You’re conflating. While I don’t disagree that Valve is soaking up money, and when it fleet-of-yachts money, it’s just as sickening as when any-and-everyone else does it. Where there’s a difference is in the ‘How’. While I have my problems with Steam, generally speaking, they offer a good service. They provide servers and bandwidth while selling games far cheaper than their closest competitors, by one means or another.
There’s also how they’re using that money as a company. Right now, I can think of three different lawsuits Valve is involved in just off the top of my head, all of which are fighting to worsen the hobby for gamers and Valve is opposing. Obviously, it’s in Valve’s interest as a game’s marketplace to keep gamers throwing money at them, but the ‘Why’ matters a lot less in this circumstance that the ‘What’. Even if it’s not the express purpose, Valve is the only company I know of that’s putting in any amount of effort to defend consumer rights in the gaming space. Everyone else with money comparable to what Valve has are too busy trying to exploit the market or diminish Valve’s share while providing nothing as close to as good as Steam.
News that has come out since your comment involving Valve includes an agreement with Facepunch Studios to make Source 2 available to public without any licensing fee under the name of s&box. While it’s obviously in Valve’s interest to increase the possible amount of games that will be sold on their platform, and Facepunch have done a significant amount of heavy lifting in making Source 2 both available and useful to the masses, that’s still Valve doing their part to make the gaming community a better place and provide an alternative to the (in some people’s opinions) over-used Unreal and (horribly untrustworthy) Unity.
As Zorque has said before me, Valve aren’t angles, but I truly believe Valve is bringing a net positive to the market, unlike any other company with comparable bank balances.
You’re conflating. While I don’t disagree that Valve is soaking up money, and when it fleet-of-yachts money, it’s just as sickening as when any-and-everyone else does it. Where there’s a difference is in the ‘How’. While I have my problems with Steam, generally speaking, they offer a good service. They provide servers and bandwidth while selling games far cheaper than their closest competitors, by one means or another.
There’s also how they’re using that money as a company. Right now, I can think of three different lawsuits Valve is involved in just off the top of my head, all of which are fighting to worsen the hobby for gamers and Valve is opposing. Obviously, it’s in Valve’s interest as a game’s marketplace to keep gamers throwing money at them, but the ‘Why’ matters a lot less in this circumstance that the ‘What’. Even if it’s not the express purpose, Valve is the only company I know of that’s putting in any amount of effort to defend consumer rights in the gaming space. Everyone else with money comparable to what Valve has are too busy trying to exploit the market or diminish Valve’s share while providing nothing as close to as good as Steam.
News that has come out since your comment involving Valve includes an agreement with Facepunch Studios to make Source 2 available to public without any licensing fee under the name of s&box. While it’s obviously in Valve’s interest to increase the possible amount of games that will be sold on their platform, and Facepunch have done a significant amount of heavy lifting in making Source 2 both available and useful to the masses, that’s still Valve doing their part to make the gaming community a better place and provide an alternative to the (in some people’s opinions) over-used Unreal and (horribly untrustworthy) Unity.
As Zorque has said before me, Valve aren’t angles, but I truly believe Valve is bringing a net positive to the market, unlike any other company with comparable bank balances.