• lb_o@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      21 days ago

      How many non-game related ads have you seen on Steam?

      How many actual ads have you seen on every other platform you used?

      How many ads have you seen in the game released on Steam in general?

      Does that answer your question?

      • osanna@lemmy.vg
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        21 days ago

        Just because Steam doesn’t have ads, doesn’t mean that Gaben is a good billionaire. For a large chunk of the existence of Valve, they wouldn’t even give you a refund. They had to be mandated for them to give you a refund.

        While the rest of us starve to death, Gabe is sitting pretty on over a billion dollars worth of boats

        • 0x0@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          20 days ago

          Your name means untrue in my native tongue; how fitting

          There are no good billionaires, true, but if you compare refunds during the times you speak of with other companies, youll quickly find out that him and Valve clearly are among the least bad ones. Gabes boat isnt going to magically disappear just because of a lawsuit like this, and you should probably go outside and do something if youre currently starving to death in front of your computer.

  • it_depends_man@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    21 days ago

    Bloomberg cites two high-profile cases referenced in the ongoing lawsuit, one involving Ubisoft, and another Warner Bros.

    First of all, I trust Ubi and WB way less than valve.

    Valve allegedly threatened to delist all editions of Rainbow Six Siege after Ubisoft offered a cheaper option on its Uplay store.

    Yeah.

    Because it violates their policy. That’s not a “threat”, those are the terms of the contract Ubi and WB agreed to. Terms that everyone has to follow.

    Heck, Ubi and WB should be hit with a counter suit for trying to leverage their market position to exert control over valve and getting unusually favorable terms.

    Clown suit. Ubi and WB are mad they can’t break their contract with valve in a one sided way.


    edit: I forgot some context:

    The deal between valve and a publisher or dev is: they can sell on steam and elsewhere if steam is at least tied in price, or cheaper, but when they sell somewhere else, that includes the steam key and access to steam and steam’s distribution at no cost.

    What the devs and publishers wanted to do was leverage other features of steam and the steam ecosystem, while undercutting steam’s price.

    They are always free to just not sell on steam for a cheaper price. That’s not what this is about.

    edit2:

    https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/keys

    “Steam Key Rules and Guidelines”

    • Chozo@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      22 days ago

      First of all, I trust Ubi and WB way less than valve.

      You shouldn’t trust any of them. No billionaire has your best interests at heart. Even Gabe.

      • imahappyguy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 days ago

        I’m inclined a little to agree with you, but it’s not like he made his money because Gabe refused to be run by anyone. He pays his employees really well. My dad’s friend still is working at Valve after going there 20 some odd years ago. He rakes in money like no ones business. But they are all benefitting from the work they have done.

        Secondly, nobody knows how charitable he is in his private life. The fact that he’s so private about it, inclines me to believe he’s probably a decent guy, who just doesn’t like the spotlight. He may be a billionaire, but how many billionaires have their employees love them like at Valve?

        Lastly, most of his money is tied up in shares of the company, as he is 50%+ owner. He may use that to leverage cash loans, but he’s also just smart. He doesn’t really do that all that much, except when he’s buying his research yachts. And those shares are only accessible by the workers, as it’s a private company. Why? Because the money belongs to the laborers who produce the goods.

        Now, I’m willing to change my view if there’s ever a situation in which Gabe Newall is intentionally trying to avoid paying taxes, but that hasn’t happened yet.

        Bezos, Musk, Gates, Trump, Zuckerburg, Page, Brin, Ellison, Dell, Huang, the Waltons, Blomberg, Thiel. There’s so many worse people out there. I do agree wealth is bad, but what the aforementioned are doing is significantly worse.

        • Chozo@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          21 days ago

          Now, I’m willing to change my view if there’s ever a situation in which Gabe Newall is intentionally trying to avoid paying taxes, but that hasn’t happened yet.

          What about exploiting child gambling? Valve’s value, and thusly Gabe’s value, skyrocketed after introducing lootboxes to TF2, CSGO, DOTA2, etc. He can be as charitable as he fucking wants, but he still defends lootboxes while taking little to no efforts to ensure that children aren’t gambling on his platform. He’s had… how many years to fix this problem now? Too many. He’s not fixed the problem, and continues to reap the rewards in the meantime.

          As far as I’m concerned, he’s just as much of a piece of shit as any other billionaire. The only difference is that he makes toys that a lot of us really, really like; toys that we apparently like so much so that we’re willing to handwave child gambling as long as it doesn’t get in the way of making it moderately convenient to download DRM-infested games.

          • imahappyguy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            21 days ago

            Mate, I did not know parents were not responsible for their own children. That is on me. I’m glad to hear all the work I’ve done on my network and computers to make them safe for my children was a moot point.

