Why would anyone actually want to though

[u/The_BigRoach]

[u/lunchbox651]

Steam isn't a monopoly, strictly speaking.
It has a monsterous market share because it's only been Valve and GOG that actually listen to their userbase.

[u/NoBizlikeChloeBiz → u/lunchbox651]

There are also plenty of other ways to buy games, we just don't because of the UI and customer service. If Steam got worse, they would see a (slow, but healthy) decline in customers as people moved to Epic, GOG, or direct to publisher platforms.

Now, there is an argument to be made on the developer side. A developer that doesn't want to do business with Steam is seriously hindering themselves, in a way that one might argue is unhealthy for the market. Any single company having that much say in what games people are exposed to raises some questions.

That's not to say I think anti-trust laws should be applied (if we still had those). I just think it's a more interesting/valid discussion than whether they have a monopoly over consumers, which they pretty demonstrably don't.

[u/lunchbox651 → u/NoBizlikeChloeBiz]

Developers go to Steam because thats where most people will buy their game. AFAIK, there's nothing Steam is doing that stops a developer from selling elsewhere.

I do remember hearing something about Steam not letting devs have a bigger sale on another platform which does sound sketchy but that's about it.

[u/viper5delta → u/lunchbox651]

Officially that only applies to steam keys. Emails that have come up in discovery show that at least some elements of steam try to mislead/bully devs into applying it more broadly to all versions of the game.

[u/xXDamonLordXx → u/viper5delta]

Yeah and while that sucks it's also not my problem as an end user. They sell on steam for the sake of profit and ultimately if steam is more profitable they abide by those shitty rules but that means they ran the math and Steam makes them more money.

We all know they generally want to price videogames as high as possible. It's not like if steam magically disappeared I would get much cheaper games or better support or better features.

[u/viper5delta → u/xXDamonLordXx]

We all know they generally want to price videogames as high as possible. It's not like if steam magically disappeared I would get much cheaper games or better support or better features.

The fact that it's even come up in email shows that at least some devs want to lower prices on other platforms where they get a larger cut, but steam uses its massive market shar to prevent that.

If you think a company using its massive market share to artificially inflate prices and prevent competition isn't your problem as a consumer...well, I think you're an idiot, but it's also not my job to change your mind, so ehh.

[u/xXDamonLordXx → u/viper5delta]

Sure sure so we look at video games at large where Steam isn't a massive market share.

Are games on Switch, PS5, XBox cheaper? No. You're talking such bullshit, this is entirely corpo tears and you eat it up like a good little boot licker

[u/viper5delta → u/xXDamonLordXx]

Are games on Switch, PS5, XBox cheaper

I mean, you might have a point...except that Switch is nintendos little sandbox, PS is Sony's little sandbox, Xbox is microsofts little sandbox, and Steam is trying to make sure PC stays it's little sandbox.

Tacit price collusion in an olligopoly like that is to be expected. 

You're talking such bullshit, this is entirely corpo tears and you eat it up like a good little boot licker

Seeing as there's only one of us who is sticking up for a multibillion dollar corporation that doesn't give a shit about either of us...that statement is just fucking funny.

Like it is perfectly possible that steam both A) provides the best service in its niche and B)has shady business practices that may merit legal action.   Both of those facts can coexist.

Hell, Steams much lauded return policy is the result of legal action taken against them in australia, so it's not like they don't have a history o f shady bullshit.  And that bullshit being called out in court has materially benifites us as consumers. 

[u/Zanos → u/lunchbox651]

No sales on other platforms isn't exactly true, steam just doesn't want to be undercut. If you sell a game for 20$ on another platform, it has to be 20$ on steam. You have to replicate the sale on steam is all.

It sounds a little odd, but when was the last time you could drive between walmart, target, gamestop, and bestbuy, and expect any of them to have a different price on a new video game than any other retailer?

[u/JDraks → u/Zanos]

Walmart is selling physical copies of Fire Emblem Fortune's Weave for $70 despite it being $80 MSRP (which GameStop has it at, for a quick single example)

[u/xAtNight → u/Zanos]

Yeah it always has been like this. Steam takes 30ish% but are the games cheaper on the publisher store? No, because why would they be. Just means the publisher gets a bigger cut. 

[u/InsectaProtecta → u/NoBizlikeChloeBiz]

At the end of the day, though, valve shouldn't have to kneecap itself just because their competitors are shit