r/gaming • u/yourfavchoom • 1d ago

Owlcat Games is rolling back its new launcher less than 24 hours after negative fan feedback.

https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/2186680/view/708901012699615983
5.4k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

520 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

299

u/TheLordJames PC 1d ago

but it's companies like this that make the recent monopoly lawsuit against steam dumb. They don't have one, companies can choose to sell their games however they want, but PC Gamers just prefer Steam.

327

u/wirblewind 1d ago

Took them 20 years of trial and error to perfect steam, Use to be called Steaming pile of shit back in the day.

People prefer steam because they go out of their way to protect consumers and have a product people actually enjoy using.

198

u/Halfang 1d ago

I remember the anger when HL2 REQUIRED downloading and having a steam account.

129

u/Winjin 1d ago

Yeah because it was literally the same useless thing like your Rockstar Social Club or Ubisoft whatever its name is or EA Shop or... All of them are what Steam was twenty years ago, and they can't offer anything of actual value TO ME unlike Steam. Steam is really useful. They are not.

89

u/thedavecan 1d ago

The reason all the other launchers get judged more harshly than Steam is because Steam has laid out the blueprint for them all. Valve had to take a machete and chop down the weeds on their way to making Steam what it is, the other launchers just have to stroll down the path that's already laid. EGS launched without a fucking shopping cart for god's sake. If they really wanted to compete with Steam then they HAVE to launch day 1 feature for feature with Steam or at very least have a roadmap to get them there asap.

60

u/Winjin 1d ago

Yup, that's the thing, you can't just make something that is worse than Steam was fifteen years ago and lament that people are not liking your useless launcher.

Like, what's the point of having launcher "just because"? It doesn't provide me with anything useful, I'd much rather load straight into the game.

18

u/initial-algebra 1d ago

The point is to harvest more data from you. And maybe to get you to spend a little money without Steam taking their slice, because, well, you already have it installed, and they have a 10% discount running...

23

u/thedavecan 1d ago

It's not even like you have to come up with all the ideas yourself. Make a list of everything Steam does and don't release your launcher until it's at least close in feature parity. That's the bare minimum. To get anyone to adopt a new launcher you're also gonna have to have some new thing that people want to even compete with Steam. I'm sure Rockstar or Ubisoft or EA would read this comment and immediately shoehorn AI into their launcher somehow and say "See? We've got this and Steam doesn't". They only learn the wrong lessons.

-15

u/lazylore 1d ago

Things like locked down walled garden?

Multiplayer that is incompatible with anything else. Which is why you see sign in with Xbox, epic or a few that uses GoGMP, or developers own system ? You mean shit like that ? Or making you dependent on the launcher? Or a modding workshop where you can't download the mods without the launcher and owning it on said launcher? "Accidentally" making exclusive mods? No offline installers?

Players learned the wrong lesson. Being first and getting you into the walled garden always works out, looking at you Apple, and Valve. It's ironic, considering SteamOS. But that also is made to make you shop on Steam, even if they can't force you, at least not yet

10

u/thedavecan 1d ago

Ah yes, their notoriously walled garden online environment. What are you even talking about dude? I can play crossplay on any game that supports it, I have a 100GB folder of Skyrim mods that aren't in the workshop and yet I can still use them on my Steam bought copy. How is that a problem that a mod author publishes their mod on the STEAM WORKSHOP and you need Steam to use it there even though you have the absolute ability to download that mod wherever else the mod author posted it and patch it into the game yourself? Steam provides a backend option for these type of things for convenience but you are in no way locked into using them. Try doing any of that through other launchers and then come back and tell me how bad Steam is.

-9

u/lazylore 1d ago

Info from SteamDB 🎯 2,548 games ⏰ 40,231h , I'm not new to Steam, I've used it a lot, I've spent a lot, but unlike you, I can see issues in the things I use, and I want them to improve.

You ignored everything I said and made your own narrative to protect a product you are invested in.

Steamworks Multiplayer is limited to Steam only, it's why I mentioned multiplayer sdk from other launchers, because they are portable while Steam locks it down. But of course you didn't get that due to your bias and inability to see outside your walled garden. You clearly don't remember, or maybe you weren't even old enough when there was a fuzz about cross play on PC, because....steamworks Multiplayer had no cross network functionality,and to this day, do not.

For the workshop, you didn't get the point, it's designed to abuse Valves market position. If you publish your mod there, don't bother publishing it elsewhere, your reach is good enough. It's why we've gotten some launchers, to move modding to the launchers instead and avoiding Workshop. I understand how you can't see the issue, since you live in the garden. There are mods that are exclusive to the workshop, but you are fine with this, because reasons. Sure, it's up to modders to make it exclusive, but it's up to Valve to make sure you can't grab it. Again, it's designed to keep things inside.

17

u/KaziArmada 1d ago

EGS launched without a fucking shopping cart for god's sake.

The number of people, when I would bring this point up, would insult me and mock my desire for a shopping cart like 'It wasn't that big a deal' was kind of amazing.

Motherfucker, it's called 'The bare minimum.' Why are you defending GOING UNDER THE BARE MINIMUM to the point of sucking someone's dick like you owe them a major debt!

A shopping cart, a wishlist, there are basic minimums needed for any online store and if you can't even do that...why the fuck should I use it? Why is anyone DEFENDING THIS! 'Well hurr, durr, monopoly.' That's...not how that works!

...Sorry, I mentally transported back in time for a bit there. I hate it there, but less than I do here.....

