The Judge Ruled Against Valve.

[@BellularNews]

Head to squarespace.com/bellularnews to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using bellularnews Sponsored by Squarespace.

[@lootemperor]

what about the fact that games nowadays specifically steam and csgo gaslight you into thinking that you're bad at the game or the game doesn't work correctly so you instinctively buy better gears and Hardware to make the game Run better but in all actuality the game is bottlenecking you and your system to make sure that you play like shit specifically for higher leveled players making them go insane and making sure that they would spend more money on valve Partnerships, graphics card makers, and pc part makers illegal securities fraud artificially inflating their own stock as they fundamentally dismantle games and servers to save more money gaslighting the players even more into thinking that you're doing something for them instead you're actually doubling down making sure the game runs specifically like shit artificially boosting player morality to shut them down again with every form of rigging games you can possibly imagine shuffling them to not be noticed with the highest level constructive dismissal

[@MonsieurDeVeteran]

@@lootemperor what? :))))))

[@thejadedkiller]

Sorry but your segment Valve's Oppertunity sounds like a shakedown

[@OriginalMicycle]

Wow, Sponsorblock saved me over 2 minutes of possibly having to watch a sponsored segment that took up over 10% of this video for a product that I have absolutely no interest in. Imagine if this were a 2 hour long video that had the same percentage dedicated to just advertising, that's 12 minutes of just ads I would have had to sit through or skip past. If I watched a 2 hour movie each day that had 10% dedicated to ads, for a year that's just over 73 hours of advertisement. That's 3 ENTIRE DAYS OF MY LIFE per year I am liable to get back thanks to Sponsorblock, some jobs don't even let you have that for sick days.

[@christophersavignon4191]

A little fact many miss is that they're also dictating content: You cannot release different versions of games when releasing on steam. So, if you have a game that is against Steam's content rules, you can't just cut the game for Steam and release the full version everwhere else. Every version you sell, including on other platforms, must be identical to the one you sell on Steam, thus forcing Steam censorship on games sold outside of Steam.

[@slaterehm8448]

If Valve is at fault for unfair requirements to sell on Steam, then Amazon has hell to pay.

[@AlexFairmont]

Yes, Amazon is indeed facing similar lawsuits.

[@scaper12123]

Fortunately for Bezos, he has all the money in the universe

[@jazzyjswift]

Reminder that the actual terms are that developers cannot sell keys for STEAM COPIES of their games for a lower price than what is listed on Steam on 3rd party sites. They're free to sell it for whatever price they want on any other site so long as they're not selling steam keys off steam at a lower price. That's the actual issue that is being intentionally misinterpreted in this case.

[@TaylorMorgan-y2z]

@@jazzyjswift Watch the video.

[@TheEdMonix]

@@jazzyjswift Can you elaborate?

[@Tyrannus_Gaming]

Steam isn't a monopoly, they're the only Launcher that works when I open it, and doesn't freeze my computer, or delete my account after a year.

[@robertbeisert3315]

Or actively install spyware with kernel level access

[@GamingInfested]

or have yearly 20 data breaches (cough like sony cough)

[@S1e73n]

Then google doesn't with this logic

[@tesladrew2608]

That doesn't mean it doesn't have anti competitive practices.

[@chsi5420]

@@S1e73n you're right, it doesn't.

[@rippl3r0]

Steam does nothing to stop competition, the competition stops themselves by being shit.

[@treemover7259]

Price fixing is anti competitive... they do have the best system but still use a very dodgy static so the game is not cheaper than steam elsewhere

[@nokutori9964]

@@treemover7259 why should it be cheaper elsewhere though lol

[@Tempires]

@@nokutori9964 pricing is literally one of main elements of competition lol

[@Dzarafata]

@@nokutori9964 If some other store can have more efficient infrastructure and operate at lower cost, then they can sell the game cheaper. If valve doesn't let You to sell the game cheaper on the other store then why even bother to try make better store? If other store would sell games cheaper, people would like to buy it there. Taht would make steam and other stores compete on having the most efficient tech to cost the cost so they can sell the game cheaper that the others. That would benefit end customers by having cheaper games. I hate it that steam forces competition out with those rules.

[@hideshisface1886]

@@treemover7259 Let's compare to competition, like Epic, which pays for exclusivity deals - I'd say that forcing equal pricing is pretty fucking tame in comparison to "release only with us, and nobody else and we will throw you a couple extra".

[@MEnUequals2]

US law be like: other companies: dump toxic waste into the ocean, sell poison, overpriced healthcare: i sleep steam: does a good job and keeps customers happy: not on my watch nu uh

[@gizmothepiefaceman3062]

@@hcolider2817 lol imagine thinking the big bad boogy man is the yet again…. The Jews… bro you do realize most wealth is inherited? You do realize most of the Jews wealth was used up in Germany and they had to restart? Vs. families who have had generational wealth since before the war? Idk just weird of you to immediately assume it’s Jews….

[@DarksideStreams]

stop supporting big pharma shills like Kamala then

[@isaacskinner5565]

@@hcolider2817 are you talking about Jesuits? What the hell is a J'ish?

[@hcolider2817]

@isaacskinner5565 Frankly I'm talking about the French and their disparate influence on our country. Getting us to fight all those foreign wars on their behalf, trying to manipulate us with their overarching control over the media and government... demanding laws that make discussing said control illegal. It's a real shame how far it's gone, and it's too bad nobody seems to care.

[@hcolider2817]

@isaacskinner5565 Frankly I'm talking about the French and their disparate influence on our country. Getting us to fight all those global conflicts on their behalf, trying to manipulate us with their overarching control over the media and society... demanding laws that make discussing said control illegal. It's a real shame how far it's gone, and it's too bad nobody seems to care.

[@hideshisface1886]

So they call Valve a monopolist... Meanwhile Epic pays developers under condition of exclusivity and delaying their release on other platforms... Smells like bullshit.

[@tiranito3715]

literally you are the only other person who has said this, thank you! I just don't understand how people don't see the double standard here.

[@AxleTrade]

This entire thing smells like a collaborative effort by Valve’s competitors to hinder them because those companies just can’t compete through being competent. So they do everything else and pay off whoever they can to screw the one that actually does things right.

[@Baldeagle-tw2nv]

Exclusives aren't illegal, and Epic does it for a year, even then it doesn't help. If that was the case then Sony and Microsoft would be getting sued into oblivion for their exclusives.

[@thorveim1174]

@@AxleTrade exactly. They cant figure out how to be as good, so they do the usual instead: trying to kill the competition through lawfare rather than by beign better.

[@tiranito3715]

@@Baldeagle-tw2nv Nobody said that exclusives are illegal. That is literally one of the main points being used to argue why is it that Steam's model is not a monopoly.

[@Dragonbro91_]

I wouldnt mind steam imposing an extra fee on these AAA games with 80 to 130 gigs of required space at launch.

[@TheBayzent]

Agreed.

[@rigen97]

in fact it's actually pretty weird that Steam didn't do that. the current Steam scheme is basically reverse of taxes. they _should_ be charging a lot _more_ for games that have passed certain income threshold (and/or size threshold as a bonus) because those games provably put strain on the Steam infrastructure.

[@IvarDaigon]

the extra fee is already built into the $60-70 price tag.

[@eon6274]

Absolutely agree. For games that need more push (easy, in the case of AAA and the amount of employees) for optimization, it gives an extra incentive to lower the installation value to lessen the fee. I could see this also helping indie devs, rewarding them for optimizing

[@AimRobot]

And they give you a skin patch like once a month to increase the size.

[@faceurhell]

Battlenet is only for what is left of Blizzard, Epic Games Launcher sucks and lacks basic features, The Microsoft Store does not work, GOG is great but has too few games, and all other storefronts are glorified launchers (Ubisoft, EA, Rockstar) or key generators (Twitch, Amazon). All this says is GOG should be used more, but publishers do not want us to own our games no strings attached.

[@Morpheus-pt3wq]

Once Gabe will pass away, it´s entirely possible high seas will be all that´ll be left for us to use. I have a hunch his replacement will start milking the brand left and right...

[@sihTdaeRtnaCuoY]

Exactly. If it was really about having competitors for Steam, devs/publishers should all flock to GoG. I'm not installing any of that other garbage, but I will install and use GoG. But that goes against the master plan of endless subscription services instead of ownership. This is all a farce. It's powerful people targeting free platforms that are a threat to their grand designs of ending ownership, using smaller companies as a proxy to obfuscate.

[@paulie-g]

.. now imagine if GOG could undercut Steam on price. Oh wait, they can't because Steam is maintaining their monopoly position with price controls. Those price controls are the only reason indies aren't flocking to GOG, they already release DRM-free on Steam.

[@sihTdaeRtnaCuoY]

@@paulie-g Explain to me how they are doing that. Explain the exact process, because I think you're just misinformed. The reason everyone flocks to Steam has nothing to do with "price controls". It's because EVERYONE uses Steam. That means way more sales. And they do that because it's an amazing service. That's why we've all been doing it for 15 years. The reason devs/publishers don't put their games on GoG as well is because they don't want you to own things. Even if your misconception was right, and Steam was doing price controls, you can still have it on for the same price on GoG, so why isn't it on GoG as well for the same price? What you're saying makes no logical sense at all. You are being fooled by an oligopoly that is trying to seize control of the industry. And if they succeed, we will all be infinitely worse off.

[@maxgehtdnixan4913]

Funny thing is, I stopped using Gog when they went DRM on some games like Cyberpunk, f.ex.. Literally no reason to use the platform anymore if they're just going to be "worse steam" and abandon their "no DRM" principles. Basically, Gog stopped being a viable competitor when they tried to ape steams model instead of continuing their own. They have no one to blame but themselves for their loss of market share.

[@megan00b8]

I find it kinda hilarious that Valve is being investigated for monopoly practices because all of their competitors are so shit they ruined their own platforms into obsolesence. Valve will survive this, just like a company that behaves reasonably should weather any storm, and hey, if the indie devs or the players get a benefit or two in the process then that's a good deal for everyone.

[@Tomos_J-J]

​@@Deniii4000 Unless the condition for commission was purely selective (while allowing other publishers not tied to competitors to sell physical copies of media) I don't understand the...problem? It's simple contract law, if you want to profit from a contract you must abide by the terms and conditions set by the promisor, if you don't like it you can either negotiate the logistics of its content or walk away.

[@jakenguyen1150]

@@Deniii4000 Would love to see some sources on this. I tried searching for the deals between Koch Media and Valve but ended empty on the web?

[@JeffTheKiller000]

@@Deniii4000 you're mad cause your favorite company got shit on by valve

[@ryojimata3708]

The game studio is putting a major black mark with this anyway. The stocks for them have been free falling since their case started. More than likely the studio will either go under or be absorbed by someone else.

[@TaylorMorgan-y2z]

@@ryojimata3708 Which studio?

[@Readesu]

If steam needs anyone to testify about why I have other competition installed but still choose to use steam I'll gladly do it.

[@nickmf22]

Yeah I'm sure they'll need some random idiot to testify

[@GHGXD360]

@@nickmf22 I love how proud of yourself you are more power to you

[@drwilyecoyote5357]

actually based

[@Seraphim_1172]

Same here. Steam is just superior.

[@Whydoesthishappen]

@@nickmf22 Do you feel better now buddy?

[@AlexanTheMan]

>Studio's games falls into irrelevance >Does little to bring anything new to the plate over several years >Feels petty, blames Valve over their own financial irresponsibility >Sues them >Wins due to judicial corruption >Studio wonders why their games are still not selling >Studio wonders why there's pitchforks and torches waiting outside their HQ

[@heychrisfox]

Perfectly summarized. If the problem is the game, then you can't blame the distributor.

