• saltesc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    216
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    While he’s there under oath, can they get some HL3 info out of him?

    • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      80
      ·
      10 months ago

      “Objection, this has nothing to do with the case.”

      “Overruled, the public needs to hear this”

      • SSTF@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        10 months ago

        “It has already been released. It has been released for thousands of years. Humanity simply needs to reach a point of true understanding to see it.”

        Gabe disappears in a flash of light.

      • Igloojoe@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        10 months ago

        They’ll never release HL3. They are not a developer anymore. They are just a game store/directory. HL3 has been overhyped so much that anything released would be a disappointment. The gaming market has changed too much from when they made a game engine and released half life to showcase that game engine.

        I can probably list a million more reasons why they’ll never release, but those are the big points.

        Half-life Alyx was HL3, just it was better to name it not HL3, because fans would lose their minds.

        • Jojo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          On the one hand, yeah. On the other hand, HL:A ended with an obvious sequel hook, and that hook was the ending of HL2:E2. Spoilers, I guess, but the game’s been out for a while.

          Of course, that doesn’t mean another game is coming, but it does mean that HL:A doesn’t mean another game isn’t coming, either.

  • xantoxis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    175
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I don’t know whether valve has violated anti-trust law or not, and I certainly don’t think gaben deserves any more protection from covid than the general public but;

    this is a stupid ruling. Why on earth can’t he appear remotely, as he requested? They can’t “adequately assess his credibility”? Are they gonna have an FBI body language expert on hand? Check his forehead for sweat droplets? There’s nothing they can ask him in person that they can’t ask him over a camera.

    Feels like the plaintiffs are doing some kind of lowkey spite thing here, and I’m surprised the judge played along.

    • Marxism-Fennekinism@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      52
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Most courtroom bullshit like this boil down to people who probably shouldn’t be in power powertripping.

    • yumpsuit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      don’t think gaben deserves any more protection from covid than the general public

      I think gaben deserves the world’s sickest powered respirator with RGB lights and holographic Team Fortress 2 unusual hat visual effects.

      Glad to hear the court will require N95s at least.

    • TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      They did meet him in the middle, though. Everyone in court has to wear a mask when he’s there, and he only has to take it off when he’s speaking.

      • deafboy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        This is not how the masks work though. If I were honestly concerned about my health I’d take this as an insult.

        • TWeaK@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          ·
          10 months ago

          Having everyone in court wear masks absolutely does help protect him. However, what would protect everyone better is proper ventilation systems - but that would cost businesses money, rather than passing the cost and responsibility onto individuals.

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      56
      ·
      10 months ago

      You’re going to need a lot more than just I’m afraid of covid to get out of being in person for a trial. People with actual fears of being killed for testimony, still appear in person. At this point with vaccines making any serious complications nearly impossible for covid, it’s a really desperate attempt to avoid attending.

  • Wogi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    157
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I appreciate requiring everyone wearing a good mask while he’s in the courtroom, but I don’t understand how having him in the room to testify would be substantially different from an online appearance.

  • The Barto@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    151
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    They get him on the stand and the judge says " so Mr Newell, remembering you are under oath, when is Half Life 3 being released?"

    • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      187
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Legit, I’ve never heard of anti-competetive practices from Valve. Anti-consumer? Sometimes, yeah, though they do a lot more right than most

      The argument seems to be that “30% cut is too high” but it’s not like there aren’t other options if you think that’s too high. Epic loves to pay for games to be exclusive there, humble and gog exist, one could even go the retro route and set up their own website (though that’s prolly the dumb idea), itch.io comes to mind…

      If Valve HAS done some shady shit to ensure their major market share I’d be down to hear it, but to me as a PC gamer since '10ish (and had PC gamer friends since 06) it seems they got there through being a not complete garbage heap of a company that actually improved over the years on user feedback, which is supposed to be the good example of capitalism innit?

      • blazera@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        65
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        Taking a high cut is the opposite of anti-competitive, that makes it easier for competitors to offer a better deal

        • Spedwell@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          …unless you have a policy that requires other marketplaces to sell at the same price as on Steam, undercutting the ability for “better deals” to exist at all.

          Which is what the lawsuit is actually arguing is going on.

