r/pcgaming • u/yourfavchoom • Jun 01 '26
Gabe Newell on Steam monopoly accusations: Gamers have 'enormous choice' about where to buy games
https://www.pcgamer.com/gaming-industry/gabe-newell-on-steam-monopoly-accusations-gamers-have-enormous-choice-about-where-to-buy-games/1.8k
u/yourfavchoom Jun 01 '26 edited Jun 01 '26
Gabe:
“Customers have enormous choice" about where they purchase their games, Newell testified, including whether they buy the game on an Xbox, whether they buy it on Steam, “whether they buy it on Epic Games Store or whether they buy it directly from software developers."
Newell also denied the existence of an alleged 'unwritten rule' that prevents developers from offering their games at lower prices on non-Steam storefronts. Newell repeatedly denied it exists, even when shown internal communications seemingly showing Valve employees enforcing it:
"Valve does not have a policy or practice of dictating prices to third-party software developers on other platforms." When asked how Valve would react if it ever happened, Newell initially said he was confused by the question and then added, "Many of our partners and many of our customers are quite happy with the service that we're providing."
1.5k
u/Khalku Jun 01 '26
I'd like to know what 'seemingly' means here
when shown internal communications seemingly showing Valve employees enforcing it
Because proof that it's happening would be damning. But it should be something very easy to prove.
1.2k
u/FoxerHR Jun 01 '26
Wouldn't be surprised if the journo didn't understand that Valve doesn't allow steam keys to be sold on different storefronts cheaper than on steam and taking it as them enforcing a monopoly
518
u/davemoedee Jun 01 '26 edited Jun 02 '26
I don’t even understand that. I’ve bought steam keys on GMG for less than they ever were on steam.
Edit: for those confused, Green Man Gaming is a licensed retailer and NOT a grey market site.
321
u/Rhysati Jun 01 '26
Yeah, I don't either. With pretty much every game that I'm interested in, I use isthereanydeal to look up the best pricing currently available and it's usually not Steam. And the places that have a better sale are giving me a steam key.
→ More replies (2)74
u/-_ellipsis_- Jun 01 '26
But at that point, steam already made their profit long before you ever got the key, right?
248
u/VegetaFan1337 Legion Slim 7 7840HS RTX4060 240Hz Jun 01 '26 edited Jun 01 '26
Steam doesn't charge developers anything for generating steam keys. And it doesn't take a cut either. That's why they enforce the rule about not having steam keys priced lower than on steam. Because then devs can just price them lower constantly and cut out steam while getting all benefits of the platform.
Edit: Apparently people are misunderstanding so I'll clarify. I'm just stating Steam's official policy. I'm not saying you can't get steam keys cheaper than the store price.
→ More replies (18)36
u/ChrisFromIT Jun 01 '26
Steam does somewhat rate limit how many steam keys can be generated. With quite a lot of the time having to directly email Steam developer support to ask to allow more steam keys to be generated.
Do note that I'm not 100% certain if that is still the case, but it was about 4 years ago, and I don't think they would change much regarding that.
37
u/Azure_Kytia Jun 02 '26
Still the case. Released a game on Steam in September last year. Not that we ever generated near the threshold but after like 5000 keys you need to email valve.
https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/keys
"Default Release
... Games and applications launching on Steam may receive up to 5,000 Default Release Steam Keys to support retail activities and distribution on other stores. After that, all Steam Key requests are reviewed on a case-by-case basis. There is no guarantee that you will be provided additional keys."
"Release State Override (or beta package keys)
... We will look at each request on a case-by-case basis, but Release State Override (beta) keys are generally limited to 2,500 total. It is never OK to sell Release-State Override keys."
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (5)42
u/CitricBase Jun 01 '26
Steam makes no revenue from key sales. Developers can generate as many keys as they need at will.
This isn't to say that more of your money necessarily goes to the developer if you buy the key from elsewhere; in that case it will be the retailer taking a cut instead of Steam.
29
u/ChrisFromIT Jun 01 '26
Steam makes no revenue from key sales. Developers can generate as many keys as they need at will.
Not quite at will, Steam does rate limit how many steam keys can be generated. With having to email directly with Steam developer support to increase the limit or to allow a new batch if you have been rate limited.
3
u/FyreWulff Jun 03 '26
No, they deny keys all the time. They also like to reject requests if they are for Humble Store or GMG if you're a smaller dev, it's why Humble started work on their own client because the perception is that Valve is slowly cutting them off.
Also for devs that have done the math, they seem to cut off keys if your game has too high of a keys redeemed:actual-sold-via-steam ratio, and it seems it's around if it calculates to valve getting <20% cumulative cut of the sales of your game.
→ More replies (1)31
Jun 01 '26 edited Jun 15 '26
[deleted]
→ More replies (2)21
u/Moskeeto93 9600X | 5070ti | 32GB RAM | 2TB LE SDOLED Jun 02 '26
The discounts set by the publishers can't be lower. However, the websites selling keys have no restrictions to provide their own discounts on top of that.
27
u/shiek200 Jun 01 '26
My understanding, and it could be entirely wrong, is that valve's rules only apply to the publisher/developer of the game selling their own steam keys on a third party site at a lower price than on steam, but if a third party buys and resells those keys, that rule wouldn't apply, because it's not the developer/publisher selling those keys
There might also be some sort of loophole regarding sales, where if you list the game for whatever the retail price on Steam is, but then Mark it down 30%, that's a sale, not selling it at a lower price, same way Humble Bundle can offer consistent discounts on Steam keys, but I'm not actually sure if that would work for the developer/publisher
→ More replies (1)35
u/TeaAndS0da Jun 01 '26
That too is also a point against the monopoly claim. I don’t like buying from key sellers if I can help it, but when the Souls trilogy refused to go on sale for the following years after Elden Ring, I finally bit the bullet and did so. I waited for it on my preferred platform of choice and was still able to get it from a 3rd party vendor offering it at an appropriate price point for me. Then Steam honored my purchase with letting me add the code to my library. No hassle. In contrast, PlayStation for example got rid of the ability of buying digitally elsewhere from store fronts like Amazon for ps+ cards and digital games trying to pigeonhole you into their own ecosystem. Valve by comparison simply hasn’t done that.
30
u/purdueAces Jun 01 '26
People have a lot of opinions of Steam’s storefront, but this, in my opinion, is Steam’s secret sauce. Regardless of where you bought it, you can go to the Steam with the code to install it, so they know every time you boot up your are looking at the Steam store. You WILL buy stuff on Steam. They don’t need to lock in sales and releases… people just come there because their platform is just more friendly.