[@otamatonefan8996]

​@@blarghblargh no garuantees that the justice system will be true to their namesake. If you need a example of reason to doubt, the recent situation with Mojang is a strong one, and how the swedish law systems and groups have both made it obnoxiously difficult to file lawsuits based on Mojang's literally illegal actions regarding altering their rules, and also with the law system there being full of layers of people that won't even do their job right. It's a convoluted mess.

[@TaylorMorgan-y2z]

Sure, Wolfire is totally capable of outbidding Valve Corporation, must be corruption /s

[@Nick-cs4oc]

Even when their game does sell, it makes more money for Valve than them. Valve has complete control over anything they could attempt to do. They have the algorithm that shows your game, they control where else you go, they control how you can sell. THEY MAKE MORE OFF OF GAMES THAN DEVELOPERS, and y’all acting like it’s all good. Hope y’all like your products because that’s what you get when you have to appease algos and mass appeal

[@WindFireAllThatKindOfThing]

Facts. To highlight this, the convos need to use the missing words when talking about the other side of 'indies': Shovel and Abandonware. As our 6th grade teachers taught all of us....missing keywords ruin the message. And that's become a generational problem of late. Media and people refusing to use the best, proper keywords.

[@Zuginator]

As a backend system operations guy. People think Steam runs for free, servers are EXPENSIVE. All those internet connections are EXPENSIVE. I did an audit of our AWS and saved my company more then my yearly salary a month, just killing old VMs developers forgot to take down. I have issues with regulators trying to force access to platforms. Why should Epic not have to pay a cut when they are using another companies resources? That sounds like squatting to me.

[@AlexFairmont]

When Valve released Half-Life 2, they announced that their profit margins for sales of the game on Steam were 86%. That means their costs in 2004 were equivalent to 14%, mostly for bandwidth. Bandwidth costs have since dropped by orders of magnitude.

[@luka188]

@@AlexFairmont That is not true at all. Bandwidth costs have increased massively over the years. Especially all the stored data and all the downloads, active users increasing over the years. Data costs from all sides have massively inflated simply because the sheer volume of data has increased thousands of times relative to the decrease in price for bandwidth over all. Bandwidth prices decreasing by 100 times does not even out with data volumes increasing by hundreds of thousands of times.

[@AlexFairmont]

@@luka188 According to the video, Valve charges 30% for small indie games that take up a few hundred MB and 20% for AAA games that take up 400 GB, so I don't think bandwidth costs are the issue here.

[@WingTzu343]

They AREN'T using another companies resources. Watch the video and then edit your comment.

[@luka188]

@@AlexFairmont Please, what nonsense comment is this? The data expenditure has nothing to do with the size of the game. It's the hosting, all the download fees, marketing, support, forums, and more. Steam makes no profit from these games at all. Instead, they give these games a platform to sell at all, even at a loss for steam/valve, which without steam they wouldn't even be able to do because what company or platform provides the same services as steam for the same price?

[@dominikbecker8167]

Valve: exists The industry: OMG YOU CANT DO THAT THAT'S A MONOPOLY, I'LL CREATE A PLATFORM MUCH WORSE THAN YOURS AND WAVE MY HANDS ANGRILY WHEN NOBODY USES IT!

[@tian7171]

Offering more benefits isn't a monopoly. It just shows that competitors are INCOMPETENT, UNNEEDED and HOSTILE TO THEIR COSTUMORS. It's on the same level of braindead as saying that certain Countries have a monopoly on their fauna and flora because only they have the right conditions for them to survive and thrive

[@tesladrew2608]

Controlling prices is

[@tian7171]

@tesladrew2608 and? A supermarket controls it's prices, too. Also, steam doesn't tell you to price your game at 60€/$, so it's not that

[@LZeugirdor]

How did you manage to typo customers in such a way that the end says tumors and now all customers sound like evil cancer leeches 😭

[@RobinYoBoi19YT]

@@tesladrew2608Valve does not decide the game price the publisher or game management do. They just can't be bothered to change the price of the game.

[@cousinpatsey2471]

@@tesladrew2608 Valve doesn't control prices on Steam. The game sellers do.

[@unkosherfood]

companies threw themselves into the furnace to keep shareholders and investors warm, and now that theyre running cold again theyre attacking the foundation they were built on as well. these companies should be ashamed.

[@TheBayzent]

Woofire has 4 employees, not sure they are (or can be) public...(so no investors)

[@RarebitFiends]

​@@TheBayzentWolfire just makes games now. They sold HB to the company that owns IGN close to a decade ago.

[@ohiasdxfcghbljokasdjhnfvaw4ehr]

that's the circle of capitalism.

[@gernhartreinholzen3992]

If Steam is a monopoly, Google is 1000 times over. So why is Google still not declared a monopoly?

[@keit99]

Because google pays the right people

[@demivideos8887]

while i dont believe steam is in the wrong, Google is in the process of the largest anti trust case since microsoft in the 90s. So, they are being declared a monopoly, due to their size its taking a long time to finish up

[@BarneyGoogl]

Recently it has. Google are going to have to chop up their company and sell of certain parts. A US judge ruled it back in Nov.

[@aragoonn]

There is literally an antitrust lawsuit going on against google right now to try and break up their internet search engine monopoly, but go off

[@Toonrick12]

​@@BarneyGooglNo they won't.

[@themomaw]

I fundamentally can't agree with any attacks on Steam's market position. When people went after Apple, it's because it's virtually impossible to use their devices WITHOUT going through the company-provided (company-censored) ecosystem. On PC it's completely different. You *can* sell your game anywhere you want. You don't need to use to Steam. Or Epic. Or any other market. You can make a service contract with any random payment provider you like and just sell your software to consumers directly. People *want* to be on Steam because of Steam's massive discoverability features. But none of that is free. Wanting to be on Steam and benefit from Steam's feature set without actually paying into the system to support it is NOT reasonable.

[@nono-yw3tv]

EXACTLY

[@Hero_Puddle]

The video does show that this extends beyond steam keys and to the price that they can sell non-steam versions for on other platforms. Valve's success is mostly their lack of good competition but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be punished for bad practises that are a more minor contribution to their success.

[@inkblotCrisis]

Their "monopoly" is based on the competitors sucking ass.

[@Kylav1996]

So? still pretty much is one.

[@KryyssTV]

Be good at what you do... but not toooo good.

[@icravedeath.1200]

Gog, I like steam but saying they have no good alternatives is silly.

[@anbfm129]

@@Kylav1996 Nope, it's pretty much anticonsumer to argue otherwise: to break the monopoly you have to make the buyers accept a shittier service. That's straight up military grade BS.

[@kman9884]

@@Kylav1996Not even close to “pretty much”. GoG, Epic, and Microsoft’s storefronts are all direct competitors. Just because Steam has the lion’s share of the market doesn’t mean they have a monopoly. The framework for a digital storefront is feasible for any savvy company, there isn’t a massive buy-in amount to be competitive in the business, and the service isn’t exclusive to Steam. It’s in no way close to a monopoly. It’s just a wildly successful storefront that has the benefit of prestige due to its longevity.

[@slavedemorto]

So let me get this straight... Company A followed by Company B open up two shops/stores in a mall. Company A opens a store that is universally perceived as better than that of Company B. Prices are literally the same, but customer service, shop's layout and amount of choices and general vibes are different. Bob, the entrepreneur extraordinaire decides to sell his home made cheese in both. Company A takes 30% cut , Company B takes 10% cut. Bob get's mad, because he sells more cheese at A.

[@tiranito3715]

literally this lmao...

[@hanro50]

It's more whacky than that. Company A provides a support network and warranty service for free with the condition that products that include that service can't be sold cheaper outside of store A. The exact same product can be sold at store B at a lower price if it doesn't use any of store A's services. Now Bob is mad he can't use store A's services while selling his stuff for cheaper at store B.

[@slavedemorto]

@@hanro50 Fair, this is so absurd to begin with that I kinda forgot that last part was the thing.

[@Rellikan]

That's funny. Turns out Company B is named after Bob and Bob is the owner.

[@nomore6167]

@@hanro50 "The exact same product can be sold at store B at a lower price if it doesn't use any of store A's services" - Thanks for succinctly proving that you didn't watch the video. Seriously, is it *THAT* onerous to watch before you comment? If you bothered to watch the video, then you would know that what you posted is the exact opposite of reality.

[@LemonRush7777]

If they win and Steam gets shittier, I will have to resort to high seas activities going forward.

[@Deep_Side_Sleep]

why will it get shittier?

[@jacksongibbs8998]

Yar har fiddle Dee Dee Being a 🏴‍☠️ is alright with me Do what you want cause a 🏴‍☠️ lives free You are a 🏴‍☠️

[@paulie-g]

There is absolutely no way Steam gets shittier if they win. Steam would potentially have to lower their cut, which would leave indies with more money to make games. They would absolutely have to stop interfering with the prices devs/publishers choose to charge elsewhere, so devs/pubs could sell directly to their fans, at a lower cost, and still make more money on those sales.. leaving them with more money to make games. It is never worse for the customer when a monopolist is forced to stop abusing their monopoly position.

[@sihTdaeRtnaCuoY]

Steam is the only reason I don't pirate PC games. I don't need to, because the service is good. If the same thing was provided for all types of media, I would have no reason to pirate. The only thing Steam lacks is true ownership of the games, but I don't think that is Valve's fault.

[@velgadisblue9923]

@@paulie-g So you believe that steam should handle bandwidth for the game, updates, cloud save service, support and all that but the devs should sell the freely generated steam keys elsewhere? They were free to set any price on other stores as long as they are not selling the steam keys. No one is forced to use steam. But if you're selling steam keys, you should follow steam's rules.

[@ToomanyFrancis]

Valve's parity requirement is actually *anti*-monopolistic. The monopolistic side of this would be a retailer offering to pay a supplier for the opportunity to offer a product at a lower price to sell more units. Valve simply requires that suppliers do not accept these deals to sell their product through Valve's platform. It's completely reasonable of them to do this and both the consumer and the supplier have benefited greatly in the long run thanks to Valve's insistence on maintaining this policy, because if they didn't the doors would be open for retailers with monopolistic intentions to take hold of the market. This practice is something that massive businesses like WalMart did to become monopolies, and now we the consumers are feeling the consequences of this with the disastrous state of the global economy thanks to rampant monopolization. It is also worth noting that there is no ruling that is decidedly "against" Valve in this case. The judge allowed the case to become a class action because it meets the requirements to become a class action. From what I understand there's no requirement of evidence for a case to become class action, as such this is no indication of guilt. I could claim whatever asinine garbage I want has negatively impacted whatever group of people I want, and if I have the money and time to pursue a class action case then I could start a class action case.

[@Mr30friends]

Valve controls like 99.9% of the player base and they force price parity. That alone makes them a monopoly. How would any other store survive? Its a circle. As a dev you HAVE to publish there since they control the player base and as a consumer you won't ever bother shopping elsewhere since the only thing that would actually drive you out of your comfort zone (steam), would be lower prices. Its simple.

[@zhenyucai8688]

​​@@Mr30friendsIts called price matching. Valve doesn't control pricing on other storefronts only their own. Which is standard practice and consumer friendly. And as a dev you don't have to publish on steam unless you want free and cheap marketing. Sales aren't something you're owed.

[@Mr30friends]

@@zhenyucai8688 What marketing does steam provide exactly? Also they do control the price in other storefronts via price matching. Since not publishing on steam is not a real option as a dev unless you are a megacorporation. And thats why they are a monopoly.

[@IIGummies]

@@Mr30friends It seems pretty logical for a storefront to want a product to have a consistent price everywhere, it's just basic fairness, no? Or is this illegal? No clue.

[@charlestrudel8308]

@@IIGummies ok, does the price matching of gaz station actually legal or should be stopped... thats what valve is doing if the email in this video are true...

[@JayEmGe]

I'm thankful that Valve is not a publicly owned company. Publicly owned companies are the absolutely worst companies.

[@woobilicious.]