          • blazera@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            a policy that requires other marketplaces to sell at the same price as on Steam

            or what?

            • Spedwell@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              10 months ago

              Steam has such a policy. Valve may remove any games from Steam which are sold on other marketplaces for less than they are on Steam.

      • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        61
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        If 30% we’re too high, surely just by offering a competitor that takes a lot less if a cut (say, 12,%), developers would flock to thst competitor because it saves them so much money, right?

        Right, Sweeney?

        • echo64@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          10 months ago

          People don’t buy games on the competitors, but yes may developers did flock to epic, which made everyone hate epic.

            • PlzGivHugs@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              Not even just that. They approached games that has already promised not to be exclusives, including kickstarter games that had already been funded with that promise, as well as buying games and removing them from other stores.

              They were paying to have the games removed from better stores so they wouldn’t have to compete. That is an example of anti-competitive practices, not just making a better product and charging more for it.

          • hypna@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            People don’t hate on Epic because their store has content. They hate on Epic because they tried to buy market share with exclusivity deals. Nobody wants PC gaming to turn into the streaming services.

      • blahsay@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Hah if 30% is deemed too much the apple app store and pretty much any retail is going to be next. Steam is popular because they don’t pull this nonsense. At 70% growth p/a why bother too

      • iforgotmyinstance@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        10 months ago

        As a consumer, the worst days of Steam were in its early years. It took hours to download the HL2 day 1 patch. But those days are long behind us.

      • sirdorius@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        I’m also curious what the allegations are. The only ones I ever heard were from Epic, which was basically making a big fuss to promote their own competitive platform (which was so shit it didn’t gain any traction apart from the free games).

        I’ve tried all the online stores ever since the cloudification (remember Impulse?) but none have ever been able to compete with Steam in terms of features and value to the customer. Steam didn’t get to the top by being anti competitive, it got there by being competitive and offering a better product to all stakeholders, not just to shareholders.

        And as you mentioned, there is plenty of competition for Steam. Don’t like the monoply? Get it on GOG or Itch instead.

        • Rose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          You can read the complaint in full here.

          Edit: Updated with a more recent version.

          • sirdorius@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Thanks. So TLDR:

            1. PMFN (Platform Most-Favored-Nations clause): Valve forces publishers to price games on other platforms at the same price or higher than Steam. This is an anticompetitive monopoly because publishers can’t sell the game at lower prices on platforms with a lower cut than 30%, which would improve competitiveness. Very valid point
            2. Keys that publishers can sell on other storefronts are limited. This point is moot. The fact that Steam allows you to activate a product that was purchased elsewhere and then use their infrastructure to download the game is way more than they have to do. They can completely make the rules here as this is basically a free service that you get from Valve.
            3. Some murky points about Valve policing review bombing that isn’t explained properly.
          • TheHarpyEagle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            10 months ago

            Valve devotes only a small percentage of its revenue to maintaining and improving the Steam Store, and dedicates very few employees to that effort.

            Okay yeah I was annoyed that it took Epic’s store to make Valve update their ancient UI, but Proton has gone a long way to improving my opinion of them (and it’s open source to boot).

            Also is a shame that the court won’t have the background to know that invoking EA’s complaints about anti-competitiveness and price gouging is so completely laughable.

      • JJROKCZ@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        10 months ago

        Escape from Tarkov has been very successful with their own site and launcher. I don’t see it ever going to steam and it’s regularly in the top 10 of twitch

        • Rose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          10 months ago

          That’s like saying racism doesn’t exist because there are black people in power.

          • JJROKCZ@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            23
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            10 months ago

            No, it’s saying if you make a good game and launcher then you don’t need to rely on one of the storefront that take 30% like epic or Valve. Idk what GoGs cut is but I’ve also never bought anything from there

            • MysticKetchup@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              31
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              10 months ago

              It’s survivorship bias. You’re looking at the success of Tarkov but you don’t hear about all the games that failed because they weren’t on Steam.

              • JJROKCZ@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                28
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                10 months ago

                Thousands fail every day on the platform as well, is that survivorship bias as well or just evidence that trash fails and quality succeeds regardless of location

      • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        humble

        That’s who’s suing Valve here.

