• hh93@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    10 months ago

    It is a monopoly - they just don’t abuse it as much against their audience.

    For developers it’s either take their 30% deal or just don’t sell your game because a lot of people only use steam.

    Not even Cyberpunk or the Witcher could sell more on gog than on steam even though you knew that there the developers got 100% of the money spent. Gwent standalone flopped so hard on GOG that it had to be rereleased with limited features on steam and sold more there

    People are just fundamentally lazy so it totally is a problem that you have one store with such a massive market share even if it’s very convenient for the end-user they can completely exploit their position against publishers.

    Sure EPICs way of making games exclusive to their store is not elegant but without that no-one would choose that store over steam

    • HollowNotion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      This is partially on these companies for failing to provide an equal experience to Steam on their platform. I bought Witcher III in GoG to support the devs, and my reward was a lost save by the time the DLCs came out, because their client didn’t have cloud saves. So guess where I bought their stuff from there on? Sure, they added these features later but for some people the damage is already done.

    • jikel@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Tell me a game store that supports Linux out of the box (not messing with wine stuff or lutris)

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

      Not even Cyberpunk or the Witcher could sell more on gog than on steam even though you knew that there the developers got 100% of the money spent.

      Most gamers don’t know and/or don’t care, so they will take the least resistance path, which is Steam.

      Steam has a “most favoured nation clause” which prevents companies from actually selling for cheaper on other platform. This is how steam maintains its monopoly. If it were possible for CD Projekt Red to sell it cheaper outside of steam it would force steam to actually charge developers less.

      Edit: see below, it’s actually not that clear.

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

        They could sell for cheaper, they just can’t sell Steam Keys specifically for cheaper than what’s on Steam itself. Which makes sense honestly, you’re literally using their service for both presence and distribution.

    • P03 Locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s a monopoly, but it’s one that a big company like EA or Epic Games can defeat. But, they have to actually put in the work and effort to present an experience that isn’t an enshittified version of Steam.

      So far, none of them are willing to put in the time, so they don’t get the prize.

    • aard@kyu.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Many years ago I bought some old DOS game where Linux runtimes using the original files exists on GOG. What I expected was a disk image or a zip containing the files - what I got was some exe containing the files. Why would I ever try to buy something from someone fucking up something that simple again?

      I might buy some indie games from a developer directly - but with a middleman steam is the only option.

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

        That’s not a steam issue, that’s a developer/publisher issue Plenty of old Scumm based games work by just pointing scummvm at the game directory

    • asexualchangeling@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Sure EPICs way of making games exclusive to their store is not elegant but without that no-one would choose that store over steam

      Personally Epic doing this is one of the reasons I still refuse to give epic my card details

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        They account for about 75% of game sales on PC from what I’m finding, it’s a “virtual monopoly”, i.e. they have enough reach to control the market even if they have competitors.

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

          75% of the units sold or 75% of the overall revemue. Given that the most successful PC games aren’t even on Steam, the latter seems unlikely to me. Roblox alone is a sustained revenue stream in insanely high numbers.

          Do they block the competition in any way? They aren’t the stewards of Windows. Epic buys exclusive rights to games. Does Valve do the same? On Steam Deck, there’s even an entire independent app store (Discover with Flathub) enabled right out of the box. That’s how the community made Minecraft and Heroic Game Launcher available. Official EGS, GamePass, and GOG launchers could be made available via Flathub but MS etc. choose not to.

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

            They have their own unethical business practice they’re getting sued for (preventing sales at a lower price on competing platforms) and just because you agree with what they do now doesn’t mean it’s not a risk to have such a behemoth in the market, Gaben is nice now, it just needs him changing his mind or retiring/dying and shit could hit the fan real quick.

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

              It’s not about Valve or Newell being nice or not, it’s about whether Valve has a monopoly and the EU just recently looked at digital markets closely and determined that Valve is not a gatekeeper.

              • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                Because of the way they act at the moment, it doesn’t mean that they’re not in a monopoly position.

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

                  Well, the EU made a list of monopolists in digital markets and decided that Valve is not one of them and that has nothing to do with current behavior.

                  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    10 months ago

                    Find me a source confirming that they actually studied Steam’s position in their market. They have specific criterias, including financial and user ones, and Steam doesn’t meet them… oopsy!

              • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                Frivolous? The judge has accepted new evidence and the lawsuit has been allowed to proceed.

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

            Nintendo is compared to other console manufacturers.

            Microsoft is considered to be in a position of monopoly in the OS market, yet they’re not the ones building the PC itself.

            Holy fuck did I just enter a freaking asylum or something?

      • Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yeah, to say a successful business is a monopoly because it is far reaching is absurd.

        Call me when Good-Old-Epic-Steam launches.

        • rambaroo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          10 months ago

          The fact that there are tons of games only available on steam should tell you it’s a monopoly.

          It’s fucking shocking to me that so many people here actually believe that Valve isn’t a monopoly. You must have your head way up your ass.

          • skulkingaround@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            How many games are actually steam exclusive on PC though, not counting 50 cent shovelware crap? A good chunk of the best selling PC games ever (minecraft for example) are not even available on steam.

            I just went through the top 10 on steam and other than counter strike, which is literally made by valve, all of them are available elsewhere.

      • Zorque@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        One can have a monopoly without directly trying for it. Especially when it comes to services with a lot infrastructure involved. Once you make those investments, it’s hard for anyone to compete against them.

        A monopoly just means you control a significant amount of the market. I think, technically, they would fall under oligopoly. Where a few businesses have control of the market instead of just a single business. But the point is they have a far larger share of the market than most others. This is mostly because they create a product that people want to use, instead of making a service that unfairly captures the market through things like game exclusivity or hostile takeovers.

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

          But when the EU recently announced service gatekeepers, Valve was not among them. Microsoft is.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            *Because they don’t meat the minimum financial and monthly user criterias to be taken into consideration when analyzing the monopoly status of their platform

            You forgot to add that part 👍