To me, the amount of excusing from the gamer community is incredible. Stuff like “they’re not a monopoly because they’re ethical and I like Steam.”
They are, in fact, a growing pseudo monopoly. They take anticompetitive measures, with their APIs and storefront policies (like dictating pricing on other stores). Set aside the 30% cut, and no, it’s mostly not enshittified on the consumer side…
Yet.
How can people type that out on Reddit + Windows 11, or on their phones, with spam and ads in their face, without seeing the future danger? The irony is tremendous.
Don’t mistake me, I like Valve and the storefront they’ve run so far. I happily use it. But I don’t trust them as far as I can throw them, and am waiting for the shoe to drop.
As far as I am aware, they only dictate the pricing of Steam keys on other stores. That seems fair to me, because they are doing the distribution in that case. Games that are on Steam can be cheaper elsewhere if they’re distributed separately.
That being said, I totally agree that they’re a monopoly based on their market power.
What I’ve read is that devs can’t price games lower than Steam on a non-Steam storefront that doesn’t use Steam keys.
For instance, if a dev has their own little DRM free store page where they sell DRM free downloads, they can’t take the 30% fee off their own store (reflecting what they’d actually make) without risking being delisted.
Maybe it’s an OCD thing, but this bothers me as a consumer. I could pay the same price for, say, Rimworld from Ludeon or from Steam, but Ludeon would get significantly less from the Steam sale.
It’s also anti competitive. For example, it means some other storefront with a lower fee can’t use that as a pricing advantage.
…It’s not a massive issue now. In practice, most little devs just sell Steam keys, and most publishers want to maintain pricing parity (outside of sales) for consistency.
I don’t know what you’re expecting. Publishers don’t put every game on GoG and all the publisher run stores are very anti consumer, or they’re EGS which will definitely turn anti consumer the second they think they’ve got the market share. Where are you wanting people to buy their games?
Wow stunning argument. I was going to sit here and trust my eyes. But the depths of rhetorical Flair you have just expressed have rendered me powerless to argue.
They have the largest share and can direct the market/development, no question, but they not a monopoly. I think GOG has a good shot to complete as time carries on. At least while Gabe is still alive, they’ve been relatively ethical. If the choice of largest developer platform is between Steam and companies like Epic, EA, or Microsoft, Steam still looks like a better alternative.
There’s a difference between being feature-rich and popular and being a monopoly. Call me when Steam is buying competing stores to shut them down. Now, in terms of PC gaming monopolies, let me introduce you to “Microsoft”.
Seriously. Part of the reason they’re even so popular is because they aren’t actively pursuing profit maxxing/enshittification business practices to corner the market and consolidate market share like every other one of these blood sucking cretins. They really are one of the extremely short list of corporations that ACTUALLY win in the marketplace because their product really is just that good. Running the steam deck with Linux, contributing to the development of Wine/Proton, and telling Microsoft to kick rocks has made me a Gaben fanboy for life. If Steam was the ONLY way you could purchase PC games, I’d honestly be fine with that, as long as Valve remains a private company under the iron fist of Mister Newell.
The difference is that Steam is not a public company. While they have done some problematic things, everything they have done has been to benefit the customers.
Plenty of stores dictate the price on other stores. The idea is just to keep pricing consistent across the board. Why would one store list a product and help advertise it when they know they aren’t going to sell much of because it’s cheaper elsewhere.
Physical items have some leeway in that as stores can mark things down, but digital items are the same regardless of where you get it from, and when it comes to steam if a store is selling a steam key Valve does not take the 30%, meaning they get nothing out of a key sold elsewhere and will sell less copies themselves if the other keys are cheaper.
On that 30%, I remember articles coming out when steam was gaining traction that showed how little it was compared to physical stores. When you combined creating the physical game, shipping, and store cut developers were lucky to get 50% of the game cost. And that didn’t count GameStop pushing preowned for $2 less that the dev didn’t get any cut of.
They have reversed a lot of things that the customers pushed back on as well.
As long as GabeN is in charge I don’t think they will go public and become shit. Apparently his son is poised to take over when he retires or passes and is in the same mindset of this father, but time will tell.
Valve got to where it is specifically by playing the long game and looking forward while putting the customer first. The efforts they made for VR and the Steam Deck would not have happened in any other company.
They aren’t buying small studios to crush them like all the rest are.
Plenty of stores dictate the price on other stores.
…How is this okay?!
Let’s put it another way. What if Walmart upcharged for some product, and told the manufacturer “if you don’t raise prices at every other store, we might pull your brand.”
They have no choice if Walmart is the majority of their marketshare.
What if Amazon did this? Or EGS, if they had 75% market share?
…Yes, it’s a massive improvement over physical retail. Does that mean 30% across the board is okay? And what about the factor of most devs getting crowded out by a much larger selection, now?
…And plenty of private companies are anti consumer. Some get worse going private. That’s no guarantee.
Look, Steam is incredible in many ways. One massively understated thing is Valve’s attempts to keep the store tagged an organized, which is a enormous boon to “niche” games and gamers, as opposed to spammy, unsorted messes like the iOS/Android App Stores or Amazon. It’s clear they actually care about their consumers and sellers, and their long term experience, and the actual quality of their store.
…But I still do not trust one company with an entire sector. I want GoG, or Itch, or hell, even EGS to still have some market share in whatever niches work for them, in case Steam starts to enshittify.
Reward corporations for good behavior. Don’t trust them.
To me, the amount of excusing from the gamer community is incredible. Stuff like “they’re not a monopoly because they’re ethical and I like Steam.”