Vanguard, and other Index ETF's are a HUGE danger to markets in general, the idea that they control *massive* amounts of the market's voting rights, and do not have the technical expertise to make sound, long term decision making for the companies is deeply worrying to me.

[@kavky]

@@woobilicious. The fact that they're ideologically driven instead of profit-motivated is what scares me the most. "You have to force changes in behaviors." - Larry Fink

[@ppp-vz1mi]

hihi, communism doesn't work.

[@DaviRenania]

​@@kavky Oh, but they are profit motivated on the long term. That is why they are so ideological.

[@Sernival]

@@kavky I've always appreciated Valve's relatively hands-off policy on games, you get all kinds of eccentric people that can create their own spaces how they like. Yet, they can also be quick to take action when a game is a scam, or a dev harasses customers, when things get bad.

[@dontask3613]

It's so fucking absurd to me that the gov't keeps going after gaming companies when amazon/wal-mart are literally the biggest most obvious monopolies ever.

[@Proxy-83]

It's because they have shares there not in gaming

[@videojuegos9379]

because one makes them money (:

[@micahh9351]

While I agree with the first half, the Walmart bit was a little weird. There's target, a bunch of smaller places that are doing just fine like Fred Meyers, and Amazon has competition with ebay, aliexpress (i guess) and -gags- temu.

[@monicaz1558]

What about Google and Apple

[@RenjiXIII]

Don't forget Microsoft

[@theforkedman3030]

This is bull. Most of these companies left PC gaming because they thought it wasn't worth it. Steam/Valve is one of the few companies that stayed. Now PC gaming is massive and because these companies do the bare minimum and don't really get used steam is now being viewed as having a monopoly?! If the Epic store or EA origins did at least half what steam does for their customers then maybe more people would use them.

[@Dark_Jaguar]

It doesn't change the fact that they dominate the market, and anyone trying to enter struggles to compete on providing those services in a way that competes. It only makes sense that as a result of their incredible success, they gotta pay a higher price. Back in the real world, stores have a hard time competing with Walmart, and I'd love to see this attention applied to them too. However, the lack of attention to another monopolistic company is not the business of this lawsuit.

[@rodh1404]

@@Dark_Jaguar Yes, but there are a LOT of stores out there selling steam keys. And that's only possible because Steam makes those keys available for free to publishers for the purpose of giving out to those other stores. So if you want to really compete with Steam, just use their own keys and sell the same product.

[@Dark_Jaguar]

@@rodh1404 That's... not competing, that's actually theft because you're not supposed to be doing that, and it bankrupts indy studios when those key resellers do that. Competing is selling the GAME, not the keys. No one care about keys.

[@Athasin]

They're viewed as having a monopoly because they DO have a monopoly.

[@FrigoCoder]

​@@Dark_Jaguar Steam has not engaged in anticompetitive practices, the competition simply keeps shooting themselves in the foot. Walmart on the other hand did and they choked out competition as a result.

[@budala1969]

FYI, Amazon does the exact same thing to their sellers. They cannot undercut Amazon on any other store front.

[@TheVancanslam]

Most of the comments here are braindead. At the very least Amazon doesn't go after indie game developers and threaten to blacklist them from the site when they offer it on another platform, but go off.

[@budala1969]

@@TheVancanslam That is exactly what Amazon does. They ban sellers who violate this policy.

[@jeanmarc6517]

@@TheVancanslam Yeah they don't threaten, they just do it. Much worse if you think about it for a sec, especially when Amazon doesnt give any kind of service back to the sellers in exchange for the percentage beside letting them sell on their site.

[@Horus9339]

You actually pointed out the real problem here and it is not really Steam, it's publishers. Steam gives a great deal to developers, it is the publishers that are screwing developers. It would be great if everyone was treated equally, but Steam is a business not a charity. I was forced to download Steam to play GTR2 or Race07 (cannot remember which) I was rather annoyed for a good year or two about that, but the ease of use, never having to reinstall software because I upgrade my PC/OS, being able to share my games with friends and family, saved me far more time/energy/money, Steam also allows sharing of games that some might never have thought to purchase. Yeah they could drop their service charge (as Steam is a service) for the smaller developers, but again the publishers make the lion share and screw the developer, so either way the customer does not benefit or the developer, only the publishers will rub their hands in glee.

[@doltBmB]

the real problem is valve

[@Royskooner]

Did you watch the video? Valve is the one selling access to the publishers, who are also a business not a charity! If Valve just put front page spots and daily deal spots on a lottery system instead of selling them, publishers would not be needed for small developers. Valve is helping keep the publishing industry alive by doing illegal shit lol

[@Horus9339]

@@Royskooner Steam may well help some developers gain access to publishers, but most of the time they do that stuff for themselves. If you are unsure then please talk to someone like Thor who will explain it much better than I. Have a great weekend.

[@kang4137]

@Horus9339 yea bring piratesoftware(thor) the same dude whom goes for the small guy then the triple aaa but then agian I'm part of the ded internet theory so you might be taking to a bot bye

[@Horus9339]

@@kang4137 LOL Have a great weekend bot. :)

[@ryanbauer3680]

If there are 5 burger joints in a town and 80% of the market *chooses* to go to one, that's not a monopoly. That's a McDonalds.

[@blarghblargh]

oversimplified thinking results in oversimplified conclusions. you can't pay $100 to start selling your stuff at mcdonalds.

[@conrad762]

@blarghblargh no but you can become a franchisee and that can make the OPs argument stronger since it helps draw even more parallels that make steam look better in this scenario

[@WingTzu343]

AH, another "viewer" who didn't watch the video.

[@rockiecraft]

Mcdonalds is cheeks.

[@zackeryhardy9504]

@@blarghblargh NO but you can at costco. Also don't forget that the epic game store exists and has been paying developers for exclusivity deals and they have flat out distributed free games. But people choose steam over epic despite the fact that in general Epic has better deals and exclusive content.

[@hanstenbrinke9207]

If Valve's 30% is so unreasonable, why do all these proprietary launchers keep failing? It's almost as if 30% isn't enough for publishers to maintain their own launchers.

[@FawxDaddy]

Other launcher’s complain while giving multiple free games away a month. 😂 I try those games and then go buy them on steam if I enjoy them. Its the same story every year, nobody is forcing anyone to use steam.. People just dont let companies tell them what to use. 🤡

[@TitaniumDragon]

Because of the monopoly Steam has. That's how monopolies work - you prevent any competition from existing, and you stifle them getting any money. 30% of 0 is 0.

[@videojuegos9379]

@@TitaniumDragon damn, wish you read hansten's comment so you actually added something

[@Delimon007]

@@TitaniumDragon How are they preventing any competition? If you say "price fixing" their prices have been industry standard. All they are really saying is that you can't undercut them if you are using their features and services to sell your game elsewhere which is already illegal anyway.

[@woobilicious.]

It's not about the 30%, it's that you're not allowed to list your game on another website for less than having it listed on Steam, EVEN if another website undercuts steam at 10%, Steam says it'll remove your game from the Store if you price your $60 game on competitors websites for less, The entire point of the Steam policy is that you cannot pass on the lower cut to your customer, so your customer is less likely to buy it in a different place.

[@zachtemoro2116]

I just got a high spec PC fairly recently and Alan Wake 2 has been on my backlog for a while. I went on Steam to look it up only to find out its exclusively on Epic Games. Thought about buying it, but wanted to see about Epic Games as a whole. All I found were Mobile/Indie games I had absolutely no care to play. Decided not to buy it and maybe if it’s available for cheap on PS5 I’ll get it there. I genuinely don’t care enough to buy from other sites when Steam is as good as it is and how bad the other sites seem to be

[@icxrusluv]

Don't worry it will come on Steam later. Same happened with Control.

[@jonathan.t.]

​​@@icxrusluv it's highly improbable for it to go to steam given that it was published by epic games itself. it'd be easier to just pirate Alan Wake 2 than wait years or buy a PS5, which is what i did to play the game

[@atticusseverus]

Trust me mate you dodged a bullet. EG sucks use wise. Hell I couldn't get games to update without taking forever despite solid internet speed and only to enjoy finding it 'exp an issue' on the last literal bit of data left and had to restart from the start. I could set up an update on steam and EG at the same time, steam good high MB+ upload while EG barely lands the same bytes a second when its the only thing running on my pc.

[@Toutvids]

How can they consider Valve a monopoly? There's so many other game platforms available: Epic Ubisoft EA Blizzard Amazon Microsoft store GoG Its not Valve's fault all the other's suck. (except GoG they provide a unique service)

[@lovelylemonfactory]

only Epic is an alternative and Valve were the only one that used illegal means to make it so their competitors could not compete. It's not that they are a monopoly, it's that they fragrantly broke antitrust laws.

[@dragonriderabens9761]

technically, MS store also offers a unique service (game pass) and Blizzard...actually has a ton of potential to compete. they just lack a big enough library right now, but MS is actually working on fixing that

[@Tempires]

When you have extremely high market share it gets very hard for other companies to compete against market leader. Google for example is being sued by US government for illegal monopoly in the search engine market

[@Zeivusgaming]

Don't forget Walmart, Apple and Humble Bundle.

[@ALEXANDERdk007]

@@Tempires yea though that is also cause Google are working to undermine the competition , which is something Valve isn't doing

[@GoldTheAngel]

Imagine selling a service so good, that a competitor in your field sues you for creating a monopoly on that service, and winning. That judge's final decision should be called into question.

[@front2battle]

Judge needs his own Luigi.

[@nichoudha]

@@front2battle For doing their job?

[@artyd42]

@@nichoudha Picture it in terms of you being Valve. You bag groceries too well. That makes you the person that all people go to when they want bagged groceries. Now you're a monopoly and the other grocery baggers are suing.

[@pi4795]

They are in a dominant position and they are anticompetitive because they force developers to fix the same prices everywhere. It's not ok that for example Epic games is offering a lower cut and the developers can't lower the price there because according to steam, "it isn't treating their customers fairly"

[@quineloe]

@@front2battle that is completely unhinged. Seek help.

[@jaelee1996]

Judge should be investigated. This happens after Steam tells devs to keep their words with Season Passes?

[@namenotfound2456]

"We've investigated ourselves and found no issue,."

[@Blaxi131]

@@namenotfound2456 lmao that's probably what would happen and it's both funny and sad

[@TaylorMorgan-y2z]

This case started more than three years ago.

[@Nick-cs4oc]

Has no one watched the video? Are you all gonna ride for a corp this hard? We don’t deserve a healthy gaming industry I guess

[@Person01234]

it's too soon for that to be the cause. Microsoft have been panicking that noone seems to be switching to windows 11, to the point where they're now compromising on the "no compromise" position of hardware requirements. At the same time, over a period of a few months, half a dozen large gaming companies suddenly decide their games won't support linux any more. Steam is a big player in helping to get linux as a viable alternative system. Steam has also been under fire from obviously staged and co-ordinated lawsuits probably being pushed by Epic. I think I'm seeing a pattern. I'm just going to say right now, if steam disappears I simply will not buy videogames any more. I am not going to use Epic's garbage (the ones doing ACTUAL monopolistic practices), I suppose I will still buy games here and there with GOG but for the most part I will just give up on this hobby. Might even go outside a bit more.

[@nebylicza]

Wanting to use an established storefront for advertising just to skim sales and avoid paying a cut. The audacity of that.

[@abcde6081]

Wonder how much that judge got "financially compensated" for that.

[@satakrionkryptomortis]

in short? yes

[@Dark_Jaguar]

Unless you have evidence for that... stop defending gigantic corporations. They aren't your friends, and they can afford a much better defense than you could ever provide.

[@soul-man]

But not as much as the senators.

[@TaylorMorgan-y2z]

You think Wolfire can outbid Valve Corporation in their own district court?

[@AMidgetWalrus]

@@TaylorMorgan-y2z No, but other corporate interests absolutely could.

