5 ms·

Considering Valve is private, it's very impressive what Gaben has accomplished (and everyone who works there).

by iamricks 5y ago

2pEXgD0fZ5cF 5y ago
I doubt Valve would've achieved these things if it wasn't private.
regnerba 5y ago
Why does them being private make what they have done impressive?
- snowgrove 5y ago
  They did it all without outside investors or stock sales.
  - toyg 5y ago
    Well, technically speaking we don't know if there are any outside investors. We only know Newell still holds most of the stock and controls it, and that significant chunks are owned by past and current employees.
- vietvu 5y ago
  Money. By being private, they might have the freedom to do whatever they see fit, but without money, it must be tough sometimes.
  - chrisseaton 5y ago
    > but without money They do have money. They made tons from Half-Life etc. Then they now have a huge continual income stream from Steam.
    - Ekaros 5y ago
      And I believe the amount the made from Half-Lifes is peanuts compared to amount they are making with TF2, CS:GO and Dota 2...
      - selfhoster11 5y ago
        Not to mention all the fees they earn as an intermediary to buying ~every modern PC game.
      - usrusr 5y ago
        Obviously. The point was that earnings from half-life were effectively the stand-in for investor capital. And I'd wager that even with all that money, or ten times as much, Steam would not have been able to establish itself without hl2 as a tool/vector. It's been almost two decades that we haven't seen a single steam copycat that did not try to ride a flagship game release in exactly the same way (unless you consider GoG or humble as steam copycats, or Playstore and whatever itms is called these days)
  - alexb_ 5y ago
    Steam is a money printing machine, I don't think they have a money problem
    - snowgrove 5y ago
      Valve predates Steam by a number of years, and Steam wasn’t always in the dominant position it’s in now.
      - selfhoster11 5y ago
        Yes, and now we are living in a reality where Steam has taken over ~all meaningful, non-niche digital PC games distribution. They got into a monopolistic position during a small time window of inflection where the market was transitioning from physical to digital distribution. It's meaningless to talk about the past in these circumstances, unless something truly drastic happens to open another such window to let someone displace Steam. Heck, Microsoft followed exactly the same trajectory some years earlier, to the extent that their operating system is still synonymous with the idea of a desktop PC outside of the US (which I understand leans heavily towards the Mac, somehow). Their position is showing signs of crumbling only after multiple years of neglect and outright self-damage to their OS. The stability of a monopolist position locked in early is sometimes greatly understated.
        snowgrove 5y ago
        You’ve flown far beyond the original comment’s context, which was Valve’s entire history from way before there was Steam. I don’t know whose point you think you’re responding to.
  - kroltan 5y ago
    It hasn't been tough since they made Steam. In fact, the biggest productivity issue at Valve seems to be exactly due to the fact that they don't _really_ need to do anything beyond maintaining Steam as the primary intermediary for computer games.
alexb_ 5y ago
Valve is probably only able to do all this stuff BECAUSE it is private. Public companies are concerned more with what pushes up numbers for 1 quarter and keeps shareholders happy than anything else.
- azemetre 5y ago
  Well that and literally owning the money printing machine known as Steam (a gaming marketplace where you can not only buy games, but sell skins, avatars, and other pictures for your profile; Valve takes their cut in every transaction). I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Valve generates multiple billions+ in revenue annually.
  - usrusr 5y ago
    Right. And if it was publicly traded, the share price would quickly rise to a point where anything less then 10x those billions would make the stock a bad investment, forcing late-buyers to push leadership into making that 10x real. Rinse and repeat.
- Karsteski 5y ago
  As long as Valve remains a private company I will trust them to do a good job over pretty much every other gaming-related company. Publicly traded companies are just fundamentally unable to be anything other than pure-profit driven, while the reverse is not true for private companies. Still profit driven, but not forced to have that sole focus.
goda90 5y ago
I'd argue being private is the only reason Valve has accomplished what it has accomplished. If they had to answer to non-gamer shareholders, they'd have not done a lot of things that have made gamers happy, but looked risky initially.
- moffkalast 5y ago
  On the other hand, making Artifact was a very shareholder style move of them. Such an utter cashgrab it's was actually disgusting.
  - account42 5y ago
    Valve has also played a major role in normalizing DRM, microtransactions and lootboxes. They definitely do have the capacity for shady shit even if they are "better" than some of the competition.

