• @Grimy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -24
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Microsoft’s refund policy is top notch too and I see proton as leveraging open source to avoid dev costs.

    More importantly, everything steam does could be done with 5% instead of 30% and Gaben would still be filthy rich.

    Steam is as greedy as the other platforms and it’s us, the consumers, and the indie scene that suffer for it. Are you okay with your favorite indie studio closing and your favorite game not getting a sequel because Gaben wants 8000 million a year instead of 1000 million a year?

    There is most likely collusion and soft monopolies, these platforms are clearly not competing in good faith.

      • @Grimy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -17
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        You would have the same service if you paid 5% or 60%, steam is ridiculously profitable.

        I’m a consumer and I care about the industry, I won’t shut up just because you made one shovelware game and tell me to. This is literally against your own self interests, are you sure you aren’t the one parroting stuff valves marketing team drilled into you?

        Explain to me how regulations and limiting the rate to 5% wouldn’t be a clear cut benefit to everyone involved including you. Do you think they go bankrupt? 336 employees and 8000 million. And no, their hardware cost for hosting games does not come close to costing 8000 million.

          • @Grimy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -8
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            regulating this to something insane like 5% would definitely make us lose out on several of these features, not to speak about future features.

            They would still have more than a billion in revenue. Steams is running on insane profits and it would still be running in insane profits at 5%. Look through the document posted and do some napkin math. Even at 0.5%, Gaben would still be able to buy a yatch, just maybe not the six like he currently owns. That isn’t an exaggeration, he owns six yatchs and spends between 70 million and 100 million a year maintaining them. That is who you are defending.

    • KubeRoot
      link
      fedilink
      English
      311 months ago

      Hold up, how is proton leveraging open source to avoid dev costs? Are you referring to steam using and contributing to existing projects instead of reinventing the wheel? Or to game developers that use it as a reason for not making native Linux versions, which wouldn’t be Valve’s workforce in the first place?

      I can see how the things Valve does contribute to their business model - steam input giving their controller compatibility with games, proton letting them launch a Linux-based handheld, and the new recording feature probably there for the steam deck… But the thing is, Valve is still providing all those things to customers for no extra charge, and they keep adding new stuff.

      • @Grimy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        111 months ago

        My point is that it isn’t charity. It’s just a smart business decision that reduces their cost greatly and let’s the community work for them for free. With all the licenses involved, I don’t even think they can even add a charge.

        If they could have built the same product but closed source, they would have.

        I love FOSS and in the end this benefits he community, I just don’t think that was the driving factor behind the decision and it doesn’t excuse them bleeding dry developers and colluding with other store fronts.