• brucethemoose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    94
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    These comments…

    Some day, Steam is going to enshittify, eat game devs for breakfast, and all these Steam fans will wonder how anyone could have possibly seen this coming.

    Kind of like a certain online bookstore named after a river.


    Not that I don’t enjoy Steam. But I trust them as much as any corporation: not at all.

      • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        52 minutes ago

        Be prepared.

        Don’t hate, but don’t trust Valve. Treat your Steam library like you don’t own it, and it could be enshittified at any time, because you don’t, and it could.


        In practice, prioritize DRM-free stores when convenient. Or better yet, 1st party game dev stores. Archive any games or saves you actually want to go back to, just in case. Game like your Steam client install could require a subscription at a moment’s notice.

      • ClamDrinker@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Exactly. And unlike many other companies there isn’t even any indication they would want to enshittify anyways. Why would they destroy the foundation of their platform? They have actual paying customers paying the bills, not some force-feed ad slop machine.

    • vapeloki@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Hearing those arguments for how many years now? Right …

      The day Gabe is bo longer there things may get ugly, may.

      But, Valve is not publicly traded, or has to cater to shareholders in any way. That is the reason they are still who they are.

      • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 hours ago

        They run a good service platform and aren’t as greedy as they could be, but they’re still not safe.

        Use them, but no fangirling. They’re a business.

        • Crozekiel@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 hour ago

          I’d be completely in agreement of what you are saying if it wasn’t for the fact that there are so many people acting like Steam is the worst platform in existence every time they get brought up. People are awfully quick to suck Tim Sweeney off for only charging 12% and fill up the comments with whatever the opposite of “fangirling” is.

          • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            51 minutes ago

            Yeah, that’s going too far, but I understand the reaction to fanning over Valve.

            There are a bazillion historical examples of why one should use, not trust, big businesses. They are entities to make transaction with, not people, and they will tighten the screws even if it takes decades.

            This is doubly true in the software business.

            And if the Valve superfans look at the world in 2026 and somehow don’t see that, I honestly don’t know what to tell them. They’re in such a completely different world than me I don’t know where to start.

    • JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Amazon was toxic from day one, anticompetitive, borderline illegal, definitely corrupt as hell. It is what Epic Games Store would have been if it had been long before steam lol. The amount of shit that they bankrupted into the ground with cheap Chinese copies off the backs of VC funds while making tons of loss and then removing their storefronts…

      But as soon as GabeN dies, steam will become shit probably as the vultures close in.

    • Yerbouti@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      4 hours ago

      They already take 30% on each game. It’s huge, considering they didn’t spent a dime on these games. That means they will take most of the profit margin on a game, if any, while a studio has to pay for dozens or hundreds of employees, tons of hardware, workspaces, etc.

      • vapeloki@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Do You have any idea what the hosting infrastructure, steam works, and traffic costs?

        Also, valve is giving massive contributions to open source from those 30%

        • garretble@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 hour ago

          So, Apple and other companies that charge 30% to host apps: BAD

          Steam changes 30% to host games: GOOD

          I’m not saying this is your argument, necessarily, but it’s funny to hear that “30% is good actually!” in the tech space because the last few years it’s been “Apple and others who charge 30% are taking too much! All they do is host and manage the traffic for apps!”

          And I’m not trying to say Apple is good or anything. It’s just funny.

        • Serinus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Do You have any idea what the hosting infrastructure, steam works, and traffic costs?

          Yeah, not 30% of all PC games. It’s how they turn out absurd profit.

          • vapeloki@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Never said that. But what is better for the dev? Using those services or run their own?

            And I am fine with Valve making absurd profits, after all, they have put at least 500.000.000 USD into open source (Around 100-200 external oss devs on payroll for projects like Mesa, SDL,…).

            Will I leave steam and call valve out if they get toxic? Yes! Are they evil or the enemy right now? To the contrary.

            • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              2 hours ago

              What would be better for the dev is a 9% platform cut and just a slightly smaller megayacht for Gabe.

            • Serinus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              2 hours ago

              Using those services or run their own?

              If they could have still images and text on the Steam store and a link to their external site for everything else, it’d by far be running their own.

              It’s the exposure that Steam has an effective monopoly on.

              Not everything has to be black and white. I appreciate Steam, but 30% is absurd. They’re absolutely raising the price of games and taking money away from developers.

              • bitjunkie@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 hour ago

                It’s the exposure that Steam has an effective monopoly on.

                See OP image. It’s an effective monopoly because the competition have dumped billions into squandering decades of consumer goodwill.

              • vapeloki@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                2 hours ago

                GOG takes 30%, most publishers take 30 to 50%, apple app store takes 30%, as does Google.

                Is this to high? Maybe, I don’t publish games. But at least it is not absurd in means of industry standards :(

                • Rose@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  2 hours ago

                  GOG’s fee is flexible, as are publisher contracts, which have no relevance to the discussion, as it’s in addition to store fees and involves major investments. Google is changing its fee to 20%. Epic’s is currently 0%. Microsoft Store’s is 12%, itch’s is adjustable. In the PC market, Valve is pretty much the main outlier at this point.

          • vapeloki@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            3 hours ago

            What exactly is this the answer to?

            Yes, they make a shit load of money. But assuming you want to distribute a game directly, how much of would that cost you, and let’s ignore the whole visibility shit for a second.

              • vapeloki@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 hours ago

                Because p2p … How exactly does this apply to content distribution? Torrents are not always a reliable option…

                • Yerbouti@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  24 minutes ago

                  There’s tons of options to host and share files, torrents are just one.

                  Steam, like spotify and other platforms is just convenient, and in this era of me, myself and I, it’s only thing most people care about.

