Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

gamesindustry.biz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 84 posts

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#31

Post by rererereferred »

lawn wrote: post #28
svpk wrote: post #15

Key distinctions between Steam and similar contenders in other spaces (google play store, the apple app store) are that: 1. Steam isn't bundled with the OS, it must be installed. 2. Steam isn't a gatekeeper to installing software (as the app store is and in a somewhat different way as google has proposed doing with their plans to require app signing). At least the US, and I assume most legal schemes, require an attem…

Valve even allows you to install whatever you want on the Steam Deck. Even Windows!

Yes, thanks to Heroic Launcher I can even play my games from Gog and Epic on it.

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#32

Post by gruez »

estimator7292 wrote: post #9

Dominant and successful, yes. Monopoly, no. It take more than simply being the best or most successful business in a sector to be a monopoly. Being a monopoly is an active choice you make as a business by intentionally engaging in anticompetitive behaviors. Valve isn't putting any pressure on anyone in this sector. There is still competition, but Valve has simply been more successful than everyone else. Mainly becaus…

>It take more than simply being the best or most successful business in a sector to be a monopoly. Being a monopoly is an active choice you make as a business by intentionally engaging in anticompetitive behaviors.

By that logic are Amazon and Whatsapp also not "monopolies"? Are they simply just the best e-commerce company and chat app respectively? What competitive behaviors are they employing against their competitors?

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#33

Post by gruez »

happymellon wrote: post #13
Pooge wrote: post #4

I've never understood this point. Other developers can just make their own platform or distribute games themselves individually. Nobody wants to do that for obvious reasons. There's clearly a network effect similar to Instagram, WhatsApp, Facebook and the likes. But apart from regulating for service interoperability, there's nothing you can do. It's like claiming that Skype had a monopoly between 2008 and 2014. Just.…

> Valve is not buying other store makers nor actively sabotaging efforts to do so. This is really key, when you see Epic bribing devs to get exclusivity, giving away games for free, they do this and still not succeed because they are actively hostile to their users. Where is my Big Picture mode? Where is my support of Linux? They've been at it for years and yet still don't actually want to provide a service that is d…

>because they are actively hostile to their users.

>Where is my Big Picture mode?

>Where is my support of Linux?

Calling the lack of linux and TV support "hostile" is bit of a stretch. The two combined probably makes up 5% of the user base at most, and there are probably workarounds (eg. using wine or the regular interface)

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#34

Post by jorvi »

svpk wrote: post #15

Key distinctions between Steam and similar contenders in other spaces (google play store, the apple app store) are that: 1. Steam isn't bundled with the OS, it must be installed. 2. Steam isn't a gatekeeper to installing software (as the app store is and in a somewhat different way as google has proposed doing with their plans to require app signing). At least the US, and I assume most legal schemes, require an attem…

Valve has market power though, which is a key part of a monopoly.

If tomorrow Steam decided to charge 30% extra to developers with the stipulation that sticker price must equal that of outside Steam, developers wouldn't have much of a choice but to eat the cost, because PC gamers are extremely reluctant to leave their Steam library and features.

A good example of market power is Apple vs Spotify. When Apple launched Apple Music, they changed Music.app into Apple Music on every iDevice in the world, with a handy subscription pop-up the first time you launched it.

This was massively anti-competitive overreach despite Apple not technically being a monopolist. You can easily install Spotify, and Spotify was much bigger. Without making this move, Apple Music would have crashed and burned, but Apple basically forced themselves into the market, using their marketshare and user migration reluctance as a crowbar.

The fair competition thing to would have been to show a pop-up on first Apple Music app launch, asking "hey, would you like to try one of these streaming services?", and show Spotify, Apple Music, Tidal and Deezer in a random order. Just like Microsoft and their browser pop-up.

Then again, aside from a decade of stagnation (2010-2020 Steam saw very few updates, until Valve started working on the Deck), Valve hasn't really abused their position. Gabe Newell famously said that piracy isn't a pricing problem, it's a service problem, and Valve is a private company, so as long as he is at the helm I assume Valve is going to continue delivering good service. After that.. who knows.

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#35

Post by happymellon »

gruez wrote: post #33
happymellon wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Valve is not buying other store makers nor actively sabotaging efforts to do so. This is really key, when you see Epic bribing devs to get exclusivity, giving away games for free, they do this and still not succeed because they are actively hostile to their users. Where is my Big Picture mode? Where is my support of Linux? They've been at it for years and yet still don't actually want to provide a service that is d…

>because they are actively hostile to their users. >Where is my Big Picture mode? >Where is my support of Linux? Calling the lack of linux and TV support "hostile" is bit of a stretch. The two combined probably makes up 5% of the user base at most, and there are probably workarounds (eg. using wine or the regular interface)

I didn't.