        Edit: I’m wrong, they created Humble Bundle but haven’t owned it since 2017.

          • Brawler Yukon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            10 months ago

            Wolfire Games created the original Humble Indie Bundle, but they’ve been divested from it for a few years now. From Wikipedia:

            The Humble Bundle concept was initially run by Wolfire Games in 2010, but by its second bundle, the Humble Bundle company was spun out to manage the promotion, payments, and distribution of the bundles. In October 2017, the company was acquired by Ziff Davis through its IGN Entertainment subsidiary.

            The comment above that Humble’s the ones suing Valve here is inaccurate.

      • echo64@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        10 months ago

        Valve hasn’t done anything shady, but monopolies are still bad and unhealthy. Both things are true. And there are no other options for less of a cut if you want to actually make sales, pc gamers won’t purchase from other platforms.

        • TheHarpyEagle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Monopolies are bad, but is it a monopoly if they naturally gained market share because their product was first and better?

          Honestly I’d be fine with them removing the “PMFN” clause, but I’d rather it be a law that it can’t be enforced because you know Valve isn’t the only one to include it. But even if they did get rid of it, I don’t think they’d see a major shift away from their platform.

          • PapstJL4U@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            Yes. Yes it is. It doesnot matter how a monopoly was created. It’s the definition of a current market state, not behaviour.

            In many countries it although does not have be a true monopoly (aka a single object), but a undisputed, sizeable market portion.

          • echo64@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Yes, it’s unhealthy for the undustry even if you enjoy it today. Gabe newel is old. He’s going to retire soon and likely sell the company. You won’t like what happens after that, and the fact that so much of the industry is provided via their product means they have a lot of agency to tighten the screws.

            “OH but then we’ll just use something else”. That’s not how the monopoly works, you might, most won’t. Most of what you want won’t be on the something else.

    • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Yes. They sued Valve with allegation that they are too successful by providing good service. Sure 30% is too much for some developers, but solution is quite simple… don’t sell on Steam. Problem solved. Go to Epic, GoG, bunch of others. Hell every company now has its own launcher and store.

      • TheHarpyEagle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Nah, it’s mean old valve making it so people aren’t flocking to publish their games on UPlay.

        • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          10 months ago

          What’s saddest of all is the fact they are willing to throw millions on this litigation instead of spending that money on improving the service. They claim it’s for the good of all users, but their actions tell different story.

      • Wilzax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Or even just make it more expensive on steam, if you really want 100% of the revenue for every sale. Pass the cost of using steam on to the user and offer the game on other (worse) markets at a markdown.

        • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          There could be a clause in terms of use that Steam won’t allow developers to make their games most expensive on Steam, or at least cheaper than elsewhere.

          • Fosheze@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Developers already do that fairly often. Typically indie devs. They will sell their game directly for lower prices than listed on steam.

    • blue_zephyr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Pretty much. Meanwhile other stores engage in actual behaviour that deserves an anti-trust lawsuit like buying up developer studio’s and making their games exclusive to their own platforms. Or paying devs to make games exclusive to their store temporarily. You know, things that actually screw the consumer over.

  • quams69@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    122
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    10 months ago

    Lmao Valve made a service so good at what it does, it’s fucking over all these other business ghouls like Tim Sweemey who are actively trying to dominate the market without actually competing; just look at Epic’s store, it’s d o g s h i t. They give out free games and still no one I know wants to use it. It’s the same across the board, these companies do not want to make good services, they want to legally strongarm the consumer.

    • bruhduh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I’ll tell you a secret) nowadays ALMOST all corporations regardless of what they make business into wanna strongarm the consumer, for quick example look up denuvo and baldurs gate, if product is good then people will buy and denuvo won’t be needed

      • Maalus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        GOG has shown that drms are never needed. More often than not, denuvo causes issues to the player, and gets bypassed by a pirate easily. It is simply there because gamedev companies think they get something out of it, when in reality they don’t.

        • Mnemnosyne@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          10 months ago

          Denuvo isn’t easily bypassed, unfortunately. I think there’s still only like two people cracking Denuvo and one of them is batshit insane.

