• _stranger_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      He hasn’t enshittified anything yet, and it’s looking like he might not ever, which is why people respect him.

      There’s valid criticisms, yes, but that meme is dead accurate. I don’t want to imagine what gaming would look like today if someone like EA the same vast influence over the industry instead of Valve.

      • nomy@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Imagine if GabeN created some sort of co-op and left Steam to an employee-run board when he died.

        • DukeHawthorne@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          That’s what I was going to say. Sure, Gabe might not be that bad, but what happens to Valve and Steam when he’s gone? Are we just hoping the next guy also isn’t evil?

    • glitchdx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      As far as billionaires go, he’s the least shit of the bunch. No idea what his personal life is like, and I don’t want to know. Every billionaire that makes their personal life public so far has turned out to be a giant cunt.

  • Integrate777@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Private company with long-term strategy VS public company chasing short-term profits to pump stock prices for shareholders.

    • HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      That’s the primary reason I abhor the stock market. It no longer works for the creator/owner or the customers at all. It simply feeds the greed of the wealthy (special call-out to private equity here).

      • jonne@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah, the flaw there is that money can flow into and out of the stock market basically instantly, so you always have to manage their expectations to make sure your price doesn’t crash.

  • darthelmet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    You’d think it wouldn’t be that hard for publishers with billions of dollars to hire enough competent devs for enough time to make a halfway decent storefront, especially when they don’t even have to reinvent the wheel on a lot of UX and marketing research that’s already been done for them by Steam existing as long as it’s had.

    That none of them have even come close to that is a monument to their incompetence.

    • The_v@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Large companies do not generally innovate. Their internal inertia prevents them from successfully creating new things. Also the larger a company gets, the more layers of brainless MBA parasites latch on to suck them dry.

      Large companies rely on purchasing innovation by buying up a never ending stream of smaller companies. They then take the ideas/products and launch them to a wider market.

      Steam has remained small by rejecting massive buyout offers. This has allowed them to remain innovative.

  • Cyrus Draegur@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    You know sometimes I actually straight up FORGET that Steam is run by the same company that created Half-Life?

    They:

    1. identified a gradient of human wants
      (Video games exist; I want them on my computer)
    2. Created a vector for that want to be satisfied
      (Digital distribution that conveys the games I want to my computer)
    3. Stayed the FUCK OUT OF THE WAY

    When you do something well, people don’t notice you’ve done anything at all.

    • kattfisk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think the key was that Steam wasn’t created to make money, but to solve problems they themselves had, like “How do we get new versions of Counter Strike out to all these players?”

      Then as Valve wasn’t the only company having these problems, the solution could easily be sold to others.

      If the other companies really wanted to crack Steam’s near-monopoly, the solution would be to tackle the problems associated with not having all your games on Steam. Work together on a open-source launcher supporting all stores, similar to GOG Galaxy. First make something useful that tackles an unsolved problem, then you can make money off it when it becomes successful.

      Instead they go in just trying to make a buck, and end up just being worse versions of Steam.

      That ended up being a bit of a rant, but I’m frustrated at their shortsighted market strategies :p

      • Cyrus Draegur@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Oh indeed! And that’s why I love GOG! I actually try to check GOG first just in case I can buy a game I want there before I go through with buying it on steam. I would actually gladly pay MORE for the GOG version because it removes bullshit like DRM!

        • kattfisk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I used to do the same, but I lost a lot of confidence in GOG after they retroactively restricted their cloud saves to 200 MB.

          My hundred-hour Witcher 3 save is exactly the kind of thing I want backed up, but that’s no longer possible. And the very low limit they set, and the urgency with which they started deleting the very data they were expected to keep safe, reeks of a desperation to save money that makes me hesitant to invest more in their ecosystem.

          I really want them to succeed though, and I think they have the right idea with Galaxy. Even Epic giving me games for free doesn’t make me actually use their client or store.

          But somehow the obvious idea of forming a consortium to develop open standards and implementations for game clients, doesn’t seem like something that will ever happen.

    • TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I mean it’s true for TF2 also, overwatch killed itself lol

      They did the bare minimum of banning bots so TF2 has been going pretty great recently. I think I’ve encountered 1 or 2 bots in the last 2 weeks and I’m pretty sure those were just blatant cheaters and not actually bots

  • cynar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Ultimately it’s a slow and steady strategy. There goal is long term profitability, not short term gains. In the long term, the best strategy is not to piss off your customers.