I asked where are these basic features. Two separate parts to my comment.

The user hostile comes from Tim Sweeneys Twitter account where he openly mocks users who ask questions.

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#36

Post by galagawinkle489 »

mzhaase wrote: post #29
yxhuvud wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A third difference is that I've seen no signs of steam actually abusing their standing in the market. If anything they seem to be nicer than they have to be.

They absolutely keep a larger cut than others. With Epic the first million you make is free. After much deliberation, steam changed it so that their 30% cut is reduced if you make more than 10M. For a lot of indie devs, its pretty much a death sentence.

Indie game development largely owes its existence to Steam. I know I would spend a lot less on indie games if I had to buy them from their own websites or, god forbid, through an awful laggy "app store" run by Ubisoft or Microsoft.

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#37

Post by wongarsu »

Pooge wrote: post #4

I've never understood this point. Other developers can just make their own platform or distribute games themselves individually. Nobody wants to do that for obvious reasons. There's clearly a network effect similar to Instagram, WhatsApp, Facebook and the likes. But apart from regulating for service interoperability, there's nothing you can do. It's like claiming that Skype had a monopoly between 2008 and 2014. Just.…

> Other developers can just make their own platform or distribute games themselves individually. Nobody wants to do that for obvious reasons

Where "nobody" is specifically "no users". Lots of publishers tried doing exactly that, and most eventually gave up because users don't want to deal with extra launchers or platforms. Offering games on your own distribution channel is fine, but not being on Steam is going to hurt your sales a lot. Epic is really the only still-running attempt (except for GOG)

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#38

Post by gruez »

happymellon wrote: post #35
gruez wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>because they are actively hostile to their users. >Where is my Big Picture mode? >Where is my support of Linux? Calling the lack of linux and TV support "hostile" is bit of a stretch. The two combined probably makes up 5% of the user base at most, and there are probably workarounds (eg. using wine or the regular interface)

I didn't. I asked where are these basic features. Two separate parts to my comment. The user hostile comes from Tim Sweeneys Twitter account where he openly mocks users who ask questions.

>The user hostile comes from Tim Sweeneys Twitter account where he openly mocks users who ask questions.

link?

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#39

Post by Retric »

svpk wrote: post #15

Key distinctions between Steam and similar contenders in other spaces (google play store, the apple app store) are that: 1. Steam isn't bundled with the OS, it must be installed. 2. Steam isn't a gatekeeper to installing software (as the app store is and in a somewhat different way as google has proposed doing with their plans to require app signing). At least the US, and I assume most legal schemes, require an attem…

Your misunderstanding what monopoly means and represents.

Monopoly just comes down to marketshare, but it’s perfectly legal in the US to be a monopoly instead it limits what you’re allowed to do. For example a regular company can give a discount if you agree to only sell their goods, obviously that becomes problematic if the company has monopoly power so they are no longer allowed to have such agreements. The boundaries around what is a market trip people up, but it’s around what customers view as substitutes goods. If you don’t have a car then an EV can be a viable substitute, however if you have a gas car then you have some wiggle room on octane ratings etc but an electric car chargers isn’t viable substitute.

“In law, a monopoly is a business entity that has significant market power, that is, the power to charge overly high prices, which is associated with unfair price raises.[2] Although monopolies may be big businesses, size is not a characteristic of a monopoly. A small business may still have the power to raise prices in a small industry (or market).[2]” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly

Re: 72% of devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games, according to study

#40

Post by plumthreads »

teroshan wrote: post #23
svpk wrote: post #15

Key distinctions between Steam and similar contenders in other spaces (google play store, the apple app store) are that: 1. Steam isn't bundled with the OS, it must be installed. 2. Steam isn't a gatekeeper to installing software (as the app store is and in a somewhat different way as google has proposed doing with their plans to require app signing). At least the US, and I assume most legal schemes, require an attem…

I'm still finishing my first read, but I really recommend Cory Doctorow's latest book [1] "Enshittification:Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What To Do About It" which covers the subject of tech monopolies and much more. Reading it I learned about the term "monopsony" which is "a market in which goods or services are offered by several sellers but there is only one buyer" which is usually conflated with monopoly…

This is really the key here. Many people are commenting their experience as a games buyers, but this article is about the developers. Monopsonies are usually linked to lower wages in labor markets. In this case lower profits for developers from selling their games.
Post reply on HN