          • Tattorack@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Empress, right? I’ve seen some things from her (if Empress indeed is a chick) that I thought really couldn’t be meant seriously.

            • Mnemnosyne@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              Yeah. I don’t even know that much about the whole thing, just what I learned when going to look for a game a while back, and even from that little it was like, wtf is with this person?

    • arefx@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I recently got Alan wake 2 on EGS because I’m a huge Remedy head and huge fan of the first game and couldn’t contain my excitement to wait for a steam release and potentially see spoilers, and damn dude that store really is the most bare bones half assed thing ever. Even EAs store on their launcher is nicer.

      Alan Wake 2 was a great game at least.

    • ivg@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      this is very true, its not like they saying no to other stores like apple for example, they just cant compete so they sue instead, really show how pathetic they are.

      • gd42@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        This lawsuit is specifically about Steam threatening to delist games if the creator tries to sell them at lower price than is listed on Steam.

        • Droechai@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Tries to sell steam keys at a lower price on other platforms than listed on Steam and not planning on giving the same rebate for Steam customers

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Doesn’t matter how good the service is if they break consumer laws.

      Valve shouldn’t be able to control the prices on other storefronts. That is out of their jurisdiction.

  • penquin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    99
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    10 months ago

    So there is an anti-trust lawsuit against steam, but not apple, Google, Amazon, Microsoft… Etc of those giant companies who literally destroy everything in their way? Please tell me they’re next?

    • flames5123@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      137
      ·
      10 months ago

      There are anti trust lawsuits going on with most the companies you listed though? Microsoft had one in the early tech days that they won, but there’s probably going to be another one soon…

      Apple, Google, Amazon (by the FTC).

    • TunaLobster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      10 months ago

      DoJ is currently in a lawsuit against Google for search monopoly. Been going on for a while now.

  • phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    10 months ago

    For those being happy that valve is in this position, don’t. Any company that gets into a monopoly position, accidentally or not, will turn. Google too had “do no evil” in their manifest, until they didn’t

    • lemmyBeHere@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      105
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      10 months ago

      While I agree, it is important to note that Valve is a private company. When you don’t have to please shareholders and do absolutely everything to increase revenue, there is possibility for a level-headed leader that keeps the company customer friendly.

      But if anything changes (greed takes over or leadership changes), it could still turn.

      • sailingbythelee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        65
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Valve is a private company right now. But Gaben is 61 and it goes without saying that Valve is at the top of every predatory tech capitalist’s wishlist. Can you even imagine what Microsoft or Google or Meta would pay for Valve? Steam is great, but that probably won’t last forever. GOG is waiting in the wings if Steam ever becomes enshittified, but most of your library cannot be transferred over.

        • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yeah. I don’t have a lot of negative things to say about Steam, and there’s a lot of high-value stuff. The mod workshop is great. Linux support is top-tier. There’s a lot of good stuff. The only major bad thing from my point of view is lock-in. Having a vast library of games tied to one account isn’t great. And having publishers and mod-makers etc essentially forced to rely on that platform is not good. Steam itself is good - but consolidation of power is generally a bad thing.

          For that reason, most of my new games have been coming from GOG over the last couple of years. GOG’s DRM free policy means there’s basically no lock-in effect. That’s a major strength, even if some of their other features aren’t as strong as Steam.

          • Chobbes@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            I have mixed feelings on GOG. I want to like them, but the lack of Linux support is a real thorn in my side… Having DRM free stuff is great and I’d love if more games had DRM free versions, but currently steam actually supports me and GOG wants to pretend I don’t exist… And realistically, I’m not totally sold on GOGs promise of always having access to your games… If GOG explodes you’re probably going to lose access to your games too? I mean, of course it’s easier to archive a game for yourself if it doesn’t have DRM, but unless you do that religiously for each game on GOG you won’t be able to acquire them after GOG hypothetically explodes either… Hopefully you get enough warning to archive what you care about, I guess?

            I do totally respect that DRM free copies can make a big difference but everybody argues that GOG means you’ll always have access to your games, and I’m not sure it’s substantially different than steam in that respect for “normal” people, you know? If either store kicks the bucket people are going to be out of luck. I kind of just want to throw Steam and GOG in a closest until they make out, though. Would be nice to get the best of both worlds.