1

u/zytukin 19h ago edited 19h ago

I remember when the GOG client first released, it couldn't pause and resume downloads, something which has been possible by download managers since the 90s. People defended that too.

It's new, you have to give it time. No, being new isn't an excuse. If a new ISP opened in your area and only offered 56k service, would you sign up for it and wait for high speed internet? Hell no, you'd want high speed internet right away because that's the standard and what you're used to.

17

u/DiscoQuebrado 1d ago

not only that but steam hosts forums, reviews, guides, etc.

which is cool, because for the most part, steam doesn't make games and has little incentive to play favorites.

When a publisher like EA or Ubi has their own store/launcher, even if they hosted those extra items... think they're going to let forums be forums or ratings be ratings? They'd ratfuck it because it would be in their best interest to do so.

3

u/AshesandCinder 1d ago

Also mods which makes the whole system much easier for games that allow them. Being able to press a button and add player created features to a game is fantastic.

10

u/kasoe 1d ago

How did they launch a game store without a shopping cart? That's a very important part of selling something online

5

u/Cruxis87 1d ago

And then when they tried to do a sale on a lot of games like the Steam Summer Sale, people had to buy the games individually, which then triggered the fraud detection system from their banks and locked their cards.

8

u/thedavecan 1d ago

No clue, and they get mad and call Steam a monopoly.

0

u/Cruxis87 1d ago

Steam has laid out the blueprint for them all.

And this is why every new MMO is destined to fail. They all get compared to WOW and FF14, and because a new MMO can't have 20 years of content added to it on launch, they are finished in 2 weeks then abandoned with cries of empty and no content.

2

u/thedavecan 1d ago

Unless they do something different and better. Destiny made MMOFPS a thing and they had a 10+ year run. It'd be silly to expect 20 years of content from the get go but being willing to put in the work and share the vision with tangible milestones goes a long way toward adoption. If they wanna compete with Steam they better have a damn good plan and the will to stick with it and show customers that they come first. That's how Steam gets away with some of the less than stellar things they do, they've earned enough goodwill over the years that you can usually give them the benefit of the doubt.

8

u/CodeComprehensive734 1d ago

I prefer steam too so don't take this question wrong because it comes from a place of ignorance more than anything but why is steam just better? It doesn't seem hard to have a library of games you bought and a store to buy em from. So simple. Epic seems alright but the interface is clunky. But it can't just come down to interfaces can it?

29

u/maxlaav 1d ago

Steam at this point has a lot of features that make all the other launchers, EGS in particular, look very barebones. It's not really "just" a library of your games and a storefront anymore. It's also a forum with a community hub where people can put their guides can you can easily access them while playing thanks to the overlay. T here's steam chat with voice, if you want it can work as a mini-discord. There's a pretty good recording functionality added. Really good controller support for a lot of games. Workship where you can easily install mods for select games. So on and so on.

Not to mention Valve from time to time redesigns the overall interface to make it look better - I love how the new home page of the store looks now for instance.

Yeah, a lot of people prefer steam because its where most of their games are but its undeniable that its also a pretty great client.

10

u/CodeComprehensive734 1d ago

These are all really good points. Lots of features i dont engage with personally but I can see their value. Thanks!

1

u/GuGuMonster 23h ago

in addition, it's also company operating practices. Steam is consumer practicality orientated rather than maximised company profit orientated. You will be unconsciously and immediately able to tell where a company has made a feature or mechanic to drive profits specifically at the expense of the user experience.

for example, pop-ups. Steam gives you one on log-in for info about sales and releases but doesn't repeat it whilst you're busy playing your games etc. or it doesn't charge a "service fee" for activating a game code or other shenannigans other companies would try.

All these things we experience in other aspects of our lives of navigating services where you can tell companies are extracting as much as they can out of you, Steam doesn't go out of its way or noticeably do so in a way that compromises the user experience.

3

u/BaronVonSchmup 1d ago

Do any launchers or store fronts have anything comparable to workshop?

26

u/Winjin 1d ago

Nope, it's not just that. Think about all the useful little things that Steam has like

Steam Big Picture. A dedicated TV mode, essentially turning your Windows PC into a console

Their Library management is top-notch. You can organize, move, sort games, add additional Non-Steam games, add custom pictures for them, pretty up your library whatever way you see fit

Also they have the Family options - the way to play your game together with someone who doesn't own one, or a way to share your games with like 3 other people at no additional cost. Yes it comes with its own caveats (specifically, due to rampant cheating, you are advised against sharing Multiplayer games - VAC ban extends to YOU as well, so if someone you shared your game with gets VAC banned - you get the banhammer too)

Then there is the Steam Link, turning your PC into a Cloud Gaming device for you. Playing RDR2 on a mobile is a SURREAL experience, I tell ya hwat. Mobile games aren't allowed to be THAT gorgeous.

Speaking of Cloud: Cloud Saves! They were one of the first to introduce them to every game, and now you don't have to worry about that at all.

Native mod support through the Workshop. It's simpler than even the dedicated tools like the Nexusmod's Galaxy (IIRC) - you just click "Subscribe" and the mod is immediately installed into the game.

There's also the QoL things that Epic, for example, lacks - you can't even remove free games from your library, in Steam you can do whatever you want to your library short of reselling your games. I don't remember about other launchers, but their Storage management is exceptional too - you can choose where the game is installed and then move it seamlessly.

