• dinckel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    112
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Every time I see a post with this specific claim, targeted at Valve, i just can’t help but laugh.

    Yes. They take a cut.

    Yes. Everyone else takes the same cut, so you’re biased, if you don’t understand this.

    Yes. They are an undisputed leader in the market, but no, that’s not called a monopoly.

    The difference is that Valve, while taking this cut, and being as big as they are, are consistently investing that money into improvement of the platform, AND also paying people to directly contribute to OSS, that affects everyone else in the market too.

    Not to even mention the regular, very considerable discounts, practically platform-wide. Show me a time when Nintendo have done the same. A 10 year old copy of MK8 is still 50$

    This isn’t even a bogus claim, but just a waste of everyone’s time

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Yeah, I don’t think they realise Steam is itself a product to pay for. Sure, someone could come up with a free game manager, but that’s only a part of Steam’s services. There’s all the licencing, marketing, communities, features, connecting to other platforms, a console mode, remote play, ongoing security, support for external titles, the workshop, great refund policies, all this stuff and Valve doesn’t ask for a sub, pays all the staff involved, and stays on top of it all with premium quality.

      No shit they take some off the top. How else could the Steam we love and know exist if they didn’t?

      The irony of this lawsuit trying to ruin things gamers cherish.

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

      The cut they take is just one of the claims they have against Valve. Some of the other ones which another comment mentioned seem like fair arguments against Valve. The whole forcing pricing parity so game devs can’t offer the games for cheaper somewhere else and DLC from other platforms isn’t compatible with the Steam game and vice versa. And again you can say other platforms are doing that and worse too but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t also go after Valve for it. Just cause they’re a private company and because of that aren’t as profit driven as other companies doesn’t mean they still are gonna do things like this to increase their profits and maintain their majority market share on PC games.

    • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      3 months ago

      If there is nothing wrong then the investigation will show this. But the claims argue that they use their undisputed market dominance (your words) to do stuff that is anti competitive.

      The fact there are alternatives does not matter if the dominant player abuses their position to stiffle competition.

      A prosecutor has to make their case, Valve gets to rebuke the claims.

      I’d say, welcome investigation into large corporations. There should be more. The fact that mega corps like the Petro industry where and still are not properly monitored is bad for everyone. A corporation is not a human being, and it’s feelings cannot be hurt, but it can do a lot of bad things.

      If it turns out there is Merrit to the claims, it is good for everyone. Why the urge to defend a multi billion dollar company? I’m not saying everyone should dust off the pitchforks either. Let the law do its thing.

      • stardust@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Interestingly enough GOG takes 30% and has had periods they struggled.

        The storefront saw a slight increase in revenue but a net loss of around $1.14 million in the last financial quarter. Overall, it’s lost about $2.21 million over the past three quarters compared to a $1.37 million profit over the same period in 2020. CD Projekt didn’t immediately reply to questions about how its new strategy might translate into changes to GOG’s features or catalog.

        One staff member tied the earlier layoffs to increased competition in PC gaming storefronts, which has driven major platforms to lower the commission they take from developers.

        https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/29/22808199/cd-projekt-gog-losses-restructuring-earnings-2021

        Funny thing is lower cut is likely to benefit steam more by killing off the competition for good with the economies of scale they have on their side compared to competitors which themselves are running at a loss and not clear if the cut is sustainable in the long run to justify running.

        • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          Everyone is very focussed on the 30pct. But there are multiple points in the claim. Price clauses and such.

          • stardust@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Used /r/gamedeals and isthereanydeals a long time so not even sure how effective the price clauses are when I’ve gotten so many deals for games on my preferred platform for a lower price.

            • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              3 months ago

              Me2… I mostly buy outside steam. But that is not the issue at hand. If a dominant company is thought to abuse their position, it should be investigated.

              And over the last years several indie devs have said there are some narly contract clauses.

      • Audacious@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Steam will not be better than it is now. I have been using it for years and not much has changed. There is no reason for it to improve for the consumers when it’s the top dog.

        • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          3 months ago

          For sure there is something to be said for not “moving fast and breaking stuff”

          I think the incremental improvements have been good on steam. They move slow, but there is development. I especially liked when they added the additional user tags.

          That said, if Valve does indeed use their dominance to stiffle competition it needs to stop, regardless of the other things.

    • helenslunch@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      As an "undisputed leader in the market, Valve holds to the ability to drive down gaming costs across the board.

      They also make insane amounts of money at the expense of consumers and developers/publishers.

      Could they do all the things they do at 15-20% commission?Absolutely.

      Is Valve a relatively pro-sumer company? Sure.

      Does that excuse exorbitant fees? No.

      Do other vendors charge similar? Outside of Epic, yes.

      30% is an absolutely insane amount of money to charge. That’s why Valve is so impossibly wealthy and powerful.