      • QuaternionsRock@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        When you don’t have to please shareholders

        Where did this rumor come from? Private companies have shareholders, too, and they have as much say in the profit direction of the company as the shareholders of any public company.

        Shares ≠ stocks

        • AstridWipenaugh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          10 months ago

          You’re not wrong, but shareholders look at their investment very differently than stockholders. Private shareholders can’t necessarily cash out whenever they want because the sale of private equity is usually tightly controlled by the company. This means they need to be interested in long-term growth and success. While public stockholders can also hold their shares for a long time, there’s much more ability and incentive to buy and sell quickly to make a quick profit.

          Anecdotally, I worked for a publicly traded company for 6 years before they got bought and taken private by a private equity group. The way profitability and trends are measured is night and day. As a public company, everything was hyper focused on quarter by quarter results. One underperforming quarter meant a tank in stock prices, hiring freezes, and a general sentiment to the employees of “quit spending money on expenses if you want to have a job next quarter”. Being controlled by private equity, they’re most concerned with year over year growth and the long-term stability of our operations.

    • Tattorack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      The only time when I’m concerned that Valve will grow rotten is if Gabe leaves.

    • blue_zephyr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Valve has been the market leader for years and still hasn’t let the consumer down. Their business strategy comes down to offering us the best possible service. Meanwhile crappy stores like Epic Games try to lure you in with free games and timed exclusives and I still gave up on their featureless mess of a platform.

  • bruhduh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’m out of the loop, can someone reply what’s going on? I’ll leave this comment for those like me who curious what happened

    • Sparking@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      55
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      David Rosen of Wolfire Games (Receiver, Overgrowth, Lugaru) is alleging that steam reps have threatened to de-list his game if he lists it as less expensive on other platforms. Specifically not just steam keys but other distribution platforms.

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        52
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        Which is hard to believe, considering how many times I’ve bought steam games on other (legitimate) platforms that were cheaper than on steam, that are still on steam today and werent removed for being cheaper on another platform.

        • Rose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          10 months ago

          Sure, but Valve essentially reserve the right to no longer sell your game if it’s offered cheaper elsewhere. See the quotes on pages 54 through 56 of the complaint.

          • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            23
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            10 months ago

            Which is a dick move on valves part.

            Remember folks, Valve isnt the peoples company.

            All the good things it does, it does only because of regulation pressure or lost lawsuits.

            • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              Remember folks, Valve isnt the peoples company.

              No corporation is “the peoples corporation”, but some corporations treat their customers with a lot more respect and fairness in pricing/policies than others.

              • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                10 months ago

                Yes, but people have to be reminded of that with “sweetheart” companies like AMD and Valve, because they get too deep in the koolaid and forget it.

            • TWeaK@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              10 months ago

              It isn’t the peoples’ company, but nor is it a publicly traded company that is obligated to pursue profits above all else. It’s Gabe’s company, and he gets to run it as he sees fit.

              Ultimately Wolfire’s argument falls apart not because Valve is setting the terms, but because their claims about Valve’s position in the industry and supposed abuse of power don’t hold much water.

            • notamechanic321@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Fyi I like valve but im in no way sworn to them.

              I think the justification would probably be that if they continued listing the item:

              1. It maybe mislead consumers into paying more for the same thing
              2. The reason why people pay more in that scenario is for convenience (IE all games in the same place) but that would be exersizing valves monopoly, so it may be safer to just remove to reduce complaints to steam about the higher pricing because there will be operational cost to processing those support requests and complaints

              I don’t feel like valve does everything because of lawsuits. Open sourcing proton wasn’t due to a lawsuit. Releasing Cs2 as a free upgrade to csgo wasn’t due to a lawsuit.

              On the other hand and in response to your comment, I think the regulatory fix is that platforms must display their platform fee clearly and separately to the publishers price.

              • deafboy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                10 months ago

                Open sourcing proton wasn’t due to a lawsuit.

                Wine and dxvk was already opensource. They couldn’t have closed it even if they wanted to.

              • BURN@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                Minor note about only a single point here

                CS2 as an “upgrade” to CSGO has been less than well received from what I can tell. If they wanted it to be free it should have been a new game and left CS:GO in place. Removing a game many of us paid for in favor of a newer, different game isn’t something that should be praised, and should be called out as the anti-consumer move it was.