            Adults like gambling. It’s not Valve’s fault that children are using it cause their parents are ignorant of their own child.

            As far as the DRM stuff goes, that’s all based on the publisher. And it’s not that difficult to bypass. Valve has shown time and time again, that they are a business for their customers. Their customers like a solid platform that works and is easy to use and has a community.

            Let’s take a look a Linux real quick. If it wasn’t for Valve, Linux gaming wouldn’t be what it is today. They did that and gave it to the community. I’m sorry other platforms can’t be bothered to put in that kind of effort. If you wanna play with the big dogs, you gotta get off the porch. And Ubisoft wants to take the easy way out through a lawsuit. They need to do better with their storefront. Offer good exclusives. Try to actually appeal to your customers.

            I still remember when everybody bitched about Steam when half-life 2 came out. It was kinda bad, and people were mad about it. But Valve was just ahead of the curve. It allowed them to publish updates, patches, anti-cheating. And soon enough, the community grew to love it. It just worked. If something broke in your game, it was probably fixed in a week if it was a Valve game. It gave so much to PC players.

            • Goodeye8@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              21 days ago

              Adults like gambling. It’s not Valve’s fault that children are using it cause their parents are ignorant of their own child.

              If adults want to gamble, fine. Let’s enforce gambling laws and get this over with. It would also solve the children gambling problem because that would be illegal. But this is why Valve’s gambling service is indefensible. Valve is actively trying to prevent the gambling classification because if it gets treated like actual gambling it most likely stops being profitable. I don’t necessarily have an issue with gambling, I have an issue with it not being treated as gambling. And all the other things Valve has done that have been positive for gaming do not justify giving Valve a free pass on gambling.

              To bring it back to Gaben, he isn’t avoiding taxes but he is avoiding the (gambling) law because it makes him more money, so is it that different from avoiding taxes?

              • imahappyguy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                21 days ago

                That is a fair point. However, I must ask, what is the different between what Valve is doing with loot boxes v. every single trading card game out there. MTG, Pokémon, Yu-Gi-Oh, or Disney’s Lorcana? You are purchasing an item that has items in it that are random. The only reason they have value is because people have the option to just buy skin they want on Valve’s marketplace. Just like people have the option to buy a specific Pokémon card from a third party.

                The other thing that Valve has done is, there’s no inherent value to the item. You can sell items for Steam Wallet funds, to then use in the marketplace. So, to me it seems, it’s really easy to set up a Steam account to not be allowed to purchase items. Which would include adding money to a Steam wallet for the marketplace. So, no this is not a “think of the children” issue. It’s yet again, another people are bad parents and can’t be bothered to use parental controls on their children’s electronics. Or take steps to prevent them from spending real money. Or take steps to prevent them from playing too much.

                • Goodeye8@piefed.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  21 days ago

                  That is a fair point. However, I must ask, what is the different between what Valve is doing with loot boxes v. every single trading card game out there. MTG, Pokémon, Yu-Gi-Oh, or Disney’s Lorcana? You are purchasing an item that has items in it that are random. The only reason they have value is because people have the option to just buy skin they want on Valve’s marketplace. Just like people have the option to buy a specific Pokémon card from a third party.

                  I don’t see how that matters at this point, you’ve already called it gambling. Are you going to walk that back to defend Valve? After all the only reason to bring up this point is to claim it’s not actually gambling. And to address your point, yes I also consider MTG, Pokemon and most trading card games the physical equivalent of a lootbox and a form of gambling. I also know they’re not gambling in a legal sense but we’ll get to where Valve differs in the next part.

                  The other thing that Valve has done is, there’s no inherent value to the item. You can sell items for Steam Wallet funds, to then use in the marketplace. So, to me it seems, it’s really easy to set up a Steam account to not be allowed to purchase items. Which would include adding money to a Steam wallet for the marketplace. So, no this is not a “think of the children” issue. It’s yet again, another people are bad parents and can’t be bothered to use parental controls on their children’s electronics. Or take steps to prevent them from spending real money. Or take steps to prevent them from playing too much.

                  Actually that’s no longer true and that’s why there was a lawsuit filed against Valve at the start of this year. The items now have a value because you sell the things to get Steam credit and then use Steam credit to buy a Steam Deck and then sell the Deck for real money. It’s no longer a closed system, you can get the money out. And once again, this wouldn’t be an issue if Valve either a) stopped their gambling or b) adhere to gambling laws.

            • Chozo@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              21 days ago

              That’s a whole lot of distraction from the point, mate. If you found out that a casino was allowing children to gamble on their property, would you not want to shut down that casino?