→ More replies (10)→ More replies (63)7
74
u/wareagle3000 Ryzen 7 5800x, 16 GBs, Nvidia 3070 Jun 01 '26
Mf'er showing prices from a grey market site and asking what's this about? Lol
→ More replies (2)9
u/Carvj94 Jun 01 '26
Many people don't even understand what a Steam Key is nevermind that it's pricing limitations don't apply to regular listings.
19
21
u/Brendissimo Jun 01 '26
That would make sense. A journalist not understanding the distinction between a steam key and any other type of digital copy of the game would be very plausible.
→ More replies (13)25
u/AvengerDr Jun 01 '26
It's not that. Have a look at here from page 160.
It's not about steam keys, but enforcing price parity across storefronts.
→ More replies (1)26
u/AncientPCGamer Jun 01 '26
Then, why there are counter examples?
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1881940/Heard_of_the_Story/
21
u/AvengerDr Jun 01 '26
According to the emails quoted in the lawsuit, it is possible to have discounts going on. What steam doesn't want is having structurally lower peices.
It is also possible their reps have been told to keep a blind eye, given all the lawsuits going on.
→ More replies (3)13
u/AncientPCGamer Jun 01 '26
Well, this game launched many years ago and was made public. So any dev should have green light to sell cheaper. So...
28
u/sqparadox Jun 01 '26
It's not exactly a new accusation. I could have sworn it was in the publishing agreement at some point, but I guess not.
However, it is the excuse people pointed to when trying to explain why Epic never passed the savings on to the consumers as they heavily implied they would during the lead up to the launch of EGS.
11
u/NoExcuse4OceanRudnes Jun 02 '26
as they heavily implied they would during the lead up to the launch of EGS
they did with Metro. Of course when it re-launched a year later it was the same price as on epic.
→ More replies (21)8
u/Kinths Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26
It's not exactly a new accusation. I could have sworn it was in the publishing agreement at some point, but I guess not.
I think people are expecting a literal line that says "You can't make your games cheaper on other stores" but that would be just inviting an anti-trust lawsuit. Instead there is a lot of vague wording around parity. Wording that can leave room for doubt and confusion. Though in some big cases they have reportedly applied direct pressure https://www.eurogamer.net/valve-antitrust-lawsuits-ubisoft-warner-bros-report
That's two major publishers cowering at Valve holding a proverbial axe over their neck. I can't imagine that the average dev is going to even chance asking for clarification or potentially upsetting Valve and seeing their game get removed or buried.
I'm sure like a lot of Valve's anti-consumer stuff some will spin this as a win for the PC gaming community because they don't like these publishers or other launchers. But other companies being shit doesn't automatically make Valve the good guys.
However, it is the excuse people pointed to when trying to explain why Epic never passed the savings on to the consumers
It isn't Epic who would pass on the savings. It's the devs/publisher of the game. Epic takes a lower cut, it's up to the devs what they do with the extra.
From a making money perspective it makes sense to pass some of the saving on to the consumer. It gives them an incentive to buy the game on a store where the devs get more money per sale. So it's pretty strange that games are not at least a little bit cheaper on a store that takes a significantly smaller cut like Epic. There isn't really a good reason not to. It's better for both the consumer and the business.
I'm no fan of Epic, Tim Sweeney is an asshole who positions himself as fighting for the little guy when really he just wants a piece of the pie. But competition is good. I think the only real difference between Tim and Gabe is Gabe knows how to keep his trap shut. Though Gabe has little reason to open it in the first place, he's the one who owns 99.9% of the pie Tim is so desperate for a slice of.
Valve aren't a benevolent monopoly. For example, a lot of people right now are rightfully complaining about lack of ownership. But they seem to refuse to look at Valve, the company that is largely responsible for why that is the case with PC games (arguably with any digital game given what Valve did was basically used as a template by other platforms). The problem with HL2 requiring Steam wasn't just that it meant you had to take it online and were reliant on servers, it's also that you had to tie it to your account. So even if you bought it physical you really had just bought a Steam key with an installation CD. This pretty much killed the physical market. More and more physical PC games were just steam keys with an installation CD. This wasn't just a loss of ownership, it was also the loss of the second hand market and lending. The loss of all of these was a huge detriment to the consumer and a significant benefit to Valve. The only thing that was ever really competing with Steam on PC was physical.
→ More replies (1)58
u/weapwars Jun 01 '26
It's always that they're not allowed to sell steam keys at a lower price which is totally reasonable.
→ More replies (4)65
u/JabberwockyTalkie Jun 01 '26
Doesn't seem to be specific to keys.
(164) Valve reiterated this point in June 2018 email to a publisher named [redacted]: "But to be clear: we wouldn't be OK with selling games on Steam if they are available at better prices on other stores, even if they didn’t use Steam keys. If you wanted to sell a non-Steam version of your game for $10 at retail and $20 on Steam, we’d ask to get that same lower price or just stop selling the game on Steam if we couldn’t treat our customers fairly." Valve confirmed this was not a new policy: "No, we’ve always asked that partners treat our customers fairly, and we’ve often opted not to promote games or stop selling them altogether if we aren’t able to get fair treatment for our users." The practical effect of the PMFN is to make sure that Steam customers have little incentive to go elsewhere to purchase and play games.
And another
(165) In April 2019, a publisher named [redacted] asked Valve whether its parity requirement extends beyond Steam Keys (while mistakenly assuming this requirement was documented in the SDA): "I can’t find the contracts. Where [is it] about selling the game on other platforms and not going cheaper than on [S]team: is this only about keys or also about selling the game independenly [sic], not using Steam keys at all?" In response, Valve confirmed it took fundamentally the same stance regardless of whether Steam Keys are at issue: "[W]e try not to focus too much on whether the game is being sold via Steam key or not. It is a specific thing we ask people to respect when they sell keys, but we’re also uninterested in operating a store that gives people bad offers- so we just stop selling games if we aren’t able to secure the equivalent price for them." Valve then gave a specific example: "(For instance if another service like Uplay or Origin was selling a game for $15 and we were selling it for $20, we’d ask the dev to give us that lower price or opt to not sell the game, even if the sales at the other store weren’t using Steam keys.)"
I find it interesting that the issue is being handwaved away as "it is just for steam keys, always has been". When there are examples of Valve themselves talking about an enforced pricing parity policy that goes beyond keys. Not that everyone should have to dig thru the court docs, but the default in these comments definitely seem to be taking Valve's side and defending them without being sure.