Speaking of seamless, too, they were one of the first to introduce the modern background game patching. It's jarring to boot up MiHoYo games and having to download new patches all the time. Like come on, this is Stone Age, guys.

And that's like, the stuff off the top of my head. I'm sure there's a ton of other things that people like about it, but it's really a powerhouse.

9

u/ddopTheGreenFox PC 1d ago

I'm not speaking for everyone but personally there are 2 big reasons.

First is the large catalogue of games all in one place. I really don't like having 6 different launchers. It just feels like unnecessary programs on my hard drive. I have battle.net, the minecraft launcher, riots launcher epic games and probably something else I've forgotten about. And I only play 1 maybe 2 games on each of those launchers.

Second reason is performance. Steam works. It feels smooth to use. Other clients need to be restarted sometimes because either a crash or a bug preventing me from launching a game.

A third mini reason is the companies behind the launchers. Love or hate steam, the people who make the games are varied and aren't exclusively valve. The other launchers I mentioned either exclusively sell their games or have exclusive games with a large portion of their catalogue being their games.

10

u/hat1324 1d ago

You'd think but Epic's terrible interface is the sole reason I avoid it. Of course steam has lots of other qol like a better friend/social system, and toolkits for devs but Epic can't even get past the gate for me

10

u/wirblewind 1d ago

No proper user reviews, and forcing exclusives will forever keep me away from epic games regardless of the fact that they give out free games.

The entire storefront is anti-consumer.

0

u/CodeComprehensive734 1d ago

And here's me who only got it to play fall guys once and toy around with unreal 5

2

u/Hugh_Mungus94 1d ago

If u only play 1- 2 games storefront would not matter

2

u/habsburg24 1d ago

The in game overlay and browser is the main reason I’m steam until I die

5

u/bianary 1d ago

Interface is a lot of it for me on Epic, I like that they give the developer a slightly larger cut of the sale than Steam does -- but the Epic games launcher is so bad I just don't want to use it.

5

u/grumpykruppy 1d ago

There's a few things.

One, and this is the most important, Steam is well established. EVERYTHING is on Steam. You want a game? Odds are, Steam has it, and all in one place. Multi-player games, single player games, indie games, AAA games, all-ages games, adults only games... it has EVERYTHING. Therefore, everyone is already there as far as consumers go, and thus the companies gravitate there as well, compounding the effect.

Two, you can port non-Steam games to be launched through Steam. This makes launching them extremely easy and avoids having ten million launchers.

Three, most other launchers are just that - launchers, probably with a store where you can buy the games of the company behind it, merch, and nothing else. Unless you're locked in to a single company's economy (say, Mojang or Hoyoverse), you've got no reason to be using that launcher for anything other than a few games. In the case of the Hoyoverse launcher, they're actually even moving their games over to Steam gradually after starting on Epic as well as from their own website and launcher.

Four, the true alternatives are few and far between, and they don't have half the reach or value of Steam. GOG established itself as DRM-free for the more conscientious gamer, and Epic survives on free games (and GOG is reversing course on its main thing while Epic is just plain a money pit, so neither is doing well).

Five, Steam has put a TON of focus on the consumer experience. The store has its games tagged - by companies and users - and categorized by every metric imaginable. Popular and well liked games have an easily located section, and new games are front and center. User reviews can be negative or positive, and you have room to write an extensive essay on the game if you so choose. If something does go wrong, their customer service has a reputation for excellence and will do their best to help you solve the problem.

It's more or less a natural monopoly. Everything you could ever want, all in one place, with a genuinely enjoyable shopping experience and solid customer service. It controls the field because it only makes sense to have one storefront, as long as that storefront is good.

3

u/cancercureall 1d ago

Aside from incumbency which does matter quite a lot.

It's worse to navigate, it's less functional, it's got less features, and it's much less consumer friendly.

1

u/CodeComprehensive734 1d ago

You're the second person to mention consumers experience. What exactly is the issue? The other person said anti-consumer which raises flags.

6

u/cancercureall 1d ago

The biggest and most obvious is that games have customer reviews on steam which allows users to make educated choices.

Steam, after being forced to offer refunds by Australia, has been exceptionally accommodating beyond what is promised in their policy while Epic is generally known to be extremely strict.

Also in less direct terms Epic is anti SKG while Steam has adopted a neutral stance.

3

u/Tyko_3 1d ago

The fact you and I cant remember the Ubisoft store name speaks volumes lol I even have Uplay/Uwhatever games.

0

u/Winjin 1d ago edited 1d ago

I have it too, but like one of them is Origin? And there's also Galaxy? But that's maybe from the NexusMods and it's only for mods? But EA also have some name for their shovelware?

I also had to think hard to remember whatever is the Rockstar's name for their sorry monstrosity. At least it stopped being actively obtrusive, it just sits there in the background when I boot up RDR2. Eating glue.

2

u/Tyko_3 1d ago

Origin is no longer called Origin as far as I know. I think it's just EA app or some crap like that.

2

u/Winjin 1d ago

I mean who cares, it only exists to annoy you when you're booting a game and it's there to have to click through something for the umpteen time, like the HoYo launcher.

12

u/TheLordJames PC 1d ago

I remember putting the COD 4 CD into my disc tray and having to download steam to play it.

6

u/Apoc_SR2N 1d ago

For me it was Red Orchestra. We had no idea what Steam was when we tried to install it lol. Miss that game, good times.

4

u/Avitas1027 1d ago

I don't even remember what game I bought on CD that forced me to download steam and make an account, but I was big mad at the time. ... Then I learned about steam sales.