              Yes, the parents shouldn’t be allowing the kids to gamble. But parents don’t always “allow” their kids to do the things they do in the first place. You know damn well you did things as a child that you weren’t “allowed” to do, things that you were told specifically not to do. You know that you successfully hid things from your parents, but expect other parents to find everything? Most of this happens completely under the parents’ radar.

              Addicts steal, and that’s no different for children, either. Often they’ll take their parent’s credit card in hopes that the charge goes unnoticed, or they’ll obfuscate the charge by spending money on another currency that gets converted after the fact to one used for lootboxes.

              There are even worse things that an addict will do for money. Some may resort to scams; sometimes they’ll set up catfish social media profiles to bait gooners into paying them gobs of money for fake pictures. Some may resort to worse behavior; I’ve seen instructional TikTok videos for children to lure adults onto Roblox for sexual acts, to be paid in Robux, which can then easily be converted into just about any other game’s currency. Literal child prostitution.

              But sure. Let’s blame the parents, instead of the billionaire’s child casino.

              • imahappyguy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                21 days ago

                I could not give a shit. I am a parent of two and no, you cannot watch them every second. But you can watch your bank accounts. You can watch your child play. You can watch your child’s behavior change if they start getting really into gambling.

                I had an older child I kinda took care of, who thinks of me as a father figure; he has none. He called me one night cause he was 16 and drunk and high and didn’t want to drive home. He said, "I called you, because you always said to call you if this happened. I’m so sorry“. I picked him up and helped his hangover the next morning and we had a long talk. That kid is on the ocean sending underwater robots to explore as an electrical engineer. Cause he liked that I did that. EE, not the water stuff lol.

                Parents are responsible for their children and children have to learn responsibility for their actions. And that is a lesson that you have to teach your children. The best way is through learning. I’ve watched my mom raise an addict, so don’t you fucking dare try to appeal to me. She was the perfect mom. He just got in with the wrong crowd and went downhill. He’s sober now, but it was rough growing up. But she put in a hell of a lot of work into him.

                I tell you that, because I’m not here to say we should ban public schools, because that’s where my brother tried heroin. I’m not here to say we should fund private schools with taxpayer money, because there are drugs in our schools. It’s a fucking bad stroke of luck. Fire and damnnation, this got me hot. Don’t fall off your pedestal as you get on your high horse.

                • Chozo@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  21 days ago

                  I could not give a shit.

                  I can tell, since nothing else about your comment was at all related to what I was saying.

          • warm@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            21 days ago

            What if governments just banned any form of real financial gambling in video games? Valve is still a business, they are going to try and make money, even if it’s shitty. Also a parental problem if you are loading your childs Steam account with money 24/7 so they can gamble.

  • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    22 days ago

    Yeah I hope Valve loses this in favor of developers and consumers. If another platform asks for a smaller share devs should be allowed to set a lower price.

    • OrgunDonor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 days ago

      Let’s go on a hypothetical trip. Say valve loses this, and as a result they stop providing free steam keys to publishers, so that you can now only buy on steam. Obviously this is the absolute worst thing they could do.

      Everyone loses, every key shop is dead. Say goodbye to humble, greenmangaming, fanatical and so on.

      • ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 days ago

        If you had actually read the article, instead of stepping in to blindly defend the corporation that is actively causing you to pay more money for games, you’d know this was not about steam key seller sites.

        Uplay featured a $15 USD Rainbow Six Siege Starter Pack, but this version was not available on Steam, making the cheapest option on Valve’s platform much more expensive. It’s claimed Valve insisted Ubisoft swiftly remedy the discrepancy, giving the publisher “until the end of day tomorrow” to change that.

        • [deleted]@piefed.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          21 days ago

          Lowering the price on steam would have been a remedy and would have benefitted players, just like all of the sales on steam that it actively promotes where the publisher drops the price.

          This is about Ubi trying to be anticompetitive in pricing on their store and steam choosing to not go along with it. Steam consistently lowers the prices of games overall and always has.

          • warm@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            21 days ago

            It’s an odd one.

            If a game cannot be sold cheaper elsewhere, publishers have two options, lower the price on Steam (which benefits consumers) or increase the price on the other platform(s) (which benefits the publisher).

            It benefits Valve no matter what. It can also benefit the consumer. It can also harm the consumer.

            Publishers have every right to not use Steam. Ubisoft had success with UPlay in the past, they just wanted even more money, so went back to Steam.

            Will be interesting to see what happens with the lawsuit.

            • imetators@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              20 days ago

              Ubisoft had success with UPlay in the past

              What?

              The whole case is about Valve forcing other storefronts to sell at the same price as these publishers sell in Steam. Key point is that allegedly Valve requires this even if the game is sold not with a Steam key, but publishers own. Allegedly. Time will tell if they actually do it or not.

