@PM_ME_FEET_PICS@njinx yes! This is why that we really need to start pushing for alternative gaming business methods. Itch.io is great for this. Better than gog in my eyes for really bringing forth gaming space to a more democratic and DRM free space. The mission needs to include more open source, libre software and we need to support that. Gamers making their games their way and not trusting third or fourth parties to get them there.
eh, i dunno. the reason Apple didnt die years ago was due to Microsoft funding back in the late 90s, and they had a linux distro for a while too (or was it unix? I forget). diversifying your interests as a company is one way to grow market share, so steam would probably still exist.
They nominate positions on the FTC, which is supposed to be responsible for managing monopolies. Recent nominations have shown interest in updating or outdated policies regarding monopolies.
They would discontinue it because Proton moves users to Linux(or more specifically outside of Windows) which they don’t want. WSL keep users on Windows.
Microsoft made WSL to get market share from web devs who were using Linux or Mac, so they could use a Linux shell for their development while using Windows as their main OS. I wouldn’t use WSL as evidence that they wouldn’t gut Proton support in Steam.
That being said, the Steam Deck is a very successful device that I doubt Microsoft would want to get rid of, and Proton is pretty vital for that, so they’d probably keep Proton going because of that. They might still seek to make the next revision of the Steam deck run a Windows based OS though.
getting rid of linux support may cause people to switch to windows, if not prevent people from switching to begin with…at least that’s how executives in ms would think
The thought of another company buying Valve, especially one like Microsoft, makes me actually sick. I have spent so much fucking money on my Steam library at this point. If my Steam library gets jacked by some billionaire dickheads it’s all over, I’m never paying for anything again.
Billionaire, yes. Dickhead? That’s subjective. I’m not gonna worship the man but his actions point to him being among the most pro-consumer of CEOs out there, so I wouldn’t say he’s a dickhead.
They bought Bethesda because they feared Starfield would become a (timed) PlayStation exclusive. They just bought the entire publisher… And now Activision is next.
Having said that I’m not a fan of Sony buying Bungie to use their “live service” expertise either.
Bungie’s been selling themselves out to one megacorporation after another for more than 20 years now. If Sony hadn’t bought them, someone else would’ve.
A stock market can still work. The ultra high speed market we have now is a problem. Ultra fast trading encourages fast, short term thinking.
A stock market with an update once per day could work better. It would take all the fast impulse trading out of the market, while still allowing price adaptation. When runs and crashes take weeks to play out, it’s a lot easier for cooler heads and logic to prevail. This, in turn would favour the sort of traders favouring long term stable investments.
The price updates whenever someone buys or sells, so doing that once a day may be a bit difficult to implement. Forbidding day-trading / imposing a minimum holding time on the other hand may be easier.
A queue type setup could likely work fine. Buyers and sellers could list their offers/requirements as a range. A round robin double blind auction matches buyers and sellers. The new price is calculated, based on this, and a new queue is opened.
Forbidding the various high profit rent seeking would be a little like trying to block a sieve. There are so many variants and workarounds, that closing them all would be difficult. It would also be a lot more vulnerable to being watered down, or declawed completely.
If once per day is too coarse, it could even work at once per hour. The key is it leaves time for people to think rather than reacting from gut instinct and high speed computer programs.
Sounds nice, but I guess the first step is to take control away from the likes of Citadel / Kenneth Griffin since they take advantage of all that information and they already get to bid against every order placed in real time.
I think our government should definitely get on that. In the meantime forbidding this kind of play aka taxing the living shit out of day-trading (like the current short-term/long-term gain system but actually painful in the very short term) should be pretty simple to implement.
I definitely agree with the need for short term fixes. Unfortunately, I suspect the core issues are inherent to the current system. Then again that applies to a lot of things at that level, and perfect is the greatest enemy of good.
Just run the company in a way where you don’t really care about maximizing profit. As long as you’re not at a loss and are liked, you will be successful.
Valve could probably be much more profitable at the expense of being a bigger dick, but Gabe is chill.
Also because valve is private, they don’t have any legal obligations to return maximise profit. They can purposefully lose money if they want and it’s not illegal. (At least to my knowledge)
Thats actually what valve does. Valve mandates all games on platforms must be the same retail price (e.g a game on Steam cannot be sold for 60$ retail, but be sold for 50$ on epic), not including deals and sales.
Its standard with how physical stores demand that digital copies of games must retail at the same price as physical else stores would see that as an attack on the business by the company.
There is essentially some level of price normalization.
Private companies can have shareholders(all nfl teams but the Packers), its just a game of finding shareholders who doesnt care about constant short term profit.
Since it’s a private company he can just appoint anyone he wants to be the ceo. Maybe his son will take it or maybe he will maintain ownership of it until I’m too old to care.
Its unknown exactly how much money Valve makes but it is a safe bet they are probably one of the most profitable companies on the planet considering they get a cut of more or less every single PC game sale. Others have larger revenues but, relative to expenditures, they are likely a top 100 if not top 50.
But yeah. Everyone just needs to figure out a billion dollar idea, luck out that people liked them enough to ignore the negatives while everyone else (Stardock, Atari, Gamespy, etc) were getting torn apart, and then maintain an effective monopoly for two decades. Easy.
But they do run it to maximize profit. There’s just allowed to do it creatively instead of obsessing over short term gains.
I mean the company essentially gave up on AAA games for well over a decade because they were making more money from steam, and Gabe famously only approves projects that have a plan to turn a profit or expand Valve’s market.
They didn’t spread into Linux out of sheer principle. It gives them more control and influence over the market to separate themselves from Windows. And they’ve done tons of shady stuff with steam like refusing to give refunds until they were sued by state governments.
I don’t read it so cynically, yes it’s in their best interest and a very smart play, but I don’t read malice into it though. Good business move, but also good for the communities and projects they’re contributing to.
Valve is the prime example of rent seeking behavior. It's a private company that collects economic rents on a market thanks to that market being the biggest. They're a private company and their only goal is to preserve those rents. They do that by fostering goodwill. They're everything I hate about capitalism, but I don't hate them for doing it.
They are also a good example of positive middleman behaviour. While they take their cut, the value they provide to both sides is huge.
They are also in a position where they are still easily replaceable. Their dominance is from doing it well, not because they have an absolute lock in.
Part of why this works is because they don’t have to prioritise short term profit over long term. Most companies like this get brought up and pumped dry. Valve seems to be the exception.
I don’t think you can do that on EGS or GOG. So they ask 30%, but only if they actually helped make the sale. If you drove the revenue yourself, they’re happy to distribute the game for free on their platform.
That’s about the least scumbag model I can think of.
Ultimately the 30% is as high as Steam estimates they can charge before they have to fear companies leaving their platform and bypassing steam altogether. Honestly I’m surprised it has not happened yet. 30% is super high, and users are not at all locked down like they are in the console market.
Epics is much lower because theyre trying to entice devs, but they are the anomally in the sea of pricing.
Epics trying to win market by enticing devs instead of working on features for the consumer, thats their market plan. Epic wasnt the only platform to have lower than 30% cut. Discord sold games at 10% cut, itchio is similar. Devs essentially debate of the baked in features of the platform and its audience is worth the 30% cut(the existing community, game review system, steams controller api, steam workshop, steamvr). Even just the client. ESPECIALLY to Linux users, on a consumer POV, ask yourself about ease getting to use the native client. Valve offers steam natively, and does a lot of work making the consumer end (and developer end too) easier on linux. EGS for example doesnt even run natively on linux, and requires a 3rd party launcher to run. People tend to take for granted all the things Valve has done for both the consumer and Developer.
Discord massively failed to get users, and devs saw little market in it. Epic takes advatage of their position using unreal engine, and offers some devs money upfront for exclusivity, something certain audiences on PC absolutely hate.
Users use steam because it simply offers them the best user experience. There are a ton of people who just buys their games directly from valve and not a 3rd party site. To a consumer, money’s not necessarily the problem on their end, and they dont see the 30% hit that developers take. Something good for the developer is not necessarily good for the consumer and vice versa, and many people make that mistake and conflate that to be the same thing when it isnt.
no cost for keys if you sell stuff outside the Steam store
no cost for downloads
no cost for improvements to games
Valve’s customers are publishers and devs, and they’re charging a finder’s fee for connecting customers to the games. To me, that’s not rent seeking, that’s a direct exchange of money for a service. If you don’t think the service is valuable or think you can do better, then generate keys and sell them elsewhere and you won’t need to pay Valve a cut.
Valve is capitalism done right imo. You only pay when you receive a service, and only when you profit from the service. Steam also has a fantastic refund policy as well, which is surprisingly rare in the digital goods market.
they have created a service that didn’t exist that’s beneficial to both the consumer and the seller, they don’t do any anti-competitive shit with it as far as I am aware.
in what world is what they do rent-seeking?
are you an edgy 15 year old that just learned a new word and didn’t understand it?
Well, Valve is privately-owned company and it’s investing a lot of money into the free software ecosystem right now. Yes it’s capitalism but very different in principles to the rest of the market.
