity's!
# The legal stuff
Wait, did you think the article was over? The donations part is, but remember how I mentioned before that donations haven't been the first issue, chronologically? Yeah, so Bosca Ceoil Blue was released on Steam on March 24th. Which is quite a far away date if you consider that I've started my journey in early January, and I've actually had a complete and working project by then.
That is because I couldn't get registered on Steam for almost 2 months.
# A sole proprietor in Europe
I'm but a one man, and as a but-one man I practice my craft as a sole proprietorship. A sole proprietorship is a form of business where your individual entity becomes a business entity. It basically allows you, the human, to act as a legal entity where a business is expected by law. Say, you can open a business bank account. You can make deals as a business. You can even hire people as employees. It's the simplest form of operating before you're considering a limited liability company.
And it is present in my places around the world. I currently live in Serbia, but this type of business organization is commonplace pretty much everywhere in Europe. Your favorite content creator or solo game developer is likely one.
A photo of your favorite content creator, maybe?
One of the features of the sole proprietorship is that your legal entity may have a distinct name. It doesn't have to be your individual name, and in some jurisdictions it (normally) can't be your individual name, in fact. I've had a sole proprietorship license in two countries so far, and in both I wasn't really given a choice of my legal name. (To be clear, in Serbia a lawyer submitted appropriate forms for me; I do not know how much control over the name there is in practice; in another country the name is standardized in a particular way.)
And why am I fixating on the name so much? That was the crux of the problem with my Steam partner registration. And it might still be a problem for me in the future when Steam pays me out. You see, Valve is an American company, and it has no business entities in other parts of the world. That is despite being filthy rich and Steam being accessible worldwide. And in the US a sole proprietor can only have a legal name that matches their individual name. If I'm Yuri Sizov (which I most certainly am), then this would be the name of me as a sole proprietorship as well.
But legally this isn't true for me. My sole proprietorship is called by another name (which includes my individual name), and that is the entity that pays taxes, and that is the entity that hold the business bank account. That is the entity that should be signing with Valve. In fact, Valve makes it very very clear in their instructions that as your Steam partner legal name you must enter the name on the tax papers and the name of the bank account holder. They MUST match, Valve says explicitly in every piece of related documentation.
And as far as the legal name and the bank details go, Valve couldn't really care less what exactly you enter. The issues manifest during the tax interview, conducted by Tax Identity. A company that you should be familiar with if you've ever done business with any US-based digital platform, like itch.io or Patreon. They are everywhere!
# Tax Identity vs the world
In that Tax Identity interview form you are asked to specify whether you're a sole proprietor, a one-man LLC, or a company. And option A, the one that I obviously pick for myself, blocks you from editing your name. There are other names which, if you follow instructions, can expand on your individual name and doing-business-as names. But the main name remains locked to the name of your Steam partner account.
And that fails the interview, because you end up with a W8-BEN form that is for an individual, but the name on the form is of a legal entity. Why is the name not editable? Because either Valve or Tax Identity says so. Is there any legal reason for this? I wouldn't be able to tell you! There is that thing that made everything worse and extended my suffering trying to figure out the root cause by weeks.
Absolutely incomprehensible support at Tax Identity. You communicate with them using emails, you never know what the status of your interview or ticket is. You ask questions and provide explicit details, asking for guidance, and all you receive is emails like this which are terse, lacking any acknowledgement of your statements, clearly copy-pasted together from various places, explain nothing, and signed by 0, 1, or 2 different names. At no point is there a sense that you're talking to an actual human being, and its impossible to get any concrete answer, or, you know, to receive support, despite waiting several days each time.
I explained that my legal entity name was not my individual name, so I couldn't do that, because that would be a lie on a legal form; they never acknowledged any of my statements.
It took weeks, during which one of their representative promised to include "Valve Finance" in the conversation, then nothing happened, then I sent a request for an updated and received an automatic response indicating that my original ticket was automatically closed and a new ticket was now created. It's so nice to be in such caring hands when you're in a tough spot.
Finally I contacted Steam support, and matters became clearer. But the solution wasn't clear at all:
- If I use the name of my business, that would be legally correct, that would allow me to input valid bank details for payouts, but that didn't work for Tax Identity.
- If I use my individual, human name, then Tax Identity would likely be finally happy, but I won't be able to provide valid bank details.
Now, the name of the bank owner is not a critical piece of information for a wire transaction, but it can also create problems for me, way later down the line. I would have no way to test if it works until after I receive some money on Steam and Valve initiates a payout. Something which I wasn't expecting to happen for months yet, for my FOSS app.
I tried to research the problem back in January, and managed to find this Reddit discussion where a person from Netherlands faced a similar conundrum. The post is dated January 2024, a year before me, with another commenter suggesting that this requirement first appeared about a year prior. And, indeed, "appeared", as prior to that you could change the name in the tax interview form, so there was no strict requirement for all 3 names to match. That would've been perfect for me, and those other Europeans.
But it wasn't allowed anymore. One person mentioned that Steam support helped them retain their bank details that didn't match the other name. The chances of this were slim from my discussion with the support team. Another person confirmed with the bank that using a wrong name wouldn't jeopardize the transaction, though there was no updated from them whether this was the option that they ultimately picked. But that seemed like the only reasonable way forward for me. So that's what I gambled with. I used my human name everywhere, and now I have no idea if I can actually receive payouts from Steam.
And if you're a solo developer like me, and you're not from the US, this is something you must figure out for yourself as well. Especially if you're a FOSS maintainer, who may very much need that donation money collected by Steam. But it's probably better to use some external service, you just can't make it obvious that you do.
# Now we're done
Thank you all for reading! Please use my experience as a guide for what you can expect when becoming a developer on Steam. If it helps you on your journey, then all my blood has not boiled for nothing.
Cheers!
Loading comments and feedback...