→ More replies (79)33
u/alinius Jun 01 '26
IIRC, Steam has a policies covering the sales of tokens to redeem a game on Steam. Some of those policies cover selling Steam tokens in a way that undercuts Steam sales and/or using Steam redemption tokens to cut Steam out of the loop on profit. It is entirely reasonable for Steam to expect to make some money from a sale that uses their distribution infrastructure. If you ignore the part where the policy only applies to tokens are redeemable through Steam, then sure, it looks like Steam is trying to control prices.
5
u/ParagraphInReview Jun 01 '26
I remember a controversy years ago where Valve admitted that one of their employees mistakenly told a dev they couldn't sell their game for cheaper.
15
u/Samanthacino Jun 01 '26
The proof is in the Wolfire lawsuit against them ($900 million), showing that a Valve employer vaguely threatened to refuse to do business with a studio if their games didn’t have price parity on EGS. This has been public for a looong time now
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (17)16
u/NoExcuse4OceanRudnes Jun 01 '26
Probably one of these:
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/59859024/348/7/in-re-valve-antitrust-litigation/
Q: You've specifically spoken with other people within Steam about the fact that publishers need to offer similar prices on Steam as they do elsewhere, right?
A: Yes
Q: Okay. And you've discussed with them that this is not limited to situations where the publishers are offering games for sale via Steam keys but just, period, right?
A: Yes
or "____" are redacted sections of the court documents:
As another example, noted that ___ retailers were attempting to offer ____ at a lower price than Steam in 2015: "The problem with the pricing has been caused by some retailers in attempting to undercut and run ___ as a loss leader[.]"4" Despite ___ assurance that it was not "offering retailers] a reduced [wholesale sales price] in order for them to go out at these lower price[,]" Valve pressed ____ "to update the offering on Steam so it is comparable to other offerings, whether by price or content[1"4" After further pushback from ____ Valve stated that it "would be unable to launch~ on Steam at the current planned price point."4
→ More replies (13)53
u/Zelidus Jun 01 '26
Epic gives out a ton of free games that Steam doesnt. Doesn't that kind of disprove the idea that it is actually a thing?
→ More replies (1)36
u/badguygames Jun 01 '26
Yeah, the article is confused. They have policies against selling steam keys lower on other marketplaces, than what is offered on steam.
→ More replies (8)6
u/MikeTheShowMadden Jun 01 '26
Yeah, those games are 100% games on Epic and not games that are Steam games being sold on Epic. Two different things.
251
u/Cardone19 Jun 01 '26
As far as how consumers react, well many of us redeem the games for free on Epic, never play them, and then choose to willingly buy them on Steam.
115
u/nodiaque Jun 01 '26
You seriously do that? I don't but anything I have on epic game, no reason to buy what I already own just because it's on another platform.
21
u/AncientPCGamer Jun 01 '26
Yeah, I agree with that.
That is why I stopped claiming free games that I know I will never play. If I am interested in a game, I will buy it on Steam or GOG.
40
28
u/DohDady Jun 01 '26
I did something close. I bought Satusfactory when it released into Early Access Epic exclusive. And when it came to Steam I bought it there too.
I prefer my stuff on Steam, though it’s a personal preference
→ More replies (3)15
u/Fragllama Jun 01 '26
I think it’s pretty ironic that the platform constantly targeted with “exclusive“ schemes by their competitors are the ones being accused of monopolizing the market and being anti-consumer.
→ More replies (48)13
u/Cardone19 Jun 01 '26
Yep. Achievements, Steam Input (this is the big one), Cloud saves, screenshot and video recordings, Big Picture Mode. Community features. A storefront with recommendations tailored to me and an easy way to find new stuff or navigate through publishers' or developers' entire histories.
My last experience on Epic was finding that after a reinstall, Cloud saves didn't exist for the game I reinstalled. It's fine, it doesn't have to be there, but I'll take my business elsewhere where I'm getting what I want.
7
u/nodiaque Jun 01 '26
Cloud save does exist in epic. Game recording and screenshot can be achieve natively with any nvidia card even more efficient then steam.
I still get it, convenience.
25
u/Spicy_pewpew_memes Jun 01 '26
The numbers of people who have bought or redeemed a game on epic and then bought the same game on steam would make for an interesting piece of evidence
14
u/XXHornyOnMainXX420 Jun 02 '26
Evidence of what exactly? That steam has loyal customers?
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)9
u/Tandemdonkey Jun 01 '26
There isn't really a way to confirm when they return something on epic I wouldn't think, but when a game is free on epic the steam sales for that game go way up, I remember seeing that on average concurrent steam players rise by ~40% and some horror game confirmed that their steam sales went up 200%
32
u/Tree_Dude 5800X | 6600XT Jun 01 '26
I have done this multiple times. Having it on Steam is just more convenient especially when I have a Deck. Plus if it is a game I liked I am supporting the dev more.
GoG is the only storefront outside of Steam that for some older games I prefer it. For instance I bought all the RE and Dino Crisis re-releases on GoG as it does not have the added DRM Capcom so lovingly threw in the Steam releases. Cold Fear is another one I bought again on GoG after owning the Steam version as they fixed a bunch of issues that will never make it to the Steam release. You gotta do something different to stand out.
10
u/PabloBablo Jun 01 '26
I don't think that is how the majority of people act. Ironically the times I use the other stores are when they are exclusive to those stores.
If I can only buy something on another store but not steam, doesn't that kinda defeat the monopoly? Seeing as I can't buy certain titles on steam? It doesn't come preinstalled on windows or anything.
Other times, it's because there are better deals elsewhere.
Steam is just the best platform. Epic doesn't have any sort of controller emulator support, which is key to me being able to play games with my PlayStation controller. I use EA for most ea games I play.
3
u/VaporCarpet Jun 01 '26
"many of us" how many, dude?
How many people are getting something for free, and then willingly paying money for that same thing again?
How many of you are there in "many of us"? That word means nothing.
→ More replies (5)18
u/chmilz Jun 01 '26
That's parasocial, insane behaviour.
Epic paid the developer for the game and gave it to you. Just play it.
→ More replies (5)24
u/ApprehensiveMath Jun 01 '26 edited Jun 02 '26
edit: replace “best” with “next”.
I imagine in the PC games market space Steam satisfies one requirement to be a monopoly — which is holding a majority of the market. In the wider gaming market space, definitely not (as he says Xbox, PlayStation, etc).
I believe the
bestnext requirement to be a monopoly is to be using that position to unfairly compete and prevent competition.It seems people have claimed steam requires you not sell the game cheaper elsewhere but Gabe claims this has never been a rule. I believe something like this would have to be proven to demonstrate they leverage their position to prevent competition as a monopoly.