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      35
      ·
      3 months ago

      And paying yachts for Gaben, you forgot to mention the money also goes to doing that.

      Get that in your head people, if someone can sell you stuff and it makes them a billionaire then you got overcharged, you can find all kinds of excuses to defend them, they’re still making more a day in interests with 1 billion invested than the median income over four years.

      • dinckel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        What he does with his money is none of my concern. Unlike the vast majority of other CEOs in his market cap tier, he’s actually paid fairly, compared to an average worker at Valve

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          25
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          He’s

          A

          Billionaire

          No, he’s not paid fairly, no one should have that kind of wealth.

          He makes more from the interest on his fortune than the average salary at Valve even if the average is very high.

          There’s no reason to defend billionaires, no matter how good they pretend to be.

          • Abnorc@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            I highly doubt that most people, given the opportunity, would not live like a billionaire. If someone builds a company like Valve, they’re going to live very well. That doesn’t say as much about the person as it does about the economic system.

            • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              3 months ago

              That’s the thing though, no one should get to live like that while the majority has a hard time affording basic needs.

  • CriticalMiss@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    I see what Vicky is attempting to do. But there’s nothing stopping publishers from going over to the Epic Games Store for example and selling their content there. Valve does nothing to suppress competition (it can’t really either), the competition is just bad.

    • snooggums@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Exactly. Epic’s complaint is that steam has such a large user base that they can get away with the percentage they charge, but nothing is stopping people from having every game selling storefront at the same time. Steam doesn’t do crappy stuff like exclusive deals with other companies to draw people in.

      Now I only used Epic for a couple years, but I don’t remember them doing sales. They did the free stuff which was mostly shovel ware crap, and their games stayed full price. I get games regularly at a discount on steam, which is a better deal as a user.

      Epic is just whining that their terrible approach isn’t as good as steam’s.

    • ogeist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      They can and had done it before, see the link at the bottom of the article. Basically, game devs are forced to sell the game at the same retail price in all platforms regardless of the commission cut of the platform according to Steam license. BUT as a customer, usually other platforms are more expensive, so mileage may vary. I like Steam a lot and support it whenever I can but if there is evidence of wrongdoing I would change my mind, however, the complaint from the article smells strongly to cashgrab.

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

        Do they? As a long time user of /r/gamedeals and isthereanydeals that is focused on game sales I’ve got tons of games cheaper than they were being sold directly through steam. Humble monthly being one of the best with sometimes price of like 8 game bundles being less than the cost of the cheapest price a single game went on sale.

    • FreeFacts@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Valve does nothing to suppress competition (it can’t really either)

      They at least used to have a rule that publishers can’t sell cheaper on other platforms (outside of timed sales that is), meaning that consumers can’t get a better price on other storefronts even when those platforms would take a smaller cut. That was very much suppressing the competition as them taking smaller cuts can’t transfer into cheaper prices if the publisher also wanted to sell on Steam.

      • chaosmarine92@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        My understanding is that valve says publishers can’t sell their games steam keys cheaper on other platforms but can charge whatever they want if steam is not the one providing the download. Network infrastructure isn’t free and if steam is the one actually facilitating the download they get to take their share.

        • furikuri@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’m not too familiar with the details but there is this excerpt from a blog post by Wolfire Games from 2021 where they say this wasn’t the case. Haven’t checked it’s validity or if it’s relevant information to this case, but it is something

          When new video game stores were opening that charged much lower commissions than Valve, I decided that I would provide my game “Overgrowth” at a lower price to take advantage of the lower commission rates. I intended to write a blog post about the results.

          But when I asked Valve about this plan, they replied that they would remove Overgrowth from Steam if I allowed it to be sold at a lower price anywhere, even from my own website without Steam keys and without Steam’s DRM.

          http://blog.wolfire.com/2021/05/Regarding-the-Valve-class-action

  • 9point6@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    There’s a thread somewhere else on lemmy about this from a couple of days ago, I think the conclusion was that this was a law firm going for a cash grab and the claims were pretty flimsy, they’re going after Sony too.

  • Corroded@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    I am not a fan of the title the article uses. It seems more about Steam abusing their near monopoly in a way that hurts publishers. The overcharging aspect seems more like a byproduct

    • kbin_space_program@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      3 months ago

      Except steam doesnt abuse their monopoly.

      If they did, Epic wouldn’t be allowed to use Fortnite and CCP blood money to bribe games to their shit store.

      • Corroded@leminal.space
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        I mean abuse in the way where they are taking advantage of their position in the market.

        There are several online game retailers publishers can utilize and being profitable is always going to be part of their business model. Epic would do it in their own way no matter what Steam did.

        Even Humble Bundle isn’t perfect. You can read this article for more information but they trialed removing the slider that decides where your money goes in 2021 and even now the Default Donation and Extra to Charity options still only give the charity a small percentage.

        It’s just an unfortunate reality.

