“fixable”? There is nothing to fix. It gives consumers an incredible and rare means to access to a market product. When Gabe goes, steam will begin it’s slow and assured decline into yet another greedy corporate business model.
Don’t be shitbags and at least try customer service.
These fuckers have tried everything except shipping a decent product.
Capitalism breeds innovation crowd seems awfully silent
They “broke it”?
I mean sure nobody likes capitalism here but have they actually tried making a better product?
To be fair, he’s kinda right about it. You can’t JUST make a better product and hope gamers will move to your platform. Everyone’s got dozens if not hundreds of games on Steam and nobody wants to sit in two gardens.
To get people to move over, Steam would actively have to turn shit too. There’s nothing you can do to make a platform so much better than Steam currently is that it would entice people to move over. Perhaps if it sucked your dick while you’re playing?
That’s a separate point from Epic itself being shit.
BS. Steam offers games simply without the bull. They didn’t break capitalism, they just didn’t enshitten their platform.
To quote the article: “Competition in this space is not only uninteresting to most Steam users, it’s actively denigrated!” He then says.
And then: “As long as Valve is independent and not a publicly traded company,” it looks impossible for Steam to be overthrown as the de-facto PC gaming marketplace.
(Sorry I don’t know how to do quotes)
This entire article tongue in cheek shows the thinking behind these ceos and how out of touch they are. The vibes I get from just scrolling here and listening, plus listening to the market in general, people are moving away from the evil, and ai whomever is least evil, wins the attention.
This guy compeletely ignores the inbetween the lines of his own words, Steam isn’t publicly traded, so doesn’t put shareholders above the actual product and it’s users. The ai isn’t used in the same ways, it’s pretty obvious to anyone who isn’t actively hallucinating , everyone hates ai.
They want an equal share of the market, and instead of listening this article (not bagging the article) highlights how much he instead sucks on sour grapes, and blames the gamers for being rusted on fans, rather than examining where they might have gone wrong, acknowledging and listening. The fact he’s unable to listen is going to actively keep users from Epic.
People just want to feel like they aren’t seen as cows to milk, in ever decreasingly comfortable and trapped ways. They want to feel listened to and be able to use the product. They don’t want to be force fed pigs pigswill and told to like it. There almost seems to be a fetish level hate towards the customers / consumers from these elitist idiot ceos etc. On a base level anyone could tell you that’s not a good business model.
The market is so fed up with all the things said out loud that previously weren’t. The whole “we own you” spiel from the top companies and ceos around the world. Gamers would more likely pack in the internet and retro game or build their own infrastructure (like has been done here) and ignore them all.
This guys egomaniacal take is just absolutely going to sink the entirely ship.
There’s an argument that steam take too high a cut from developers, but if that keeps it stable as is for a very long time, instead of tipping the scale and leading to a publicly traded company, so be it.
We’ve tried nothing and we’re out of ideas.
When Gabe passes one day and the next owner is some business dimwit and makes steam really win capitalism, pretty sure we’ll jump to GoG. That’s my headcanon at least. Because that’s what always happens to private companies when the person who cares about the thing no longer leads the company.
Is GoG immune?
Not entirely, but they’re focused on delivering DRM free copies for your purchases. So if they were to pivot and revoke your library, that part is impossible if you’ve downloaded your DRM free installation files.
Do you keep an up to date copy of all your games installers?
I have some games on GoG. But when I wanted to install games, I got their launcher installer. You need to go through some dark path to find the true installer. At least it was the case a couple years back.
Also a few month ago they putted an announce to hire someone to lead the Galaxy launcher. They explicitly asked for someone that would push the use of AI in their team.
I fear the moment they gain enough traction, the game won’t be as easy to install DRM free. Their launcher will be the DRM, just like steam.
So yeah, they provide an escape hatch for now, but sadly other than that it looks to me they are more like Epic than Valve. I have not much trust for them.
(Maybe Humble Bundle stopping to provide DRM free download of the game + the steam key eaeliy on made me very skeptical of this?)
You need to go through some dark path to find the true installer. At least it was the case a couple years back.
No? Literally just go to your games page on the website, click the game, and “Download Offline Backup Game Installers” is right where it’s been for as long as I can remember.
if you’re running a business (like epic), and you feel like you’re somehow just entitled to a certain percentage of the market share dominated by the king of the market (steam), while also giving consumers literally no reason to give you that money (in epic’s case, actually giving more reasons NOT to use them), then-- LOL get fucked. keep shitting on linux and refusing to unfuck your shit tier slopfest UI, while whining about everything. i find it amusing.
Seriously!!
The best part to me is that this is a former “principal animation engineer,” and they still have no self-awareness about why Epic sucks.
It reminds me of an old saying that really good people hire really good people… but mediocre people often hire those that are worse than them to look better. That is, “A” people hire “A” people, but “B” people hire “C” people, and the team (or company) declines.
Essays like this make me wonder if Epic has hired many good people over the years.
It’s not a good sign that the cult of entitlement at Epic is so strong, even their most experienced former technical staff still write entitled essays after they leave. And they post them on X.
unfortunately, narcissists/psychos are often the ones that ruthlessly manipulate and bully and deceive their way to the top, shoving aside higher quality and more human people more deserving of those positions of authority. you see it in musk, bezos, the epic chode, etc… also in govt
you are not the target audience
just assume malfeasance
12·3 days agothey bought a game I liked after it was released and now I can’t play it, because I don’t internet without VPN. I’m very upset with them about this.
because they own it now.
and they want my money.
