this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2024
16 points (64.8% liked)

PC Gaming

8458 readers
277 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
EXiLExJD@lemmy.ca
UncleBadTouch@lemmy.ca
KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
16
The most promising Disco Elysium successor studio says workers must unite to topple Valve's 'digital fiefdom' of Steam (www.pcgamer.com)
submitted 5 hours ago by alessandro@lemmy.ca to c/pcgaming@lemmy.ca
43 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 43 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] atro_city@fedia.io 5 points 1 hour ago

Digital fiefdoms like who, you ask, as if you don't already know the answer? "Valve is the most egregious example," says Gavrilović. He hopes for a future where devs, not digital feudal lords, have more power, "but I lack the imagination to envision the replacement of Valve with a community owned alternative. That 'winter castle' will not fall as easily, but we should at least start openly discussing alternatives."

Make an opensource game store that's owned by a non-profit and paid for by the game studios that want to sell on it, giving them a say on how things should run.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 6 points 2 hours ago

I don't know if a spiritual successor will be as good. I mean, it wasn't exactly the gameplay that made it so compelling; it was the writing. None of the supposed successors being made rn have the writers from the original game.

It also is a shame it wouldn't be set within Elysium; a very well build world that is as exciting as it is mysterious.

[–] CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.ml 32 points 4 hours ago (3 children)

Until any competing store releases a Linux client, I can't really argue against Steam. They are a gatekeeper and almost a monopoly, but they're also the most benevolent and pro-consumer gatekeeper that we have in the PC gaming distribution space. As long as all the competition continue to be Windows-only and, in some cases, actively work against Linux users, I don't want Valve's digital fiefdom to fall.

[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 27 points 3 hours ago

I'm not sure "gatekeepr" is the right term when all you do is simply being better for your customers than anyone else. Like, Ubisoft, EA, Epic, they all are garbage companies. GOG is the only store I'd mildly consider (ignoring tiny indie ones like Itch here), but they also have 0 interest in Linux support, which is where they lose me. Without Valve, Linux gaming would not be where it is today, and as a Linux user that is already like 85% of my decision making being done in favor of Valve - with the remaining 15% not all strictly being in another camp either. If someone wants to challenge that monopoly, they'd have to do something better than forcing exclusives or luring with "free" games, because that's some shady shit that makes me just want to stay away even more.

[–] VOIEVOID@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Just wanted to say: good work with OpenRGB!

[–] usrtrv@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

How are they a gatekeeper? Near monopoly sure. But they don't force companies to only publish on Steam. They don't have restrictive rules. I'm not sure what gate they are keeping.

[–] AEsheron@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

If you reeeeally want to stretch, they do have rules about pricing things lower on other platforms. Like, you can have a sale on your website that makes it cheaper than Steam, but can't have the base price cheaper there than on Steam. That's about it.

[–] BonerMan@ani.social 50 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

One of the only good stores is suddenly the asshole but not because they did something wrong, its because everyone else sucks.

Fuck that. They aren't responsible for other's failures. GOG and itch.io are around and doing fine and aren't hated, if GOG would finally make a Linux GOG Galaxy without having to go through troublesome third Party tinkering (compared to steam) it would be a great competitor. But Epic and the other "stores" just suck ass lack features lack community lack privacy and generally suck ass. That's not valves fault.

[–] domi@lemmy.secnd.me 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

if GOG would finally make a Linux GOG Galaxy without having to go through troublesome third Party tinkering (compared to steam) it would be a great competitor.

I still think this is a huge blunder by GOG. There has to be a very significant overlap in the user base of DRM free software and Linux.

At least Heroic has matured very well and GOG partnered up with them so something is moving.

[–] BonerMan@ani.social 1 points 1 hour ago

By far not enough sadly, and they could literally just integrate proton into a store that runs on Linux, proton is open source (besides some steam API stuff).

Its not hard and them not doing it shows how little CDPR actually cares about GOG, its either running or not they don't really give a fuck. And for that it works good all things considered.