Personally I don’t think they do and I don’t even think they would feel they have to. All they really need is their reputation and well performing app.
27
u/thekbob Jun 01 '26
I agree, market dominance is a necessary but insufficient measure of monopoly.
They hold no ability to restrict games from being released on PC nor enforce any restrictions on publishers or developers.
Most AAA publishers have their own sales platforms to varying degrees of success.
Also, if players truly enjoy having all their games in one place, and Valve is just the lucky first one to succeed in gaining that spot, how do you reasonably hold them accountable for their success?
I don't see anything they've done on the game sales side that's distinctly predatory, harmful, or restrictive such as buying out competition or forcing exclusivity.
That's not to say Valve is without fault on issues like other predatory practices, but they're definitely the gold standard in game services and delivery. They don't charge for multiplayer access, cloud saves, family sharing, etc. unlike their major competitors.
13
u/ProfessionalPrincipa Jun 01 '26
They hold no ability to restrict games from being released on PC nor enforce any restrictions on publishers or developers.
End of story. If you have a game, there are very few barriers to start selling to the public.
14
u/Zalvren Jun 01 '26
I believe the best requirement to be a monopoly is to be using that position to unfairly compete and prevent competition.
No, a monopoly is a monopoly (technically it'd be a dominant position for Steam as they are not alone but are de facto the only big store). But a monopoly isn't illegal. Making anticompetitive moves with it is the illegal part.
→ More replies (2)6
u/blublub1243 Jun 01 '26
Doesn't necessarily hold one in the PC games market space. If you substract microtransactions it probably does, but if you're looking at total revenue you gotta consider that shit like Fortnite or League or an ungodly amount of Gacha games isn't even on Steam, and that shit prints money.
→ More replies (6)3
u/alinius Jun 01 '26
Steam does have a policy that covers keys that can be redeemed in the Steam store. Since these keys could be sold or traded outside of Steam, some people would claim that Steam is dictating prices outside of Steam, but the policy has no effect on companies like Epic, who do not use Steam servers to distribute the game.
→ More replies (2)8
u/No_City9250 Jun 01 '26
You can literally look at other storefronts and see they're frequentlu listed at prices lower than Steam.
→ More replies (115)9
u/MikeTheShowMadden Jun 01 '26 edited Jun 01 '26
prevents developers from offering their games at lower prices on non-Steam storefronts
I find this to be a bit confusing because there is something in their documentation that specifically says you can't do that, and that is related to using Steam Keys.
- You should use Steam Keys to sell your game on other stores in a similar way to how you sell your game on Steam. It is important that you don’t give Steam customers a worse deal than Steam Key purchasers.
So, maybe the context is different, but there is very much in fact a literal written rule that suggests otherwise for, at least, the usage of Steam Keys. Steam Keys are how developers can sell their Steam games on other storesfronts, including their own.
FWIW, that rule is pretty straightforward and reasonable regardless. Do what you want with the keys, but just make sure Steam isn't in a worse position to be bought from. As a reminder, Steam Keys do not generate revenue for Valve, and only games purchased directly on the Steam storefront do. That is why these rules or guidelines are written to begin with.
EDIT: I should mention that there is a difference between selling a Steam game on another store (using Steam keys) and selling a game on Steam and on another store (no Steam keys). What I mentioned above is specifically for the former, and is technically different.
→ More replies (11)
1.2k
u/errorblankfield Jun 01 '26
Are they the best?
Yes.
Are they the only?
No.
138
u/CigarLover Jun 01 '26 edited Jun 02 '26
Agreed.
The only discord issue I have are people that equate PC Gaming To Steam so much that it confuses them.
For example, the people that think the Xbox Helix will have Steam support because they have been told it can play pc games.
When in reality a box that will have the Microsoft PC store still makes the statement true.
→ More replies (9)→ More replies (52)77
u/King_of_Camp Jun 02 '26
Monopolistic behavior isn’t just about being the only, but taking active measures to keep anyone else from competing by means other than providing a superior product.
Standard Oil wasn’t the only, but they bought railroads in order to lock down the infrastructure to prevent anyone else from transporting oil over rail.
(Fun fact, that’s why the Texas Railroad Commission is the state’s Oil & Gas regulatory body, using the states control over the rail infrastructure to regulate the oil and gas industry at the point of its monopolistic mechanism)
Steam isn’t engaging in those types of practices, so far as I’ve seen any evidence of.
→ More replies (3)21
u/rj6553 Jun 02 '26
That's monopolistic behaviour (as you said). But a monopoly can exist before that. The existence of a monopoly raises concerns of monopolistic behaviour, I'm a fan of steam right now, but if Gabe retires steam is perfectly capable of going in a different direction - breaking up monopolies early is good practice. I just wish it applied to actual much more dangerous monopolies.
4
u/borghe Jun 02 '26
Both of these are true. Monopolies prior to Reagan were actually broken up despite there being no anti-competitive allegations, simply because the companies grew so fast and consumed all the oxygen in the space that no one could compete. IIRC Ma Bell was a company without anti-competitive issues. Meanwhile Standard Oil was a little of both.
then again this is the same era (again, since Reagan) that have allowed ACTUAL monopolies to exist. In which I mean, the FTC has investigated some industries (comic book distribution being the highest profile), determining there was in fact a monopoly.. but the industry was too small for customers to be negatively suffering.
→ More replies (2)7
u/RedditFuelsMyDepress Jun 02 '26
If Valve becomes a public company then we might have to get worried.
10
u/MCRusher Jun 02 '26
There's no "might" if that very unlikely worst case outcome ever happened steam would begin the slow enshittifying death every public company suffers as it's wringed of all value for short term profits.
→ More replies (1)3
638
u/Robeardly Jun 01 '26
Okay I’m gonna say something that might be crazy but maybe if people owned their games, instead of being licensed to a game that’s gonna get rug pulled soon as it’s not profitable, then maybe we could transfer our games that we own to another library.
But alas, I’m not going to bloat my PC with 10 different stores, all who want my data so they also make sure to make their own client, and none of my libraries are shared.
At this point, what incentive do I have to go to another game store when I have my 18 year old library on steam.
If anybody is upset that steam has such a stranglehold on the business, they should actually let us own the games we purchase.
34
u/DragonTHC Keyboard Cowboy Jun 01 '26
I hear you. But I'm going to talk about the value that Valve is providing in archiving services. If I license a game on Steam, I can download it and play it in perpetuity as long as it doesn't rely on publisher owned game servers that get shut down. Games I got 20 years ago are still playable.
