One of the only good stores is suddenly the asshole but not because they did something wrong, its because everyone else sucks.
Fuck that. They aren’t responsible for other’s failures. GOG and itch.io are around and doing fine and aren’t hated, if GOG would finally make a Linux GOG Galaxy without having to go through troublesome third Party tinkering (compared to steam) it would be a great competitor. But Epic and the other “stores” just suck ass lack features lack community lack privacy and generally suck ass. That’s not valves fault.
if GOG would finally make a Linux GOG Galaxy without having to go through troublesome third Party tinkering (compared to steam) it would be a great competitor.
I still think this is a huge blunder by GOG. There has to be a very significant overlap in the user base of DRM free software and Linux.
At least Heroic has matured very well and GOG partnered up with them so something is moving.
By far not enough sadly, and they could literally just integrate proton into a store that runs on Linux, proton is open source (besides some steam API stuff).
Its not hard and them not doing it shows how little CDPR actually cares about GOG, its either running or not they don’t really give a fuck. And for that it works good all things considered.
CDPR aren’t gamers’ friends. Look at the transphobia controversy. Look at promising no crunch and then crunching anyway. CDPR are the “how do you do fellow kids” of the gaming industry. Everything they put out is greenwashed garbage.
“They have a monopoly” doesn’t mean they’re the asshole.
But they still have a monopoly.
People get so fucking weird trying to deny this. They insist there’s good reasons none of their competitors matter, when the question was, do their competitors matter. They proudly state they never consider buying from anywhere else… end of thought. No amount of explanation for why they’re the PC gaming store will change that they are the PC gaming store. But the label doesn’t mean it’s their fault. The label means, it is so.
I think there’s a difference between them being a good company for customers and them being a digital fief. Similar to how Amazon could be seen as a “good” company by customers (return policy, cheap stuff, etc), but they essentially own an entire marketplace and decides who sells products, and extracts rents from people who are making good innovative stuff. Steam is the same way.
Of course, Valve doesn’t have the mistreatment of employees Amazon does. They have no internal hierarchy, which is cool and I imagine means less management involvement. Their president seems to just want to make gamers happy, and thats great too.
Theyre an anomaly in the business world because they’re seemingly a great company that doesn’t follow monetization trends, while still being hugely financially successful. But they still extract rents from videogame makers, so leftists see that as a black eye.
Agree with most you say. Just two things
Steam doesn’t own the market place, as said, gog and itch.io do their stuff, epic is also there (nobody with a brain likes them but they still have a share) and then a publisher could just make a website for their game, Minecraft for example.
They don’t decide either, the algorithms within steam work very clearly and their seasonal sales are from my knollage open sign up for the devs and publishers. The player specific feeds also work according to tags, play a lot of builder games recently? Steam recommends similar games you might like, sometimes mixes between tags you haven’t played like that.
In reality it’s almost exclusively up to the devs/publishers and the players what gets sold steam does push indie stuff a little more in recent years but I don’t see the downside of that.
And secondly.
“Leftist” real left people would be happy that steam is how it is and would bring constructive criticism. The people screaming Steam bad, are the same people that scream everything else when they get cloud from it.
I see what you’re getting at, and I agree to an extent. Steam doesn’t own the whole marketplace, but they do own their whole marketplace, which is the biggest. So I think the issue for leftists that I’m referring to is the rents aspect – profiting off of the value of other people’s work.
You could argue steam adds some value to accessing games in one place, or that they need to be able to maintain their servers in order to maintain efficient distribution for publishers. But in terms of classical economics Steam doesn’t produce a product, I think it’s arguable they provide a service, and I think their capital is mostly a product of their ownership of cloud capital. When a company makes money based mostly on the ownership of an asset, be it land or machinery or computers, that’s where leftists take umbrage. Not liberals or Democrats necessarily, just leftists.
But that all said I still like Steam and Valve overall.
Until any competing store releases a Linux client, I can’t really argue against Steam. They are a gatekeeper and almost a monopoly, but they’re also the most benevolent and pro-consumer gatekeeper that we have in the PC gaming distribution space. As long as all the competition continue to be Windows-only and, in some cases, actively work against Linux users, I don’t want Valve’s digital fiefdom to fall.