[–] jwiggler@sh.itjust.works -1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I think there's a difference between them being a good company for customers and them being a digital fief. Similar to how Amazon could be seen as a "good" company by customers (return policy, cheap stuff, etc), but they essentially own an entire marketplace and decides who sells products, and extracts rents from people who are making good innovative stuff. Steam is the same way.

Of course, Valve doesn't have the mistreatment of employees Amazon does. They have no internal hierarchy, which is cool and I imagine means less management involvement. Their president seems to just want to make gamers happy, and thats great too.

Theyre an anomaly in the business world because they're seemingly a great company that doesn't follow monetization trends, while still being hugely financially successful. But they still extract rents from videogame makers, so leftists see that as a black eye.

[–] BonerMan@ani.social 4 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Agree with most you say. Just two things

Steam doesn't own the market place, as said, gog and itch.io do their stuff, epic is also there (nobody with a brain likes them but they still have a share) and then a publisher could just make a website for their game, Minecraft for example.

They don't decide either, the algorithms within steam work very clearly and their seasonal sales are from my knollage open sign up for the devs and publishers. The player specific feeds also work according to tags, play a lot of builder games recently? Steam recommends similar games you might like, sometimes mixes between tags you haven't played like that.

In reality it's almost exclusively up to the devs/publishers and the players what gets sold steam does push indie stuff a little more in recent years but I don't see the downside of that.

And secondly.

"Leftist" real left people would be happy that steam is how it is and would bring constructive criticism. The people screaming Steam bad, are the same people that scream everything else when they get cloud from it.

[–] jwiggler@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I see what you're getting at, and I agree to an extent. Steam doesn't own the whole marketplace, but they do own their whole marketplace, which is the biggest. So I think the issue for leftists that I'm referring to is the rents aspect -- profiting off of the value of other people's work.

You could argue steam adds some value to accessing games in one place, or that they need to be able to maintain their servers in order to maintain efficient distribution for publishers. But in terms of classical economics Steam doesn't produce a product, I think it's arguable they provide a service, and I think their capital is mostly a product of their ownership of cloud capital. When a company makes money based mostly on the ownership of an asset, be it land or machinery or computers, that's where leftists take umbrage. Not liberals or Democrats necessarily, just leftists.

But that all said I still like Steam and Valve overall.

[–] BonerMan@ani.social 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

These "leftists" have a screw loose. Servers are a money sink, especially regarding electricity costs. Its not a property they own its a service they provide that costs a lot, servers have gigantic upkeep compared to real estate or similar.

These "leftists" as said aren't actually left, they are identity political cloud farmers and no life trolls. Actual left people don't hate on reality for the sake of it. Shit costs money and actual left people know and accept that. Shure you could argue that steam needs to pay more taxes around the world and I would even agree, that's a leftist take, but brain rot morons shitting on people doing business isn't left, its dumb.

[–] jwiggler@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

Sorry dude, you have a right to your opinion -- but most of what you just said isn't true. I understand you think it's ridiculous, but being against rent extraction is a classically leftist political philosophy. You're right that it costs money to operate servers, but that doesn't mean those servers are not the property of Valve. They utilize that property to collect rent from publishers.

That fact is not well liked by leftists. By liberals? Sure, go nuts. But I think you're in the process of finding yourself in the latter camp, at the moment. I'd definitely encourage you to look up leftists vs liberals because I think you may have a misunderstanding.

Regardless, I agree the hate/vitriol can go overboard coming from these types of people. I agree with the political and philosophical underpinnings of their frustration, but we are all born into a rat race and taught that we should do anything to get out of it, so no one actually thinks about whether things like "passive income" are right or wrong. We are taught that's what you gotta shoot for, and I'm not going to blame someone for still believing that.

[–] BonerMan@ani.social 2 points 54 minutes ago

I came to think of a good analogy!