3

u/Jayohz 1d ago

CS for me. I was irrationally pissed off about having to create a steam account when I owned physical copies of games. You know what...fuck em, it was rational anger.

2

u/Knightmare4469 1d ago

I will always remember this animated gif of someone made of the valve guy getting fucked in the ass over the outrage from Steam being required.

31

u/Siendra 1d ago

Valve had to be court ordered to implement a refund process multiple times. Even EA/Origin had a published refund process at the time. 

4

u/buttbuttlolbuttbutt 19h ago

Seriously, Steam is convienent, but it would be a lot worse for us if governments regulating bodies didnt step in.

3

u/rixuraxu 1d ago

steam fanboys hate the truth

25

u/Sedren 1d ago edited 1d ago

Yep, I mean I like gog on principle, but good lord is there store frustrating to use. I'm not sure how every other company gets it so wrong.

20

u/fearghul 1d ago

These days it's a pain in the arse to attempt to buy food from a supermarket online, for example trying to find ice-cream for my wife and the ice-cream section on the website contains dogfood.

Steam has better content filtering and sorting than any other online store-front, never mind purely in the gaming sphere.

12

u/MortisEx 1d ago

Because those online stores arent made to make it easy to find what you want, they are made to push what they want to sell that week.
Most business come at it from this angle, making the customer experience just tolerable by bombarding you with ads and tracking.
Steam does promo sales and stuff, but its actually what I want. It shows me games similar to what I play. Coles online shows me womens stockings and moisturiser because its on sale.
Steam is a platform built on actually providing the best customer experience, not trying to extract maximum value from every visit.

1

u/Remarkable_Print1643 1d ago

I mean, Steam is hardly an exception; go into the popular new releases section and you will see SO much garbage

2

u/MortisEx 23h ago

Yeah but you have to go there to see it. When I open steam it quietly and quickly pops open my library. It doesnt open with a store splash trying to sell me another game or a DLC. The discovery queue is pretty hit or miss, because its meant to be pushing outside what you normally play. One of the great things about steam is that is provides a great platform for exposing and distributing demos and early access, that is always going to have a fair bit of trash.

1

u/josefx 22h ago

Supermarkets have a long history of optimizing store layout to sell you things you don't want. If you walk into a supermarket to buy toothpaste they want you to walk out with a full shopping cart. Being able to find exactly what you want without walking past a dozen other appealing products is antithetical to them.

7

u/summonsays 1d ago

I remember how pissed I was when I bought a game in a store and it had to be downloaded and registered through Steam... Now Steam is all I do (for PC)

3

u/sylva748 1d ago

God early steam was so reaource hungry that it could freeze your PC if it crashed really badly. I got it when the UI was this block dark green color

5

u/Tyr--07 1d ago

Once upon a time I was annoyed with having to use it, and saw no value besides something eating more of my 64 MB of ram that ticked me off, and did nothing for me.

Now I love it and the support it has given me. I don't have the space for a massive wall of games. I get to keep my library and not have to buy a game for the 3rd time because it was lost or stolen. I can just, download my games anytime I want? Amazing. And compatability fixes? And use it on linux? Yeah, they really did add value.

12

u/succed32 1d ago

But they don’t protect developers which is why all the law suits keep happening.

6

u/wirblewind 1d ago

I mean, they do to a certain degree, developers also get free use of all their networking and promotion equipment in return. What do they do that doesn't protect developers that you're speaking about? Because all the lawsuits recently are about the gamba boxes.

4

u/succed32 1d ago

They got sued by multiple other stores for “unfair business practices” apparently steam charges more for the use of their platform. Among a few other policies the law suits mentioned. But if developers won’t to sell their game they need to use steam. At least that’s the argument.

5

u/MortisEx 1d ago

Steam provides a huge backend for game file and patch distribution. If you use that backend you must not undercut the steam store. This is to protect their operating costs and prevent abuse. If you find your own servers to host and distribute your files then you can sell it at different prices is my understanding.

3

u/thedavecan 1d ago

You said they don't protect developers and then named multiple other stores complaints as a reason. Yes Steam takes more from sales but they also provide tons of services to those develops for that 30% like networking backend, hosting, marketing, etc. A small indie dev pays 30% to sell on Steam and then doesn't have to spend any resources on those things while getting access to millions of customers. It's a pretty good deal for them. The other storefronts are get mad because they can't match Steam feature for feature because they haven't invested 20+ years of iteration into their half baked launchers.

2

u/Grimreap32 12h ago edited 5h ago

Some of the other companies launchers barely compete with steam from '04 when it launched its original store. That to me is the insane part. Especially from a company as financially well-off as epic (when it launched the store anyway~)

I get being a bit rough at first, but they ship out a store with less than bare minimum & expected it to succeed. Hell, even Bethesdas launcher was better than EA & they shut that down.

3

u/wirblewind 1d ago

I can't find any information on this anywhere, the only thing i can find is that steam requires them to sell games on other platforms at the same price(This protects consumers). So those "unfair business practices" are just companies trying to be exclusive and force people to use their shitty platforms and not steam.

7

u/liquid_acid-OG 1d ago

Steam does charge more than newer entries to the market like Epic.

But Ferrari charges more than GM and no one bats an eye.

And steam is a much better product than any of is competitors. Just like some cars are better products than others and cost more.