[@nikres888]

Steam happened to be the single most powerful pc gaming service because they are the only ones that provide a worthwhile quality service. It's a dead horse, sure, but epic games, blizzard store, amazon games, all of their gaming store mediums are genuinely awful to use regularly. I didn't know all the semantics about profits and developer pay, but valve has already developed a reputation to be pro-consumer. I also think that valve does a better job of advertising indie games, but I'm curious to learn what it takes to receive any kind of main page advertising.

[@Theonevidz]

blizzard is equally good but heavily restricts externals who can release a game on blizz

[@operator8014]

GOG is better in every way except selection, and 99% of the games that are missing aren't worth your time anyways.

[@dragonriderabens9761]

@@operator8014 not...really

[@TheShizzlemop]

@@operator8014 ????????

[@lovelylemonfactory]

And they illegal fix the market so it's impossible for any company compete with them. That sure does help

[@ethancampbell2422]

I can't wait to see Valve and Steam survive and thrive anyway while Tim Sweeney keeps seething with impotent rage.

[@TheRealRuddRants]

Epic salt just keeps on flowing. That along with the fortnite salt.

[@DemonicAkumi]

If it wasn't for unreal and Fortnite, they would've disappeared real quick. Not even their free games is helping them.

[@Xport9]

No matter how many times Tim tries, I'll never use their platform.

[@jacksongibbs8998]

@@ethancampbell2422 Impotent Rage: The Liberal Superhero

[@Nemean-se5k]

​​@@DemonicAkumiunreal isnt even good, its designed for fortnite, creating massive performance issues (treating all structures as destructible etc), and massively incentivising the use of taa to cover for shoddy rendering and flickering. let alone unreal becoming a monopoly in its own right

[@nebylicza]

Anyone who thinks 30% is a lot should try and sell their game themselves.

[@CanIHasThisName]

Yes. And they should have the ability to sell their game for cheaper than on Steam. Unfortunately Valve doesn’t allow this.

[@ric270]

​@@CanIHasThisNamethen you have the freedom to not sell on steam. Why should steam give you advertising on their service just for people to buy the game on a service that does not use that advertising

[@BoodieJ-c5c]

@@ric270 That's the whole debate of why this is anti-competitive and drawing a lawsuit.

[@Mr30friends]

@@ric270 you practically dont. Steam controls the vast majority of the costumers. They could charge 70% and other marketplaces still wouldnt be a realistic option for devs. And thats why they are a monopoly.

[@nebylicza]

@@Mr30friends Steam isn’t a monopoly by definition. They don’t have exclusive control. They allow devs to sell their games elsewhere. Also, Wolfire case.

[@denisrichard58]

Apple store is a monopoly. Steam is not.

[@aragoonn]

What's the difference?

[@AlexanderVonMalachi]

​@@aragoonn you're forced to use apple store. You're free not to use Steam.

[@wekgdskfhisdkfjsuehufeqruy7185]

@@aragoonn Can you sideload on Iphone? can you install epic game store on Iphone? Can you install epic game store on computer?

[@BxPanda7]

@@aragoonn When you have an IPhone you are forced to use the Apple store, but nobody is forcing you to even download steam to your pc, there are almost always alternative ways to buy your games, most people prefer to buy on steam due to convenience. It's just a great app and that's why people use it, not because they have to.

[@LiteralDog2000]

@@aragoonn there are many options for pc gaming, even if many of them are ass. On the other hand, if you want something on a apple device then you have the Apple store, or illegal downloads

[@chillin5703]

Im all for anti monopoly cases, but this one isnt it. Nothing is stopping me from using Epic Games, or some other launcher, except for the fact that I like Steam more. Devs against Steam are almost certainly in the wrong.

[@tesladrew2608]

Watch the beginning of the video

[@naerbo19]

Not with enforcing price parity, and the multi tier system is dodgy. Well. I guess the lawsuit will find out if it goes ahead.

[@C.G.Gaster]

@@naerbo19 which is foolish from my pov, i use all these game launchers just fine. However if steam is as favored as said, then this will only hurt those companies more. Think of this from a business that relies on customers, if you upset them, then that is your money going away. Look at the studio that started all of this, they won the battle but in the end they lost their army.

[@CanIHasThisName]

@@C.G.Gaster So your argument is that when someone is screwing you over like Valve does developers, you should just take it and not complain?

[@nono-yw3tv]

@@CanIHasThisName (Readers context) Valve isn't screwing over developers.

[@loneskankster2242]

A court case was lost in America? So Valve didn't pay off the judge. Rookie move

[@handson4580]

other way around, They paid off the judge

[@monicaz1558]

The judge doesn't like video games, probably a Soros activist...

[@luipaardprint]

Let’s not forget that physical stores usually take a 50% cut.

[@Wolfeisberg]

completely irrelevant to PC gaming because physical sales are non existent anyways for PC gaming.

[@darknessvamp]

Wolfire literally doesn't have a case. Their game was sold from early access years before Steam did early access or even Steam Greenlight. They were spamming dev logs and key sales for access to game builds on moddb before they brought their game to Steam.

[@paulie-g]

What Wolfire has or has not done does not matter (there's also a second lead plaintiff, and the class has now been certified). All that matters is what Valve has done. Could Valve charge the fees they do if they had competition? Likely not, but that's open to judgment (what juries are for). Is Valve enforcing price controls on pain of blacklisting? Absolutely, we have their emails to this effect from document production. This is a slam dunk, open and shut case. Price controls, or anything that even remotely can be construed as price controls, is a huge no-no under antitrust law. I'm not sure the class is going to get much out of this portion of the case, but that doesn't matter - Valve will be forced to abandon price controls and competition will actually have a chance, lowering prices for everyone.

[@TaylorMorgan-y2z]

Wolfire was selling preorders for years before Steam early access was a thing. They have never sold Steam keys at all, let alone 'spammed' them. They sell direct downloads from their own servers, sometimes with optional Steam integration.

[@moonasha]

@@paulie-g the only reason valve has price controls is because they let developers generate keys. If this law suit goes through, then valve will stop letting developers generate free keys for use in other storefronts. Simple as. That would hurt developers far worse.

[@conlatoso]

​@@moonasha Valve also controls the price of games sold outside of steam (withou steam keys). For example you cant have a game be in Steam at $20 and at the same time in GOG at $10

[@OzixiThrill]

@@conlatoso So far, that is the claim that's being made. But claims are not facts.

[@OXY187]

What a coincidence. Steam develops SteamOS and rumors of it coming to PC and being a much better OS than Windows swarms the internet, and then somehow the US Government decides to hurt Valve.

[@qwertyiuwg4uwtwthn]

@@OXY187 oy vey

[@paulie-g]

SteamOS is Arch Linux and has been available "on PC" for over 20 years.

[@Person01234]

at the same time as multiple large gaming companies decide "oopsie can't support linux any more" and now we hear that microsoft is kind of panicking that noone wants to use windows 11. Smells like something.

[@WingTzu343]

this case has been ongoing for over 3 years. Sorry if that hurts your tinfoil theory though.

[@OXY187]

@@WingTzu343 yet it's approved only now

[@RiorXD]

4:42 to skip square space ad :D

[@supergamer1]

Cough cough sponserblock cough

[@Przekarykaturalizowany]

@@supergamer1 How on phone?

[@supergamer1]

@Przekarykaturalizowany with youtube revanced

[@RolyPolyGames]

It rewards successful developers who already dominate. While keeping the lil guy down. I hope steam rethinks this and perhaps does something for new developers.

[@JNJNRobin1337]

hold on isnt this one of those 'monopolies that are legal' things? they're winning specifically because they have the *highest quality product* , which should logically give them protection

[@handson4580]

i personally call it a social monopoly. While valve does have a monopoly in that i mean a HUGE chunk of pc game sales and operations there ultra consumer friendly and willing to admit wrong doing to the point everyone uses them because everything else is trash

[@imeakdo7]

Well doesn't Google also have the best search? Other search engines like bing are often worse than google. Yet Google was declared a monopoly a few weeks ago

[@paulie-g]

Yes, it's perfectly legal for them to have a monopoly position. It is *not* legal to abuse it/protect it by instituting price controls and implementing discriminatory (in a prohibited manner) policies for vendors. Gov't regulators may choose to break up a monopoly (or enforce other remedial actions) even if it is legal and has not violated antitrust law if they judge it to be sufficiently negatively impacting competition, but that's not the process at issue here. This is a private, class action case that's open and shut, 100% proven with the document production that's already happened, on the price control portion. It is not legal to tell vendors what they may charge elsewhere, period. That's the definition of a price control. Their motives (if you believe the motives they cite, which you shouldn't) are immaterial. Do they have a monopoly position by market share (units sold, revenue)? Yes. Did they, in their own e-mails, threaten to stop doing business with any vendor who chose to sell at a lower price elsewhere, eg on their own website? Yes. Slam dunk.

[@rylak3]

@@paulie-g They can refuse to sell the product on their service. Especially if it is scamming their customers. Walmart wouldn't accept selling something $20 more at their store if they know target is selling the same product for less. They will just get it from someone else under a different brand. Point to me exactly which store is going to willingly take a terrible deal, knowing customers would for sure go somewhere else because the deal is that much better, and still offer it on their shelves. I believe walmart made a company go out of business specifically because it was trying to sell at walmart for more and walmart just refused to sell the product entirely instead. What you call black listing is just refusing to sell the product at a scam to their own customers or let themselves be cut out of the deal after using steams services.

[@paulie-g]

@@rylak3 No, it is not legal for Valve/Steam to do because of their monopoly position. It's called a price control and it is a) anticompetitive, b) costs gamers money, c) morally wrong, and d) illegal under antitrust law. Walmart is not adjudged to be a monopoly, therefore they can do as they please (absent specific actions, like cartel price fixing/coordination with, say, Target) until they become one (unlikely). Incidentally, Walmart is notorious for bankrupting nearly every supplier they've ever had by first making them dependent on revenue from sales at Walmart, then squeezing them on margins until they go out of business. If you like Valve/Steam, the last corp you'd want to use as an analogy is Walmart. Although it's not an entirely bad analogy given how many indie studios fail with their first and only game while Valve collects their gargantuan 30% of gross.

[@IOAwaits]

Did Gabe tell him to delete his account?

[@Umbra_TuSlayer]

If steam reduces its prices, the competition goes bankrupt and it becomes a real monopoly...

[@tiranito3715]

shhh they don't know, let them force steam to lower their prices so that we can slowly watch the competition burn

[@TaylorMorgan-y2z]

You seem to have misunderstood literally everything about this situation. Steam is raising prices *on other stores*. The case is about forcing them to stop doing that.

[@Umbra_TuSlayer]

@TaylorMorgan-y2z and all physical stores go bankrupt. You need to see this in terms of the whole market...

[@tiranito3715]

@@TaylorMorgan-y2z How can Steam be raising the prices on OTHER stores lol? YOU seem you have misunderstood literally everything about this situation.

[@elijahaitaok8624]

​@@TaylorMorgan-y2z -"it's true because it came to me from a dream."

[@doctorfresh3856]

So that explains why the discounts on Steam Sales have been trash in the last couple of years....

[@andrejdelaney4222]

I am still waiting for all the consumer benefits developers have been touting while promoting the lower cut of Epic's storefront. 30% is fair for what Steam is doing for developers AND gamers. In contrast to Epic they are actually investing into their platform. "Indies are suffering". Are you kidding me? I have discovered and bought so many indie games BECAUSE of Steam Next Fest. A lot more landed on my wishlist and are waiting to be purchased ... Also being a AAA doesn't guarantee success. Look at Dragon Age Veilguard, most recently. Competition is fierce. You gotta stand out to be noticed. But it's not like Steam is giving 0 opportunities to indie devs. Edit: Comparing the likes of Apple to Steam is ludicrous. Steam has earned its place. Consumers decided Steam was their platform of choice, they are setting the demands and Valve has been really good at fulfilling those over the years. Punishing success is NOT the way to go.

