Nothing more disappointing to me than seeing a game I might enjoy… and then it’s only available on PC on Epic Games store. Why can’t it be available on Epic, Xbox game store and Steam? It’s so annoying, like you have no choice but to use Epic… which I would literally do ANYTHING not to use.

  • RxBrad
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Look at all those downvotes from people who took offense to this comment, and WANT Steam to have a monopoly.

    Yes, corporations bad. But don’t forget: Steam is a corporation, too.

    • shneancy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      yeah but the thing is, Steam isn’t even trying to be a monopoly, all of Steam’s competitors just seem to have a hobby of shooting their own foot, repeatedly. Steam is trying to make the gaming experience easier and more fun, and excelling at it!

      unlike some other platforms, Steam doesn’t do exclusive deals, literally the only Steam exclusives are Valve’s own games, everything else is up to be decided by devs

      • RxBrad
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Steam itself seemingly isn’t trying to have a monopoly.

        But damned if there isn’t a massive, very-loud Internet contingent that desperately wants them to have that monopoly.

        If your immediate trigger reaction is seething anger when someone says, “I got a good deal on a game from Epic”… maybe that’s not healthy. The “Lord Gaben” meme isn’t meant to be taken 100% literally.

        • shneancy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 hours ago

          i don’t get angry at things that don’t affect me lol

          i do worry for steam’s future, it’s only this good because “Lord Gaben” has made many great decisions, it may not be a democracy but a good “dictator” is often more effective than a democracy. But what happens if/when Steam goes to shit for whatever reason? the internet will implode

      • indog@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        8 hours ago

        They’re in a class action lawsuit now over price fixing. They’re kicking games off Steam if their publishers offer games at lower prices on cheaper stores. They’re trying to be a monopoly.

        • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          … That’s not price fixing.

          Do companies that don’t use steam offer comensuratelty lower prices?

          • indog@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 hours ago

            They don’t offer lower prices on Epic because Valve bullies publishers into matching the price with Steam. Valve threatens to delist the game from Steam if a lower price is available elsewhere, using their market dominance to prevent smaller stores from competing the only way they realistically can – on price.

            • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 hours ago

              I literally said “companies that don’t use steam”. If a publisher opted to not use steam, it should have lower prices, right?

              Except we see games not released on steam still selling for the same $60 for a full feature game that we do everywhere.

              • indog@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 hours ago

                The lawsuit already has several public examples of communications between Valve and publishers where Valve is all “whoah whoah you can’t be selling that cheap on another store!”. Publishers want to offer lower prices. The economics make sense, passing on some of the savings to consumers will result in an increase in revenue, this is also what the expert economists in the lawsuit are going to be testifying.

                If you’re big enough to not be using Steam, you’re what, Ubisoft or EA? (and even these are using Steam these days.)

                • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 hours ago

                  Or blizzard, riot or epic. All of which are perfectly successful without using steam.

                  Communication between valve and publishers about TOS violations is only an issue if it’s an anticompetitive clause.
                  If publishers want to offer lower prices, they can use a different storefront like the others. If they can’t make sufficient revenue without valves advertisement and distribution network, then maybe the service is worth the price valve charges for it.
                  Valve has done nothing to stop consumers from using other stores, so I’m not particularly sympathetic when the stores are upset about consumer choice.

                  • indog@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    6 hours ago

                    epic. All of which are perfectly successful without using steam.

                    This entire lemmy post is about someone being upset that Epic is successful enough to have an exclusive. If a few large players can still succeed without Steam, it’s not proof that Steam’s practices aren’t making the market worse for consumers.

                    If they can’t make sufficient revenue without valves advertisement and distribution network, then maybe the service is worth the price valve charges for it.

                    Listing your product on Steam isn’t advertising. They’re not promoting your game unless you pay them.

                    Let’s make an analogy. Is it reasonable for Nordstrom to go after a company selling the same product at Wal-Mart cheaper?

                    Valve has done nothing to stop consumers from using other stores

                    If we lived in a world where Epic was allowed to compete with Steam on the only way it can, with lower prices, we might have cheaper prices on Steam, and a more robust competitive market. This is why Valve is doing this price fixing. They know that consumers are price sensitive, and a $55 price tag on a new game going for $60 on Steam would be a disaster for them. They know their price fixing department would have to become a “watch for prices on other platforms and adjust our prices / cut to be competitive” department.

          • RxBrad
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            That would seem to be price fixing by its very definition. (EDIT: Note that I’m not making any judgment on this class action. The reality of pricing on IsThereAnyDeal would suggest that there is no such rule that prices can’t be lower outside of Steam.)

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

            manufacturers and retailers may conspire to sell at a common “retail” price; set a common minimum sales price, where sellers agree not to discount the sales price below the agreed-to minimum price

            And the question is irrelevant. Other companies can still benefit from external price fixing.

            • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              6 hours ago

              Price fixing is, as your highlighted bit says, a conspiracy to not compete on prices. Valve isn’t conspiring with their competition to fix prices, nor does valve even set the price.

              The lawsuit alleges that it’s anticompetitive, not price fixing.

              I personally don’t think it’s anticompetitive , given the number of popular games that don’t use steam. I just think that epic has a worse product, which isn’t valves fault.

              • RxBrad
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                5 hours ago

                From the actual lawsuit documents (emphasis is mine):

                Valve’s monopolization and attempted monopolization have the purpose and effect of fixing and inflating prices in the relevant market.

                EDIT: Uh… Exactly what part are we downvoting here? All I did was quote the lawsuit.