Steam is the guy that build up a stand on a farmers market and sells his goods and the goods from the people in his village that don't want to brother with the work to drive a hour to the city and set up a stand and stay there all ray long.

The steam guy does a service and keeps a agreed upon portion of the sales for his needs.

Its not rent, rent is what the steam guy has to pay as a stand fee.

[–] BonerMan@ani.social 0 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Yes, being against RENT is left, but steam is a store not a property that is rented, a real store also needs to pay its employees and profits from selling stuff. Its not rent. Its not passive income either, steam as a store is under constant maintenance and upkeep.

And i know what liberal means, liberal means less government involvement, however liberals opposite is authoritarian, not left. Left doesn't need to be authoritarian even though it tends to become in real life.

I'm a liberal, moderately conservative, leftist, and yes all these terms have separate meanings that don't excluded each other. Liberal = Less state and government involvement, Conservative = doesn't like cultural change (in my case its mostly about being realistic about things, so I could replace moderate conservative with realism, however realism isn't a political terminology) and left is a economic/social orientation that wants to reduce wealth gap between poor and rich.

I have passive income, I'm literally profiting of of basically every war, doesn't mean I want war, I just invented intelligently when it was too quite for some time. There are people that hate me for it, and i actually couldn't care less. I make a dollar doing nothing and they don't, I still go to work every day like a normal person and contribute with my work, Im also politically active, all the people that are loud and cry on the internet have something in common, their RL sucks and nobody cares about them.

Again, Rent and a service are different things. And people that don't understand that are... Well, mistaken.

[–] jwiggler@sh.itjust.works 0 points 59 minutes ago (1 children)

The cut that Steam takes from publishers is a rent. It is the equivalent of buying property and allowing an individual or family to live in it, for a cut of their wages. The landowner and Steam do not produce anything -- they are a place, physical or virtual, for people to operate out of, at a cost. Steam is not a store that sells their own products, they are a platform that sells other people's stuff and they take a cut. If I own a big plot of land, and let a bunch of businesses operate on that land as long as they pay me monthly, I'm taking a rent. It's the same thing.

I feel like I don't even need to comment on your weird bragging about profiting off of war, but I'll just say this -- whether you like it or not, whether you are personally interested or not, you are financially interested in the suffering and death of other people. If you think that's morally okay, good for you. Personally, I think that's pretty monstrous. I'd wish you a good day, but after learning that, I hope you get some help.

[–] BonerMan@ani.social 1 points 42 minutes ago (1 children)

Steam is a service provider, they don't rent out shit. They do the marketing, distribution and payment processing. They are not rent. Idk what definition of rent is stuck in your head but I think that definition needs some reinstall, apparently its corrupted and fucked up the definition of Services.

A rent is something you get for giving someone property for money and still own it.

A service is (for example) when you distribute a product for someone and market it to people that might want it.

Big difference, and exactly what I don't like about the nowadays leftists, speak a lot without knowing theory and definitions. Make the movement look like anti realistic morons that fight ghosts.

Oh and yes I'm absolutely financially interested in the suffering of others... Where is the diviece from that you made this comment with?

[–] FluorideMind@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

Let's save it for when Gabe bites it and it gets shity.

[–] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Even Avalon fell eventually.

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 6 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (3 children)

Right on. I enjoy steam and I find Valve are mostly responsible gatekeepers, but at the end of the day, they’re still a gatekeeper

[–] Charzard4261@programming.dev 21 points 4 hours ago (3 children)

Are they gatekeepers though? It's not like they own Windows or Linux and stop you from using any other store. Just having the biggest audience doesn't make them gatekeepers to the market.

I never see people talking about what valve should change other than lowering the 30% cut, but arbitrarily forcing that would set a bad precedent.

Instead of virtue signalling here's reasonable things Valve could do:

  • allow developers to chose what features of steam they use for each game, allowing them to lower the cut by individually opting out of forums, workshop, cloud saves, achievements, inventory items etc
  • offer a purchase = one time download with no drm (still legally one copy) for the closest thing to "owning" a digital game
  • allow someone to inherit a steam account

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure proton is free to use and you can install stores and games not from steam on a Steam Deck, so again I really don't know what they're gatekeeping.

