3 ms·

Seriously, the pass Valve gets from allowing a gambling empire to piggyback on their API and profit from the lootboxes that fuel it is crazy to me. "Yeah they m

Seriously, the pass Valve gets from allowing a gambling empire to piggyback on their API and profit from the lootboxes that fuel it is crazy to me. "Yeah they might have a pseudo-monopoly but their product is good, I think the 30% cut is fine." would be laughed at in most other sectors. They barely even try for their market position, people just rejected competition and scream it's not Steam because "I don't want multiple launchers"

voxic11 2y ago
Don't twitch and apple take 30% cuts as well? Seems pretty standard for content distribution platforms.
- jachee 2y ago
  Don’t forget Sony, and MS, and Nintendo.
dotnet00 2y ago
Valve just has a lot of goodwill, they don't feel the need to comment on every social issue, they censor less than the competition, they are very indie friendly, they'd rather just not put out a sequel than churn out yearly releases, the tech they have put out has been (mostly) innovative and still retains popularity. They also have the goodwill for helping make gaming on linux practical enough that there can be a handheld gaming console that runs linux (plus, of course, popularizing that entire new market segment). They also don't constantly change large parts of Steam. Point is, people like that Valve is relatively stable, and that's why they insist on sticking to it. The industry is otherwise such a shitshow. The stability is an especially important value for a platform that holds, in many cases, thousands of dollars worth of games for people.
lmm 2y ago
> "Yeah they might have a pseudo-monopoly but their product is good, I think the 30% cut is fine." would be laughed at in most other sectors. In most other sectors the bar is higher. They've earned their near-monopoly fair and square (unlike Apple, they don't do anything to block competing marketplaces - they're not even preinstalled) by being head and shoulders above their competitors in terms of quality - the fact that that's due to those competitors all sawing their own legs off doesn't change that.
_carbyau_ 2y ago
They might have some features that Steam has but that platform has been in hard development for a long while now. When you've tried the others and then been denied playing your game because of their crappiness... it gets old quick.
sickofparadox 2y ago
You are glossing over how every other launcher is a piece of crap written by the lowest costing bidder to spy on me even when I'm not playing a game from it. "They barely even try for their market position." Not one launcher comes anywhere close in terms of feature set. Valve alone is the reason gamers aren't shackled to windows anymore, only Steam gives disabled people the ability to forcibly remap controllers so they can play games, only Steam offers gamers in every country the opportunity to refund games after they bought them in client without any back and forth, library sharing, functional reviews independent of developer moderation, open access to developers, robust community features, even the steam overlay is amazing. Even with Fortnite and free games every few weeks, Epic is struggling to gain market share because of how GOOD Steam is and how fairly Valve treats its customers.

voxic11 2y ago

Don't twitch and apple take 30% cuts as well? Seems pretty standard for content distribution platforms.

jachee 2y ago
Don’t forget Sony, and MS, and Nintendo.

dotnet00 2y ago

Valve just has a lot of goodwill, they don't feel the need to comment on every social issue, they censor less than the competition, they are very indie friendly, they'd rather just not put out a sequel than churn out yearly releases, the tech they have put out has been (mostly) innovative and still retains popularity. They also have the goodwill for helping make gaming on linux practical enough that there can be a handheld gaming console that runs linux (plus, of course, popularizing that entire new market segment). They also don't constantly change large parts of Steam. Point is, people like that Valve is relatively stable, and that's why they insist on sticking to it. The industry is otherwise such a shitshow. The stability is an especially important value for a platform that holds, in many cases, thousands of dollars worth of games for people.

lmm 2y ago

> "Yeah they might have a pseudo-monopoly but their product is good, I think the 30% cut is fine." would be laughed at in most other sectors. In most other sectors the bar is higher. They've earned their near-monopoly fair and square (unlike Apple, they don't do anything to block competing marketplaces - they're not even preinstalled) by being head and shoulders above their competitors in terms of quality - the fact that that's due to those competitors all sawing their own legs off doesn't change that.

_carbyau_ 2y ago

They might have some features that Steam has but that platform has been in hard development for a long while now. When you've tried the others and then been denied playing your game because of their crappiness... it gets old quick.

sickofparadox 2y ago

You are glossing over how every other launcher is a piece of crap written by the lowest costing bidder to spy on me even when I'm not playing a game from it. "They barely even try for their market position." Not one launcher comes anywhere close in terms of feature set. Valve alone is the reason gamers aren't shackled to windows anymore, only Steam gives disabled people the ability to forcibly remap controllers so they can play games, only Steam offers gamers in every country the opportunity to refund games after they bought them in client without any back and forth, library sharing, functional reviews independent of developer moderation, open access to developers, robust community features, even the steam overlay is amazing. Even with Fortnite and free games every few weeks, Epic is struggling to gain market share because of how GOOD Steam is and how fairly Valve treats its customers.