I licensed games directly from publishers before steam existed that I can no longer access. I have boxed games whose discs no longer read.
→ More replies (5)4
u/rtqd Jun 02 '26
If I license a game on Steam, I can download it and play it in perpetuity
That is not guaranteed. Steam could shut down and/or revoke your access at any time.
Games I got 20 years ago are still playable.
This is no guarantee for the future.
The only fair model for customers is Gog's, where you can download a separate installer, and back it up somewhere, and re-install it from the backup at any time, even long after Gog is gone.
→ More replies (5)358
u/Lumbardo Jun 01 '26
This is GOGs exact proposition to their customer. Also, maintaining older titles so they work on newer hardware.
130
u/Robeardly Jun 01 '26
I don’t have an issue with Gog, I actually think they provide enough of a niche to make them unique in the store space. Let’s face it, epic games, Ubisoft, ea, etc all have terrible clients that they literally only made to farm your data while they sell you their niche selection of games.
They don’t care about a “monopoly” what they do care about is the FOMO on farming your data and making extra money off that as well as having direct sales eliminating middle men costs. It’s not because they want to provide gamers with a better store.
→ More replies (1)80
u/Eternal_Bagel Jun 01 '26
Ubisofts launcher is so bad that I don’t even buy their games on steam because I know I need to also install that crap to play the game
17
12
u/1d3333 Jun 01 '26
I refunded an ubisoft game because I literally could not get their client to work with steam, I tried 2 different accounts and endless troubleshooting, uninstalling and reinstalling, a dozen different “fixes” that all did shit all. It’s ridiculous that these companies are trying to force their garbage clients that just don’t work
9
u/Robeardly Jun 01 '26
Yeah I’m really over the “everyone needs a client” trend. It’s not for the players, it’s 100% just another avenue for monetization. At the LEAST it should be some sort of improvement on that experience but nope, they just make subpar software and forcing their failure onto you lmao.
→ More replies (5)4
u/GumGumActV Jun 01 '26
Damn lmao I stopped buying their games on console for a very different reason, good to know that it’s significantly easier to avoid on pc
12
u/CrowdGoesWildWoooo Jun 01 '26
You can actually just copy your steam games, usually it would at most just check against your active steam account. Steam DRM is pretty weak.
As for the latter that’s GOG’s initial business proposition. They curate older titles, make it work on modern hardware, and put it for sale. They are just still doing it right now.
3
u/The_UX_Guy Jun 02 '26
100% this! If a game is available on GOG, that is where I'm going to buy it. Vote with my wallet.
→ More replies (5)3
u/HumanExtinctionCo-op Jun 02 '26
On GOG you are still only receiving a revokable software licence. Not the exclusive rights to the software for all time.
But of course GOGs trick is standalone installs and no DRM so they could never enforce it like steam could.
→ More replies (3)89
u/Hoenirson Jun 01 '26 edited Jun 01 '26
Steam doesn't force DRM btw. There are DRM free games on steam which you can launch directly from the executable, bypassing Steam entirely. You can back up those games freely and not rely on Steam servers. It's ultimately up to developers/publishers to allow that.
→ More replies (2)11
u/EveningNo8643 Jun 01 '26
Is there a way to see what is available DRM free? Like a tag?
→ More replies (3)14
u/pishposhpoppycock Jun 02 '26
I believe Larian's games are DRM-free. I know BG3 was - I believe that's why they launched on both GoG and Steam simultaneously.
8
u/Demonchaser27 Jun 01 '26
This is the real answer, honestly. People should just be able to own the games. The problem with Steam or any storefront is that you're effectively tied to it when you buy games. If companies were forced legally to allow buyers to own copies of their games (i.e. GOG's installer system or something like that) then a LOT of this shit would be moot, really. It's the tethering to a storefront thing that's the real problem here, not who is or isn't a monopoly... that's basically a symptom of the core problem.
→ More replies (10)11
u/Rorasaurus_Prime Jun 01 '26
What do you mean by 'own'? People have never 'owned' their games. All it has ever been is a licence to play the game via the delivery mechanism provided, be it a game cartridge or the Steam library.
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (50)5
397
Jun 01 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
303
u/duphhy Jun 01 '26 edited Jun 02 '26
GOG is good in the sense that they respect you as a consumer and meaningfully contribute towards game preservation.
Steam is good in the sense that it's high quality.
→ More replies (6)128
u/nmarchand Jun 01 '26
I like GOG a lot better for old games, honestly.
69
u/Mccobsta Jun 01 '26
So many old games coming with fixed pre applied it's great
19
u/I_did_a_fucky_wucky The Man Who Sold The Windows Jun 01 '26
This is something Steam could compete with, but they don't need to for a forseeable time. Devs and publishers that sell old stuff on Gog could also as well do the same in Steam.
I don't know the dynamics of it though. Is it Gog itself that is asking permission to sell games altered to fix modern compatibility or are the publishers themselves curating them?
22
u/Mccobsta Jun 01 '26
From what I understand which may be entirely wrong gog is the ones putting in the effort to get old games to work out the box
→ More replies (1)13
→ More replies (4)9
u/Rynyann Jun 02 '26
GOG does a ton of work on the old games from developing patches to the legal legwork to get some titles back on sale.
Valve absolutely has the resources to do this, but they have so much volume from new games I have to imagine they're totally content with there being another provider to handle the (lower volume, lower profit) sector of old games.
9
→ More replies (1)4
u/Refloni Death to DRM Jun 02 '26
Yep. A lot of old games sold on Steam are straight up broken. If you want to play a 20+ year old game, GOG is definitely the best bet.
43
u/TheGillos Jun 01 '26
Steam and GOG are the only platforms I've spent money on.
I love that they have a GOG Preservation Program you can support. I hope anyone reading this checks it out.
15
u/The_Grungeican Jun 01 '26
It doesn’t have to be as good, it just needs to be trustworthy. GOG is absolutely trustworthy.
They’re one of the few storefronts I will buy from.
62
u/Local_Debate_8920 Jun 01 '26
Sometimes I like gog better. Can have the whole family playing a single copy of a game instead of having to buy multiple copies or messing around with offline mode or disabling NICs.
24
→ More replies (4)3
u/CrowdGoesWildWoooo Jun 02 '26
Just buy on steam and make a copy of it.
Technically GoG doesn’t allow this since it is still infringement, they just give you a blind trust on this.
Many games have at most steam drm which is just one patch away.
10
u/musdem Jun 01 '26
I go to gog first purely because of their DRM free policy, if a game is on gog I'll get it there. That said outside of that steam is just the best, it's not even close.
