• dinckel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    125
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Every time I see a post with this specific claim, targeted at Valve, i just can’t help but laugh.

    Yes. They take a cut.

    Yes. Everyone else takes the same cut, so you’re biased, if you don’t understand this.

    Yes. They are an undisputed leader in the market, but no, that’s not called a monopoly.

    The difference is that Valve, while taking this cut, and being as big as they are, are consistently investing that money into improvement of the platform, AND also paying people to directly contribute to OSS, that affects everyone else in the market too.

    Not to even mention the regular, very considerable discounts, practically platform-wide. Show me a time when Nintendo have done the same. A 10 year old copy of MK8 is still 50$

    This isn’t even a bogus claim, but just a waste of everyone’s time

    • Anyolduser@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      48
      ·
      5 months ago

      Wait, you’re telling me that reinvesting in the business instead of increasing dividends and executive pay increases profits in the long term?

      Preposterous!

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Yeah, I don’t think they realise Steam is itself a product to pay for. Sure, someone could come up with a free game manager, but that’s only a part of Steam’s services. There’s all the licencing, marketing, communities, features, connecting to other platforms, a console mode, remote play, ongoing security, support for external titles, the workshop, great refund policies, all this stuff and Valve doesn’t ask for a sub, pays all the staff involved, and stays on top of it all with premium quality.

      No shit they take some off the top. How else could the Steam we love and know exist if they didn’t?

      The irony of this lawsuit trying to ruin things gamers cherish.

    • WarlordSdocy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      The cut they take is just one of the claims they have against Valve. Some of the other ones which another comment mentioned seem like fair arguments against Valve. The whole forcing pricing parity so game devs can’t offer the games for cheaper somewhere else and DLC from other platforms isn’t compatible with the Steam game and vice versa. And again you can say other platforms are doing that and worse too but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t also go after Valve for it. Just cause they’re a private company and because of that aren’t as profit driven as other companies doesn’t mean they still are gonna do things like this to increase their profits and maintain their majority market share on PC games.

    • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      5 months ago

      If there is nothing wrong then the investigation will show this. But the claims argue that they use their undisputed market dominance (your words) to do stuff that is anti competitive.

      The fact there are alternatives does not matter if the dominant player abuses their position to stiffle competition.

      A prosecutor has to make their case, Valve gets to rebuke the claims.

      I’d say, welcome investigation into large corporations. There should be more. The fact that mega corps like the Petro industry where and still are not properly monitored is bad for everyone. A corporation is not a human being, and it’s feelings cannot be hurt, but it can do a lot of bad things.

      If it turns out there is Merrit to the claims, it is good for everyone. Why the urge to defend a multi billion dollar company? I’m not saying everyone should dust off the pitchforks either. Let the law do its thing.

      • stardust@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Interestingly enough GOG takes 30% and has had periods they struggled.

        The storefront saw a slight increase in revenue but a net loss of around $1.14 million in the last financial quarter. Overall, it’s lost about $2.21 million over the past three quarters compared to a $1.37 million profit over the same period in 2020. CD Projekt didn’t immediately reply to questions about how its new strategy might translate into changes to GOG’s features or catalog.

        One staff member tied the earlier layoffs to increased competition in PC gaming storefronts, which has driven major platforms to lower the commission they take from developers.

        https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/29/22808199/cd-projekt-gog-losses-restructuring-earnings-2021

        Funny thing is lower cut is likely to benefit steam more by killing off the competition for good with the economies of scale they have on their side compared to competitors which themselves are running at a loss and not clear if the cut is sustainable in the long run to justify running.

        • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          Everyone is very focussed on the 30pct. But there are multiple points in the claim. Price clauses and such.

          • stardust@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Used /r/gamedeals and isthereanydeals a long time so not even sure how effective the price clauses are when I’ve gotten so many deals for games on my preferred platform for a lower price.

            • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              5 months ago

              Me2… I mostly buy outside steam. But that is not the issue at hand. If a dominant company is thought to abuse their position, it should be investigated.

              And over the last years several indie devs have said there are some narly contract clauses.

      • CEbbinghaus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Do to stuff that is anti competitive (your words)? What the fuck? Pleas point out the “stuff” that they are doing because this article is accusing them of charging too high a cut on game revenue. Which is NOT the case. Anyone that has half a braincell can do a Google search and see that their cut is perfectly inline with Xbox, PlayStation and Nintendo. They are NOT abusing they market dominance since this same hcut has been in place for basically forever. Someone looked at the 30% and just now said “hey that sounds kinda high” when it has been the norm for decades.

        Also please for the love of God do some research. This has already been battled in court and the case got dropped because of fucking course steam isn’t being anti competitive. A godamm legal company thought they could make some money if they got a ton of people to sign up to a class action and somehow manage to convince the judge with numbers. But it’s utterly bullshit and beating a gift horse around the head. Steam let’s you sell their steamkeys on your website which they make 0 cut on. And all they ask is that you sell it at the same price as on steam? I don’t think anyone realized how good of a deal that is please for the love of God look at any other game platform and if you can so much as find a clause that lets you sell their keys on any other platform I will be VERY impressed.

        TLDR: Stuff is not exact enough of a reason to hate on steam

      • Audacious@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Steam will not be better than it is now. I have been using it for years and not much has changed. There is no reason for it to improve for the consumers when it’s the top dog.

        • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          For sure there is something to be said for not “moving fast and breaking stuff”

          I think the incremental improvements have been good on steam. They move slow, but there is development. I especially liked when they added the additional user tags.

          That said, if Valve does indeed use their dominance to stiffle competition it needs to stop, regardless of the other things.

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      40
      ·
      5 months ago

      And paying yachts for Gaben, you forgot to mention the money also goes to doing that.

      Get that in your head people, if someone can sell you stuff and it makes them a billionaire then you got overcharged, you can find all kinds of excuses to defend them, they’re still making more a day in interests with 1 billion invested than the median income over four years.

      • dinckel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        What he does with his money is none of my concern. Unlike the vast majority of other CEOs in his market cap tier, he’s actually paid fairly, compared to an average worker at Valve

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          27
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          He’s

          A

          Billionaire

          No, he’s not paid fairly, no one should have that kind of wealth.

          He makes more from the interest on his fortune than the average salary at Valve even if the average is very high.

          There’s no reason to defend billionaires, no matter how good they pretend to be.

          • Zos_Kia@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            19
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            I think gaben has retained his popularity because you just never hear about him. He doesn’t go around publicly doing evil shit so he’s got the benefit of the doubt. Not that I disagree with your general point about billionaires…

          • Abnorc@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            I highly doubt that most people, given the opportunity, would not live like a billionaire. If someone builds a company like Valve, they’re going to live very well. That doesn’t say as much about the person as it does about the economic system.

            • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              5 months ago

              That’s the thing though, no one should get to live like that while the majority has a hard time affording basic needs.