    The advantage of this is that it can snowball to impressive levels. At least until a exec with more education than brains does a pump and run on it. A mistake steam seems to know to avoid.

    • MrVilliam@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m not looking forward to what happens to steam post-gaben. I expect a stupid successor to IPO and fuck it all up.

      • cynar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        That makes me nervous as well. Hopefully, there are enough people involved to know not to kill the golden goose for a quick buck.

  • snekerpimp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m not quite sure they have “done nothing”. They have made a digital storefront that other storefronts strive for, they have help with Linux compatibility with windows only games, have released a few bits of awesome hardware every now and then. I think this is what happens when you are not beholden to shareholders and the mantra “make line go up at all costs”

  • Snowclone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    His plan isn’t based off trying to squeeze blood from stones, it’s to sell some video games. Not a very capitalist mindset, but there you have it.

    • Kilgore Trout@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Valve takes 30% from every sale on Steam, which is quite landlord-like. Although there are much worse practices in the market.

      • Zron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Oh no, a sales platform that takes a cut of revenue.

        Valve isn’t a charity, and they provide very good services for what developers pay.

        Devs don’t need to host download servers, they don’t need to staff customer service reps, they don’t have to set up banking infrastructure or worry at all about handling payments from hundreds of different banks across hundreds of countries.

        It’s not like valve takes 30% and sits on it. They put that money to use.

  • wizzim@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I have a mixed feeling about Gabe and Valve.

    While I am insanely grateful for proton (even if it was strategically important for them, they didn’t do it out of kindness of heart), some other stuff disturb me:

    • Valve being so lenient on CS2 skin gambling, hurting the young people
    • A steam account being un-inheritable, making you defacto a tenant of your games
    • The 30% percent cut, stealing money from devs
    • Gabe spending his money on multiple mega yachts, like every asshole billionaire, instead of making the world a better place
    • Gabe claiming to be a libertarian, like Elon and other pieces of shit
    • Sylvartas@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I love Valve for a lot of things but I’ll never forget that they spearheaded some of the most predatory microtransactions in the industry (loot boxes and battle passes) and were happy to help Bethesda try to sell mods until players raised a huge stink.

    • rocket_dragon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The 30% percent cut, stealing money from devs

      This is a pretty spicy take. Let’s consider two possibilities:

      1. Game devs choose to distribute independently, and sell their game for $20. They sell 100,000 copies and make $2 million in revenue, and keep the entire $2 million.

      2. Game devs choose to distribute via Steam, promote it with a 50% off sale, it goes to the Steam front page, sells 500,000 copies at only $10 each, for a total $5 million in revenue. Steam takes $1.5 million and the devs take $3.5 million.

      In scenario 2 the devs make 75% more than in scenario 1. Did Valve steal from the game devs?

      • vga@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Obviously Valve and the developer collaborated to steal money from the consumers who wouldn’t have bought the game without the promotion.

        to make sure: /s

    • rabber@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Not to mention his insane Porsche collection, yeah he’s just another billionaire

      Valve ruined my favourite game (dota) by flooding the game with ridiculous cosmetics that even change particle effects with no way to disable any of this

    • Im_a_GDeveloper@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I didn’t knew about he claiming to be a libertarian. Rothbard must be turning over in his grave.

      • sensiblepuffin@lemmy.funami.tech
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Here’s the thing - Theoretically we shouldn’t give a shit about his political leanings and we don’t have to, because he and his company deliver a good service. I can privately think he’s another asshole libertarian tech bro whose only guiding principle is “everyone should be able to do what I want, but only some people should have the money to do those things”, but it doesn’t change anything about Steam or Half-Life 3.

        • wizzim@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          But this is a problem right ?

          Because the libertarian view of the world DOES have an impact on Steam: they have so much inertia to fight against hate speech and extreme right, they do nothing against gambling, and so on. All under the pretense “free speech” which is so convenient.

          IMO this is the view of the modern libertarian: all the money, none of the accountability.

          • sensiblepuffin@lemmy.funami.tech
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            It is a problem, you’re right. We shouldn’t have to rely on people with the motivation to do good. Capitalism is failing because without regulation, it motivates people to fuck each other over for an extra dime.

    • Owl@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      A steam account being un-inheritable, making you defacto a tenant of your games

      Can’t you just give your kids your steam password ? How would they notice ?