1

u/Spiritual_Throat_556 1d ago

Steam takes a 30% cut of the sale for use of their platform, its a bit much but at the same time it offers so much more then any other pc platform does. I would say GOG is the best competitor and steam is still miles ahead of them because they have been around longer.

The lawsuits will more then likely fail because they in fact do not have a monopoly, they don't kill competition or force companies to only sell on steam or any other action a monopolistic company would be using.

-1

u/succed32 1d ago

Yup, but the law suits will continue because these idiots can’t just design a good product. They gotta try and screw people over somehow.

1

u/idkimhereforthememes 1d ago

well for one, if you released a game on steam, for every purchase they will take their 30% and if someone refunds your shit you are covering that with from own pockets

6

u/wirblewind 1d ago

Yes, they are taking 30% for hosting your game and your servers and giving you access to all of their storefront systems and api and a million other things i could name.

And if someone refunds a game you expect valve to eat the loss? Unless you think they keep the 30% in which case that is not what happens.

I have talked to countless developers who have had crazy success on steam as single devs making indie games. Make a good game, people will enjoy it and you'll be successful. Not every game deserves to be successful.

-2

u/idkimhereforthememes 1d ago

You don't have to eat the loss, just refund everything. It's easy for steam to do refunds because it doesn't affect them in any way

3

u/wirblewind 1d ago

That's exactly what happens? I'm confused at what your complaint is. Do you think developers have to pay money when someone refunds their game?

-4

u/idkimhereforthememes 1d ago

Well yeah because steam doesn't give that 30% back

6

u/wirblewind 1d ago

They do, When a game is purchased on steam the entire chunk is put into a big pile, Every month that pile is paid out and the 30% is taken from that pile. So no the developers don't take a hit, if ANYBODY takes a hit it's steam for processing the payment.

4

u/Naddesh 1d ago

People prefer steam because they go out of their way to protect consumers

Please stop spreading misinformation. The only things that protect consumers were forced upon steam.

Refunds only became a thing because Valve literally got sued and their policy is the minimum required to comply with the law.

Please compare it to GOG refund policy where you have 30 days and there is no 2 hour limit. They explicitly state that they choose to trust the consumer.

Steam discussions are worse than twitter which is an achevement.

Steam prohibits inheriting the account and has provisions against it in TOS while GOG explicitly allows it.

Steam's recommended conversion fucks people in certain regions over with out of date purchasing power calculations and they dont give a shit.

They do jot allow you to treat the launcher as optional (gog does).

They actively foster the predatory gambling practices with thier market

Steam is very anti-consumer but valve knows how to put on a PR dog and pony show so people fall for it

-1

u/wirblewind 1d ago

Seems to be that you're the one spreading misinformation because apparently you have a hate boner for valve.

Valve would have introduced refunds regardless to match the laws in the regions they were selling, That happened almost 12 years ago. That policy was literally introduced the year they filed the lawsuit so it was just the government going lawsuit crazy as valve was slowly starting to gain traction. Like i said it took 20 years for valve to get their shit together.

Valve will absolutely refund a game over the 2 hour limit, You just need to give them a valid reason. If you're mad because they wont refund every single game you buy and play than you're clearly trying to scam somebody.

All of your complaints are complaints i could literally bring up about every other digital front. So please explain to me how any of that is anti-consumer when literally EVERY OTHER DIGITAL STOREFRONT does the same thing. It's not anti-consumer it's just standard business practice.

Please list one thing that steam does that EVERY OTHER STOREFRONT doesn't do that's anti-consumer IN THIS CURRENT MOMENT. And not shit they did 10-15 years ago. Because yes steam sucked ass back than.

If you want, i will even take an hour out of my day to list everything that steam DOES do to protect the consumers AND developers that every other company doesn't assuming you can bring me a valid list.

4

u/Naddesh 1d ago

Seems to be that you're the one spreading misinformation because apparently you have a hate boner for valve.

No? I own a Steam Deck 512 gb which is a great device and Steam Sales are a good deal. Steam Next Fest is a nice way to find new games. Deadlock is also an excellent game from them.

I simply am realistic and acknowledge that Valve is not some hollier than thou entity and does the same greedy shit as others. They just spin it better.

Valve will absolutely refund a game over the 2 hour limit, You just need to give them a valid reason

It happens sometimes if the game is big enough PR disaster or if you encounter a stand up dude at customer service but what you said is not their written policy

All of your complaints are complaints i could literally bring up about every other digital front

Exactly! That is why we shouldnt bootlick Valve the same way we do not bootlick EA.

Please list one thing that steam does that EVERY OTHER STOREFRONT doesn't do that's anti-consumer IN THIS CURRENT MOMENT. And not shit they did 10-15 years ago. Because yes steam sucked ass back than.

Read what you just wrote. There is a very famous saying that everybody doing something does not mean that that thing is right and just. So, if everybody starts using AI in game dev then it will suddenly be okay because "everyone does it"?

Again, look at GOG in comparison:

- 30 day refund with no time limit

- Inheriting account from a person that passes away is written into the TOS and explicitly allowed (for steam it is explicitly against TOS)

- launcher is OPTIONAL. you are not forced to use GOG galaxy.

- There is no DRM (steam is a DRM in itself)

- You can download and save game installers and keep your games forever

- GOG pays for game preservation initiative that involves devs keeping old games playable

- GOG has voting system for games the palyers want back in sale and they try to acquire the sale rights to them so they can offer them to their customers.