              So far Ubisoft and WB hasnt had a great reputation in gaming community, so there should be no surprises why most gamers side with Valve.

              • warm@kbin.earth
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                20 days ago

                Of course. Ubisoft sold their games on UPlay and not Steam for a while. People still played their games and they had some big releases.

                Did they sell the games any cheaper? Of course they didnt.

  • 520@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    21 days ago

    I love valve as much as the next PC gamer, but I agree their rules should not affect what publishers do entirely on other platforms.

        • BlackAura@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          21 days ago

          Yeah but it’s fairly simple.

          You can generate Steam keys using the Steam developer tools. This allows a game key to be purchased on any storefront that supports selling them, which can then be activated on Steam.

          The main requirement? You can’t price those steam keys on a 3rd party store cheaper than on Steam itself.

          For that, it means if the 3rd party store takes a smaller cut than Steam itself would take, the developer makes a bit more profit through almost no additional effort. Steam is the system users use to download and update the game, and cloud save syncing, and community guides, forums, workshop, etc.

          The developer is, afaik, more than welcome to also sell a UPlay key if they partner with Ubisoft at any price point they want (regardless of the Steam price) because Ubisoft is the taking on the burden of distribution, etc.

          The only price requirement Valve imposes is on selling Steam keys on 3rd party storefronts. Not UPlay keys. Not Xbox keys. Not Epic Store keys.

          Edit: and I read the article, while albeit short (can’t access the linked Bloomberg article sadly), they claim exactly that, that the version on UPlay was significantly cheaper than the version on Steam for essentially the same game. Valve was arguing that Rainbow Six Siege needs to change their pricing on UPlay or they would be delisted.

          • TJA!@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            21 days ago

            Yes it’s a very short article and apparently you completely hallucinated a paragraph where it’s about steam keys?

            I do not see any mention of steam keys in the article. They wanted to sell a version that wasn’t even on steam. Only on Uplay. This has nothing to do with steam keys. And valve was still complaining.

            So yeah. It’s fairly simple and you still got it wrong.

            • 0x0@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              20 days ago

              You should probably read the lawsuit instead of an article before you act so sure on this lmao

      • Ashelyn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 days ago

        Steam can delist all of Ubisoft’s games from their storefront in retaliation to what Ubisoft does on their own independent store

        • 0x0@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          20 days ago

          Sure, and ubisoft can decide to not sell their property on steam at all, that mechanic goes both ways.

          I forgot the issue at hand while writing that, oh bother

  • Pika@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    21 days ago

    The amount of people in this thread that are arguing that steam is fully within the right here due to the fact that they have a restriction on steam key pricing blows my mind.

    for example with the UbiSoft case, It’s clear they have never actually opened or used Uplay because if they had they would realize that Uplay does not use Steam keys period at all. They are their own distribution platform that distributes off of uplay servers.

    The entire point of the lawsuits is going one step further, which is that despite steam having a policy that says it’s for keys only, they unilaterally enforce it on all platforms regardless of the usage of the keys.

    Now whether that’s actually true or not is what the lawsuits have to determine. But that is what the claim is. Personally I’m leaning towards it’s true because I’ve seen some screenshots posted about customer service saying that’s how it worked and threatening to delist steam games for cheaper first party distribution pricing elsewhere.

    I’ll be curious where these cases go.

    • 0x0@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      20 days ago

      Spot on, this is literally the whole lawsuit. Quite boring and a very easy fix when decided.

  • mabeledo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    Such a weird stream of comments to be read on Lemmy.

    Regardless of what you folks think about Valve, does anyone believe that a marketplace should have this kind of leverage over their suppliers? For instance, should Amazon be permitted to force manufacturers to set the price of a product outside of their marketplace? Should Apple be allowed to force app developers to price match the Google store?

    • architect@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      21 days ago

      Amazon literally does this if you sell on their platform as the manufacturer or just at all. My source: Hi, that’s me, and I can confirm this is standard practice at Amazon and I’m the manufacturer of my own product.

          • mabeledo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            21 days ago

            Do you really think that Amazon should be allowed to set prices outside their marketplace? That’s wild.

            • 0x0@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              21 days ago

              You are allowed to not market yourself at amazon, i dont see the issue really

              • mabeledo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                21 days ago

                Amazon is one of the largest online retailers in the world. If they force prices on suppliers to get a better deal than anyone else, that’s between extortion and price fixing.

                • 0x0@infosec.pub
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  21 days ago

                  Sounds like not shopping or selling at amazon is the actual solution to the problem. I havent bought a single item of them in my life, so why do you?