They are, in fact, a growing pseudo monopoly. They take anticompetitive measures, with their APIs and storefront policies (like dictating pricing on other stores). Set aside the 30% cut, and no, it’s mostly not enshittified on the consumer side…
Yet.
How can people type that out on Reddit + Windows 11, or on their phones, with spam and ads in their face, without seeing the future danger? The irony is tremendous.
Don’t mistake me, I like Valve and the storefront they’ve run so far. I happily use it. But I don’t trust them as far as I can throw them, and am waiting for the shoe to drop.
As far as I am aware, they only dictate the pricing of Steam keys on other stores. That seems fair to me, because they are doing the distribution in that case. Games that are on Steam can be cheaper elsewhere if they’re distributed separately.
That being said, I totally agree that they’re a monopoly based on their market power.
What I’ve read is that devs can’t price games lower than Steam on a non-Steam storefront that doesn’t use Steam keys.
For instance, if a dev has their own little DRM free store page where they sell DRM free downloads, they can’t take the 30% fee off their own store (reflecting what they’d actually make) without risking being delisted.
Maybe it’s an OCD thing, but this bothers me as a consumer. I could pay the same price for, say, Rimworld from Ludeon or from Steam, but Ludeon would get significantly less from the Steam sale.
It’s also anti competitive. For example, it means some other storefront with a lower fee can’t use that as a pricing advantage.
…It’s not a massive issue now. In practice, most little devs just sell Steam keys, and most publishers want to maintain pricing parity (outside of sales) for consistency.
I don’t know what you’re expecting. Publishers don’t put every game on GoG and all the publisher run stores are very anti consumer, or they’re EGS which will definitely turn anti consumer the second they think they’ve got the market share. Where are you wanting people to buy their games?
I want them available and Itch and GoG or publisher stores or elsewhere, basically anything but one store unless they need Steam for API features.
I want Steam to not have so much marketshare they can dictate prices to other stores.
The status quo right now is okay, but I don’t like the direction it’s heading, where other stores may not even keep their heads above water.
This seems to be suggesting that a large portion of games is only published to steam, which I don’t think is the case?
Except it literally is, per the article?
Well, this is publishers complaining. Maybe they should publish on other platforms. I don’t know what they expect to happen lol
Who said anything resembling “they’re not a monopoly because they’re ethical and I like Steam.”?
Like half the comments on this thread are absolutely in that vein.
No they aren’t.
Wow stunning argument. I was going to sit here and trust my eyes. But the depths of rhetorical Flair you have just expressed have rendered me powerless to argue.
Yeah, it’s about as stunning as yours.
The comment threads above mine?
I typed this out before I saw them, not expecting much of that on Lemmy (being a enshittification refuge and all).
No they don’t
Not a single one of those are saying anything close to what you claimed…
Friend, I don’t know what more you could want. That’s… pretty similar.
They didn’t say they don’t have a monopoly because they are ethical. They said they don’t have a monopoly and also that they are ethical.
The fact that you have to cherry pick and misrepresent context to try and save face is pretty pathetic TBH.
The difference is that Steam is not a public company. While they have done some problematic things, everything they have done has been to benefit the customers.
Plenty of stores dictate the price on other stores. The idea is just to keep pricing consistent across the board. Why would one store list a product and help advertise it when they know they aren’t going to sell much of because it’s cheaper elsewhere.
Physical items have some leeway in that as stores can mark things down, but digital items are the same regardless of where you get it from, and when it comes to steam if a store is selling a steam key Valve does not take the 30%, meaning they get nothing out of a key sold elsewhere and will sell less copies themselves if the other keys are cheaper.
On that 30%, I remember articles coming out when steam was gaining traction that showed how little it was compared to physical stores. When you combined creating the physical game, shipping, and store cut developers were lucky to get 50% of the game cost. And that didn’t count GameStop pushing preowned for $2 less that the dev didn’t get any cut of.
They have reversed a lot of things that the customers pushed back on as well.
As long as GabeN is in charge I don’t think they will go public and become shit. Apparently his son is poised to take over when he retires or passes and is in the same mindset of this father, but time will tell.
Valve got to where it is specifically by playing the long game and looking forward while putting the customer first. The efforts they made for VR and the Steam Deck would not have happened in any other company.
They aren’t buying small studios to crush them like all the rest are.
…How is this okay?!
Let’s put it another way. What if Walmart upcharged for some product, and told the manufacturer “if you don’t raise prices at every other store, we might pull your brand.”
They have no choice if Walmart is the majority of their marketshare.
What if Amazon did this? Or EGS, if they had 75% market share?
…Yes, it’s a massive improvement over physical retail. Does that mean 30% across the board is okay? And what about the factor of most devs getting crowded out by a much larger selection, now?
…And plenty of private companies are anti consumer. Some get worse going private. That’s no guarantee.
Look, Steam is incredible in many ways. One massively understated thing is Valve’s attempts to keep the store tagged an organized, which is a enormous boon to “niche” games and gamers, as opposed to spammy, unsorted messes like the iOS/Android App Stores or Amazon. It’s clear they actually care about their consumers and sellers, and their long term experience, and the actual quality of their store.
…But I still do not trust one company with an entire sector. I want GoG, or Itch, or hell, even EGS to still have some market share in whatever niches work for them, in case Steam starts to enshittify.
Reward corporations for good behavior. Don’t trust them.
Amazon does do that, and people hate it for it. Lemmings just seem to suddenly go blind when dealing with Valve’s shitty practices.