• Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    3 months ago

    So because they’re treating you right it’s ok to put 70% of the market in the hands of a single person?

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      They’re not anti-competitive, that’s the difference. Devs can even sell Steam keys on their own website and take 100% of the profit if they so choose, and there’s absolutely no lock-in.

      I’m not sure where the anti-trust is. Having a high marketshare by itself doesn’t mean you’re committing anti-trust, abusing that market position does.

    • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      3 months ago

      Just having a high market share isn’t the issue. It’s abusing that dominant market position that is.

      Valve has been smart enough not to do that. Google, Amazon, Microsoft and the like haven’t. In fact, Valve’s competitors have been more anti-competitive than Valve.

      ASML, who make EUV machines and other semiconductor tooling, is also in a dominant market position (way more dominant actually). Do you ever see calls to break them up? No. Because they haven’t been abusing their power. They know that if they put a toe out of line, they’ll be in trouble with regulators.

      Google and the like have been able to act with impunity because the US protects them, to the detriment of their smaller companies and their citizens.

      • Tiresia@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        ASML is basically a strategic asset. Breaking them up to have a more level playing field inherently threatens the West’s economic-political position. If ASML abused their position, it wouldn’t be the regulators so much as the CIA that showed up to tell them to reconsider.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Really? Because they’re part of the giants that determine game prices, pricing is based on everyone that takes a cut along the way, they take 30%, that’s calculated into what games need to sell for, 30% is enough to make them billions in profit, billions in profit is money that came out of our pockets to go in Newell’s pockets so he can own six yachts.

        I swear if it was a public company people would be flipping out because their numbers would be public and the profit would be going to investors, but they’re private and they only have one investor the profit goes to do that’s perfectly fine I guess???

        • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          30% is the industry standard.

          Shit, doesn’t YouTube take like 60%? I think Twitch takes a big chunk too. Gog takes 30%. MS takes 30%. Sony takes 30%. Nintendo takes 30%. Apple takes 30%. GameStop, BestBuy, Amazon, and Walmart all take roughly 30% too.

          It’s the industry standard.

          And unlike the likes of the Play Store or App store, Valve provides a lot for that 30%.

          • free cloud sync

          • free online multiplayer (not a given, look at MS/Sony/Nintendo)

          • forums

          • game demos

          • game recording with some neat features

          • a VR system

          • in-home streaming

          • family game sharing

          • a review system

          • a mod distribution platform

          • dev tools

          • advertising

          • online services you can tie into your game

          • achievements

          • a cross-platform, userspace anti-cheat solution

          • notes

          • backwards compatibility tooling

          • OS compatibility layers

          • Linux development

          • driver development

          • vast controller support

          • performance overlays

          • steam input

          • the list goes on…

          I’m not in love with everything Valve does (loot boxes, micro-transactions 🤢). But it’s undeniable that compared to other companies that take the same (or higher) cut, you get a lot back.

          Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to live in the fantasy world where they only take a 1% cut, but that’s just what it is, a fantasy.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Ok so because it’s the industry standard it’s ok?

            How about we focus on the fact that the industry standard makes owners and c-suite billionaires? Do you think people would start hating a company if they cut their share to 10% and prices came down instead of having that extra enrich the few?

            • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              3 months ago

              Reread my comment. I’m not saying it’s ok because it’s the industry standard, I’m saying it’s tolerable because it’s the industry standard and yet despite their strong market position, they still consciously provide a good value.

              And let’s not pretend that even if everyone switched to a 10% margin (assuming that would even be profitable), people wouldn’t then complain about 10% being too high. It’s like taxes - no matter what it’s set as, a significant amount of people will always say “that’s too high! I don’t want to pay that!”

        • patatahooligan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Antitrust is not about preventing big companies making money. It’s about preventing specific practices by monopolies to restrict the free market and to abuse their users. Don’t get me wrong, there’s a ton I find morally objectionable with companies as big as Valve and people as rich as Gabe. We might agree on those issues. But this particular Google thing is about something else. And Valve is indeed different to most tech companies in that regard.

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

            If you don’t consider that a company taking billions out of our pockets and putting it in the pockets of a single person abuse then I don’t know what to say.