[@imeakdo7]

You did not talk about how Apple didn't earn their place. Don't people love their cameras?

[@andrejdelaney4222]

@@imeakdo7 I was more referring to their own storefront and less their individual products. Personally, I am not a fan of both.

[@shinyrayquaza9]

@@imeakdo7 Apple provideds shitty overpriced products with the only benefit being security through obscurity and you cant repair their stuff

[@AlexFairmont]

Steam 'earned' its place by forcing itself upon millions of customers who bought retail video games, resulting in a huge backlash from retailers and gamers.

[@elijahaitaok8624]

​@@AlexFairmont"ok no millions of indie games popped up in the market! Will someone please think of the AAA gaming industry!"

[@sureberferber9101]

If Steam was a publicly traded company, and our politicians were getting rich off of it... this discussion would've never happened.

[@AlexFairmont]

Valve Corporation does make large political donations.

[@DarkRavenhaft]

If it were publicly traded their business model would be the same as Epic and MSoft ie: customers are sheep to be herded and exploited.

[@doktork3406]

Pray that it never gets there... Valve IPO... *shudders* Say goodbye to your game library, replacing it with "A carefully curated and streamlined service that offers an unparalleled experience by means of energistically utilizing team driven data for the purposes of compellingly developing client-centric catalysts for change:) {Starting at 5.99/mo}"

[@arnithor5137]

Most definitely

[@Jonas-Seiler]

@@DarkRavenhaft this is by law btw. publically traded companies cannot legally not screw over customers as long as that is legal itself (not really but basically).

[@kharmachaos667]

Oh for... VALVE is a monopoly but GOOGLE or FACEBOOK isn't?!

[@KeirosDragon]

This all reeks of Epic…

[@TaylorMorgan-y2z]

Google was ruled an illegal monopoly in multiple recent cases. Facebook cases are ongoing.

[@treemover7259]

Meta had to sell one of the companies it had, Alphabet is facing mono0lyt charges

[@moonasha]

the DOJ is currently trying to take chrome away from google because of monopolistic stuff

[@Baldeagle-tw2nv]

Alphabet is being torn apart and the same is happening with Meta. Do you people actually pay attention to news or just rage to rage?

[@TheLegionsKing]

Aren't the emails at 1:35 talking about price discrepancy between the stores? 442 is talking about a $10 difference in price. They want it at either $10 or $20 everywhere not $20 on Steam and $10 everywhere else.

[@the_boogey_man0]

Jesus loves you btw

[@sarahbentague1466]

30% are fair, they give so much advantages to developer, Devs can also get keys from steam and sell them on another platform where steam dosnt take any cut for free.

[@Exis247]

That's exactly why Valve won't let you sell Steam Keys on other platforms for less than what you're selling it on Steam for. If you want to sell your game for less than what you're selling it on Steam for, it cannot be a Steam copy. It has to be from your own launcher or just the direct launch or whatever. You can't compete with Steam, with steam.

[@paragonwill]

​@@Exis247 worse than that, those e-mail that came to public seems to indicate that valve "wouldn't be inclined" to sell the game on steam EVEN if the other key wasn't a steam key, even it is was another different platform. If it were only about steam keys there is a basic conflict of interest since valve would be the one holding the bill for the servers alone so from a businesses perspective it's understandable... But if that is happening even if those aren't steam keys as the e-mails indicated. Lol Than is just another classic example of monopolistic behavior.

[@FrigoCoder]

@@Exis247 Obviously because Steam still has to pay for the infrastructure cost for keys and games.

[@dragonriderabens9761]

@@paragonwill you talking a lot of smack while saying actually saying a lot and what little you do say is utter BS

[@Athasin]

Steam also cuts off devs who do that. If you sell your steam keys on other stores for less they stop giving you keys to your own game... hence why it's in trouble for being a monopoly.

[@pheade1254]

If a developer thinks grabbing a piece of Steam is a good idea, they clearly haven't considered where to sell their games in the future.

[@crazyabe4571]

Realistically, with how they bit the hand that fed them- the only option they have for selling "new" games is the Epic launcher... which basically means they eliminated themselves as a studio.

[@theburnboss]

You just learned why Steam is considered a monopoly. Congratulations.

[@tylerdotapp]

@@theburnboss steam is a monoply because other corporations are so fucking useless they cant do shit for themselves?

[@budwittman4907]

@@crazyabe4571 yrp epic sux, offered me death stranding for free.... both epic games and death stranding suxs

[@brentonherbert7775]

@@theburnboss Because unlike steams competition it DOESNT shoot itself in the foot on a weekly basis? If thats a monopoly god only knows what isnt.

[@gridalien]

Cool. Companies and clueless law officials making things worse for everyone else. Definitely haven't seen this happen before. Seriously, when is this gonna stop?

[@wyattbarnett3877]

until we do revalution

[@MiGujack3]

never

[@SleeplessTVgames]

Do as Luigi

[@imeakdo7]

Launch a steam competitor. Watch it flop even though it's better than steam. Would you still say steam is the best store?

[@paulie-g]

Enforcing antitrust law has *never* made things worse for consumers. Fair competition is a universal good. The irony of a dude who doesn't understand that he's paying extra for less because there can't be effective competition with a network effect and price controls in place calling professionals in the field of antitrust clueless is..

[@SephirothsBIade]

Why do publishers even exist if they are taking such an insanely massive cut? Like, their entire purpose is supposed to be exposure and a brand... But the game is going on Steam, an exposure/brand (cant put the game on steam unless it meets criteria of actually being a game) Why even use a publisher that will take more than 3% when they are a glorified IGN reviewer?

[@Azarilh]

Yea, i don't get it. Real indie games don't do that tho. They self-publish.

[@decwow]

1:15 I mean... yeah... but it's also a good way to never be allowed to publish on Steam, ever again.

[@flaviparous]

@@decwow that’s kind of the whole point of why monopolies are bad

[@Candlemancer]

​@@flaviparous There is no monopoly. They're free to sell their game on Epic or whatever

[@sgtsnokeem1139]

​@@Candlemancerepic who use monopolistic tactics like forcing exclusivity.

[@halomaster2956]

Steam is fine look at Sony and epic games those are real monopoly

[@sgtsnokeem1139]

@@halomaster2956 dude I can guarantee somehow Epic is bankrolling this. Oh it's Wolfire? Yup epic is behind this.

[@ikeniewo2943]

So steam cannot punish devs for abusing steam? Like, it's obvious that those who who filed the lawsuit are not "strugglers who fall to injustice", they got irrelevant by making mediocre product and they want to have all the money for it while using steams infrastructure and service. This is just dirty. But they aren't first and they are not going to be last for sure. I hope that steam will build a proper defence and will win once again

[@GAMERRAZUMNO]

No, steam punish devs for NOT abusing steam. If you sell you game on GOG or Epic, you are not selling a steam game/key. You just selling a game. And Steam punish those who sell their game on GOG, Epic, etc, using NON-steam keys at a lower price as Steam counterpart.

[@ikeniewo2943]

@@GAMERRAZUMNO There will be too many of those who want to use steams ecosystem and infrastructure to advertise game and maintain the community but don't want to pay the fee for that, so they will sell it a lot cheaper elsewhere while still using steams resources as well is making sure to let people know it's cheaper elsewhere. Squatting basically, parasite mentality. You want to sell at lower price? Either lower it on steam. Wanna keep the price but don't want to pay the fee? Leave steam and sell it elsewhere. Nobody is forcing such publishers to stay on steam. Path of Titans seems to be doing fine enough selling on their own website.

[@GAMERRAZUMNO]

@@ikeniewo2943 That's why Path of Titans is not in the view, yes. It's illegal for a monopoly company to demand sellers to change their prices, so that Steam could benefit from their monopoly status. You are not advertising your game in Steam and sell it elsewhere, because Steam is a monopoly, and everyone uses Steam, so sells ends up on Steam page with 30% cut. Nobody will see a game on Steam and buy it somewhere else if prices are the same. This is as a whole anti-competitor practices, which is illegal for a monopoly company.

[@ikeniewo2943]

​@@GAMERRAZUMNO Steam isn't monopoly neither legally, not by definition. Quit with that delusion. Making sure that prices everywhere are same while you are letting publishers use your platforms algorithms and ecosystem (which takes up resources as well) is not only logical but also completely fine legally. Everyone advertises their games on steam and a lot of publishers sell them also on other and own platforms. What are you even trying to say? What's the point? Yes, everyone uses steam so in order to distribute, advertise on steam and use their ecosystem publishers have to pay the fee for said services, what is exactly wrong here? It's been like that forever, even when steam was smaller. You don't like that as a publisher? Publish elsewhere, you are free to do that since there is no monopoly and other stores exist and thrive! "Nobody will see a game on Steam and buy it somewhere else if prices are the same." No damn shot, steam provides superior service, why would they go anywhere else? It would be anti-competitor if valve were forcing them to make price lower on steam. But it's opposite and it's PRO-COMPETITOR. You want to partake in competition? Make superior service, do better. GOG somehow does better than steam where they specialize and that's why in their own field they are doing better than steam and valve are FINE WITH THAT

[@CanIHasThisName]

@@ikeniewo2943 Steam is effectively a monopoly. No, enforcing price parity is absolutely not legal. Even Apple isn’t doing it anymore because they knew there was no chance they could defend that in court.

[@mikesbasement6954]

Publishers and developers will get a tiny amount while the lawyers will take the vast majority of any settlement

[@AlexFairmont]

Lawyers, ironically, usually take 20-30%.

[@jackbob83]

@@AlexFairmont wow, you're right. That is ironic

[@dvxc]

Crazy how many people in these comments have clearly not watched any of this video at all.

[@Psyche_TH]

It's quite concerning. I am undecided if it's further proof for dead internet theory or if internet users are just becoming plain dumber. Either is worrisome.

[@Sinaeb]

compete with steam by offering an at least on par service? nah "destroy" steam with "evidences" showing that steam is kinda pro consumer? yeah

[@SimonVaIe]

If I'm understanding the video, the accusation is that valve tries to dictate prices for all stores. Assuming they do, if they lose the case and cannot do it anymore, what would be the problem of paying less on another store? You could still go to steam and pay more for their service, no? The accusation is like a boutique forcing suppliers to sell their products for the same price in discounters, no?

[@paulie-g]

OK, let's play. You invest money in building and offering an 'on par' service. Better in some ways even. But you can't ever compete on price, because Steam is abusing their monopoly position by enforcing price controls on pubs/devs. Your project is dead in the water. This is why antitrust laws exist.

[@TaylorMorgan-y2z]

Valve produced this evidence themselves.

[@Sinaeb]

@@SimonVaIe If they want to sell cheaper then they just need to not use steam, valve wants to compete by service, not by price.

[@SimonVaIe]

@@Sinaeb basically steam can increase their service quality and quantity, put in tons of stuff most won't need but charge more for it from the dev. The dev increases the price to the consumer since he gets less money from it. And every other store not putting in unnecessary services has to have the same price as on steam. I guess that only sounds stupid to me?

[@arjanzweers6542]

I'm hard pressed to call Steam a monopoly when the competition, save for GOG, just outright sucks compared to Steam. Steam became the market leader simply because the competition isn't properly competing with them as well as they can. Can it be friendlier to the indies and can the cut be lower? Absolutely. But Steam has been an absolute blessing for PC gaming, and gaming as a whole. But at this point, regardless of any rulings, I don't see Steam's market dominance being broken anymore because people have established their entire PC gaming library on it for over two decades.

[@handson4580]

i like to call it a social monopoly- Yes a vast majority of pc sales and games operate on steam but thats because its MILES ahead of anything else anyone else can offer (except gog but i havent used it myself) so everyone naturally gravitates to steam while at the same time they DONT abuse there power and constently make consumer friendly moves like better season pass disclosures or creating revolutionary games/tech (seriously even by todays standerd the valve index is ahead)

[@AlexFairmont]

@@handson4580 They clearly are abusing their power. Did you watch the video?