Yeah, and their unknowable secret sauce to win capitalism was to not overdo it and enshittify. Wild stuff. Who could tell that keeping your userbase happy is more productive in the long term than chasing “growth” at every turn?
On the one hand, they’re not really competing on features right now.
On the other hand, I have heard (more times than I can count or remember), that Steam users will never use another launcher for any reason ever.
So they kind of have a point. If they invest hundreds of millions or billions into features, would Steam users really use the Epic launcher? I don’t think so.
I’d be fine using a different launcher. Just not theirs.
Epic has done so much to breed ill will with gamers. If they wanted to be disruptors they should have just followed the typical tactics. Come in with a decent or even good service that is cheaper or more user friendly than the competition, be extremely consumer focused with customer support and decisions, get enough market share to have a solid user base, then start tightening the strings so they can turn a profit.
Instead, they said ‘fuck gamers’, spent years bribing developers for exclusives, offered fuck-all in terms of features that people want, had very strict customer service, and then proceeded to tell everyone that they’re wrong for preferring the other guy.
I’d be fine using a different launcher. Just not theirs.
Do you not have games on Steam then, or are you saying you’d be fine using two launchers?
Most people have a ton of games on Steam and would not use multiple launchers. People here on Lemmy are always going to be a strongly opinionated minority.
I mean, Steam isn’t even my preferred storefront, despite being where I buy most of my games. I actually prefer GoG when it’s an option.
they released a new video codec for steamlink vr streaming not too long ago, and are adding achievement categories
What’s with all the shade on GOG and itch? They’re great, and arguably serve other segments of the gaming market better already. The only difference is that Steam has a dominant position in online and AAA PC gaming, which is all corpos actually care about.
They are ignored in conversations like this because their existence undermines the monopoly accusations aimed at Steam. Talk like this isn’t about the reality, but trying to tear Steam down so Epic can compete without having to actually provide a good product.
Wish people would start asking Epic why they aren’t letting Alan Wake 2 be released on GOG and itch, since they act like Steam is the only platform and attack it to avoid being asked why they are holding the game hostage from coming out on other platforms.
100% on point
Huh? Steam is absolutely a monopoly in PC game sales.
Monopoly doesn’t mean there are no alternatives. It means controlling an overwhelming share of the market.
Even Google has a monopoly w.r.t. search engines despite controlling less of its market than Steam does. If your site is deindexed by Google alone you might as well not exist for most of the population.
People keep saying that and it still isn’t true. It was argued the dictionary definition wasn’t good enough, so how about US legal criteria to be considered a monopoly.
Federal criteria looks at three things: market power, exclusionary conduct, and business justification.
- Market power: “…significant and durable market power — that is, the long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors.” You could argue this as I believe Steam has something like 75% of PC game sales. However I don’t think it would be difficult to argue that console gaming is also a market competitor which would bring their market share down some, but I’m not sure by how much. There is no hard limit for what market share is required for the firm to match this criteria. “if competitive forces or the entry of new firms could discipline the conduct of the leading firm, courts are unlikely to find that the firm has lasting market power.” It is likely that if steam began being anti consumer, the existing competitors could take advantage, or other markets could be developed. So this criteria is in the maybe column.
- Exclusionary Conduct: “Obtaining a monopoly by superior products, innovation, or business acumen is legal.” This alone means that even if they have the market share to be investigated as a monopoly, they haven’t broken the law since they allow open competition against them. They have simply provided a superior product to consumers. “Exclusionary or predatory acts may include such things as exclusive supply or purchase agreements; tying; predatory pricing; or refusal to deal.” I am unaware of Steam doing any of this. Epic on the other hand, absolutely does.
- Business Justification: “The monopolist may be competing on the merits in a way that benefits consumers through greater efficiency or a unique set of products or services.” Steam is providing a unique set of services that benefit the consumer. So it seems that have a business justification.
Put simply, Steam is not a monopoly by the dictionary definition and likely wouldn’t be found to be a monopoly in a legal sense either.
- Obtaining a monopoly by [various reasons] is legal
Steam is not a monopoly
Am I missing something here? Just because Steam doesn’t violate the (comparatively weak) US antitrust law does not make it not a monopoly. Especially when there are clearly legal ways to have a monopoly according to point 2 and point 3.
Sorry home slice, but those facts you’re dropping are a little too accurate for ol’ Timbo’s liking.
Haven’t had someone hit me with ‘home slice’ in a minute. Flameo, hotman.
Now I can’t help but wonder what the Venn diagram of c/pcgaming and people who get “Flameo, hotman” looks like.
It felt like a safe assumption. I bet even the highly niche agenda-driven weirdos on Lemmy have good taste in cartoons.
At the very least, you sized the recipient up well. Otherwise, it would have been rough, buddy.
Even on Lemmy people talking about stock value fluctuations as if that’s the whole of the game for businesses.
All Steam had to do is something that has long been forgotten by lot of companies these days. Treat customers well and make them feel they are the main priority.
Lot of other companies know they can treat customers like crap and still make money, and even outright reject them like Crucial deciding enterprise customers buying millions to billions in bulk sales is all they need.
Many companies think customers can be forced to buy from them. Like Epic did with exclusives and thinking sounds bites taunting Steam would wins hearts and minds. Meanwhile steam just quietly focused on improvements to their own services without acknowledging Epic.
The performance complaints were also stupid.
Valve had their boot time fixed in beta channel for weeks
Only an idiot would have put out a marketing blitz about it when the sword of Damocles is swinging above them.
If Epic could find a way to monetize the constant fucking whining about Valve they’d be doing great.
They’re trying, that’s why the keep suing
