• ssillyssadass@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    Steam is the very, very rare case of a major company that is both not beholden to shareholders, and has a pretty good guy at the helm.

    • ThirdConsul@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 days ago

      I simply do not understand the sentiment that not being a total bastard is something celebrated and not expected or required.

      And while many like our Steam benevolent (almost) monopoly, I do wonder how would the market look like if we had 20 competing companies that cannot gain more than 5% of the market share. Can you imagine the competition between them and how would that benefit us, the consumer?

      • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        That would mean exclusives everywhere. Everyone would try to force some game pass on us, until our only choice to get an OK selection would be having 4 subscriptions. Or piracy.

        With Steam, I get a well integrated platform for buying, updating and launching everything with the correct compatibility layer.

        That’s more convenient than piracy, so I use it.

      • offspec@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        “Not being a total bastard” is a weird way to describe overhauling the gaming on linux experience at no additional cost to the end user, among many other incredibly pro consumer choices they’ve pushed in the last twenty odd years.

  • exu@feditown.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 days ago

    Devs are still free to sell their game outside of Steam and charge whatever price they want for that version

  • Mwa@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    i think personally Steam’s/Valve’s dominance is really good here’s why:

    • Improving Linux gaming,improving Wine and DXVK for gaming,so you dont rely on Microsoft for your OS.
    • Great client(i like the: inbuilt Chromium based browser,Community features)
    • Not so awful and maybe simple DRM methods(eg, needing the Steam client doesnt tank the performance that much,compared to something like denuvo which i think makes modding impossible,needs consistent internet connection,and tanks the game’s fps alot )
    • I can buy with cash giftcard to buy games(I wish GOG had that)
    • Workshop for modding on supported games.(ik some games have workshop and dont let you mod everything)
    • Makes/has good games(Half-life 2 is the best game i ever played)

    but the bad things:

    • Steam Client is still 32 bit and Steam doesnt target ARM(E,G. For like M1+ macs,those need rosetta )
    • third party clients arent a option
    • You dont own anything you buy on Steam.
    • Having the Steam client open at all times(ik not all games have this, but i assume CEF based Steam will lower the performance like slightly)
    • TF2 neglect
    • lootboxes/battle pass in some games(i am aware Valve was the first company to have a battle pass and fortnite popularized it)
      alright thats what i think of the Good and bad of Valve/Steam

    Edit: Fixed Paragraph break.

    • Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      I think you switched to cons without saying.

      I admit I haven’t tried very many, but I think you can launch any steam app “normally” without steam running. If you can find the executable or startup script, you can just point a shortcut to it. Some games will need Steam Services to run, but it’s not blocked or anything.

      • Mwa@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        I admit I haven’t tried very many, but I think you can launch any steam app “normally” without steam running. If you can find the executable or startup script, you can just point a shortcut to it. Some games will need Steam Services to run, but it’s not blocked or anything.

        I think i mentioned this,? but there are Steam games that dont let you use it without having the client open, but yeah there are Steam games that work without the client.

        I think you switched to cons without saying.

        Its there but i didnt have a line break.

  • magic_lobster_party@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 days ago

    People feel good about Valve because they don’t rely on anti consumer behavior. It does what I want and doesn’t enforce me on other crap.

    • nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      it’s crazy how you offer people convenience and they willingly pay for it. I remember steam killing piracy before DRM or anything like that existing

      • wellheh@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        You make it sound like drm didn’t exist before steam or like steam isn’t a form of drm itself. Old drm was more basic and far less nefarious, like entering a cd key or codes in your manual. This later escalated to online activated cd keys. At the very least, these forms of drm didn’t run all the time like steam did- I remember steam getting huge pushback (from myself included) because it ran like absolute dogshit. Later forms of drm got worse with checks in the discs that collected data on your pc (securom, anyone?). Steam did a lot of good things but it did not erase drm- it merely created another form of it (I.e. You no longer own your games, you are buying licenses they can revoke at any time)

  • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 days ago

    While many accuse Valve of monopolising the PC gaming market, others argue that Steam’s dominance is simply the result of doing things right.

    These assertions do not contradict. I cannot overstress that.

    This whole article is ‘Valve’s monopoly is fine because they did things right.’

    Having one good store is not, in itself, a problem. But it does mean we’re one fuckup away from having no good stores.

  • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 days ago

    So we’re acknowledging it’s a monopoly? Cool. Defense is still an acknowledgement. I’ve had the weirdest goddamn arguments with people insisting they’d never shop anywhere else, and if games aren’t on there it’s their own fault they’re doomed… but how dare anyone use the m-word! Obviously that can only mean one seller with absolute control, like how Standard Oil owned all 85% of the market.

    • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 days ago

      The question is, is it a monopoly because they are doing something to force their way into that position, or does every other offering just suck?

      And what is the solution to said monopoly? Because as far as I can tell, the only way to give the other shitty stores a chance is to deliberately make the steam experience worse.

      There’s also the question of if this is even a real problem. For instance, if two people are trying to sell lemonade on their street, and one is just throwing a lukewarm cup of haphazardly crushed lemons at you for $2, and the other is charging $3 but giving you a cool glass of carefully squeezed lemons… the second one may have a monopoly, but that’s because the first isn’t competent. Should the second be punished in some way because of that?