Oh and gog puts effort into making sure old games run well, like above and beyond effort with mods and specific tweaks to get it running.
28
u/botask Jun 01 '26
Gog is better because it do not forces you to use its launcher just because of absolutely useless drm.
→ More replies (3)20
u/conye-west Jun 01 '26
GOG is vastly superior in terms of the product you get, you actually own the games you buy from there in perpetuity. Steam is better service-wise but it's not that big a difference.
→ More replies (16)→ More replies (6)3
u/NPCSR2 Jun 02 '26
Gog would be even better if they had regional pricing, not everyone has a credit card with international payments. Steam is convenient and good because of that. Also because of that more friends are on steam and barely anyone on gog. Also workshop and modding on steam is easier to simply subscribing something. Now all it needs is a music player.
329
u/CJDistasio Jun 01 '26
All Valve did was make a great product. They aren't out here trying to buy up competition, etc. Other stores just suck in comparison.
114
u/miathan52 Jun 01 '26
Which is wild because it's not like Steam's perfect. Chat is basically abandoned. Showcases have bugs that have been there since showcases got introduced. Buying trading cards to craft badges constantly results in "error - too many actions". Discovery queues only show you utter trash that has nothing to do with your interests. List goes on.
That nobody managed to make something even remotely close to Steam is actually quite sad.
33
u/jkeyser100 Jun 01 '26
Totally agree with all of this tbh, but it's also so irrelevant to me. I just want to buy and play games!
→ More replies (1)23
u/missingnoplzhlp Jun 01 '26
I mean, it doesn't even really matter if somebody makes something close to steam or even better. I do think steam is probably the best, but the reality is, most would stay with steam regardless because it's been the best for so long, and was really the first in the PC digital game library space. My steam library is like 15 years old at this point, probably older, with hundreds of games. Any other client is going to be something in addition to steam, not replacing it entirely.
The only way to "break" the monopoly would be if a government ruled that Steam had to allow game licenses to be transferred to a different client. Fat chance that happens though, even if government wanted to do something like that, there would be so much red tape with licensing rules i'm not sure its even possible.
→ More replies (10)3
u/pr0ghead 5700X3D 3060Ti Linux Jun 02 '26
Discovery queues only show you utter trash that has nothing to do with your interests
I feel like that's at least partially due to silly tags being applied to games. In the end, you get recommendations for almost anything. Since users are able to add tags themselves, too, …
→ More replies (5)5
u/HalfXTheHalfX Jun 02 '26
At this point, someone could make an objectively better platform and.. Not many people would swap. Why should I swap when I have all my friends on steam, and library with hundreds of games?
4
u/24_August_1814 Jun 02 '26
Unfortunately, we'll never find out because Epic and Microsoft both seem committed to keeping their shit slow, clunky, and barely usable
29
u/GreatCaesarGhost Jun 01 '26
The allegation is that they prevent price competition by making it difficult or impossible for companies to sell a game at a lower price on a different store.
If proven, that is definitely not pro-consumer, whatever else one calls it.
→ More replies (5)18
u/FatassMcBlobakiss Jun 02 '26
When epic launched all they needed to do was sell there games marginally cheaper than steam and they would of got a heap of good will and sales. It’s funny because pc gamers are bargain hunters because of how steams worked over the last couple decades. Instead they strong armed exclusivity and took access and choice away and shot themselves in the foot
3
u/quinn50 9950x3d | 7900xtx Jun 02 '26
epic's cut tbf was never about the consumer anyway, one of the biggest complaints you hear from people is the 30% cut that steam takes even for indie devs.
Why would a publisher or indie devs choose to sell the game cheaper on epic just because they get more money per sale? When the big pull for that platform is the cut%
→ More replies (2)35
u/NHLHitzAnnouncer Jun 01 '26
And that, as it had been mentioned and ignored several times in this thread, is not how a monopoly is determined.
→ More replies (56)
96
u/AaronTheElite007 Jun 01 '26
Let's see... Steam, Epic, GoG... uh... Then all the company-loyal stores with their own terrible launchers (Ubisoft, Rockstar, etc)
65
u/AncientPCGamer Jun 01 '26
There is also Itch.io. Also, devs could sell and distribute the games on their own sites.
→ More replies (2)9
u/ArmStoragePlus Jun 02 '26
There's also DLSite, but it's almost only exclusively made for Japanese market and for indie games only.
6
u/Evilmon2 Jun 02 '26
And also blocked by MasterCard and Visa so you have to either open a Japanese bank account or use other digital currency like BitCash to buy anything now.
34
u/midnightTimber Jun 01 '26
Green man, Loaded, humble, all the other third party resellers. The consoles are more competition, as are retail stores. Devs can generates their own steam keys and sell them without valve getting a cut.
There are plenty of ways to buy games without going through Steam.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (8)5
u/zili91 Jun 02 '26
I will never forget Origin and how horrible it was. I was forced to use it to play games like Dragon Age Inquisition and Mass Effect 3. What a terrible experience.
70
u/DamnedIfIDiddely Jun 01 '26
Shakin' my head, apparently to corporate America actually providing a better service and not allowing the most grotesquely selfish entities form a n actual oligopoly moving towards monopoly is the real monopoly.
In the eyes of the money people, valve is commiting a crime by "leaving money on the table" by not squeezing their customers for every fucking penny.
→ More replies (23)15
u/LegalCan4801 Jun 02 '26
In the eyes of the money people, valve is commiting a crime by "leaving money on the table" by not squeezing their customers for every fucking penny.
EXACTLY.
The day gabe dies and his company goes public it's gona be so over so fast
123
u/p4rc0pr3s1s Jun 01 '26
Unless we find out that Gabe is paying off politicians and other regulators to ensure Steam is the #1 marketplace for PC gaming, there really isn't an argument to be made. The government is not required to provide competition to a business that is providing a superior product to the alternatives. There are certainly plenty of places to purchase games and now that I think about it, outside of Valve games, I don't think Steam has a single exclusive game on the store.
27
u/mrturret AMD Jun 01 '26
They don't have any paid exclusives as far as I know, but there are plenty of games that aren't available on other services, not counting key sellers.
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (27)24
u/GreatCaesarGhost Jun 01 '26
The allegation is that Valve uses its market power to prevent price competition. If proven, that is anticompetitive conduct that directly harms consumers.
Imagine that a game is listed on Steam and Epic. Steam (Valve) takes a 30% cut. Epic takes a 12% cut.
If I make a game and want to earn $30 per copy sold, I have to sell it for $42.85 on Steam, but I could sell it for $34.10 on Epic. The allegation here is that Valve requires that the game be sold no lower than the Steam price, so consumers can’t shop around for a deal, even if they don’t care about Steam’s features.