                  Anyway, I’m done with the steam fanboys and their cognitive dissonance. Just remember you are directly creating the enshitifcation of gaming, because at the rate studios are firing people, you will soon enjoy only AI stuff, the only way to make profit from games.

            • Serinus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 hours ago

              Honestly not that much. The biggest thing Valve brings to the table is advertising and access to customers.

              Hosting doesn’t cost that much. If you were that desperate for bandwidth (no one is), torrents exist as an option. Blizzard used to have torrents built into their downloader.

              The infrastructure is a nice afterthought.

              • vapeloki@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 hours ago

                My day job is designing complex IT platforms.

                And the cost goes massive down with size.

                So. If your game sells badly, you will most likely spend more. Oney in hosting and distribution then you would make profit.

                For example, assume your game has around 50gb. You sell 100 copies of it. You can easily calculate 1-2$ per download.

                Add your own personal on top of it, someone has to run that stuff, and licensing and more for statistics tooling and more.

                Platforms like valve allow indie devs and small studios to avoid all those costs upfront.

                “Not that much” depends on the view

      • carpelbridgesyndrome@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        There definitely is some amount of expenditure by valve. I don’t know if its 30% worth. For multiplayer games they provide a server/client DDOS protection and traffic optomization service though it is opt in by the developer through an api. The other option for this tends to be a “contact sales” priced product from cloudflare. There is also some of proton’s development, some linux graphics driver work, and workshop support though I suspect hosting and content moderation expenditure there is fairly minimal.

      • ericwdhs@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        30% is the industry standard though, and Valve’s contributions of distribution and discovery infrastructure, its audience, and expanding hardware initiatives are not nothing. If you’re not pricing a game to give yourself a healthy margin within the 70% or your development model doesn’t make that viable, that’s really on you.

        • Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          Industry standard doesn’t mean reasonable. It’s renter class bullshit, profiting off of other’s labor. Pretending creating a distribution and discovery platform is seriously deserving of 30% of the value of the hard work of game devs is not reasonable. If it was reasonable, gabe wouldn’t be a billionaire.

          • ericwdhs@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            I never called it reasonable. I just don’t think it’s especially egregious. Honestly, I would price the value of Valve’s contribution (which is definitely not zero) at maybe 15% to 20%, but that’s just a gut feeling.

        • Yerbouti@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I mean, Spotify’s model is the industry standard, and it still suck big time and doesn’t give a shit about artists.

          Anyway if I’ve learn anything over the past 10 years, it’s that it would probably be easier to convince a room full of maga to vote for Hillary Clinton than the average gamer to admit that steam sucks. So keep kissing this billionaire’s ass because he really does care about you, and remember Ubisoft and Epic (12% cut) bad.

          • ClamDrinker@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            56 minutes ago

            Challenging biased views, half truths, or having your own opinions isn’t kissing some billionaire’s ass. I don’t want billionaire’s to exist. Gabe shouldn’t need to be a billionaire. But all of this is absofuckinglutely irrelevant to whether or not Steam is a good platform, unless Gabe was wielding Steam in a way that would promote a billionaire class, which he isn’t.

            • Yerbouti@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              31 minutes ago

              Oh, I didn’t know you were a personal friend of Gabe, my bad.

              Anyway I don’t care about people like you, you are the problem. I care about people looking for solutions to have a healthy and fair industry.

              I use to make a decent living out of music and sound design, 15-20 years ago. Then spotify came along and nobody lives from selling music anymore. Now I teach and if I was honest with my students, I’d tell them they are wasting time. Even here in Montreal, with hundreds of studios, there’s basically no more job in audio because the only way to make profit out of game is with AI and sound banks. So yeah, enjoy the enshitification of games, you’re directly promoting it.

              • ClamDrinker@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 minutes ago

                You really need to take a good look in the mirror, because you are reading things that aren’t there and embarrassing yourself and the industry you claim to care about.

          • Rose@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 hour ago

            The “30% is the industry standard” claim is not even true anymore. Epic currently takes 0% to expand its catalog, though from what I remember, it estimated that it needs to take 7% or so to be profitable. Microsoft takes 12%. Itch allows to adjust. GOG’s fee varies from deal to deal. Ubisoft (and EA) no longer sell third-party games, so they’re out of scope here.

            The only way I’ve seen people try to counter this is by referring to the mobile and console store fees, but going by the Epic v. Google trial where the jury was asked to define the market and defined it as Android, there’s just no way that argument would hold water. Still, console manufacturers produce at a loss, so they need to make up for that. In the mobile market, Google is already changing its fee to be 20% or less.

            Edit: lawsuit->trial

          • ericwdhs@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 hours ago

            I’m not saying the standard doesn’t suck, just taking issue with the implication that anyone using it is uniquely bad to do so.

            But yeah, you’re right that getting me to admit Steam (overall) sucks would be nigh impossible. I genuinely don’t believe it does, so there’s nothing to admit. Maybe you could convince me to lie about it though? Lol.

            I do admit there’s a few places it sucks, the gambling stuff being the biggest, but their positives eclipse those for me. I also acknowledge I’m in a privileged position being able to enjoy Valve’s efforts in VR, Linux compatibility, etc. directly and that I might have different opinions if I was on the outside looking in. I imagine that’s not quite the admission you want though.

          • Serinus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 hours ago

            I’m not gonna say Steam sucks. It’s a nice organizational tool that enforces some standards.

            I’d rather have a drm free game that’s 20% cheaper though. The devs can pocket the other 10%.

      • Kairos@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Brick and mortar stores take 50% of revenue usually. The profit margin for the manufacturer applies after that

        • Yerbouti@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          You comparing a store with a digital storefront? Anyway enjoy the library you don’t own, at best it will die with you.