I’m not sure “gatekeepr” is the right term when all you do is simply being better for your customers than anyone else. Like, Ubisoft, EA, Epic, they all are garbage companies. GOG is the only store I’d mildly consider (ignoring tiny indie ones like Itch here), but they also have 0 interest in Linux support, which is where they lose me. Without Valve, Linux gaming would not be where it is today, and as a Linux user that is already like 85% of my decision making being done in favor of Valve - with the remaining 15% not all strictly being in another camp either. If someone wants to challenge that monopoly, they’d have to do something better than forcing exclusives or luring with “free” games, because that’s some shady shit that makes me just want to stay away even more.
Valve isn’t perfect though. Especially when it comes to owning games. I couldn’t use Asprite on my laptop on my schools wifi because it couldn’t verify that I own a 1gb program to draw pixels. Disabling wifi didn’t help either. Still made up it’s mind on not letting me make sprites for my school assignment till I connected it to my home wifi.
The best part? There’s literally a free version that’s not on steam that I purposely didn’t download because I wanted to support the dev!
How are they a gatekeeper? Near monopoly sure. But they don’t force companies to only publish on Steam. They don’t have restrictive rules. I’m not sure what gate they are keeping.
If you reeeeally want to stretch, they do have rules about pricing things lower on other platforms. Like, you can have a sale on your website that makes it cheaper than Steam, but can’t have the base price cheaper there than on Steam. That’s about it.
Valve is interesting. Enshitification is the standard for something like social media. Corporations are the real customer and users do creative labor to keep it valuable.
Valve flips the script. Developers struggle because they are only expected to labor. Studios don’t get the full value of their labor. They might be a huge corporation but they are a worker to valve
When a monopoly is faced with a smaller, more efficient competitor, they cut prices to keep people from switching, or buy the new competitor, make themselves more efficient, and increase profits.
When Steam was faced with smaller competition that charged lower prices, they did - nothing. They’re not the leader because of a trick, or clever marketing, but because they give both publishers and gamers a huge stack of things they want.
Sure, Steam seems fairly okay, especially their Linux support, but I still mostly prefer GOG, wherever possible, because it offers more control to their customer over the product they bought.
It helps that Valve is not publicly traded, but I fear that if the current owner (Gabe Newell) dies, there might be a shift in business practices.
Enshittification can still happen in privately traded/owned companies, it generally happens slower and in case there are other reason for the owner(s) to maximize short term profits (e.g. business built on VC money), it can happen faster.
Gog support sucks tbh. Steam refunds everything no questions asked. Bought elden ring on gog, wrong region, couldn’t activate it back home. They told me to suck it. Fuck gog
In what region is Elden Ring available on GOG?
Gog is also much easier to deal with via a VPN. I bought some region locked games easily doing that and could play them anywhere, because they are DRM-free. Steam is much more difficult, because each account belongs to a specific region. Moving accounts means you have to have an bank account and address in different countries, so easy for rich people, more difficult for ordinary folks.
So more-efficient competitors emerged against the supermajority market leader and didn’t impact that company’s market share.
Hmm.
Thats not what they said, “More efficient” didn’t happen.
Just either a wildly more toxic environment with Epic, or a cheaper but much less user friendly one with GOG.
Steam didn’t need to change because neither of the competition understand the market.
Steam didn’t need to change because none of their competitors challenge their de facto monopoly. Reasons do not change how it is plainly a monopoly. They have a supermajority market share, and people glibly admit, they don’t even consider buying games except on Steam.
This is just silly, is this dev just a salty b?
I may not like some parts of steam (like its ui) but I’d say gaben showed us how a big company should always be run.
They don’t buy out anyone (hello epic) they made many proconsuner moves and they are funding alternatives like proton without any guarantee of return.
Your shit doesn’t sell without steam not because its YouTube and holding everything and everyone hostage, but because everything else is just that much worse.
If you wanna shoot yourself in the foot go ahead but don’t complain nobody is is helping with it.
Digital fiefdoms like who, you ask, as if you don’t already know the answer? “Valve is the most egregious example,” says Gavrilović. He hopes for a future where devs, not digital feudal lords, have more power, “but I lack the imagination to envision the replacement of Valve with a community owned alternative. That ‘winter castle’ will not fall as easily, but we should at least start openly discussing alternatives.”
Make an opensource game store that’s owned by a non-profit and paid for by the game studios that want to sell on it, giving them a say on how things should run.