Valve is far from a typical company. While technically not, they operate pretty much like a worker owned cooperative. Have a look at their employee handbook: www.valvesoftware.com/en/publications
(and Igalia, the company presenting in OP is really a worker owned cooperative).
no, especially not. After messing/locking down gaming for 2 decades and people having doing the job in porting/reverse engineer their API, etc… they will simply exploit it without any effort.
MSFT is evil, it does not “love” opensource (which is only TS and .NET), it just came with their massive war treasure and eat the effort of people while having been the MAIN responsible of slowing down innovation!
They pretend they love FOSS. “Look, we own GitHub, the biggest FOSS code sharing platform!”. Of course, because you bought it you morons.
For the love of God, please Valve never sell out. I love the current state of things and every day I dread someone might get a bad idea and fuck it all up for the rest of us to enrich himself.
I am not sure if there are any failsafes in the BoD at Valve, but I am sure as long as Gabe is at the helm, we are all safe.
only millennials and JS soyboy devs think that MSFT is good opensource boy, they didn’t grow up during while Ballmer/Gates were in charge and didn’t notice how nasty MSFT was for the computing and still is.
Gaben is one of the few people in tech I trust to resist the money MSFT would be willing to throw at something as successful as valve. I mean - they’re the closest thing to a trustworthy company as you can find these days.
Yeah, I doubt he cares about the money at this point, and he did leave MSFT, so I’m guessing he isn’t interested in selling. He also went out of his way to use Linux to stick it to MSFT.
As long as he runs the company, I don’t see it happening.
Eh, I would hardly call Valve trustworthy or the good guy
I would say don’t worship multi billion dollar companies.
Especially ones that only give you things you should have always had, like refunds, after being forced to by state lawsuits to force them into compliance with the law.
I miss the days when you actually owned your fucking games and could loan them to friends or sell them to get something else.
They aren’t the ‘good guy’ but they are one of the few tech companies left that try to make money by selling a product people want to buy. Basically everyone else is just trying to screw people over or sell out to investors as soon as they can.
That’s not good, but it’s the way people understand and think businesses should be run, even though most modern companies no longer work that way.
Valve is not worthy of your trust. Gabe won’t sell to MS because Valve is an absolute gold mine and it’s extremely unlikely even MS could make him an offer that actually makes more money for him in the long run.
Once my mental health doesn’t suck so bad anymore, i am considering to use SteamOS (or ChimeraOS where SteamOS is not officially available). Alternatively Kubuntu, because Ubuntu has the most help resources. May not be as fancy as a runit based system like Void Linux but it’s fine.
Perhaps, but many people don’t realize that “Add Non-Steam Game” also gives you a Proton prefix on Linux, as if it were a Steam game. Can be used for non-DRM games or even another launcher and keep everything relatively tidy.
Didn’t get my favorite Sims games to run on Void. And my mental health is so bad, i can hardly deal with failures while tinkering, which is necessary on Linux in conjunction with Windows gaming.
Tons of Windows based gaming handhelds already exist from Asus, Lenovo, Aya, GPD, etc. I’d doubt Microsoft releasing one, hypothetical Valve acquisition or not, would set the world on fire.
Knowing good old M$, though, if they tried it they’d make it some kind of Xbox product.
Yeah, but SteamOS is definitely a better OS. A lighter OS specifically. The Steam Deck, while being powerful, isn’t exactly too powerful and having Windows on it isn’t optimal.
Luckily GPD (i think) offers SteamOS for their devices and i do want to buy a Win Mini.
Maybe you just haven’t found the right distro that made you feel at home. If you’re still willing to try, experiment with a bunch of different distros, then use the one you like the most for an extended period of time (weeks instead of days) to build familiarity. Resist the urge to boot windows during that period and try to do everything on Linux.
I did try Void initially. Void Linux doesn’t have much resources but they did have an IRC chat willing to help… albeit with a little dont ask to ask schtick. I actually installed Void on a few of my devices for a while to try and get my favorite games to run.
Aaaanyway i encountered some weirdness like being able to install a game one time and then not anymore after installing Void on the internal SSD. I didn’t get my favorite Sims games to work and tried various Proton configurations… It was sad. My ex gf told me to buy a graphics card for my GPD Win 2, which has an Intel HD 600. I could but first i’d have to somehow make this thing compatible to Thunderbolt. Intel HD graphics aren’t exactly good but “buy a graphics card” sucks as an answer too, even if in jest.
I do still want to switch to Linux later once my mental health is better. And perhaps once i got the new Win Mini with integrated AMD graphics. I think GPD actually offers SteamOS for their devices so that’s a distro i may want to give a shot. I do love the SteamOS interface and the KDE desktop.
linux_gaming
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.