• λλλ@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      If only they supported Linux better, or really like at all… I know you can grab the files and install without DRM. But, the whole lack of a client makes it a nuisance to use. I used to buy everything on GOG when possible. Since I got a Steam Deck that’s changed. I shouldn’t have to use Heroic Launcher IMO…

      • bouh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why shouldn’t you have to use heroic launcher or lutris? The whole point of drm free is that you don’t need a specific launcher connected to Internet.

        • NightOwl@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yet, ease of access is what appeals to the average consumer which leads to preferring steam for Linux for the same reason people get hardware restricted consoles. If a company wants to appeal and expand their market making themselves more accessible is how they do it. Otherwise alternative is to be an overlooked option.

          • Gamey@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Not directly related but this Gabe quote still seems somewhat fitting: “Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem”

        • λλλ@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Because they should be able to make a launcher that works. The Windows GOG launcher (GOG Galaxy) is a joke. They want to make one launcher to rule them all but it struggles with almost every one. I have a Windows computer for games that require it (Valorant mostly for me) and even on PC I use Heroic. I don’t want crazy features. I just want an officially supported GOG client that works well on Linux and Windows.

          • bouh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Galaxy works fine on windows. It’s far more stable than steam btw.

            In the meantime heroic or lutris work very well. So why is there even a need for something else? I’d argue it’s better if a company don’t hold your game hostage for you to play them.

            • ECB@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              “It’s far more stable than steam btw.”

              I’ll admit I’ve only used Linux for the past 5-6 years, but I think the last time steam crashed for me was almost a decade ago or something? Is it not stable on windows anymore?

  • dan@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    But Steam doesn’t have a monopoly. There’s Epic and GOG and whatever Origin’s called now and probably others. They’re all free to exist, Valve doesn’t do anything to stifle competition, and even lets other companies sell games that start their launcher from Steam.

    The only thing you have to lose by using a different system is that it’s probably not as good.

    All they’ve done is produce a really fucking exemplary product and it’s become really popular because it’s honestly just good. The second it stops being good or Valve stop being awesome there’s plenty of alternative ways to buy games that I’m sure will be there to replace it.

    But for now… it’s pretty good.

    • Gamey@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The position makes a monopoly so I would say they are but they remain the good guys because they don’t engage in anti-competitive practices, you can have a monopoly wven if you don’t abuse it.

  • TheBlue22@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Steam doesn’t have a monopoly, other platforms are just shit.

    Missing features, badly made features, fucking spyware, some barely working at all (I am looking at you, ubisoft)

    Perhaps if the other platforms tried a little bit, they would actually be a competition.

      • TheBlue22@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        A monopoly is defined as a single seller or producer that excludes competition from providing the same product

        By this definition, Epic games would be a monopoly with its exclusives.

        • Gamey@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s not at all what a monopoly is, it’s simply the absence of competition aka the market position. You don’t have to engage in anti-competitive practices to havw a monopoly, I don’t get why that’s so hard to understand for many here…

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        The barriers to entry make them Monopoly. Steam does not enforce exclusivity, people are free to list their game on steam and any other platform with no penalties.

        Steam may act as the de facto option, but it is not a monopoly. It is not excluding anybody from participating in the market

        • Gamey@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          No, the market position makes a monopoly! What you are talking about are anticompetitive practices, a monopoly enables you to leverage those in a damaging way but they aren’t part of a monopoly…

        • Gamey@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          A monopoly refers to the market position, you don’t have to abuse your monopoly to have one…

            • Gamey@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              The historical term has nothing to do with todays use, that’s just the roots of the damn word. According to your logic monopolies can’t exist, Microsoft wouldn’t be one and Amazon and so on, that’s plain wrong…

              • jet@hackertalks.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                I linked to the definition of the word, because we appear to have a disagreement on what the word means.

                As long as the system is not exclusive, it’s not a monopoly. Steam is not excluding anybody.

                But since we disagree on the definition, I don’t think there’s any point in talking anymore.

                • Gamey@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I don’t think there is much of a point in it judging from the rediculess replies I got from you and others but that’s just plain fucking wrong, a monopoly is a entity with abusable position and not a entity abusing it’s position! “In law, a monopoly is a business entity that has significant market power” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly

    • reddig33@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh, I dunno. Everyone seems to bitch about Apple not wanting to give any leeway to Epic on the App Store. Personally I find Epic ridiculously hypocritical, so I say let them eat dirt.

      • Gamey@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Everyone likes to shit on Epic so it’s probably not a very unpopular opinion ether but there is a big difference between the App and Play store and Steam, only one of them doesn’t use anti-competiive practices and the other two also force their payment provider which is rather shitty!

  • yumcake@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I buy all my games on Epic Games Launcher becomes it has less DRM than steam. If you have kids, they can’t play 2 completely different games on two different computers.

    It’s like your kid not being able to play Mario kart on her switch because her brother is playing Halo on Xbox in another room. Steam doesn’t support that. Epic games doesn’t have a problem with you having 2 different games being played on 2 different computers, so I buy my games there whenever I have the choice because it’s the more consumer-friendly platform.

  • Paradoxvoid@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    People saying Steam doesn’t have a monopoly because other stores exist, is the same as saying Microsoft doesn’t have a monopoly on PC Gaming because Mac and Linux exist. Technically true, but ultimately meaningless because its their market power that determines a monopoly, not whether there are other niche players.

    While Valve and Steam have generally been a good player, and currently do offer the best product, they still wield an ungodly amount of influence over the PC gaming market space.

    Epic is chasing that because they really want what Valve has, though no doubt they plan to speedrun the enshittification process as soon as they think it safe.

    • rtxn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      When people say Valve doesn’t have a monopoly, they usually mean they don’t engage in anti-competitive practices (like making exclusivity a condition for publishing on their store, cough cough).

      Actually, Valve’s recent moves represent what free market capitalism should be about - when competing stores started to appear, they instead made massive contributions to Linux gaming and appealed to right-to-repair advocates with the Steam Deck. Now both of those demographics are suckling on Gaben’s teats, myself included.

      • Gamey@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I hate DRM but really like Steam, they put in a shit ton of work to achive that! It’s certainly a monopoly but I think one of the biggest differences is that it’s not a publically tradet company so they don’t have to chase that infinite growth many very influencial idiots don’t see any issue with and there for aren’t willing to destroy everything for short term gains.

        • rena_ch@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Despite not having pressure from shareholders Valve pioneered or at least popularized and normalized many of the worst practices in videogame industry designed to milk players dry: microtransactions, battle passe, loot boxes, real money gambling, you name it, Valve has it

  • UntouchedWagons@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Is Steam really a monopoly when Valve doesn’t try to stifle competition and no other company could be bothered (besides maybe GOG) to make a half decent store?

    • Gamey@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well, what makes a monopoly is the position in the market, without the obligation to infinite growth that doesn’t have to involve anti-competitive prectices.