Until any competing store releases a Linux client, I can't really argue against Steam. They are a gatekeeper and almost a monopoly, but they're also the most benevolent and pro-consumer gatekeeper that we have in the PC gaming distribution space. As long as all the competition continue to be Windows-only and, in some cases, actively work against Linux users, I don't want Valve's digital fiefdom to fall.
I'm not sure "gatekeepr" is the right term when all you do is simply being better for your customers than anyone else. Like, Ubisoft, EA, Epic, they all are garbage companies. GOG is the only store I'd mildly consider (ignoring tiny indie ones like Itch here), but they also have 0 interest in Linux support, which is where they lose me. Without Valve, Linux gaming would not be where it is today, and as a Linux user that is already like 85% of my decision making being done in favor of Valve - with the remaining 15% not all strictly being in another camp either. If someone wants to challenge that monopoly, they'd have to do something better than forcing exclusives or luring with "free" games, because that's some shady shit that makes me just want to stay away even more.
Valve isn't perfect though. Especially when it comes to owning games. I couldn't use Asprite on my laptop on my schools wifi because it couldn't verify that I own a 1gb program to draw pixels. Disabling wifi didn't help either. Still made up it's mind on not letting me make sprites for my school assignment till I connected it to my home wifi.
The best part? There's literally a free version that's not on steam that I purposely didn't download because I wanted to support the dev!
How are they a gatekeeper? Near monopoly sure. But they don't force companies to only publish on Steam. They don't have restrictive rules. I'm not sure what gate they are keeping.
If you reeeeally want to stretch, they do have rules about pricing things lower on other platforms. Like, you can have a sale on your website that makes it cheaper than Steam, but can't have the base price cheaper there than on Steam. That's about it.
Valve is interesting. Enshitification is the standard for something like social media. Corporations are the real customer and users do creative labor to keep it valuable.
Valve flips the script. Developers struggle because they are only expected to labor. Studios don't get the full value of their labor. They might be a huge corporation but they are a worker to valve
When a monopoly is faced with a smaller, more efficient competitor, they cut prices to keep people from switching, or buy the new competitor, make themselves more efficient, and increase profits.
When Steam was faced with smaller competition that charged lower prices, they did - nothing. They're not the leader because of a trick, or clever marketing, but because they give both publishers and gamers a huge stack of things they want.
Sure, Steam seems fairly okay, especially their Linux support, but I still mostly prefer GOG, wherever possible, because it offers more control to their customer over the product they bought.
It helps that Valve is not publicly traded, but I fear that if the current owner (Gabe Newell) dies, there might be a shift in business practices.
Enshittification can still happen in privately traded/owned companies, it generally happens slower and in case there are other reason for the owner(s) to maximize short term profits (e.g. business built on VC money), it can happen faster.
Gog support sucks tbh. Steam refunds everything no questions asked. Bought elden ring on gog, wrong region, couldn't activate it back home. They told me to suck it. Fuck gog
This is just silly, is this dev just a salty b?
I may not like some parts of steam (like its ui) but I'd say gaben showed us how a big company should always be run.
They don't buy out anyone (hello epic) they made many proconsuner moves and they are funding alternatives like proton without any guarantee of return.
Your shit doesn't sell without steam not because its YouTube and holding everything and everyone hostage, but because everything else is just that much worse.
If you wanna shoot yourself in the foot go ahead but don't complain nobody is is helping with it.
Digital fiefdoms like who, you ask, as if you don't already know the answer? "Valve is the most egregious example," says Gavrilović. He hopes for a future where devs, not digital feudal lords, have more power, "but I lack the imagination to envision the replacement of Valve with a community owned alternative. That 'winter castle' will not fall as easily, but we should at least start openly discussing alternatives."
Make an opensource game store that's owned by a non-profit and paid for by the game studios that want to sell on it, giving them a say on how things should run.
Are they gatekeepers though? It's not like they own Windows or Linux and stop you from using any other store. Just having the biggest audience doesn't make them gatekeepers to the market.
I never see people talking about what valve should change other than lowering the 30% cut, but arbitrarily forcing that would set a bad precedent.
Instead of virtue signalling here's reasonable things Valve could do:
allow developers to chose what features of steam they use for each game, allowing them to lower the cut by individually opting out of forums, workshop, cloud saves, achievements, inventory items etc
offer a purchase = one time download with no drm (still legally one copy) for the closest thing to "owning" a digital game
allow someone to inherit a steam account
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure proton is free to use and you can install stores and games not from steam on a Steam Deck, so again I really don't know what they're gatekeeping.
For specifics, I'd like to see consistent, transparent censorship standards, and Steam Workshop files made publicly available.
Steam's censorship issues are only going to be more of a problem as the Japanese PC market continues its explosive growth. The platform's inconsistency is surely frustrating Japanese developers, and the lack of transparency is giving fuel to a (not unearned) narrative that its content reviewers are arbitrary and xenophobic.
The Workshop matter is far smaller in comparison, but Steam is gatekeeping crowdsourced work product.
I find it really interesting how Valve hired Yanis Varoufakis to analyze the markets that were spontaneously emerging from games on their platform, and how he went on to write a book about the feudalistic nature of internet platforms that is being referred to here. I wonder what Gaben thinks of that and what Yanis thinks about Steam.
Then there is the aspect of Valve being a flat company, no hierarchy, and how Gaben has talked about avoiding rent-seeking that other companies were taking part in, how he wants to make good products for gamers, doesn't look at sales numbers.
Valve has some really great philosophy running behind it, and then there is the fiefdom of Steam extracting rents from publishers.
I feel like some journalist got high as fuck with a dev, wrote out a fucking fever dream of... drivel and then the editors were like fuck it, Tim Sweeney pays us to post some hit pieces against Valve and this is all we got this month so we'll just run with this.
I don't know if a spiritual successor will be as good. I mean, it wasn't exactly the gameplay that made it so compelling; it was the writing. None of the supposed successors being made rn have the writers from the original game.
It also is a shame it wouldn't be set within Elysium; a very well built world that is as exciting as it is mysterious.
I agree and hope that what comes after it is even better at supporting gaming on GNU/Linux and contributing to various libre and opensource projects like KDE and Proton and Mesa and such.
Steam obsessed people always cry about the lack of "features" in other stores, as if a game store + launcher needs features other than being able to buy and launch games.
Hell, I don't even want to launch games. Just let me buy and download an exe (oh yeah, GoG does that, which is why I use GoG whenever I can...)
Sucks for devs that people just won't buy their game if it isn't on Steam though :/ Idk how to change peoples' behaviour, unless Steam does something egregiously bad to users
Steam was around for long enough, with it's array of features, that I have grown accustomed to having them. Even when it first launched, Steam was more than just a store and library. It had Friends and, while not yet integrated into the app itself, they also provided the User Forums for every single individual game.
Even as just a store and ignoring all the other periphery features, it has more features for actually finding things than any other digital market for buying games. Not to mention sales, user reviews, and more.
Steam is widely regarded as the best option because they do things in the interest of their customers, instead of shareholders with a stake in the company.