this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

Steam

10232 readers
3 users here now

Steam is a video game digital distribution service by Valve.

Steam News | Steam Beta Client news

Useful tools:
SteamDB
SteamCharts
Issue tracker for Linux version of Steam

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (2 children)

It matters if people are captive consumers of the product. It does not matter if they can simply stop using the product with no ill consequences.

The same goes for movies, TV, music. You can simply stop buying these commercially with no ill effect.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Wrong. There is an "ill consequences" effect added to this. For most consumer media (games, TV, music, etc) there are very few options. You either get most of what you want by surrendering to the bullshit scummy practices of the few huge ones, or choose to cut the options dramatically by moving over to some platform that's all but doomed to fail or be purchased by the "huge ones". There is one third option, do not consume anything. There's you "ill consequence" right there.

Take electricity or communications, for example. I have yet to see one of those companies that does not work exclusively on predatory practices. If you know of any, please, enlighten us. Fine, go live in a cave without electricity and/or communication in this day and age. You won't, you're using a device that you paid for, which uses electricity that you paid for and a connection to be able to transfer these hits of data, that you also paid for. Guess what, like the rest of us, you're a captive consumer as well. You're welcome.

Again, valve is a corporation, their function, before anything else, is to be viable, and the only way to achieve this, at least that I'm aware, is making money.

Very few of the comments here actually defend the 30% cut, which is the main subject of the whole thread (fully deviated from the OP post, granted). But the fact remains that Valve is, and has been (nobody knows about the future, so no "will be") the one consumer media distributor with the best rap across the board, because they do bring a lot of added value with their offering, to both sides of the gaming industry (devs and consumers).

Make no mistake, they are after our money like every other business out there is, they just have been wise enough to build trust among it's stakeholders (not to be confused with "stockholders", just in case).

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

@jjlinux @dudinax Valve made it super easy for users to play games on Linux!
I'm a Linux user since 1998; that is enough for me to support Steam/Valve, just so I won't need to dual-boot bullshit!
I buy it all on Steam, have my library of games concentrated on Steam, and I can play like 90% of em on Linux! Good enough for me!
I give em some money, same way I donate for the Debian distro...

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago

Yup. I'm not a Dev, so I can't tell what their panorama looks like, I believe 30% of anything is hefty, but I also know that Steam has a platform and perks so solid that they don't have to worry about competition, since evidently no other consumer media distributor is willing to follow Valve's business model. Having said that, from a consumer point of view, I challenge anyone to show me a more beneficial platform than Steam.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

You can’t possibly believe that (in particular) developers and (to a lesser degree) users aren’t captured by Steam when Steam controls over 90% of the PC market. If a developer doesn’t release on Steam they may as well not release at all unless you want everyone to go to consoles.

You are giving valve a pass because currently their interests align largely with ours.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I don't like Valve. I don't like the non-ownership model of game distribution.

Users aren't captured at all, since none of them need to purchase video games. Game developers may be captured by Valve, but game developers aren't producing anything of importance.

I'm for legal restrictions on industry practice that are predatory towards the users, but there's no need to protect the industry itself from control by Valve, since nothing important is being controlled.

Valve also can't control the gaming industry if they don't control the OS gamers use. They may be trying to control the OS, but they haven't done it yet. Until then, they can't prevent users from installing games outside of Steam. If Developers are locked in to Steam, it's because users buy games in Steam and refuse to buy games outside of Steam. The users behave this way because Steam provides lots of value to them.

If Steam starts to abuse users instead of serving them, there's nothing stopping them from purchasing games some other way.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You can’t argue about this while also saying none of this matters. Again, it’s a massive media industry. You can’t just hand wave it away.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm not arguing none of this matters.

This is what I'm arguing: if Valve had control of the gaming industry, which it doesn't yet but might later, it would matter so little that we'd need no public policy to address it. Anyone who isn't in the industry needn't concern themselves about it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago

This is some pretty interesting mental gymnastics and I’m kind of tired of spending my weekend unpacking it. Have a good one.