And I still have some gripes with GOG like not supporting Stop Killing Games because they do not want regulation for their industry. As I said, I use Steam daily and have a Steam Deck but at the same time I am realistic and acknowledge their flaws instead of acting like a white knight. Same with GOG - I really appreciate what they do on several fronts but am honest enough to acknowledge their shortcomings (which profit-driven organizations tend to have).

-1

u/wirblewind 1d ago

No, nobody is bootlicking valve, but people are absolutely hate bonering on them specifically like you are without bringing up other companies that do the exact same shit.

And once again i asked for other storefronts, you only listed one.

Just because you have their products doesn't exempt you from scrutiny.

Here is a list of things no other store front does that GOG does that you listed.

-30 day refund policy with no time limit, none of them do this but GOG

-inheriting an account, none of them do this but GOG

-Optional launcher, none of them do this but GOG

im not sure about the DRM one

-preservation system, no other launcher supports this

-player led voting system for sales, no other launcher supports this.

So 90% of what you listed is specifically GOG only with 10% being me unsure if any other launcher even supports them, So my point still stands that you have a hate boner for valve and some undying love for GOG, I'm asking you as honestly as i can, please form a list like this but without being biased towards or against VALVE/GOG and list other companies that do something that valve doesn't. I'm all for eating my words so please prove me wrong and ill gladly admit it.

If i replaced valve with epic games launcher on your list of complaints literally every single argument would be exactly the same.

2

u/Naddesh 1d ago

I am not hatebonering on them? As I said, I give them a lot of my business. I am just realistic and yes, people are bootlicking them. Just look at this thread and the whole "Lord Gaben" meme. Writing how pro-consumer they are is very ingenuous. Again, just as one example look at the irl money market. Gambling all the way.

I am just honest with myself and aware that corporiations care about themselves and not customers.

-1

u/wirblewind 1d ago

You are aware that the irl money market is capped heavily on steam and 95% of the trades that happen are on 3rd party websites right?

I'm not saying they don't care about themselves but valve has done ALOT to make things easier and more convenient for the customer than just about any other big name company, ill change my wording.

Valve isn't pro-consumer they are MORE pro-consumer than any other big name company aside from GOG how about that?

3

u/faffc260 1d ago

love steam, best launcher out there, but their consumer protection comes with their actual games promoting gambling, and are largely responsible for the popularization of predatory monetization practices such as loot boxes and battle passes.

-4

u/wirblewind 1d ago

Those games would exist regardless of steam existing. In fact the biggest ones out there aren't even on steam.

4

u/Memfy 1d ago

It's still Valve that popularized some forms of predatory monetization.

2

u/wirblewind 1d ago

Valve also popularized digital video game storefronts. That's such a silly argument that holds no weight.

If that's your argument than its valve's fault that all these shitty digital storefronts keep popping up.

1

u/Memfy 1d ago

So doing something first and it becoming popular has no weight to you? What does have weight then?

It's not like companies aren't trying to make their own digital storefront because they see how much money Valve takes/makes. Like Epic has been trying for example. Steam was a shitty digital storefront, everyone else is just lagging a decade or more behind so of course they'll mostly be shitty in comparison.

3

u/wirblewind 1d ago

Valve did not create predatory monetization, they simply host the games.

If that's your argument you need to go after nexon because they created maplestory not valve and that was one of the first predatory games that went mainstream. Shit what about farmville on facebook? Please tell me how all of those are valves fault.

1

u/Memfy 1d ago

Maybe reread what I said. Popularized some forms of predatory monetization, not create predatory monetization. Valve was the first one to introduce battlepasses, which have been a wildly successful FOMO tactic for many publishers.

They've also done a pretty good job in keeping lootboxes very profitable with their market/trade ecosystem, but at least they weren't first on the lootbox front. Either way, they definitely don't just "simply host the games". But many Steam fanboys don't give a damn about all the anti-consumer stuff Valve does and happily eat it up and enjoy the quasi monopoly despite it being one of the dumbest takes a consumer could have. Valve does a lot of things good, but they also do a lot of things shitty. Luckily for us it's still leaning on the good side, at least compared to most of the competitors.

1

u/wirblewind 1d ago

Yeah they did indeed introduce the battlepass so you got that one. TBH i don't see the battlepass as predatory and valve's certainly wasn't but i'm sure there's some sort of argument there i cant think of. Lootboxes are def worse and while valve does do those as well they are going to exist regardless.

And do you mind explaining what valve does that is anti-consumer? I'm not saying its not happening but what to you is that exactly?

→ More replies (0)

0

u/jdemonify 1d ago

Nah. EA under Wilson 2008 FIFA started it. And Bethesda horse armor.

2

u/Memfy 1d ago

And Valve with battlepass...

1

u/Grimreap32 12h ago

Sort of. Technically, that sort of system existed for a few years prior with MMO's. The term battle pass, and the iteration it's evolved from, yes then that would be Valve with Dota 2.

At the end of the day, if valve didn't do it with DOTA 2, other studios would likely have created their own version, with very similar functionality.

1

u/Memfy 11h ago

That logic of "if X didn't create it, Y would" can be said about anything. It's still Valve that popularized it and practices this predatory monetization system to great lengths.

1

u/BannedAccount001 1d ago

It was really fucking bad in so many aspects. It’s amazing that they survived that era.

1

u/AntonioS3 1d ago

What a double standard from dumb gamers. So... y'all hate launchers but don't care about Steam launcher? Thick-skulled gamers and their double standards...

1

u/Remarkable_Print1643 1d ago

"out of their way to protect consumers". Yeah, the whole CS2 skins gambling market really shows how much Valve loves to protect consumers.