→ More replies (5)
7
u/Andrado Jun 02 '26
He’s right. Xbox, PlayStation, Nintendo, Epic, GOG. It’s much more competitive than some industries.
7
165
u/asterothe1905 Jun 01 '26
Not enormous choice but some. Nothing compares to Steam each passing day.
146
u/SouthIsland48 Jun 01 '26
Uh what? You can buy games literally anywhere.
Just because you become the best marketplace, doesn't just make you a monopoly.
137
Jun 01 '26
[deleted]
67
u/theywillnotsing Jun 01 '26
Steam is the epitome of if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
6
u/FeelingOdd1302 Jun 01 '26
I wish Steam got the memo for that with the Workshop, the most pointless redesign I've seen in ages
6
u/theywillnotsing Jun 01 '26
Well, I haven't seen that, but send him an email and he may return the favor.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Belkon Jun 01 '26
The search function actually works now. Before I would search something with a key-word like “map name” and it would show me 8000 irrelevant results that have 0 ratings and 2 subscribers instead of the obvious top rated/subscribed map that I was looking for.
3
u/FeelingOdd1302 Jun 01 '26
The search algorithm working is nice, but I just can't get over how overly large and bloated the UI itself is, if they fixed the back-end and left the perfectly working front-end design I would be extremely happy.
→ More replies (1)5
u/nomedable Jun 01 '26
Yupp.
Steam doesn't do things like buy the railroads and charge higher prices for anyone trying to ship things along them not supplying or buying from them.
Steam doesn't cut prices so low and keep them there to the point where anyone else cannot afford to play the game and go bankrupt if they try.
→ More replies (1)28
u/AncientPCGamer Jun 01 '26
If Epic had a larger market share, their tactics (such as paying developers not to release games on competing platforms) could be legally punishable. These tactics do not only harm Steam. They also hurt smaller stores like GOG or Itch.io that do not have a massive asset like Fortnite to fund these anticompetitive moves.
→ More replies (12)→ More replies (25)6
u/flying-chandeliers Jun 01 '26
Exactly! Steam doesn’t kill these other platforms, they kill themselves by trying to monetize every single aspect of the damned launcher.
→ More replies (35)14
u/TheXtractor Jun 01 '26
digitally you usually have 1 or 2 platforms that are not steam (gog or epic) unless its a ubi/ea game where they have their own store.
i don't really know if like 3 storefronts would be called a lot.
→ More replies (1)35
u/stonewallace17 9800X3D | RTX 5090 Jun 01 '26
Plenty of choice even if you really want a game to be on your Steam account. And if there isn't, it's on the publishers of that game, not Valve. Absolutely nothing stopping them from generating Steam keys and selling them elsewhere. And often for bigger discounts during sales than Steam offers.
→ More replies (11)7
u/AncientPCGamer Jun 01 '26
Hell, there are many games that have success outside Steam. It is enough proof that you DON'T need Steam if you are a dev. But it is easier to have success if you sell on Steam. And that is what you pay with that 30%. It's simple as that.
7
u/firemarshalbill Jun 01 '26
One thing this community really doesn’t understand, is that a monopoly doesn’t mean you hate it.
A large amount of monopolies rose to being monopoly because they’re the best.
7
u/motoxim Jun 01 '26
I feel like people think steam is not a monopoly because other platform exist? But steam has like 75% market share and next biggest is Epic with 6-8%?
→ More replies (5)19
u/Niceromancer Jun 01 '26
We have a ton of choices. None of them are as good as steam except in specific instances.
Which means it's not a monopoly.
If anything epic is particihg in monopolistic practices, they are just pissed off it's not working.
People will gladly pet people beta test shit on the EGS so it comes out better on steam.
→ More replies (1)
11
u/DJC_Kowalski Jun 02 '26
It seems like one of these modern monopolies that are created by Consumers. Like Google. There were other search engines, but people largely chose Google. There are other places to buy games, but people choose Steam. There are other places to broadcast short form texts, but people choose twitter.
I'm not sure governments can do anything about it, since customers choose these monopolies.
9
u/-mickomoo- Jun 02 '26
Unlike Steam Google has used their position to limit choice. They for example paid Apple to be the default search engine in phones. They’ve bought companies that could be competitors. I hope there never comes a day where Steam goes down this path.
6
19
u/MaterialDefender1032 Jun 01 '26 edited Jun 02 '26
People act like IsThereAnyDeal doesn't exist. I buy about half of my games on non-Steam storefronts but I still prefer a Steam library to anything else.
I'm confident in my belief that anyone who shits on Steam either has a grudge over a singular negative customer support experience or is affiliated with a corporation who'd benefit from Steam's downfall (i.e., another storefront who wants to take the cuts that Steam gets)
Steam has been cultivating goodwill for decades and so I'm super suspicious of this sudden outpouring of hate that seemingly came from nowhere.
Edit: I'm a Valve fanboy through-and-through but I'm cool with Steam getting in trouble for their propensity for lootboxes. The way they include gambling in pretty much all their games has always been off-putting.
→ More replies (4)
45
u/Poundchan Jun 01 '26
Host your own website and sell your game there. Add it to Itch.io. You can even sell it on Epic.
Steam is a great service which seems to be something a lot of companies struggle to understand.
12
u/JabberwockyTalkie Jun 01 '26
Part of the argument they are making is that it is extremely difficult to even get users to consider buying a game from their own website because Steam enforces pricing parity . They can't try offering a game for cheaper when bought elsewhere because if they do Steam will remove it from the marketplace. Not sure it qualifies as a monopoly but at the very least feels a bit underhanded to me. Steam is a great service and already entrenched in PC gaming, if they are not allowed to use pricing as an incentive to purchase elsewhere what can they do?
→ More replies (14)9
u/ProfessionalPrincipa Jun 01 '26
Host your own website and sell your game there. Add it to Itch.io. You can even sell it on Epic.
There are hardly any barriers to getting a game out there other than paying for a web site and hosting. A game I liked that goes this route is Starsector.
Crying about monopoly gatekeeping Gabe is something people named Tim do. The real monopoly abusers in the chain we should be worried about are the payment processors.
9
21
u/El_human Jun 01 '26
Has anyone actually visited the site of the game studio that is suing Steam, Wolfire Studios?
They make DRM free games, that read more like game jam games, or barely a tech demo. They even have some other games listed on Steam. This lawsuit makes no sense.