[@littlemoth4956]

@@AlexFairmont ???

[@Rellikan]

​@@handson4580calling is social monopoly is silly. It's as if you are casting negative light on the majority gamer population's vote by money, as a bad thing. Consumers have chosen Steam to be the best. What happened to giving consumers choice? If they all happen to choose the best one now it's "social monopoly"? That's arbitrqry BS.

[@leoSaunders]

GOG doesn't even have any AAA games safe for CDPR games because CDPR owns GOG

[@Aventus707]

Valve and Steam are so much better than any big western game company. Be better.

[@elsalfo]

They are Western.................

[@heychrisfox]

@@elsalfo The key word in that sentence was than. Hope that helps.

[@lovelylemonfactory]

@@heychrisfox "than" doesn't make a difference in that sentence. The guy left out the word "other". Hope this helps.

[@arjix8738]

​@@elsalfoAt this point, what is western? For me, Spain is a western county, for you Americans, it is an eastern country. The semantics are kinda dumb. The US is right next to Japan, but Japan is "eastern" and the US is "western"

[@heychrisfox]

@@lovelylemonfactory He is not comparing "other" companies; he's comparing to ANY western game companies. Other does not help this sentence because that would insist on a limited number as a determiner, whereas the OP is not calling for a limited number, but the maximum number. Than is thereby important because it institutes a comparative statement. I understand you probably flunked out of middle school English, but please don't argue things you don't understand.

[@gravity_mxk5663]

It’s ridiculous that Valve requires games to be sold at the same price on Steam as on other platforms. No other storefront operates this way. Devs should be able to pass the savings on to consumers if they’re not being charged an exorbitant fee for each sale. Consumers should benefit from lower prices when they choose to buy from platforms that take a fairer cut than Steam.

[@DarkTheGreat]

As an indie game dev i can totally say that 15:25 is absolutely true and in some cases it can be even more aggressive. We've told multiple publishers that had offered us up to 1 million we weren't interested when we saw the ROI (Return on investment) they wanted. During that time they basically owned you and your IP in not so many words. I.E very clever wording in the contracts, at the time i was smart enough to have multiple lawyers look at the contracts they sent us... Its very bias towards indies unless you just dont care/plan on selling the IP anyway.

[@otie9237]

The worst case for Valve is also going to do the most damage globally, as the large studios try to claw their 30% from Valve ---- that 30% is common to all their publishing platforms, tho Amazon, PS, Xbox, MS, etc.

[@moonasha]

the worst case is valve adopts practices that hurt developers in the long run, like not allowing them to generate keys

[@otie9237]

​@@moonasha ​ They've already (always?) had problems with generating keys for indie games, when AAA games are launched. Worst case is the company takes a hit and has to listen to AAA studio execs, who tend to have the worst comprehension of game release business ethics & models. i.e. They would act to remove the 30% for the platform, and raise the price of the game to cover that 30% anyway, making it two hits into Valve (publishing cut, and customer base). Which could be even worse, setting a precedent, legally, for AAA execs to band together and remove % cut of platforms for certain affiliated studios (leading to developers, studios launching many smaller game 'platforms' where games are niched into studio launchers like Nexon and EA and Ubisoft and Epic).

[@SPTX.]

@@moonasha How about you make your game not require steam to work? The only reason you need steam to generate keys is because steam is made a requirement. "Ho no, not the extra work to make the game work without steam" You can sell a game on steam, make it work with steam and still not require steam to be online, therefore not requiring steam keys to install/launch the game, but that's too much to ask for the player's convenience. Better grift your customers then complain that valve is unfair to you.

[@Warfoki]

@@SPTX. Keys are a simple solution to be able to check what account has what, and it belongs to whom, while at the same time providing a baseline anti-piracy DRM (without which most publishers will never sell anything, which is why the GoG storefront is barren when it comes to new releases).

[@SPTX.]

@@Warfoki bullshit that DRM boost sales. Enough studies have been made to prove the opposite. It's a myth that publisher religiously believe believe. It may be the reason they don't publish so much on GOG, but it's no less of a strawman.

[@adrianflare7951]

I like how there are people shilling for Wolf Fire here. Even funnier is that it's the same 4-5 guys, each spamming the same comment.

[@0kr4m]

is being against big corpos bad

[@tiranito3715]

@@0kr4m no, but it's kind of bad to defend anti consumer practices

[@0kr4m]

@@tiranito3715 how are these practices anti consumer

[@targitausrithux2320]

@@0kr4m cause its done by anti consumer companies who expressly seek to treat consumers as cattle... you can list literally every single actions of the various members of this lawsuit's crimes and it would all align with the definition of anti consumer

[@chatboss000]

@@targitausrithux2320 You can list them? Okay, list them.

[@EisakoTheAvali]

The problem is steam isn’t the problem. It is not a monopoly because there is room for other storefront to complete. It’s just a lot of them don’t wanna put in the time effort or money to make their front able to compete this is not a valve issue. We just trust valve more.

[@judgegrinch1139]

And I am now never buying from Wolf fire games.

[@J_G_G_R]

Don't worry, they basically only made that stupid bunny game with about 5 minutes worth of content

[@iamvorzs]

Wolfire games. Boycott them and never let them have a good game again

[@Tempires]

@@iamvorzs because they are suing company exersicing market dominance? Makes no sense. Steam is not your friend, you don't need defend them like corporate shill

[@Rellikan]

I loved their previous Bunny fighting game. I'm glad I never gave their new startup any money.

[@Rellikan]

Lugaru was genuinely fun and amazing. Watching those development videos for their new bunny fighting game was awesome. But I'm glad I never gave any money if this is what they're doing with the rest of their time.

[@N7Val]

Valve isn't a monopoly, the problem is every other game distributor is just ass.

[@jtnachos16]

Valve needs to IMMEDIATELY appeal for a different judge. Because that 'judge' has just demonstrated a clear lack of understanding and lack of intent to do their job correctly. I would even go so far as to argue that the judge should be checked for potential bribery/outside influences on the case. Steam's cut is literally industry standard, and are basically payment for a LOT of services that would be FAR more costly for the devs/publsihers to handle on their own. Their pricing rules are actually EXTREMELY soft and ACTIVELY BENEFICIAL to the consumers, while not even being a detriment to devs. After all, if someone buys a steam key off the dev website at 15 dollars, Valve is, in fact, losing that 30% cut. That price parity request in no way harms ANY party. It simply requires a publisher to not actively choose to penalize steam's customers, lest steam refuse to sell their product. We are literally at the stage, where people are attempting to make the LEGAL ARGUMENT that a store can be mandated to carry specific luxury goods even if the luxury good in question is being price-fixed by producer. AND A JUDGE IS TREATING THIS AS REMOTELY VALID. So, yes, the judge needs taken off the case and it reexamined by one who isn't either paid off or utterly stupid. With regards to Bellular's comments: It's real interesting that your commentary on Publsihers getting a cut seems to blame Valve in part for the situation. The reality is, these days, Publishers are a vestigial cancer that is not worth their cost. A publsiher does nothing but eat an indie's profits and cause potential bankruptcy. STOP JOINING PUBLISHERS. That is the solution. That is how you solve the industry. Devs stop joining publishers, letting them DIRECTLY see the fruits of their labor after the distributor who is handling delivery, storage and even a significant chunk of advertising, takes a cut. Valve's policies ARE NOT THE PROBLEM. It is the layering of middlemen that is the problem. There is NO reason to sign up with a publisher, except that it is the 'standard' thing to do. STOP trading your ACTUAL profitability for the promise of a short-term cash injection, and the problem disappears. We are literally seeing 'pleasing investors' bankrupt AAA studios under massive publishers IN REAL TIME. Stop chasing 'investment' money and focus on making money from your consumers. crowdfund if you have to, but don't throw in with a publisher. Also don't take your company public. All that does is lead to a decline in quality, sales, and eventually a crap reputation. Being a private company is a LARGE portion of why Valve can basically win while doing next to nothing beyond minor improvements to their existing features. They aren't trying to satisfy outsiders who are constantly going 'this isn't enough money'. Valve is also actively REINVESTING their profits into both the service and it's accessories that complement the service. Good god, it's the same problem as what keeps Adobe photoshop and Microsoft Windows relevant. Inertia. They don't actually provide enough upsides to make up for the downsides, but because they are what people are trained on, everyone assumes they HAVE to use them. That is literally what publishers are in the modern day and age.

[@Wolfeisberg]

What did the Judge do legally wrong? What Belliar is talking about is that Judge ruled to allowing the lawsuit to be turned into a Class action lawsuit, Valve tried to stop turning it into a class action lawsuit and the arguments against it did not convince the judge it should not be a class action lawsuit. So what exactly did the Judge do incorrectly?

[@Wolfeisberg]

Oh, and I forgot to mention, Most Favored Nation clauses, like what is being accused against Valve, has gone to court before against other companies and had judgement against those companies for having such clauses. So there is already presidence for this kind of stuff. So how is the Judge doing his job incorrectly, and potentially being bribed, when other companies have been found guilty of doing such things in the past?

[@jtnachos16]

@@Wolfeisberg It's not a 'most-favoured nation' clause. You clearly don't know what a MFN clause actually is. A MFN clause necessitates that a particular storefront gets special treatment. That's not what is happening here. Steam literally does not care if your sale price is lower on other storefronts. What they ask is that your BASELINE price does not undercut them, or they will not sell yuor game anymore. I would love to know, in what delusion you live, that demanding a store be FORCED to distribute a luxury good even though the manufacturer of that luxury good is actively trying to hamper the distributor, makes any sense logically or even morally/ethically. Or are you one of those people who blindly read a few snippets selected out of an Email chain and assumed that was the whole story? Valve's employee wasn't saying you can't sell cheaper elsewhere. He was saying you cannot blatantly try to screw over their storefront, and expect them to sell your product, which is more than fair. This WHOLE SITUATION started because Wolfire did a total stupid and actively asked Valve for permission to undercut them, instead of just offering frequent sales through their own storefront to make the functional price lower than the standard one on steam. But god forbid you use your brain for basic logic, right? There is also no reason for this to BE a class-action lawsuit, as there are no damages that can be tallied, no reasonable argument to show any actual loss that came from this issue, let alone that came consistently to an ENTIRE GROUP. A JUDGE is not allowed to make the decision on whether something is a class action or not. That is on the lawyer at initial filing. A case filed initially as private is not supposed to be able to be suddenly massively expanded in scope. Instead, it can be re-filed as a separate case at a later date.

[@Wolfeisberg]

@@jtnachos16 I suggest you read the Judges orders so you can learn how wrong you are. Read the document: Case 2:21-cv-00563-JCC Document 80 Filed 05/06/22 I also suggest you search: "do judges determine if a case can be a class action" and read the link from Hagans Berman law site. Cause yes the judge does get to decide if a case can be certified as a class action or not. Also the case has been refiled multiple times, which is why in Pacer there are multiple case numbers with one being closed due to a new one being opened. So considering you have are very much wrong in what you said in regards to those, it really shows that the person here who is ignorant about what is actually going on, who has no idea what they are talking about is you. Everything you said here is pure non sense and wrong.

[@MonsieurDeVeteran]

@@Wolfeisberg the judge is a biased democrat appointed 2 years ago by the Biden admin who is notoriously anti "big-business" (whenever it suits them though, like the FTC bowing to Sony against Microsoft buying ATVI, but not against other stuff that ACTUALLY needs addressing like Amazon or Google in due enough time / punishments). The judge just gave his activist biased decision on the case. Valve just needs to go to an upper circuit of the Law, and get a panel of judges, and those are gonna s1th on this judges decision, ez pz. Just like the circuit panel of judges s1th on FTCs attempt to say that the first judge was wrong on her decision in the MS case, even though she was literate with years of experience on TECH stuff, unlike this judge.

