top 70 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 188 points 1 year ago (39 children)

They really figured out the infinite money glitch.

They've been nothing but fair to me as a customer but the cynic in me thinks they've got an excessive amount of good will to squander since they dominate the PC gaming scene.

Please don't become shitty. And please release new non competitive games.

  • source
  • hideshow 39 child comments
  • [–] 124 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    Gaben said it best when he said "piracy is a service issue, not a price issue." There is no other company that even comes close to matching Steam's services, both to consumers and developers. The industry could become a different place when he dies. I don't see any other CEO continuing to spend money to innovate and expand services rather than offer less and charge more to extract record profits.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I feel the same, I know that things will likely go downhill if he goes. That's why I also buy GoG games, I want to be able to download them if things go sour with Steam.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    You can downlowad some of the steam games. DRM is possible, but not mandatory

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 53 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    This is absolutely mad cope, but I want to believe that, as forward thinking as Gabe is, he either will find a worthy successor, or already has one lined up to ensure the company isn't saced for all it's worth when he's gone.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    I mean this is obvious af

    When Netflix had 90% of the shows that you wanted to watch and they weren’t annoying little fucks with account sharing and geo location, everyone was happy to support them

    But once paying users feel like they are being taken advantage of, instead of catered to, they leave.

    There’s so many cases where pirating is not only cheaper (duh) it’s actually a better product/experience. And when you charge to provide a worse product/experience than what people can get for free, then you can’t be surprised at the outcome

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 32 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    the average person really needs to realize that most businesses are just hilariously incompetent, the only reason things stay together is because of shittily paid workers doing their jobs despite management's best efforts.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    I laugh whenever some one thinks the government is "inefficient" and that the company will be more efficient. I've watched publicly traded companies waste a tonne of money on various boondoggles.

    Usually the company survives despite the incompetence for other reasons.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    If they were publicly traded they could have started to do the smart things that investors like to see, like spending billions to integrate AI in steam. Why is there no AI in steam yet ? Clearly a failure, Gabe should be replaced by a CEO that would not lose time and money in frivolous things like Linux (what is Linux BTW ?) and start improving the company values by adding AI and firing employees.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 5 points 1 year ago (20 children)
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    Before steam, digital sales of games wasn't really a thing outside of a few niche examples. The 30% cut was the same percentage that retail stores were taking.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (8 children)

    The difference is physical retail had a lot of overhead. Steam just creates a new key and adds it to your account. Yeah, they also have to store the game data and distribution up to the ISP, but that's really cheap compared to storing physical games at physical locations that only have access to their local buyers. Valve's profit margins are significantly higher. They could probably take 5% and this would still be true.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Storage and bandwidth definitely weren't cheap in 2003. Additionally Steam provides features that a brick and mortar store could never even think of providing, including updates, DRM, instant access to global consumers, community features, in-depth data analytics, and the ability to adjust pricing in real time.

    While a lot of the work Valve has put in Steam seems both obvious and ubiquitous today, these were features they pioneered for both developers and consumers.

    I'd also like to point out that the only digital marketplace I'm aware of that charges less than 30% by default (Epic) is famous for losing billions of dollars in the endeavor.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Storage and bandwidth definitely weren't cheap in 2003.

    To access the same number of people, all around the world, compared to physical stores it's essentially a rounding error. Rent alone for all the stores would be far more than Valve had to spend, then you need employees to operate the stores and all the other ongoing costs. Storage was not as cheap, and from a consumer point of view it wasn't cheap, it it's far cheaper than physical stores around the world.

    Additionally Steam provides features that a brick and mortar store could never even think of providing, including updates, DRM, instant access to global consumers, community features, in-depth data analytics, and the ability to adjust pricing in real time.

    Not sure how that's relevant, but yes. I didn't say they didn't.

    While a lot of the work Valve has put in Steam seems both obvious and ubiquitous today, these were features they pioneered for both developers and consumers.

    Again, sure. It doesn't contradict anything I said so I don't know why you said it.

    I'd also like to point out that the only digital marketplace I'm aware of that charges less than 30% by default (Epic) is famous for losing billions of dollars in the endeavor.

    Once again, sure. It doesn't change anything in my comment.

    I don't know why if anyone says anything that is not just gobbling Valve's cock with enthusiasm they get people showing up talking about how great they are. Sure, I like them too. It doesn't mean there aren't reasons to complain. That's how you end up with companies enshitifying.

