Not OC, duh.

  • PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    99
    ·
    5 hours ago

    It’s still a monopoly though. The misconception is that calling Valve a monopoly, is somehow an attack on Valve or blames Valve. It’s just a description of Valve’s position in the market.

    Also, shame on whoever thinks Valve won’t ever abuse this position at some point in the future.

    Funny meme tho, just being pedantic

    • hayvan@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 hour ago

      The meme I hate is “Valve wins by doing nothing”. You cannot be any further from the truth. Valve has won so far by doing many things right, they keep doing many things right. It’s like IT or maintenance work, or being God, your work is invisible until everyone dies.

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      2 hours ago

      It’s still a monopoly though.

      No, it is not. You and the other commentators need to stop repeating that propaganda lie by the true monopolists of PC gaming (Epic, Microsoft,…).

      All of Steam combined makes up a fifth of the PC gaming revenue. A fifth! That’s a very good percentage but a fifth of anything is not a monopoly and that’s not even including mobile and consoles where Valve isn’t even competing at the moment.

      Fortnite, Rocket League, Valorant, League of Legends, Minecraft, still World of Warcraft, Roblox,… are where all that PC gaming revenue is concentrated but a few mid-tier games sell best on Steam (because the same priced copy on EGS offers worse value) and suddenly everybody keeps repeating the lie of the true monopolists that the company that isn’t classified in the EU as a gatekeeper under the Digital Markets Act is a monopoly (but Microsoft is).

    • AbsolutelyNotAVelociraptor@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      52
      ·
      4 hours ago

      People call Valve a monopoly, and they are right but… is it a monopoly because they wanted to become one? Or because the competitors are completely clueless about what do the customers want? Can we blame Valve on becoming a monopoly when they simply are listening to the customers while the competitors (like Epic) keep ignoring users demands?

      EA, Ubisoft, Microslop… they all tried to make their own launchers to move away from Steam and they all failed. Why? Because they wanted to make those launchers their way, while actively telling the users to shut up about their demands on what would make the launchers great.

      Epic… Epic keeps throwing fortnite money to EGS launcher but keeps ignoring the most basic user demands.

      Like, dude? I’m telling you that, for buying your product, it must have A, B and C. But, instead of offering me that, you make a product that lacks specifically A, B and C. And you expect me to buy it?

      It is a monopoly, but because nobody else is even trying. And that pisses me off.

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

        Microslop… they all tried to make their own launchers to move away from Steam and they all failed.

        Microsoft didn’t fail. They bought Minecraft and Blizzard / Battle.net, two things that are money printers outside of Steam.

        Microsoft ACTS like they fail because they demand higher profit margins from their gaming division to fund their AI investments.

        Epic… Epic keeps throwing fortnite money to EGS launcher but keeps ignoring the most basic user demands.

        EGS has an insane installed base because of Fortnite and Rocket League alone. League of Legends and Valorant are also available there but not Steam. Same with Genshin Impact and Honkai Impact.

        It’s just that these games drone out the other games on EGS and that’s why they sell better on Steam. And what is that droning out usually called? A monopoly.

      • theparadox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I agree that Valve has, in some instances, succeeded primarily because they’re not aggressively anti-consumer in a market of aggressively anti-consumer alternatives. However, they are not innocent by any means.

        Last I checked, they are still automated when it comes to the majority of their “customer services”. Getting an actual human to consider things is expensive and they don’t want to spend money on that.

        They are very conscious the numbers behind their success and the money that their platform and marketplace rakes in. They have worked with literal economists when it comes to their marketplace. Yet they turn a blind eye to the skin gambling issue.

        They do sometimes behave like bullies when negotiating with those who want to sell their games on Steam. The proportion of money paid out to devs/publishers is a factor of success and benefit to valve rather than anything else - if your game makes a lot of money (for Valve), you get a discount on the percentage taken. Some of that bullying behavior is also anticompetitive - as has been brought up in lawsuits. Their policies use “most favored nation” clauses.

        • Basically if you want to benefit from Steam, the dominant marketplace, you have to offer Steam customers nothing less than you offer customers anywhere else. No discounts on another store or your website. No bonus content or service that might make a non-steam purchase feel better than a purchase on Steam.

        Finally, they may not be anti-consumer but they have exactly been spending a lot of effort on improving the functionality of services that their platform has. Issues with their friends-related services like voice chat have plagued the platform for a long time, though some have recently been improved. They know they are dominant and don’t spend money when they don’t need to in order to keep customers.

        All said and done, I use them as my default though I’ve made efforts to be more dev and indie dev conscious. Unfortunately, greed fuels most of the world and makes it hard to do anything that favors anyone besides those with power.

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

          Doesn’t matter. Monopolies are bad and should be dismantled.

          Then start with actual monopolists:

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

                Market share is not the only determinant, and also yes holding 20% of the market can empower an actor to exert monopolistic power. Maybe learn a little bit before you open your mouth; you sound as stupid as the FTC.

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      4 hours ago

      The term monopoly does not apply here. Not only do we lack any evidence of anti-competitive practices, there literally are competitors, they just suck and they are very unpopular.

      • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        4 hours ago

        A monopoly […] is a market in which one person or company is the only supplier of a particular good or service[1]. A monopoly is characterized by a lack of economic competition to produce a particular thing, a lack of viable substitute goods, and the possibility of a high monopoly price well above the seller’s marginal cost that leads to a high monopoly profit.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly

        A monopoly is just an observation of the market landscape. Doesnt require ill intent or anti-competitive practices. Steam is just a benevolent monopoly. Until its not…

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

          A monopoly […] is a market in which one person or company is the only supplier of a particular good or service

          So like Epic in case of Unreal Engine and Microsoft in case of Windows. Steam makes up a fifth of all PC gaming revenue and EGS has a wide installed based because of Fortnite, Rocket League etc. People just choose not to spend their money there for games that are available elsewhere. That’s different from EGS not being able from supplying goods and services because they were pushed out.

        • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          4 hours ago

          There is competition. And the term “monopolize” is used as a way of saying someone took action to stomp out the competition so I would say that 99% of people would assume intent whether or not it’s technically a part of the definition, because 99% of the time a monopoly exists it’s not by accident. But again, importantly, there IS competition.

    • lime!@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 hours ago

      is steam really over 95% of the market? i think that’s where the limit is

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

        is steam really over 95% of the market? i think that’s where the limit is

        No, 8.6 billion out of 45 billion dollars. That’s a fifth.

    • Mwa@thelemmy.clubOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      agreed, i will just hope they dont abuse the monopoly like Google or Microsoft. (this will be wishful thinking)