[@PerciusLive]

Im split on this. While on one hand, i do like centralizing it to steam because of just how good a platform it is, this aspect surely does sound like them taking more marketshare and possibly "monopolozing" game distribution, and especially random deals. In more depth, as a user, i love to see that if a game is free elsewhere, it would also be free on steam as its the whole point of me not downloading other launchers, making additional accounts, etc. But when viewing from a dev perspective, i can understand why they would want to do that outside steam as it can generate positive word of mouth outside of the steam store, where profits dont matter as much compared to positive press.

[@Riiyan]

That Wolfire guy is a griefter.

[@TaylorMorgan-y2z]

A grifter who raised more than $250M for charity, taking nothing for himself? And then paid for a class action that benefits all other developers in the world? Some grift!

[@phepheboi]

@@TaylorMorgan-y2z yea right, "paid" it from a charity, so other people's money. Just to maybe get billions when they win against valve. Those poor developers, can't even lie anymore about their game and not delivering 1/4! How dare valve to protect billions of users from getting scammed and push developers to actually work on their promises. Those people behind that lawsuit digging their own grave, it's a direct attack to any consumer and gamer. Me and millions of other gamers will do their best to protect valve, they literally saved and made gaming on PC the holy grail. Imagine a world without them. 90$+ games would be a standard with a high online subscription everywhere.

[@arcadenoah993]

​@@TaylorMorgan-y2z "benefits all others devs in the world" lol! 😂 You are so pure

[@Riiyan]

@@TaylorMorgan-y2z People have the choice to whatever platform they want, every single one of them sucks but steam and they want to harm those steam users for their own benefit. Steam has done nothing wrong, humble bundle is salty.

[@AlexFairmont]

@@arcadenoah993 It is a class action. The class literally includes all developers in the world. Anyone who has sold a game either from the US or to at least one US customer.

[@2e45t7u]

Funny if Valve boots those devs from Steam. I know it won’t happen, but it would be hilarious. Also Wolfire, really going to bite the hand that feeds you?

[@handson4580]

honestly there well in there right i think as you said literally biting there hand. If they want to create a frivolous lawsuit about how valve is a "evil monopoly" while also useing steam heavily for there games they should at least be booted out

[@AlexFairmont]

Valve benefits from Wolfire much more than the other way around. They drove a ton of traffic to Valve through Humble Bundle integration and they kickstarted the Linux game revival.

[@tiranito3715]

@@AlexFairmont and you think it's bad for games to have Linux support??? what are you on about? I really hope I read your comment the wrong way cause that's some deranged take right there.

[@vxicepickxv]

​@AlexFairmont what are you talking about? Valve would be fine without Wolfire games.

[@Remyria]

@@tiranito3715 you did read wrong

[@OurLordCuthulhu]

a funny thing about class action suits. If too many people make a claim. The money doesn't actually get paid out.

[@TaylorMorgan-y2z]

That's not how anything works.

[@mateuszzimon8216]

IRC For Ps3 OtherOs was 65$....

[@creationsmaxo]

One of the massive game changer about Steam for game developers is the fact that Steam algorithm has be developed originally to promotes games based on what players are playing and allowing such players to discover newer maybe-niche games of the same genres, but as always Steam moved on with the algorithm to promote game based on general popularity which killed the "discover new game that you might never have heard from" side of the system. Steam doubled-down on that by also basically forsaking any form of assistance toward lesser-played games which makes it so that only around 1 to 3 games out of 50 are actually not "big sellers" (indie or AAA) when you looks at any form of front store display on Steam. At this point, Steam is not promoting the indie game development at all. In fact, every (and I mean e.v.e.r.y.) "breakthrough" of indie games that ended up moving up in the TOP list on Steam and which constantly appears in the sales list top choices are games that had their breakthrough from OUTSIDE of Steam such as having a game being heavily played and enjoyed by a VTuber or Twitch or else. It comes to the point where, to have ANY form of success on Steam as an indie dev, you NEED to find a source of PR that works OUTSIDE of Steam well enough. And that triples down on the problem between Steam and indie game devs and their revenues cut. Remember, nowadays, Steam release over 32,000 NEW games per year. 32 freaking thousands! Even if around 60% of those are lazy-close-to-scam crappy games that will remains in EA forever, that's would still leave ~40% of 32 freaking thousands being ~12 thousands new games per year. Compared to ~700-1200 PC games per year back 2 decades ago, it's a massive different in how any devs can makes any money out of this situation. In 2 decades, the PC video game markets has seen a raise of about 8x to 10x more "players" (customers), but also has seen a raise of available product raise by ~32x to ~48x. Hell, if you see the median of revenues per YEAR for games on Steam within that year, the median is less than $2,000 USD. This means that, within 1 year after their release, half of the game released on Steam doesn't even make $2,000. In fact, only ~12% makes even above $40,000, ~8% makes above $100,000. Less than 1% makes above $1.2M USD and less than 0.02% makes above $20M USD. In facts, there are many lotteries in certain places of the world that has higher chance of netting your a millions USD than Steam itself in chances per-dollar investment.

[@HattaTHEZulZILLA86]

HOWEVER! The AAA scene is NOT what it used to be, I can't remember the last time I bought anything AAA, game OR the studios. But I do wonder, am I the ONLY one that's has eyes on the indie titles MORE than the well known AAA titles?

[@handson4580]

nah indie games have been popping off while triple A games have been going in the dumpster like clockwork, The only western triple A game currently i see seeing success is black ops 6 only because thats legit the only series activision works on because it has a huge cult following that will play any CoD game no matter the quality (yes i know marval rivals is popping off but that was made by a chinese compony)

[@hugofontes5708]

I've been like that for good 10 years now. The only few big games I do buy are from studios I do like who consistently deliver decent games, and I never buy even close to launch. Few that interest me nearly as much as smaller indies

[@Zalazaar]

Isn't Wolfire that furry dood that spent forever releasing Overgrowth and it ended up being pretty bad?

[@mursefaneca]

Bingo.

[@spicydong317]

Another hack acting like it's not his fault he failed Classic

[@tiranito3715]

Oh dear God I had no idea it was them, thank you so much for pointing this out, this makes it a million times better LMAO... This truly gives me a whole other perspective on this entire case... So basically they are seething at the fact that they released a trash game and got barely any sales and pin the blame on Steam.

[@eradragon3090]

Don't improve your services when you can just pay a judge to nerf your competition

[@Kaltsit-]

Bs. Steam is being used the most because ITS ACTUALLY TRYING TO BE GOOD FOR CUSTOMERS. You don’t legal action it. You’re supposed to try and make something better, but no other launcher does anything better.

[@dragonriderabens9761]

all I'm hearing is that AAA doesn't want to put in the time and effort to actually compete with Steam, despite more than having the ability to do so, and would rather tear Steam down what is more anti-competitive: making the best possible product you can, and succeeding because all your competition keeps shooting itself in the foot? or tearing down competition just because you don't want to put in the time and effort to actually get on their level? anyone who defends this lawsuit or claims Steam is a monopoly should have any takes they have on gaming at all completely ignored. because it's obvious they have no idea what they are talking about

[@chatboss000]

Imagine the worst comes to pass tomorrow. This lawsuit wins, devs get what they want, Valve changes stuff. Walk me through this. What gets worse about my Steam experience if I want to buy Baldur's Gate 3?

[@hugofontes5708]

​​@@chatboss000good question, I don't really know either. For one, they will probably have to change their contracts so either change their cut or allow devs to sell cheaper on stores and still publish there. Either of these would mean Valve gets less revenue but they still have to keep the service running so they need to be making more money per game/per sale/over time, my silly non seller brain can only come up with downright refusing to sell some games with worse performance perspective if anything noticeable at all on steam. But that would mean the other stores can continue being not as good because there's even less of a competition so maybe overall games get pricier because every store jacks the cut at once?

[@tesladrew2608]

​​@@hugofontes5708except steam gets paid the most for worse performing games. From a consumer perspective, I might be able to get something on epic for 20$ less.

[@tiranito3715]

@@chatboss000 what happens then is that devs will go to other stores, and since less users are on those platforms, and devs still haven't figured out how to make air edible, they will have to rise their prices even more, because selling less units means that you need to charge more per unit to make the same profit.

[@death13a]

I think Steam should allow indie devs to host their own version of games on their own website to buy. But it must be separate from Steam version. So if person starts to dig deeper to support developers then they get option to do so.

[@Gastell0]

So, just like Factorio

[@thelinuxgamer1]

This is already an option for developers, the issue at hand being that of Non-Compete pricing (not allowing the pricing to change depending on salepoint.). Presumably done so that you cannot incentivise consumers to use a seperate platform based on cheaper pricing than Steam. In a sense, understandable, as you do have the option to not sell on steam in the first place.

[@death13a]

@thelinuxgamer1 If you are selling Steam key for lower price, then on Steam store, then I agree with Steam. Sell it at the same price. Since you will be using Steam's resources. But if the developer sells the same game without Steam resources on their website, then sell at what price they want.

[@thelinuxgamer1]

@@death13a Oh don't get me wrong I agree that it isn't right or okay, I am just pointing out why Steam/Valve may have put the clause in place. My point to you was that selling on steam is not required, you can sell from yourself, or other launchers if you wish.

[@n9ne]

already allowed. there's also no issue other than wolf fire and epic games doing something criminal here. selling the same game but at two totally different prices to lead people away from one platform is illegal i am pretty sure. why exactly would wolf fire even want to sell their game at two different costs? the developer sets the price. not the store. i use plenty of stores that all have different prices.. epic games has the same price as steam because they are liars. sure they take a smaller cut but the developer and publisher still sell for the exact same price. the consumer isn't winning here. and developers aren't either.

[@Chewie260]

Beyond the monopoly talk, sueing someone cuz they set a price is a fucking wild.

[@nathanbrown8680]

Price leadership schemes *are* illegal.

[@JerbilKonai]

To play devils advocate: If you set a price on breathing, suing would not be wild. (I like to point out edge cases)

[@treemover7259]

Price fixing is illeagal and has been for a long time and for good reason

[@moonasha]

they're being sued because supposedly valve won't let them sell the game elsewhere for cheaper using their own servers. Of course they'd have to prove this is a valve practice and not a one off

[@echomjp]

@@treemover7259 It would be nice if people like you understood WHY price fixing was illegal, rather than assuming this is somehow not acceptable. Price fixing was made illegal because it stifled competition. In this case however, the "price fixing" simply ensures a level playing field because with digital games and digital distribution the service provided is the only real differentiating factor between most services - the game is the same after all. If Valve can't ensure others won't undercut them on price, then Epic Games can simply use their billions in Fortnite dollars to undercut them on everything for years until they gain enough market share, then jack up the prices. This is the sort of anti-competitive action we should be against in the long run. I would rather live in a world where game distribution clients and such are differentiated based on their quality, not based on that kind of price manipulation that allows companies or developers to drive traffic towards a specific service completely arbitrarily - rather than based on which service is actually better for consumers.

[@matthewnichols4429]

Just gonna say this to everyone who says steam isnt a monopoly because its the best around. As someone whonas used steam from day one it had the exact same problems as every single other storefront in the beginning. The problem is ha steam is choking out the competition with its practices that doesnt allow them to find their footing. Steam was one of the first and there for didnt have to worry about being killed before it could be what it is now.

[@jasperpluk]

i just hope Company's like Epic won't try some bullshit with this... knowing how shit that company is, not to mention various other company's who are just like it...

[@wrongthinker843]

Who do you think is funding this lawsuit.

[@jasperpluk]

@@wrongthinker843 yeah I figured they would be already involved, still sad tho

[@TrackMediaOnly]

I'd be less surprised if Epic didn't have its fingers in this to begin with. They've failed to take over like they wanted to and they are not ones to let things get in the way of their ambitions. Epic really are comic book villains.