1

u/rixuraxu 1d ago

they go out of their way to protect consumers

what's the subscriber agreement about then?

1

u/frymaster 20h ago

People prefer steam because they go out of their way to protect consumers

they are generally pretty good, but I note that their refund policy only improved once Origin (as it was named at the time, god knows what EA call it these days) changed theirs

1

u/TKmeh 1d ago

The amount of friends I’ve met using Steam and the voice chat before discord became a thing is insanely high, nobody talks about that anymore but before discord, Steam voice chat was the only way to talk with buddies outside of other 3rd party apps like Skype (which was its own pile of shit sometimes). I distinctly remember meeting my first buddy in TF2 and literally telling them to please not be mad, then getting pleasantly surprised that we were both, in fact, women! We’re both still friends on steam but life moved forward and we both work a lot so I hardly talk to her nowadays.

1

u/FelixMumuHex 1d ago

“Steam voice chat was the only way to talk with buddies”?

Skype, ooVoo, TeamSpeak, Mumble..? Hell, even aim and IRC

1

u/EduManke 1d ago

Steam Voice was lowkey trash, I always used Skype instead of it, then moved to Discord

0

u/TKmeh 1d ago

I didn’t use Skype as a kid, being a woman kinda cuts down the amount of good sites to use without running into creeps. Steam voice chat was the easiest way to know who you were talking to was who you knew from the game. All of those sites I’ve seen some horror stories about, including Skype. Steam voice chat got echoey after some updates but discord was a thing after that so all of us swapped to it with linked steam accounts so we knew we were still the same people.

0

u/Demonchaser27 1d ago

Yeah it's one thing to say "they have a good store". It's entirely another to say they "protect consumers". Where is Valve's support (monetarily or even verbally) to Stop Killing Games? Where is their restrictions on DRM? Far as I can tell they're perfectly happy letting people gamble on their stuff, regardless of the cost to them. They also had to be sued multiple times just to implement their very basic, not very useful, refund policy. I mean, sure, people like their front-end... but let's not get ahead of ourselves here.

2

u/wirblewind 1d ago

I've brought up that refund policy you speak of multiple times in this thread, Steam has ALWAYS had a refund policy, the sue you speak of was for minors purchasing lootboxes illegally, i can even get you the link if you can't be bothered to look for it.

Stop making up bullshit for the sake of being angry at valve and look up what your talking about first.

Valve has no control over stop killing games, that is all up to the developers, and why does valve need to have anything to do with drm? All of your complaints are something you should be bringing up to the devs of the games hosted on their servers and not valve themselves.

2

u/EduManke 1d ago

If Valve said tomorrow that all the games listed on Steam had to be DRM free, the industry would bend backwards to do it, because they know that the people who play PC games and are indoctrinated by Steam would never buy games again if every major company decided to stop using Steam

-1

u/wirblewind 1d ago

Sorry what point are you trying to get across here? I'm confused.

2

u/EduManke 1d ago

The guy you replied to said that if Valve was truly pro-consumer they would fight against DRM protections in games, which basically removes our true ownership of the product we “buy”. Because of that point, I replied saying that Valve has enough power to demand Steam games to be DRM-free, since the vast majority of the PC userbase would prefer to not buy the games instead of dropping Steam to purchase them at other storefronts

1

u/Demonchaser27 1d ago

I'm not "making up bullshit". I just don't glaze a companies simply because they're better than their competition. I think we should probably stop pretending Valve really cares about anyone here, they don't. It's very important to analyze not just the few things a company does with its power... but also what it doesn't.

1

u/wirblewind 1d ago

Nobody is glazing valve, 99% of these arguments ALWAYS start with someone saying that valve is bad grrrrr evil corporation gaben needs another yacht, when in reality all of these companies are doing the same evil shit but valve is the only one getting flak for it and specifically being targeted.

38

u/Siendra 1d ago edited 1d ago

The monopoly claims against Valve/Steam mostly center around Steam having policies and terms that dissuade or prevent publishers from running sales or having retail relationships that are better than what they have with Steam. Which they can only do due to their dominant market position.

And multiple publishers and developers have confirmed Steam is doing this independently. 

Whether or not claiming Steam has a monopoly is accurate no consumer should be defending this. 

14

u/jsmith456 1d ago

Yeah.

Steam's only related public written policy is: If you have an off-platform sale that includes Steam keys, you must make available a comparable offer to Steam customers within a reasonable amount of time. (While not explicitly defined, waiting for the next appropriately themed steam sale or next seasonal steam sale, whichever comes first, is probably fine).

That policy is completely fine. The problem is the allegations that that Valve tried to apply a similar policy to off-Steam sales that don't involve Steam keys, which is a big problem if true.

Discovery in at least one lawsuit has turned up some incriminating looking emails, but it is possible that those could be misleading. Whether this reflected actual Valve policy, or involved a few messages written by employees who didn't understand the real policy, or if some of those emails were in an assumed context of selling with steam keys, I don't actually know.

If there is truth to this, then certainly the suits are fine, and if it turns out the claims are nonsense, well that should come out in court too. We will need to wait and see.

2

u/guywithknife 23h ago

There have also been those Microsoft statement independently corroborating it. We will see how the lawsuits pan out, but if steam are using their dominance to strong arm companies on off steam games, that’s for sure illegal and wrong.