        • kbin_space_program@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          That would be the Windows Store that is taking advantage of things.

          Steam, for its faults, is where it is because it is the best application to do what it does.

          Yes others exist, and they’re all vastly inferior.

          • Corroded@leminal.space
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Steam, for its faults, is where it is because it is the best application to do what it does.

            Yes others exist, and they’re all vastly inferior.

            I’m not denying that. As a consumer I like a lot of what Steam does. I am a big fan of what they’ve done for the Linux gaming community for example. I am saying because they are so dominant in the market they can do things like keep their commissions high and push publishers to sign price parity obligations.

            I imagine a lot of publishers feel like if they don’t have a choice but to list their games on Steam. The alternative would greatly limit their reach.

            My initial point was Steam isn’t directly overcharging players like the title of the article implies. I feel like the title should have been about the cause and not the effect.

  • Agrivar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    3 months ago

    I would much rather see this level of dedication aimed at an evil corporation. Save pestering the good guys for WAAAAAY later - like, after we’ve fixed everything else.

      • Mango@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah but the thing about that is how tons of those are throwaway games just tagging along in a bundle.

        Still though. Damn.

            • asexualchangeling
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              I mean… No? I have a lot of games and I find a lot that are worth playing in that list, but I’ve not even played half… And even if I had I don’t exactly have a spreadsheet of what I liked and what I didn’t

              Weird question imho

  • bitfucker@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    I really wanted to see the effect of valve lowering their cut. It would be pretty funny IMHO since currently people are always talking about valve competition, especially Epic taking lower cuts. If valve started taking lower cut and developers flocked from Epic to valve, wouldn’t it be epic? (Pun fully intentional)

  • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    https://lemmy.world/comment/10610894

    The issues at hand:

    1. Price parity obligation clauses: We say that Valve Corporation imposes price parity clauses that restrict and prevent game developers from offering better prices on PC-games on rival platforms, limiting consumer choice and harming competition.

    This seems to be common practice, but is anti competitive. If another platform would charge 20 instead of 30 pct and the publisher would give half this discount to the customers this would be against these clauses. Good that these are looked at.

    1. Tying: We say that the restrictions Valve Corporation imposes, that mean the add-on content for games must also be purchased from Steam, restricts competition in the market.

    And vice versa, steam dlc does not work with games on epic. Interesting case here too.

    1. Excessive pricing: We argue that Valve Corporation has imposed an excessive commission, of up to 30%, charged to publishers, that resulted in inflated prices on its Steam platform.

    The 30% market standard seems to be under fire across the board, so if there is a solid case to be made that this is excessive, I’m glad the watchdog is trying to make it.

    In all good that this is investigated, cause just paying for another yaght or house for Gabe is not nessecary.

    • madcaesar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      The part about another platform charging less and they passing the savings on to the consumer… Yea I’ll believe it when I see it. All these “pro consumer” arguments are usually just a masked way to keep more profits.

      Now, a middleman keeping 30% or even 20% seems high to me all over so it will be interesting to see it play out.

      The part about dlc purchased from competitors being incompatible is definitely anti consumer and should be challenged.

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

        Oh don’t get me wrong, I’m plenty sceptical about the whole ordeal. I just argue mega corps should be audited when there is even a wiff of impropriety.

        And I don’t understand the rabid defence of a corp like valve. Just look at the downvotes and the users defending valve. As if it’s their sports team.

        And even sports teams move to another city if the money there is better.

    • cristo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      Esperanto
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      All of these same points can be made about microsoft, sony, nintendo. I agree that all these things could change and be better for the consumer but they should have gone after the mega corporation who lock content not only behind a platform but also a special computer you have to buy.

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

    What a pointless claim. Developers get charged, not the end user. You pay the same price as elsewhere, in fact Steam requires developers to price the same if am not mistaken. Besides what’s the charge? People are willing to pay more for product they enjoy? If that’s the precedent then Apple will go bankrupt day after this lawsuit is won.

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

      in fact Steam requires developers to price the same if am not mistaken.

      That practice is the whole point of the lawsuit. The lawsuit claims they’re Anti-Competitive because of that.

      And it doesn’t sound too far fetched imo. They’re stiffling other platforms by this.

      But then, Sony and Epic and Microsoft have to pay as well because of exclusive deals.

      This case might be good for customers .

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

        How is it anti-competitive. No one is forcing developers to publish on Steam. It would be one thing to have a monopoly like Apple does and no other way to install. But they don’t. Developers definitely have a choice whether to publish on Steam or not. Cost of publishing might be high, but that’s no different than self-publishing and spending money on advertising. It’s just operational cost.

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

          Valve has good lawyers, they will win if they’re in the right.

          It doesn’t really matter to even argue about it, we don’t know the laws around it well enough, especially UK laws.

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

            An objective answer. Right you are. Although in law those who are right don’t win by default but those that argue better.