[@TaylorMorgan-y2z]

Is there any evidence that Epic has anything to do with this?

[@Remyria]

epic is really a mixed bag. I hear a lot of good and a lot of bad.

[@DePhoegonIsle]

Good God. This will only end in tears. Next thing you know 'those poor indies will start 'giving keys' out for those who bought their DRM free keys. Like Also seriously... I have to pose the damn'd question here. "Hy the hell would an indie not price match and say you could donate to me by buying it here, and ensure I get a larger cut? Like good god, Can you seriously imagine the brai dead takes that instead of going 'oh here If you like you could donate an extra dollar or two here & get some cool artwork from the game delivered to you for it (which you've no idea how I'd do that to get some very cool pieces from the games i like) ... Seriusly I won't touch this 'class action thing with anything, Talk about a sure way to suddenly give valve a reason to be at odds with you.

[@thrackerzod6097]

Oh the inconceivable horror. /s Meanwhile you'll get a bunch more Indie devs that will be able to make more profits, thus make more and better games. Fanboys of any kind drive me up the wall. Think about this critically for more than two seconds.

[@jasam01]

@@thrackerzod6097 Yeah, lets go back to what we had before!.. Almost no indie games. Because it's the steam platform that generally gets them the visibility and sales volume to succeed in the first place. Seriosuly, does no-one remember before Steam greenlight? Like Factorio is one of maybe a dozern exceptions in a half decade. Just because steam could be /better/ doesn't mean what they're doing already isn't excellent for both consumers and devs.

[@thrackerzod6097]

@@jasam01 How in the world did you come to that conclusion? Yes I remember Steam greenlight, no, overcharging Indie developers will not help anyone. How can you stand there and say "Indie developers should pay as much as triple A developers" and just ignore that the 30% cut puts up a huge barrier on its own, let alone the fact they often need a publisher to get that visibility as stated in this very video? Did you watch the video? Nothing I said would take us back to where we were before. What I said is already what a lot of other services do as it only makes sense. Valve is behind the times with their current policies. Steam can be better. It should be better, it being good doesn't somehow exclude it, or shield it from that.

[@SangoProductions213]

"Steam is effectively a monopoly." Like dude. What the fuck. Just make a better store front. Steam isn't the absolute best version of a store front. Just make it better. People would come over if your shitty Epic Games Store wasn't shit. Heck, with how much you shit out money to subsidize the store... just make it comparably usable while you give people thousands of dollars of games. Just don't be shit.

[@FlashySenap]

They either cant, or wont. Most storefronts online that compete with steam are public companies and have to bow down to their investors. Steam is private and choose who and who arent investing. So most likely a lot of money would need to go to make any other client even close to as good as steam and its simply not something investors wanna spend. Either way. steam is my home, I ain't leaving. if it ain't on steam I ain't gaming that shit.

[@z28yeti]

If you don't understand why steam wants a game THEY HOST to be listed at THE SAME PRICE across the board... then you don't understand business 101. THEY are paying server costs. You are getting THEIR network effects (free advertising, free userbase, etc). All they're asking is that IF you put out a sale somewhere else, YOU PRICE MATCH IT. This isn't some nefarious thing. If a dev hosts it on their own site, they WILL GET MORE MONEY, because they don't lose the cut to steam... BUT, this means they have to pay server costs, hosting fees for the website, transaction fees to CC/payment providers ETC ETC ETC... What valve is asking is CONSUMER PROTECTION, and it benefits US, as steam users.

[@Wolfeisberg]

Go away with this BS excuse. You are literally trying to say that is good that Valve abused their market power to prevent pricing competition between Steam and stores not selling Steam enabled PC games, and that it is good that Valve prevented cheaper prices for us consumers. That is the exact opposite of consumer protection, that is market manipulation to protect their 60% profit margin rip off, while the very people responsible for the games existence don't get anywhere close to that much in profit margins. Valve does not do anything that justifies taking 30% while having 60% profit margin on it. Valve are leaches on this industry and it is objectively causing damage.

[@nono-yw3tv]

@@Wolfeisberg Weird.... My BS detector is only pinging off your comment. Not OP's.....

[@nono-yw3tv]

@@Wolfeisberg "and that it is good that Valve prevented cheaper prices for us consumers" This is 100% false. Also, Steam isn't at all getting a cut from those other websites. Especially when those websites are selling STEAM KEYS that can only be used on steam. Where steam doesn't even make penny on.... From steams point of view, It would be no different than steam just giving you the game, At that point.

[@nono-yw3tv]

@@Wolfeisberg "Valve does not do anything that justifies taking 30% while having 60% profit margin on it. " Servers that valve/steam host themselves, The very website, Ratings, Doing ads for people who use their service, And creating proton which literally makes windows only games be able to work on linux. (But, Yeah, They're TOTALLY doing nothing that justifies taking 30%...... I have to heavily disagree.)

[@Wolfeisberg]

@@nono-yw3tv they do enough to justify getting 15%, not 30%. Everything you mentioned is super cheap, and only a very tiny extremely small amount of games get "advertisement". Linux is used by 1% of gamers, no Steamdeck users do not count because they did not get that because of Linux, linux just happens to be on the device, so proton doesn't justify it either. THem getting 60% profit margin on other people's work is out right robbery and is damaging the indie industry.

[@zacharyfrey3264]

There ought to be a song sung by Yakko that lists all the things that steam does for their customers that the competition won’t.

[@Gileum]

@@zacharyfrey3264 make it happen!

[@IaeyanElyuex]

So because no other distro platform will have the moral standards that Valve has, we have to gimp Steam to be like these ones. Not because they can't, but because they won't. ...Can we please have the grownups in charge again?

[@TaylorMorgan-y2z]

Moral standards like taking billions of dollars from child gambling addicts?

[@targitausrithux2320]

@@TaylorMorgan-y2z other platforms do this but in worse proportions... if they were as big as steam they would be taking an even higher amount than steam is... while hiding and backlash in the process.... siding against steam in this lawsuit is crazy but i already suspect you to be a corporate shill

[@StrikeForce2013]

@@TaylorMorgan-y2zIt’s almost like the Steam user agreement requires a guardian for minors. Huh, it sounds like bad parents aren’t parenting and it’s Steams fault that they don’t know through osmosis how to restrict each account.

[@Ishaan_A]

I think Steam should absolutely treat indies better, cause they don't have the risk of losing AAA publishers now with EGS being a dump compared to Steam. This will gain them so much goodwill with barely any difference in their sales numbers, and it will benefit their image as a monopoly towards the govt too. I think Valva has earned that level of trust that I can expect them to go forward with that kind of plan.

[@haroldcampos9661]

Valve isn't a monopoly because they haven't tried to beat any competitors, they simply started out with the plan to provide better service than other companies in order to curtail piracy of their own games. They've been in the market so long that they simply have the largest share in the pc gaming market. What they have is almost like a community, in a way. But in the overall gaming market, they are still a subsect. Noone wants to quit using steam to go to playstation, for example. Like noone wants to quit buying playstations to build a computer, or buy an expensive prebuilt. In the handheld market even, they still don't really compete with nintendo in sales. And so on... I'm not saying they have everyone's interests at heart, but they started out with a good ethos and it's taken them this far. You can't really slam valve, though, because they do their own thing. That's what they do, and they have decent customer service, too. I like to do my own thing too, and that's why most of the games I buy is on steam only, not playstation or switch, etc. I rediscovered gaming on steam in the last years, I bought a r13 a month ago, and I have an atomic purple steam deck, etc.etc. Epic and gog give away free games! Steam is not your only option. They are literally giving away free games right now on other platforms. Hell, you can stream games now, too.

[@justapleb7096]

There needs to be a new law where you're not considered a monopoly if you only practically became a monopoly simply because everyone else is offering a much much lesser service

[@lovelylemonfactory]

What if you then used that position to make it impossible for anyone to compete with you? Why are you ignoring they were found doing that.

[@MonsieurDeVeteran]

@@lovelylemonfactory they weren't though little Tim Sweaty, but do continue to tell me how Valve armstrong EA and Microsoft to come back to Steam... somehow :)))))

[@drwilyecoyote5357]

@@lovelylemonfactory Hi wolfire, epic, microsoft, blizzard all have the resources and capability to compete easily, they just chose not to make the effort valve makes, so your arguemeent is invalide.

[@Zeivusgaming]

​​​@@lovelylemonfactory- You would need to prove it in court. Valve isn't going out of their way to f*** their competitors via sabotage or buyouts

[@lovelylemonfactory]

@@drwilyecoyote5357 How 70% of the player base is on Steam. Valve forced companies to not sell cheaper on Epic(or elsewhere). Making it impossible for anyone to compete on price. They lost the case. You're argument is invalid.

[@vicpall]

So the gov and crappy gaming company’s want steam to take down the ability to see how many people are playing a gam and steam said no. So now they are coming for the company in other ways…

[@Sinloud]

Steam: is a great product Judge: we can't have that

[@stuntea]

so targeting one of the few companies that treat their customers correctly :/ edit: didn't knew that devs in this industry where treated like farmers and many other workers, those who do the actual work are far from being the one to eat the top part of the cake

[@Baraz_Red]

It would be cool if Steam took a smaller cut from small studios or for games that did not sell massively. A bit like how popular game engines (Unreal and Unity) typically ask a bigger cut from games that make more money.

[@pedrojustice]

all this lawsuit did is to make me even less sympathetic with all studios.

[@BlueBD]

Valve does the opposite. It takes a Smaller cut the more successful a game is and it's Gated. 30% Only on the first 10 Million. 25% Only on the following 40 Million(Up to 50 total) 20% on everything after 50 million

[@TrackMediaOnly]

Honestly according what what Bellular said it seems the real issue is the publishers(as usual). When it isn't the publishers it people wanting to extract the Value of being on Steam, but make sure Steam doesn't get anything in return. They want the reach, marketing, and other advantages of Steam, but then sell it on a worse platform that takes less of a cut for that less effort. Epic for instance has to take less of a cut, because they offer nothing of real value otherwise.

[@Arthur_Grey34]

Most of those small games likely don't even make Steam a profit at 30% is the thing. Steam creates a store page, hosts the downloads, forums, and handles everything else in the background. You also get unlimited steam keys for your game for free that you can sell on any other store without steam taking a cut of the profits. 30% seems very fair to me for the services they provide, you don't even need a publisher as a small indie team thanks to steam.

[@luka188]

@@Arthur_Grey34 Well said. These devs should try to sell without steam and see how much it will cost them to try and do all this themselves, compared to a measly 30% cut on sales (Which often is taken in consideration with the sell price itself, just setting a higher price by approximately 20-30% will recoup all these "losses", like selling a game for 13 dollars instead of 10 dollars).

[@Klayperson]

Welcome to America, where being better than the competition is simply against the law.

[@GAMERRAZUMNO]

No, it's not against the law to be a better than competitors. But it's against a law everywhere to make a bad pricing practices while being a monopoly (being better than anyone else). The whole point of the video is that Steam is telling you that you can not have different prices for a game on Steam and on Epic, for example., while being a monopoly company.

[@erebus79]

@@GAMERRAZUMNO It's not a monopoly. There are many competitors do valve in this industry.

[@GAMERRAZUMNO]

@@erebus79 Monopoly is not about being the only one (pure monopoly). It's about have high enough market share. In order for a company to be deemed as monopoly they need to reach certain threshhold, and Steam reached that threshhold long ago.

[@atomic3325]

This is more than just about PC gaming. This is the whole MFN clause across all storefronts. This will go against Amazon and Apple and more titans in the e-retail space as well as basically all retail.

[@lycanwarrior2137]

Exactly! Steam/Valve is very much a monopoly in the same way that Amazon, Apple and Netflix are.