What Wolfire wants to happen is for game marketplaces and game services platforms to be decoupled. Right now Valve has vertically integrated the two. You buy the game, and they offer peer multiplayer, social, workshop, etc.

If those services were charged separately, so that the costs of those services was not forced into the pricing of other marketplaces that don't offer those services, you open the market to more competition.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So Wolfire's idea of being anticompetitive is to restrict how many features a platform may offer?

Honestly, it just sounds like Wolfire has an axe to grind. Steam doesn't price in the features it offers, their 30% cut existed a long time before most of this stuff was added.

Something like this will never be implemented. Consider the outcome: Steam decouples the marketplace from the extra services, so they create a separate application and offer it as a free service, and creates a link between the two services. There are a hundred ways around this, and all of them inconvenience the consumer.

[–] Spedwell@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'm at my wits end trying to explain this. I guess I can just recommend reading the legal briefs that summarize the matter, or articles that dig deeper than this one.

Maybe I'll think about it later and make a more complete write up with concrete examples. I really hate to see the confusion here. Wolfire is doing us a favor, we should not be handing Valve the keys to the market just because they act like Mr. Benevolent.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 1 points 1 year ago

Sorry, as aforementioned, I'm just not seeing what you're seeing.