        • Spedwell@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          I believe it is in the Steam marketplace agreement, and applies to all games. Are you referring to sales on other platforms, or to the full listed price?

        • Sparking@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          That hasn’t been my experience, could be a regional pricing thing.

      • Mango@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Oh shit. I love David Rosen. I also live GabeN…

        I should be the judge.

  • nexussapphire@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    10 months ago

    Valve is trying to escape Microsoft’s monopolistic practices with Linux while out performing their competition in a fair market. I like competition but I don’t get what advantage steam has that their competition doesn’t. Even with the steam deck they’re using standardized hardware and open source software to make a competitive product leaving room for competition to create their own versions.

    • Spedwell@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Steam has a large userbase, which offers a lot of consumer inertia to prefer games on Steam. They also have a policy where game pricing on other platforms cannot undercut Steam.

      The main complaint is that this pricing policy coupled with the consumer inertia makes it difficult for other gaming marketplaces to enter the market. You cannot undercut steam unless a publisher wants to not put their game on Steam at all (which would be suicide for anything but the largest titles), so you have to sell at Steam’s price point. Few platforms could match Steams’ established workshop, multiplayer, streaming, and social services; all of which benefit from costs at scale and the established user content.

      Imagine trying to convince a user: “Buy your game here instead. It will cost the same as on Steam. No, you won’t have access to the existing Workshop. No, you won’t have in-platform multiplayer with your Steam friends.” Even if you had feature parity, people would prefer Steam since that’s where their existing games and friends are.

      • Spedwell@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        Note that the main argument Wolfire is making is that game marketplaces (buy/download the game) and game platforms (online features, mod distribution, social pages) need to be decoupled. By integrating the two, Steam is vertically integrating, amortizing the cost, and then forcing every other marketplace to bear the cost of a platform in their pricing.

        If you bought a game and paid for platform services separately, then competition can better exist for both of those roles. Which is good for consumers.

        • BURN@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          I’m going to be real, the seperatization might be good technically from a consumer standpoint, but mostly will just prove to make consumers lives harder for no reason. One of the major benefits of Steam is that it handles everything, and isn’t something I, or anyone else, would be happy to give up.

      • nexussapphire@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I typically try to buy games from gog if available and on epic if not and steam if it’s on sale. The only harm I see is how janky the other storefronts are and how frequently they break or refuse to load and that’s not steams fault. I don’t play a lot of online games but epic and gog are my primary platforms to play on.

        I’m not defending steam but I also don’t see how the advantage a platform like steam has is a direct result of any anti consumer practices. Honestly I prefer a storefront over rootkits and heavy handed drm any day not to mention downloading gamepatches directly from the publishers website.

    • Rose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      One can appreciate Valve’s contributions to Linux gaming without idealizing them. The likely reason they went for Linux is that they would have to pay Microsoft to use Windows.

      • GaMEChld@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        This is true that it is a likely reason. It is also possible that Gabe Newell runs his company in a very deliberate way because he thinks it’s a net benefit to both his company and gaming in general. From what I have heard, which of course may be a flawed understanding of the man, it seems like he has certain principles. I guess the question is whether or not a person believes intent matters or only the end result.

      • nexussapphire@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I don’t idealize them, I use the other storefronts (gog epic) potentially more because they often don’t sell games with any form of drm. I just don’t get it because as far as my experience goes they’re all about the same minus more jank on the other two.

        I’ve actually spent the most time with Rockstar games launcher thanks to GTA V and RDR2 and that one is a real piece of work tbh.

      • steelrat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Their VR is all open as well for the good of the universe. Perhaps have a little deeper look.

    • Cybersteel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Years of experience. It’s like wow. When your audienfe is so entrenched other MMOs can’t compete

  • uis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    10 months ago

    Really? Steam? With all those EGS, GOG and Origins? Is it Apple’s trolling?

  • Crack0n7uesday@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Is this why they were giving away all free steam keys on 4chan yesterday? I thought it was just Black Friday deals, shoulda known those anons don’t do anything for the sake of being nice.