    It almost feels like bots how frequent it is, but I just think you people have a compulsion to defend them from what isn't even criticism, like they're going to praise you for it. Well guess what? They don't even know you exist.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    They're a private company, so the data is not available, but we can estimate. GameStop, which IIRC is only US based, not global, has total expenses of about $2b/y. Valve, meanwhile, spends $221m paying employees in their gaming division, which is larger than the Steam division (that we don't have data for).

    As you can see, the cost of operating Steam is significantly lower than operating physical stores. That's obvious to anyone, but for some reason I had to prove it to you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (2 children)

    They have to include them anyway, because almost no game is sold exclusively on Steam. The only features they don't have to include are features for the customer, so that's not relevant. The features relevant to developers are access to market (which is the same as physical retail) and DRM, which they have to include anyway if it's available outside of Steam. Just for reference though, Denuvo is about $100k/y, which is close to the cost of 1 employee.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    My god, you people are so frustrating. I said Steam provides a good service. I only said their profit margins are significantly higher than physical retail (which is obvious), and you act like I'm saying people should avoid it. You're so dramatic. You people are against anyone saying anything besides Valve should make more money. It's crazy.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Steam offers a lot more to developers than a storefront to sell your games. The App Store is an extremely minimal offering to developers for the amount of money they demand in exchange.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 1 year ago* (3 children)
  • [+] 6 points 1 year ago* (2 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Iirc valve will even allow devs to generate as many steam keys as they want and sell them outside of steam for no cut whatsoever (and Steam will still provide support for the game on the launcher for those keys). And virtually no devs do it. They prefer to take the 30%. So that tells me that what they charge is more than fair to the devs

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 20 points 1 year ago

    Weird how if you pay the people activly invested in a product things work rather than having to awnser to why line no go up

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    I really hope that the workers are well compensated.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] -16 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] 37 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Valve is the living proof that you can have great service and still be profitable. Will capitalists learn? No

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Why have great service and be profitable when you can have terrible service and be 1.6% more profitable?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [+] -4 points 1 year ago* (4 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    This is so deranged its actually funny. Legit not sure if this is next level sarcasm or just utter dumbness

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 47 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    I've been on Steam since 2005, and the only thing that sucks about Valve is that their steam sales are shit now. Other than that I've had no issues with them. They seem like a decent company.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Wonder how much of this comes from the gambling business. They don’t own the secondary market where you can sell skins, but they are the gateway into that world.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago

    I suspect a fair chunk. Steam for gamers and devs is great and all but its underbelly of opening up the world of gambling to kids is real gross. Its insane how valve has been getting away with it for so long.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    They brag about overworking their employees so they can hire less. No one thinks they’re a good company, just the only option for most games

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • 9 comments in c/apple@lemmy.zip view that post
    [+] -10 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    It’s good to have a monopoly on games distribution

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] [S] 21 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Valve doesn’t force you to buy games on their platform like Epic does.

    You can use GOG and Itch.io instead.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Just because there are other distribution channels doesn’t mean that valve doesn’t have that market stitched up. Their profitability is a function of being a monopoly. It isn’t like their client or anything is revolutionary.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 22 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    I disagree as their client is the most feature rich one available and it’s not Valve’s fault that the competition shoots itself in the foot too often. Show me one example where Valve bought out competitor stores.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Agreed they have a monopoly. But given the modern pattern of digital services always racing to the bottom with enshitification, it’s apparent that we are all very fortunate that the game didtribution market is not an efficient market right now.

    Steam would not survive in a competitive market, they’d be outcompeted by loss leaders running on infinite venture capital which would inevitably start turning the screws to draw profit from their captive audience before eventually collapsing and taking all their games with them.

    That monopoly is a win for consumers because it is lazy and predictable, it’s a win for game devs because it’s vaguely pleasant to use over a long period which keeps piracy down, and it’s very good for valve, obviously.

    Monopoly’s are usually bad when you assume you’re the customer, but with modern services we’re generally the product, a fat and happy monopoly is sometimes better than the alternative.

    This comment is only slightly tongue in cheek.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    They were the first to market and built it to distribute some of the most popular PC games to ever exist. They are an entrenched market leader who haven’t tried to make steam into something more than what it should be. They do not have a monopoly, windows store, gog, itch, epic, Apple store, android store, battle.net, EA store, Xbox/store cloud, PlayStation store…

  • source
  • parent