Till it goes public or his son decides to shit all over it for profit.
This risks being true for any and every successful company and is a genuine concern, but this is why I only named Gabe in my comment. Being a private company and him as CEO, based on statements from him in the past, pro-consumer practices are his directive. What-aboutisms have nothing to do with it.
I don’t disagree with the 30% being too much. That said, Steam often provides more than just a sales pages for the fee, they always provide server access for multiplayer and cloud saving. That has to get covered somehow. I also believe in celebrating the good things going and there really aren’t many of those in the gaming market these days, certainly not in the AAA-money tier. I’m going to enjoy the wins we get. If you don’t want to do that, enjoy being miserable, I guess.
More entrenching of their services as a monopoly.
Without a doubt the cost of a sales page and servers would be less than 30% of a lot of games sales. It’s a cost they are willing to pay if it means keeping their walled garden and 30% flat rate. (Like Sony selling consoles at a loss)
Any open source Linux contributions from steam (proton) are welcome because it’s not tied into their monopoly and people can use them freely.
You can enjoy the small victories while also being aware of future outcomes from these corporate giants.
lol and that excuses their monopoly and blatant anti competition tactics?
They made their own monopoly where they saw the opportunity. Doesn’t mean we can’t do better and shouldn’t fight billionaires entrenching themselves into aspect of life.
Yeah M$ fucked up their chances at the steam monopoly. Still doesn’t mean we need it to be a monopoly at all. Going from one billionaire conglomerate to another owning the monopoly, still leaves you with a monopoly. Neither option is good, you are still stuck in a monopoly that will enshittify.
Till it goes public or his son decides to shit all over it for profit.
Credit to the people making the Linux software not the wealthy oligarch that happens to allow it.
This risks being true for any and every successful company and is a genuine concern, but this is why I only named Gabe in my comment. Being a private company and him as CEO, based on statements from him in the past, pro-consumer practices are his directive. What-aboutisms have nothing to do with it.
And yet he still charges 30% to list on steam…
He could move it all to a non profit like blender and charge creators a reasonable price if he cared about the industry or players.
He’s just as profit minded as any billionaire. He’s just using Linux contributions to solidify their monopoly on pc gaming.
I don’t disagree with the 30% being too much. That said, Steam often provides more than just a sales pages for the fee, they always provide server access for multiplayer and cloud saving. That has to get covered somehow. I also believe in celebrating the good things going and there really aren’t many of those in the gaming market these days, certainly not in the AAA-money tier. I’m going to enjoy the wins we get. If you don’t want to do that, enjoy being miserable, I guess.
More entrenching of their services as a monopoly. Without a doubt the cost of a sales page and servers would be less than 30% of a lot of games sales. It’s a cost they are willing to pay if it means keeping their walled garden and 30% flat rate. (Like Sony selling consoles at a loss)
Any open source Linux contributions from steam (proton) are welcome because it’s not tied into their monopoly and people can use them freely.
You can enjoy the small victories while also being aware of future outcomes from these corporate giants.
deleted by creator
Yeah their monopoly already has fucked the whole gaming industry to the point of there being virtual no competition.
That fucking toxic shit needs to burn with the rest of the corporate shitheads.
A previously stated, eat the rich won’t make any exceptions for any oligarch let alone one running a monopoly.
deleted by creator
lol and that excuses their monopoly and blatant anti competition tactics?
They made their own monopoly where they saw the opportunity. Doesn’t mean we can’t do better and shouldn’t fight billionaires entrenching themselves into aspect of life.
deleted by creator
Yeah M$ fucked up their chances at the steam monopoly. Still doesn’t mean we need it to be a monopoly at all. Going from one billionaire conglomerate to another owning the monopoly, still leaves you with a monopoly. Neither option is good, you are still stuck in a monopoly that will enshittify.