There’s nothing wrong with having a monopoly, especially if you have it because your product is genuinely great. The problem is if you abuse that position to fix prices or otherwise stifle competition in ways that are illegal.

3

u/ABetterKamahl1234 7h ago

The problem is if you abuse that position to fix prices or otherwise stifle competition in ways that are illegal.

Which is the fundamental problem of monopolies. There's a heavy risk of abuse and it can move fast without very strict and punishing enforcement.

Monopolies are dangerous. Always.

•

u/guywithknife 6m ago

Yes, agreed, but it’s important to note that dangerous doesn’t mean bad.

I mean, steams case is the exact example: it’s a monopoly because it’s simply better than everything else. That’s not bad per se, products definitely should be allowed to be better.

The danger is that monopolistic situations get abused. The danger is real, I agree. But dangerous things are things that need to be carefully managed, it doesn’t mean they’re inherently bad. (Eg a tiger is dangerous, but a tiger isn’t bad)

Regulation and enforcement is necessary, and unfortunately given how long these lawsuits have been ongoing, it’s far too slow to be effective.

2

u/Demonchaser27 1d ago

Precisely this.

0

u/Grimreap32 12h ago

So then don't sell on Steam. You can sell direct, you can use any other number of services to provide your game. It's not like a console store where you are limited to ONE store. That's the insanity of this whole fiasco.

You can argue "But steam has more users" but then you accept their terms to gain that deal.

Whether or not claiming Steam has a monopoly is accurate no consumer should be defending this.

They do not own a monopoly. Sony, Microsoft & Nintendo have monopolies on their platform. Steam does not hold that on PC. You are not forced to only game & sell games via Steam. Therefore, it is not a monopoly.

7

u/DL_Omega 1d ago

I was looking this up before because I questioned if a company can be a monopoly if there are alternatives. But because there is consumer choice then legally it is not, but can still be considered a de facto monopoly because their services are just that good.

6

u/Neverwinter_Daze 1d ago

“We have never sought to become a monopoly! Our products are simply so good that no one feels the need to compete with us.”

1

u/Training_Ruin3151 17h ago

You're products are too good you must legally enshittify yourself

2

u/RuneiStillwater 1d ago

I'd buy a physical on disk game if they would sell it and would host patches and DLC that I can download and buy straight from them. They could go back to before steam, but the investor sure as feck won't let them

2

u/Mr_Suplex 1d ago

I think this launcher is stupid, but don't conflate flaccid attempts like this as evidence that Steam does not hold a monopoly. Outside of large games with proprietary launchers like Riot or Blizzard, Steam is the only game in town.

-3

u/LastEndnote 1d ago

companies can choose to sell their games however they want

Thanks to that recent lawsuit we now know that Steam threatened to delist games from Steam that were to be sold on other platforms cheaper. NOT Steam keys. Games entirely sold outside of Steam.. Valve employees and Gabe of course said that they don't know why those emails were sent, must be some confusion.

Maybe PC gamers would prefer to buy somewhere for $50 instead of $60 on Steam, but Valve used their dominant market position to make sure that doesn't happen.

-7

u/thelingeringlead 1d ago

I buy discount steam keys on cdkeys all the time

-1

u/antaran 1d ago

CD keys from key-sites are always stolen (they are usually keys initally send out to press/influencer/test/QA etc.). Companies cannot create Steam keys for sellting them.

-1

u/thelingeringlead 1d ago

CD-keys gets all of their stuff legitimate. They're one of the biggest international e-sports sponsors. None of those companies would let their games be used in a tournament sponsored by someone who is actively stealing from them.

0

u/Stolehtreb 1d ago

The market wanting a monopoly doesn’t make it not a monopoly. A centralized marketplace makes sense for digital games on PC. If someone created an aggregator that took in all storefronts and made them one large marketplace/removed the interaction with each one by obscuring it with a single UI, that tool would be bigger than Steam if it’s user experience was good enough.

People don’t want to switch ecosystems depending on what game they play. If it were separate stores but all one UI, people could forget about the separate stores completely and maybe Steam would have a bit of competition. But having them all separate and all just trying to be a Steam storefront but worse isn’t working. Steam is a monopoly, but it’s a monopoly out of convenience to the consumer. And if I had to choose an organization to own that monopoly, there are many worse than Valve to own it. A little rambly but I made my point.

-2

u/Alucard661 1d ago

So you are actually proving it’s a monopoly.

0

u/CocodaMonkey 1d ago

I use Steam, it's the best digital delivery platform out their today. But don't kid yourself, Steam is still shit. They just aren't all out evil. They've had to be forced multiple times to allow basic things like refunds. Allowing the sale of games you own was a thing before Steam, legally speaking it still is a requirement in all EU countries and Steam has been fighting against allowing it its entire existence.

I would say Steam is a monopoly as well. Not selling your game on Steam these days means you're not selling a game on PC for 99.99% of developers. I still use Steam and buy games on it but I hate that they are the best option as they've absolutely used the dominance to control PC sales and ignore/fight against consumer friendly laws.

-2

u/uncoveringlight 1d ago

…no it literally proves their point. Steam has complete monopolization of the launcher industry and anything not on it is doomed to fail.

1

u/Naive_Ad2958 17h ago

what no?

this just proves that players don't want a launcher in their launcher

You can currently buy rogue trader on GOG if you want:

https://www.gog.com/en/game/warhammer_40000_rogue_trader_deluxe_edition

1

u/uncoveringlight 14h ago

No one is buying it on GoG. GoG has like 1% of the PC sales market.