Considering Valve is private, it's very impressive what Gaben has accomplished (and everyone who works there).

2pEXgD0fZ5cF 5y ago

I doubt Valve would've achieved these things if it wasn't private.

regnerba 5y ago

Why does them being private make what they have done impressive?

snowgrove 5y ago
They did it all without outside investors or stock sales.
- toyg 5y ago
  Well, technically speaking we don't know if there are any outside investors. We only know Newell still holds most of the stock and controls it, and that significant chunks are owned by past and current employees.
vietvu 5y ago
Money. By being private, they might have the freedom to do whatever they see fit, but without money, it must be tough sometimes.
- chrisseaton 5y ago
  > but without money They do have money. They made tons from Half-Life etc. Then they now have a huge continual income stream from Steam.
  - Ekaros 5y ago
    And I believe the amount the made from Half-Lifes is peanuts compared to amount they are making with TF2, CS:GO and Dota 2...
    - selfhoster11 5y ago
      Not to mention all the fees they earn as an intermediary to buying ~every modern PC game.
    - usrusr 5y ago
      Obviously. The point was that earnings from half-life were effectively the stand-in for investor capital. And I'd wager that even with all that money, or ten times as much, Steam would not have been able to establish itself without hl2 as a tool/vector. It's been almost two decades that we haven't seen a single steam copycat that did not try to ride a flagship game release in exactly the same way (unless you consider GoG or humble as steam copycats, or Playstore and whatever itms is called these days)
- alexb_ 5y ago
  Steam is a money printing machine, I don't think they have a money problem
  - snowgrove 5y ago
    Valve predates Steam by a number of years, and Steam wasn’t always in the dominant position it’s in now.
    - selfhoster11 5y ago
      Yes, and now we are living in a reality where Steam has taken over ~all meaningful, non-niche digital PC games distribution. They got into a monopolistic position during a small time window of inflection where the market was transitioning from physical to digital distribution. It's meaningless to talk about the past in these circumstances, unless something truly drastic happens to open another such window to let someone displace Steam. Heck, Microsoft followed exactly the same trajectory some years earlier, to the extent that their operating system is still synonymous with the idea of a desktop PC outside of the US (which I understand leans heavily towards the Mac, somehow). Their position is showing signs of crumbling only after multiple years of neglect and outright self-damage to their OS. The stability of a monopolist position locked in early is sometimes greatly understated.
      - snowgrove 5y ago
        You’ve flown far beyond the original comment’s context, which was Valve’s entire history from way before there was Steam. I don’t know whose point you think you’re responding to.
- kroltan 5y ago
  It hasn't been tough since they made Steam. In fact, the biggest productivity issue at Valve seems to be exactly due to the fact that they don't _really_ need to do anything beyond maintaining Steam as the primary intermediary for computer games.

alexb_ 5y ago

Valve is probably only able to do all this stuff BECAUSE it is private. Public companies are concerned more with what pushes up numbers for 1 quarter and keeps shareholders happy than anything else.

azemetre 5y ago
Well that and literally owning the money printing machine known as Steam (a gaming marketplace where you can not only buy games, but sell skins, avatars, and other pictures for your profile; Valve takes their cut in every transaction). I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Valve generates multiple billions+ in revenue annually.
- usrusr 5y ago
  Right. And if it was publicly traded, the share price would quickly rise to a point where anything less then 10x those billions would make the stock a bad investment, forcing late-buyers to push leadership into making that 10x real. Rinse and repeat.
Karsteski 5y ago
As long as Valve remains a private company I will trust them to do a good job over pretty much every other gaming-related company. Publicly traded companies are just fundamentally unable to be anything other than pure-profit driven, while the reverse is not true for private companies. Still profit driven, but not forced to have that sole focus.

goda90 5y ago

I'd argue being private is the only reason Valve has accomplished what it has accomplished. If they had to answer to non-gamer shareholders, they'd have not done a lot of things that have made gamers happy, but looked risky initially.

moffkalast 5y ago
On the other hand, making Artifact was a very shareholder style move of them. Such an utter cashgrab it's was actually disgusting.
- account42 5y ago
  Valve has also played a major role in normalizing DRM, microtransactions and lootboxes. They definitely do have the capacity for shady shit even if they are "better" than some of the competition.