At the same time, people drastically overestimate how big of a deal it would be…
Someone could always just stop buying games on there.
And if it did “go away” and people lost their games, they think how much they’ve spent on games over decades, and not how much it would cost to replace what they still play.
Out of all the real life horrible shit going on, very few people have the longevity of Valve as a priority.
It’s not 100% safe but at this point it’s more likely to be here in 20 years than the country it’s based in.
But besides all that, I don’t think you know what the word “monopoly” means if you think steam is one.
littleomid@feddit.org 19 hours ago
Imagine thinking valve isn’t an absolute monopoly in PC video game industry
Nelots@piefed.zip 1 hour ago
Okay, question: What do you want Valve to do about their “monopoly”? You can’t blame them for providing the most useful service while their main competition all collectively shoots themselves in the mouth. They aren’t out here abusing their “monopoly” to increase prices or drive away competition. In fact, they’re often cheaper due to better and more frequent sales. So what do they do about it?
That aside, they’re literally not a monopoly. By any actual definition on the word, they don’t meet the criteria to be a monopoly. There are other companies like Epic or GOG that provide the same games for the same prices that are easily available at all times online. Sure, Steam has more in the form of Early Access games and such, but again, it’s not Steam’s fault that their competition doesn’t provide a decent platform for devs of early access titles.
forestbeasts@pawb.social 11 hours ago
I mean, it’s not. GOG is pretty decent too, at the very least.
– Frost