    • YeetPics@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      You say that like your only option is to buy games from steam.

      There are many other online stores you can use. Sorry you don’t like the most popular/oldest/one that reflects the wishes of the consumer the most.

    • Harvey656@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Hot take: if they aren’t hurting me or others, money wise or not, I don’t care if they have majority market share. In this case it makes sense, they treat their customers right and don’t bully the market.

      This simply isn’t the fight.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        But they’re hurting you, their market dominance means they don’t have to compete for pricing, the reason Newell is a billionaire is because the games they sell are sold for more than they’re worth.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            The devs determine they need to sell X copies at Y$/copy, they then calculate what Valve’s cut will be and add it over Y$

            Example: You think you’ll sell a million copy and want to make 10 millions to recoup your cost and make a profit so you need 10$ per. But the truth is that after everyone else gets their cut (publisher, distributor, taxes…) you’re left with about 50% of the sale price going to you, that means your need to sell the game for 20$ to end up with 10$/copy going to you. If everyone else had lower margins and you got 70% of the sale price ending up in your pocket you would need to sell your game for 14.30$ a copy to end up with 10$ going to you. Everyone else in this example are the people who aren’t part of the actual development cost, their margins are huge compared to the amount of work they accomplish, the proof of that is that they’re making billions in profit, profit is revenue - cost, their cost is basically nothing, hosting content and distributing it costs peanuts these days and prices are only going down, so their profit is actually increasing passively over time. Because the devs need to set the price at 20$ instead of 14.30$ you’re paying 5.70$ more for the same product and that 5.70$ is all going into the pockets of people that had nothing to do with actually creating the product you’re purchasing.

            • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              3 months ago

              How is that different than selling anything else anywhere? You’ve picked a strange hill to die on, and your reasoning doesn’t even fit.

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

                    I just added one more example that no one talks about. Find one of my comments where I say the other examples weren’t just as guilty.

                • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  Oh now you haven’t only been harping about steam for the last 12 hours? Now the problem is that everything is a monopoly? Lmao ok

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

                    I’m talking about Steam because that’s what this part of the conversation is about, funny how that works, right? I’ll be the first one to call out any company who’s owner/c-suite are billionaires. If we want to talk about PC gaming specifically then Epic is no better, neither is GOG. Decentralize that shit.

        • Harvey656@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          You don’t get to decide for me who I think is or isn’t hurting me, I do.

          With these takes, what I really want to know is: Who hurt you?

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

            Oh so you believe that margins high enough that the owner is a billionaire don’t hurt your wallet?

            • Harvey656@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              You are so lost in the sauce. We’re talking about a company that hosts a video game sales platform, if I feel like they are fucking me, I can go elsewhere, there’s epic, gog, ubishit, ea, xbox, itch, I don’t have to go to steam. I choose to.

              If they aren’t fucking me, let them make as much as they want. There are far, FAR bigger fish to fry.

              • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                But all of them are fucking us at the same time. It’s the same thing as saying “I don’t need to go to that grocery chain, I can go to another one.” Sure you can, in the end you’re just making a difference boss a billionaire, all of them are fucking evil!

                It’s a systemic issue and unless you’re a billionaire you’re a victim just like all of us, even if you refuse to see it.

                • Harvey656@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  The systemic issue you are talking about is far higher than any company or conglomerate. You cannot blame them for playing the game they’ve been given. The system itself needs changed, until such a day I will continue to use the products and services that do not ruin my bank or values. Therefore I will continue to use steam, they are not harming me, I am no fucking victim. The world you desire won’t come to pass by crying online and telling others how to feel. Go be the change you want and protest, send mail to government officials, fuck it throw some tomato sauce in some paintings, do whatever you have to. But do not, under any circumstance think I’m going to change my mind on a service that I not only use, but like and most generally would endorse. If you want to change minds, you need a compelling argument.

                  ADHD rant over, thanks for your time.

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

                    “It’s an issue but I don’t consider myself a victim. I won’t stop sending money to the people profiting from the system in place at my expense. Be the change your want to see.”

                    Are you for real?

                    No one force Newell to be a billionaire, he owns the fucking company, he could decide to cut their margins to 20% tomorrow morning, he doesn’t, he collects fucking yachts instead.