45
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Soup@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

“They charge developers too much!”

“Ok, Tim, so how exactly do you make money for your company, then? Because giving away all the free stuff seems like awfully bad business.”

Never thought I’d be defending a company charging a lot of money but since Steam actually does provide an excellent, stable service with bonuses like Linux development and the Steam Deck I mean, I really ain’t that mad, especially they still offer really good sales.

[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

“They charge developers too much!”

So you should be able to undercut them, right? Right?

[-] masterspace@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 week ago

Not when the Steam Terms of Service prevents them from charging less on other stores.

[-] architect@thelemmy.club 1 points 1 week ago

I mean is obvious if they killed valve or even knocked it down a peg they would raise prices on devs so fast.

[-] masterspace@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 week ago

“They charge developers too much!”

“Ok, Tim, so how exactly do you make money for your company, then? Because giving away all the free stuff seems like awfully bad business.

I think you're missing the point that Epic's store is only not profitable at their margins because of scale. If they had even half of Steam's user base they would be profitable. Their problem is that gamers insist on backing Valve's monopoly because it's what other gamers tell them to do online.

And Epic provides Unreal Engine, the gaming engine that powers the majority of modern games, with free and extremely cheap tiers for indie devs, and they provide explicit Linux support for their engine and dev environment. They've also used a substantial amount of their Fortnite money to break up app store monopolies on Android and iOS.

They are not the villain that the gaming community thinks they are.

[-] IzzyJ@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Have you considered maybe Valves monopoly is natural? That is convenient to have all the games in one place and their customers like what they're selling?

[-] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Have you considered maybe Valves monopoly is natural?

Yes that changes literally nothing.

All monopolies, be they natural or otherwise, need to be heavily regulated or else they can:

a) easily do stuff to prevent competition. Stuff like preventing developers from selling their game for cheaper on other stores.

b) charge exorbitant markups, markups like 30% of all revenue for a listing in a store.

I do not understand why gamers have such a hard time grasping that Valve taking a massive cut off the top of every single game sold, just enriches the already rich for doing nothing, at the expense of consumers and creators.

[-] architect@thelemmy.club 1 points 1 week ago

That’s has absolutely no chance in hell to happen while these right wing fucks are in charge. Any “regulation” would be a secret dick in the ass while they make everything worse and somehow we all end up paying more.

[-] imetators@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago

Sorry to bust your balls, but here's a thing from a fucking 6 years ago that debunks your B point to the ground.

30% has used to be standard in a PHYSICAL releases too, except these wont give you any convenience like cloud saves, remote play, family share, friend/community integration, support for older releases, huge ass discounts, linux support, and may other pro-consumer things. Valve takes this chunk and actually invests in the quality of their service.

Do you really think that MS or Epic would keep low markups if they have gained majority of the market?

[-] masterspace@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 week ago

Lmfao bro, you think that digital storefronts cost more to run then physical ones?

You think it takes more resource to change a database entry, then it does to run a physical store, staffed by real people, that have to import and store a physical item that they then have to sell you, and potentially take back and return?

Lmfao, Valve has tossed you trinkets over the course of 20 years and you praise them like they're altrusitic gods, instead of the wealth hoarding millionaires and billionaires that they actually are.

Do you really think that MS or Epic would keep low markups if they have gained majority of the market?

Jesus Christ, thats literally the whole fucking point. Valve has been overcharging you because they have a monopoly.

Competition is what keeps prices low, and that's not possible when Valve has clauses that prevent developers from selling their games for less on other stores.

[-] imetators@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago

Steam provides much more than just a store. Having to print, burn, deliver and sell physical CDs is not cheap. Nor is the service Steam provides that physical discs wont. Also, did you pass over the fact that PS, Xbox, Nintendo, Apple and Google also have charged 30% for their online stores?

Anyone can go get free games at Epic and be happy they save 100% cash on their games. and that is why Epic's user base grew 173% withing last 6 years but with 1.6% revenue growth. If this doesn't make you realize that we pay for a good service, then nothing will.

[-] masterspace@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 week ago

PlayStation and Xbox subsidize the cost of the console.

Apple and Google have been having their 30% fees (and the monopolies that allow them) struck down by courts and competition regulators around the world.

[-] imetators@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago

PlayStation and Xbox subsidize the cost of the console.

Valve is subsidizing their services that they provide to gamers.

Apple and Google have been having their 30% fees (and the monopolies that allow them) struck down by courts and competition regulators around the world.

They have 15% since 2020 or so. As far as I understood, Apple got sued, then changed the cut% and Google followed shortly after to avoid getting sued. Once app earns more than $1 million, it gets 30% cut again.

[-] masterspace@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 week ago

Valve is subsidizing their services that they provide to gamers.

Lmfao. No they are not.

They are the most profitable company tech company per employee, of any tech company. That's profit, as in revenue - expenses.

[-] Nikelui@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

They are the most profitable company tech company per employee, of any tech company.

They are also known for not hiring in excess, which leads to company bloat and massive layoffs years down the road?

[-] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

You don't need to be remotely close to the most profitable tech company per employee to do that.

this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2026
45 points (95.9% liked)

Technology

81024 readers
646 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS