I agree. It’d obviously be the best experience for the customer if they could choose whichever store/launcher they want to buy on and not have to worry about having to pay more if they don’t shop around. Like the tea with price printed on the can so it’s consistent.
Comment on Steam is basically a PC gaming monopoly, so why isn’t anyone mad?
Jason@feddit.uk 3 weeks agoI don’t understand. If the price is $7 elsewhere, why try to release on Steam for twice that price?
Why did the dev have to increase the price elsewhere to “match the price”, instead of matching the price to $7 on Steam?
Why would any store stock your product for the twice the price that it can be bought elsewhere? There is no obligation for them to stock a certain product (at any price).
I can’t dictate what other stores price it at, but I can certainly refuse to sell it in mine if it is not profitable for me. How is that anticompetitve?
Arcka@midwest.social 2 weeks ago
Rose@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
I’m glad we at least have moved on from people outright denying Valve does this to defending Valve doing this.
You’d have to ask the dev, but obviously Valve takes 30%, while the dev would get 100% on its own store. If there’s a publisher involved, and publisher contracts often cover specific platforms, the dev would get much less than 70% on Steam.
Comparing Steam to traditional stores is incorrect. Even Valve’s own argument in the same Wolfire case was that monopoly power requires a market share of 75%, which Steam exceeds.
Jason@feddit.uk 3 weeks ago
So the dev wants all the benefits of selling on the Steam store while at the same time earning profits that they would if they sold it independently?
Am I reading that correctly?
Rose@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
As I said, we don’t know the terms of their publishing contract, if any, so that would be a baseless assumption to make. I could also flip your argument and say they might not even want to sell on Steam, but feel forced to because of its monopoly power. It’s one of the points of the class action lawsuit.