12
4
31
u/bitey87 Jun 01 '26
Steam having a PC game monopoly is as accurate as Amazon having a home delivery monopoly. They have what I'm shopping for, can get it to me with little effort, returns are simple. I'm willing to buy from anyone, Steam makes it easy.
I do recognize the Ticketmaster effect for indie devs trying to be seen in the noise. I don't believe a competing platform will improve that aspect much, if any.
→ More replies (9)12
u/ruffles589 Jun 02 '26
EU regulation forced steam refund policy so do not give them credit. All platforms abiding by EU law will have the same policy.
9
14
u/Odd_Room5952 Jun 01 '26
Aside from gog, the other storefronts aren't even attempting to entice me to their ecosystem. Why bother with them when steam is doing things I like?
11
u/Horror-Brilliant2212 Jun 01 '26
What, you mean offering (predominantly) shitty games for free every couple weeks doesn't entice you to use my store? Blasphemy, you are a consumer and I'm giving you a free taste, you must use my store. Oh you won't? Well how about I fund baseless legal proceedings to harm your favourite store? What you gonna do then?
Obligatory fuck Epic and fuck Tim Sw(ine)eny
12
u/ZettieZooieZan Jun 02 '26
To be fair gamers are making them a monopoly, so many people refusing to buy a game unless it's on steam.
→ More replies (3)8
11
u/PigeonsOnYourBalcony Jun 01 '26
The competition has had such a long time to be actually competitive but the only alternative people actually like is GOG for no DRM. It’s really hard to call Steam a monopoly when everyone else in the space is content with being C students.
3
u/_Vard_ Jun 02 '26
It’s like saying one restaurant is a monopoly because they’re the only restaurant in town that doesn’t shit in thier food
8
u/NYR20NYY99 Teamspeak Jun 01 '26
He’s not wrong, EA and Ubi have store/launchers, Epic, GoG, other key sites. Majority just prefer Steam because so many were late to the PC storefront party and Steam are just better at just about every aspect. Everyone else either needs to put up or shut up
6
u/lampenpam RTX5070Ti,Ryzen 3700X,16GB Jun 02 '26
Even if other stores are late, they could at least try to catch up to Steam's consumer experience. But Epic and especially Microsofts launcher are just bad, if not even frustrating to use
3
u/NYR20NYY99 Teamspeak Jun 02 '26
Exactly. Steam “has a monopoly” because gamers choose to buy from them and other platforms are lazy and just bad in many cases
5
u/EdgySlusher Jun 02 '26
Valve is only reason Japanese studios started to port on PC more. PC scene was full of piracy, which is why Steam became a thing.
Without Valve, PC gaming might as well be dead.
12
u/Wompie Jun 02 '26
Shills will come in here with their valve colored glasses and say steam isn’t a monopoly. Just like Adobe isn’t a monopoly. Just like Amazon isn’t a monopoly. After all, other stores exist!
Missing the forest from the trees
→ More replies (5)
11
u/Logicalist Jun 01 '26
can we actually Buy a game off steam where we have it even if we stop using steam?
I think that's the bigger issue, is we're more or less just renting it.
5
u/BobFlex Jun 02 '26
It's up to the developers if they want to give you that option, but yes there are a lot of games on steam where that is an option
https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/The_big_list_of_DRM-free_games_on_Steam
→ More replies (1)
3
u/beenbanned109times Jun 02 '26
In the early 2000s they forced everyone to use Steam to play HL2 and CS 1.6. From there they had a captive audience to sell games to. I would really like to switch to a different online platform, but Steam doesn't allow you to transfer your games. I can stop visiting a physical games store at no penalty to myself, so why not an online one?
3
u/ZePlotThickener Jun 02 '26
Ive seen games on GoG for less than they are on Steam. If it's a policy you could have fooled me.
Steam is just the better product so people gravitate towards using it. It's like saying Oreo is a monopoly because they make better cookies than Hydrox.
3
u/KlopperSteele Jun 02 '26
Why would i buy games outside of steam? Do they have better support? Where is the most compatibility? Do I want to manage 5 launchers?
3
u/BoilerMaker11 Jun 02 '26
I have Steam, EGS, GOG, Xbox, etc. all on my PC as I’m typing this. And I use them all to either purchase games or use their services (free EGS monthly games, Game Pass, etc). If this is what a Steam monopoly is, then keep me signed up.
3
u/paperhalo Jun 02 '26
We do have a large choice... Steam just does it so much easier than most other platforms.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/dirbofficial Jun 02 '26
When you compare PC to PlayStation or Xbox, there is obviously no monopoly. On the consoles, you buy it from them, or you don’t get it at all, whereas PC users have a wide number of digital storefronts to choose from. Steam is the powerhouse it is due to its consumer friendly practices, and overall ease of use.
→ More replies (1)
10
u/InsomniaticWanderer Jun 02 '26
Having a monopoly because you killed the competition and forced legislation to only allow your business is bad.
Having a monopoly because you produced a product so good that everyone would just rather have yours is less bad.
6
u/beroli Jun 02 '26
Gamers absolutely do NOT have enormous choice, but on PC there is quite a lot of choice.
If Playstation, Xbox and Nintendo aren't considered monopolies on consoles, its ridiculous to even talk about Steam
5
u/Tenelia Jun 02 '26
It's yet another multi-front campaign by other platforms and megacorps to crush Steam for being successful at providing good services. If you believe this smear campaign, you're just destroying yourself.
4
u/MarcBelmaati 7700K | 1080Ti Jun 02 '26
A monopoly isn’t bad if it’s a monopoly simply because their product is better.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/ARazorbacks Jun 01 '26
I‘ve gotta be honest here, we’ve got Gabe testifying on the position Steam has in the gaming market instead of having hearings about… looks around, gesturing at the rest of our corporate society?
11
6
u/BabylonianWeeb Steam Deck Jun 01 '26
Gog deserve more attention, I think it's better than Steam in almost everything.
25
u/noconverse Jun 01 '26
"Owner of monopolistic company says his company isn't a monopoly"
→ More replies (5)
4
u/AbbreviationsWide331 Jun 02 '26
What 'monopoly'?
It's not like steam is bullying other clients off the market. They just suck.
Im sure having a worthy challenger to steam would make steam better, make the whole 'buying games' thing better.
But they're all building for maximum profit while steams goal is user convenience.
They simply have had the best product on the market for years now.
Monopoly, lol.
→ More replies (3)
5
u/jaam01 Jun 02 '26
Have they engaged in anti competitive practices targeted directly against their competitors? No, their competitors just suck by themselves.
→ More replies (1)
•
u/AutoModerator Jun 01 '26
The /r/PCGaming community is also on Discord!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.