[–] Ashtear@lemm.ee 1 points 1 hour ago

For specifics, I'd like to see consistent, transparent censorship standards, and Steam Workshop files made publicly available.

Steam's censorship issues are only going to be more of a problem as the Japanese PC market continues its explosive growth. The platform's inconsistency is surely frustrating Japanese developers, and the lack of transparency is giving fuel to a (not unearned) narrative that its content reviewers are arbitrary and xenophobic.

The Workshop matter is far smaller in comparison, but Steam is gatekeeping crowdsourced work product.

[–] BonerMan@ani.social 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I see why steam doesn't let people inherit a account and why they don't let people chose what features they use.

The inheritance is likely a legal issue with the license, officially they don't let you do it, but just logging in changing the account email and taking it will nither be noticed nor do they care.

And the features is likely because they have running costs, the small stuff like cloud save and community cost them almost nothing, what is costly is the games distribution itself and that's what they get the money for (also the advertising on the Front page). You need to send all the data from a server as close as possible to the user downloading it, steam operates in almost any country in the world. Its a huge amount of data they need to store, backup, secure and transmit, they do cut their share after a certain amount of copys are sold because they are then in the plus with less money, but they also pay for all the free games, all the mods and all the other stuff.

publishing on steam costs nothing, they just take a share, and thats a fair share in my opinion, when you don't sell, steam gets nothing and eats the costs, when you sell they gain from it as well and probability recommend people your game that are willing to buy it.

[–] Charzard4261@programming.dev 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I'm with you on all of this. I'm familiar with this (am a game dev) and you're 100% right that the biggest cost is game distribution. One thing though: it costs ~$100 to list a game on Steam, which is returned to you after it's made a thousand or two.

Honestly there's nothing much valve can do to appease people, but I believe the most likely thing they can do is release data on how much distribution costs and give companies the ability to disable the "extra stuff" to save even a few percent of their revenue.

[–] BonerMan@ani.social 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

One thing though: it costs ~$100 to list a game on Steam, which is returned to you after it's made a thousand or two.

Thanks for the input. Wasn't aware of that, is this a recent thing?

[–] Charzard4261@programming.dev 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

It got added when they moved from Greenlight to the current system IIRC.

Double checked and it's called the "Steam Direct fee", is $100 (+ potential taxes) and you get it back when the game makes $1,000 "Adjusted Gross Revenue".

[–] BonerMan@ani.social 2 points 2 hours ago

Ah that makes sense.

[–] ogeist@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

But what's the alternative?

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago

Gog, direct distribution, something else I haven’t thought of. I just fear monocultures. Things can go south fast

[–] jwiggler@sh.itjust.works -1 points 4 hours ago

I find it really interesting how Valve hired Yanis Varoufakis to analyze the markets that were spontaneously emerging from games on their platform, and how he went on to write a book about the feudalistic nature of internet platforms that is being referred to here. I wonder what Gaben thinks of that and what Yanis thinks about Steam.

Then there is the aspect of Valve being a flat company, no hierarchy, and how Gaben has talked about avoiding rent-seeking that other companies were taking part in, how he wants to make good products for gamers, doesn't look at sales numbers.

Valve has some really great philosophy running behind it, and then there is the fiefdom of Steam extracting rents from publishers.

[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee -3 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I'd really like it if Valve waits for until after I get a pile of external hard drives before they go under.

[–] BonerMan@ani.social 9 points 4 hours ago

They won't go under. They are managed with good knowledge and in good faith towards all people involved in the game processes (devs, publishers, gamers and themselves)

[–] JRepin@lemmy.ml 0 points 5 hours ago

I agree and hope that what comes after it is even better at supporting gaming on GNU/Linux and contributing to various libre and opensource projects like KDE and Proton and Mesa and such.