111
why physical media is ESSENTIAL for a healthy games industry - Danny Odwyer - noclip2 (i.ytimg.com)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/pcgaming@lemmy.ca
15 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
why physical media is ESSENTIAL for a healthy games industry
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 4 months ago (8 children)

Which is why they're a part of Video Games Europe the group against Stop Killing Games?

Or why Steam has been selling slop even before AI?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    Not my point. They aren’t saints, but Steam is still a far better steward for a digital storefront than most.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    By doing the same as every other company?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago* (5 children)

    Valve doesn’t try and lock in exclusives on their platform like the Epic Store or delete your account with games on it like Origin did. Steam provides plenty of notices about invasive DRM and anti-cheat that other stores don’t. Steam also has an easy refund process that doesn’t require you to call an agent. Valve does a lot to support gaming on Linux while all of the other platforms are almost exclusively Windows only.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Valve grew Steam's market share by locking in exclusives.

    There were multiple digital distribution platforms in the early days, IGN even had one.

    Then Valve forced exclusivity to starve out the competition.

    Steam has its Most-Favored-Nation clause to prevent publishers selling games for cheaper on other platforms.

    Valve fought against refunds for years until the EU told them to wise up.

    Valve only started supporting Linux when needed to sell consoles. They just like most other companies saw Linux gaming as an extreme niche.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (2 children)

    Steam didn't employ forced retail exclusivity.

    You also don't seem to be fully aware of Valve's contributions to Linux gaming.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Steam didn't employ forced retail exclusivity.

    They did though by patterning with publishers. Forcing physical releases to go through Steam as DRM. Killing the physical pc gaming market.

    They also have their Non-Favoured-Nations clause, meaning a game can't be sold for cheaper off Steam.

    Valve's contributions to Linux gaming

    Only as they geared up to sell their own consoles.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago

    They did though by patterning with publishers. Forcing physical releases to go through Steam as DRM. Killing the physical pc gaming market.

    Not only does this not describe forced retail exclusivity, it's three different statements that are all false in their own ways. Distribution agreements aren't exclusivity agreements, Steam only deals in digital copies not physical copies, DRM implementation is optional, and there are no stipulations barring publishers from making or distributing physical copies.

    We've gone from one incorrect statement about Steam to five.

    They also have their Non-Favoured-Nations clause, meaning a game can’t be sold for cheaper off Steam.

    You mean the Most-Favoured Nations clause that five people filed a suit over, based on a a Tim Sweeney tweet from 2019? Not only was that suit silly, it doesn't even make sense as this sort of clause is extremely common in retail and not at all unique to Steam or Valve compared to other storefronts.

    Only as they geared up to sell their own consoles.

    You also don’t seem to be fully aware of Valve’s contributions to Linux gaming.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago*

    Valve grew Steam’s market share by locking in exclusives.

    By exclusives you mean their own games? Or are you referring to the time before Steam Greenlight?

    There were multiple digital distribution platforms in the early days, IGN even had one.

    Yeah I remember D2D, it had awful DRM and they deleted my account one day without refunds.

    Then Valve forced exclusivity to starve out the competition.

    No the competition died because they were trash. I used D2D, Origin, Impulse, they were all horrible compared to Steam.

    Steam has its Most-Favored-Nation clause to prevent publishers selling games for cheaper on other platforms.

    No, Steam doesn't let you sell Steam keys to your game on other platforms for cheaper. That's very different.

    Valve fought against refunds for years until the EU told them to wise up.

    I refunded things multiple times for the policy changes. As long as you gave a good justification and weren't abusing the system then they have always been quite reasonable.

    Valve only started supporting Linux when needed to sell consoles. They just like most other companies saw Linux gaming as an extreme niche.

    No this started because of the Windows Store initiative back in 2012 where Microsoft was trying to consolidate the sale of all software to their proprietary platform. Supporting Linux was Valve's way of hedging against that future.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent