this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2024
711 points (91.1% liked)
Games
32958 readers
1817 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No, they don't. Unless otherwise implemented, Steam games are DRM free and can be launched directly from their executables.
As evidenced by this post, they are not a monopoly. So what does this statement actually mean?
This post gives evidence of the contrary, game that dared not to be published on platform that has 70-80% of pc market share ( https://www.geekwire.com/2024/gaming-giant-valve-hit-with-another-antitrust-lawsuit-alleging-anticompetitive-practices/ ) shouldn't even exist and even stating otherwise is a blasphemy, lol. As for more anecdotical examples, games that are published on steam only, are majority most don't even list other platforms on their web sites, in cases when they can be bought elsewhere. Even more, updates and patches often do not reach other marketplaces. So yeah steam is a shitty marketplace with horrible ui and captured fanatical clients.
Lawsuits are cheap and meaningless. Unless actually ruled on, they don't mean crap (and even then, sometimes it's just clear evidence of jury / judge bias, like the infamous patent trolls of East Texas).
This source puts their market share at ~20% of the PC gaming market. Your source is for '85% market share in multi-publisher PC game stores', which is not the same thing, and it's based on a random tweet by their competitor CEO attacking them, which should carry approximately 0 credibility.
You keep using the word monopoly. It does not mean what you seem to think it means.
Your "source" is an image that doesn't even differentiate between various stores and lists everything as blue, with text that says "steam revenue is probabaly x billion". I couldn't find anything except other similar images when looking up Pelham Smithers reports. In reports from previous years steam is not mentioned. I will rephrase it then if you dislike the word I am using: Steam has a dominant position in the pc gaming market and uses it to their benefit which doesn't (in my opinion) coincide with consumer benefit, also their app is shit.
P.S.: I've used the word monopoly once
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/video-game-industry-revenues-by-platform/
Also, Steam's estimated revenue and the PC gaming market are numbers available from various sources. I've pointed out why your source is nonsense, and provided more accurate figures.
That's changed from your original 'behave like a monopoly' comment, and which I'm still waiting for clarification on. How exactly do they behave like a monopoly supposedly does?
You post the same data now with article that doesn't even have word "steam" in it. Your various sources weren't linked. I think that clears why your source is "nonsense".
Yes my words are changed because, you somehow read me saying multiple times of steam being monopoly in single use of phrase, steam behaves like a monopoly. I repeat, not liking one store doesn't make me a fan of another, they both are horrible.
As for examples of anti-competitive behaviour, price matching that is being discussed in comments here is a big one, don't you think?