      • wizzim@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yes you can workaround it. But this is still a society right they forbid you. And who can say that in 2100 they won’t implement a cleanup job that lock all accounts that are over 100 years old ? 🤪

      • sensiblepuffin@lemmy.funami.tech
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m not sure about that either - unless you really want your real name on a Steam account, you just change the password and the payment method and you should be fine, right?

        • derpgon@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          You can’t change the login username. That’s about it. You can change the profile link, profile name, avatar and other cosmetics, and edit payment methods.

    • rtxn@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago
      • The 30% percent cut, stealing money from devs

      Sigh. Here we go again. I’ll just copy one of my older comments about that attitude.


      Steam is not a parasitic middle man, it is a collection of services that would have to be provisioned and operated by the developer otherwise. The 30% cut pays for:

      • A massive infrastructure to store and deliver the game and its updates, worldwide, and at an acceptable bandwidth that Valve operates
      • A storefront that enables monetizing the game
      • The audience and discoverability that would not exist otherwise
      • The Steam API, achievements, cloud saves
      • The client itself, content management, validation, and Linux compatibility tools
      • Network and operational security
      • Also keep in mind that Steam and its services are operated by experts. A game developer would have to hire the experts or get training.

      If the revenue from the cut exceeds the operational costs: it’s called profitability, not theft. The world doesn’t run on good vibes.

      • wizzim@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Yeah you’re of course right, they are not a charity and shouldn’t have to provide their service for free.

        I expressed myself too quickly (the rage!). What I meant is the this cut of 30% is fucking predatory, mafia or middle-age money lender style. You get one third of the rewards of your efforts just for delivering my product? And don’t talk about promotion because this store is now stuffed with too many games for visibility.

        You can argue “but this is it the standard rate of the industry”. Well it is predatory everywhere else and I hate Google and Apple as much for it.

        A cut of 10% would be more humane. This is something EGS got right, even if I dislike them for many other things (Epic and Tim Sweeney).

        • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          You get one third of the rewards of my efforts just for delivering my product

          you have not read the comment you responded to.

          • derbolle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            and forgot or ignored that it often is not the dev who gets most of the money at all but publishers like ea and ubisoft. why should customers act in defense of those companies who actively try and make gaming worse for everyone?

            an indie dev paying 30% is expensive but steam is really a premium platform for distributing games. it would be nice if it were cheaper but I don‘t really understand the outrage here

        • rtxn@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          predatory, mafia or middle-age money lender style.

          Your words have lots of sentiments, but present no facts. I know that Wolfire and Sweeney are independently throwing a tantrum, and we all hate taxes, but I don’t see public exposés showing game developers who went hungry because they couldn’t afford the 70-30 split.

          I’ll also remind you that the EGS (12%) is barely profitable, and operated for years at a loss, only sustained by Fortnite (which used dark patterns to extract money from kids, in case you want to see something actually predatory).

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      A steam account being un-inheritable, making you defacto a tenant of your games

      This is unenforceable under US Law

          • wizzim@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Maybe, maybe not.

            Frankly I don’t even know if this clause can be enforced in Europa. I wanted to point out that we shouldn’t rely on the customer protection laws of each country to address that: this clause shouldn’t exist in the first place.

            But to be frank, it most likely doesn’t come from Valve and rather from the games company themselves.

  • dipcart@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Just my two cents but as others have said, not being publically traded helps a lot. The focus on short term benefits that come with shareholders stops “master plans” when they come with mistakes. Learning from relative failures, like the steam controller and the like, ultimately contributes to major successes like the steam deck. Being able to stay committed to improving the software experience over time, instead of killing the product when it didn’t immediately succeed, is fairly rare in the tech industry. And in all honesty, it would be better if they released a polished profuct, but being committed to it made it a success.

    I feel like the pressure to have a majorly successful product day one means that smaller companies can’t innovate the way they want to, so they have to find other ways to produce revenue. Huge companies, like Apple can afford to do both but still stumble, like with the vision pro. Maybe it’ll be a success, but for now its not great and iteration makes it more difficult to maintain the original vision.

    • AppleTea@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      eh, kinda think strapping a monitor to your face just isn’t the future movies seem to think it should be

    • sensiblepuffin@lemmy.funami.tech
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      You can either be publicly traded and let greedy shareholders sell things for parts or you can have private ownership and pray to God that they’re benevolent. There has to be another option, surely. Maybe one where Valve becomes employee-owned with a trust/foundation backing it once Gabe dies?