I get you are in denial they have a monopoly. For instance Microsoft only has about 65% market share and everyone considers them a monopoly
“A monopoly describes a market dominated by a single seller or producer that controls so much of that market share, anywhere from 50% to 100%, that it faces no meaningful competition.”
At this point you could even argue they have become a natural monopoly as they have not used a lot of anti-competitive practices. The only way to protect consumers is government regulation at this point since no competitor can reign them in.
Okay, So what prevents developers from pulling their games from Steam? Over 100,000 titles available on Steam vs. 4,000+ titles on EGS , which has better revenue sharing (12%). Surely, they dislike this monopolistic platform. So, why haven’t they at least offered their games elsewhere?
You still haven’t answered my question. If a Steam equivalent was released today. Had all the same features of Steam. But had better revenue sharing and even an exclusive feature that takes it over the top. Would that product be able to compete? That’s one of the questions that will be asked in court soon.
Another one could be, more directly related to monopolistic practices, does Steam take measures to prevent someone from downloading another marketplace and using it instead? The only discipline Valve could receive for being a “monopoly” would be is if the government wants to apply a windfall tax on their profits. Which has yet to happen.
Nobody is even trying to compete with Steam, cause no one wants to. So, what do you recommend happen? The entire Steam team gets broken up and has to develop new marketplaces? How does that work with a flat structure company like Valve? How would the employees, who are very happy feel? The consumers?
These are some of the questions one must answer when dealing with monopolies. Monopoly laws are there to protect the consumer. Therefore, the last question I will posit is this: What is Steam doing that is actively harming the industry and consumers?
Dude, I explained they are a monopoly. You have not provided anything other than conjecture that they are not a monopoly.
I suppose I could field your questions, but considering how resistant to basic facts you are I am not sure I could provide satisfactory answers for you.
I will give it a try though. What prevents developers from pulling from steam. The answer is nothing except for a loss in potential revenue since that is where (75%) the majority of PC gaming software is sold. There is also nothing preventing you from shutting off the power to your house. This doesn’t suddenly make your power company not a monopoly.
Whether someone likes or dislikes a monopoly has no bearing on the monopoly. Just because you liked IE in Windows didn’t mean that MS didn’t leverage their monopoly in an attempt to make it the Internet standard.
Also, the antitrust bit. Steam requires you to sell your product for the same price even if a competitor charges less of a cut. You are not allowed to sell it for less to increase the sales on another platform that charges less. This is anti-competitive and a clear sign of a monopoly.
What would it take for that company to compete. They can’t and that is the point. Even after Epic has thrown billions at the issue they have been unable to move the needle. This makes me laugh at your previous question about building your own steam competitor from scratch. Clearly you could do it in your basement with no help when a multi-billion dollar company can’t manage it.
Please don’t talk to me about court when you can’t even agree to a basic fact. While I am not a lawyer I have studied monopoly laws and cases for years. That is why it is crystal clear that Steam is a monopoly.
Your statement about no one competing because they don’t want to is false, but if it were true that would definitely make Steam a natural monopoly which I alluded to earlier.
Does steam prevent you from downloading and using another marketplace. No, but Windows never prevented you from installing another browser either. Clearly you are grasping here and I think studying some monopoly cases could help you.
Keep in mind the US government, in particular, has given up on enforcing monopolies in the digital space as seen by their refusal to hold Google accountable for their many monopolistic practices. So don’t worry, me calling Steam a monopoly or you accepting this reality isn’t going to change shit.
Your questions asking what would happen if Steam was broken up are missing the point. There are numerous policies that could be passed to ensure competition or just regulate the rights of consumers and publishers. I would recommend that Steam’s anti-competitive policies be eliminated.
To answer your final question, because of Steams dominant market presence they keep prices high (despite their great sales) and take a disproportionally unfair cut for the work they do. This actively harms customers through lack of competition and anti-competitive practices.
Let me put it this way. If you poured you life into a indie game project and made a million in sales, do you feel a 300k cut is fair? Clearly you would feel that is way too much and it is for a digital marketplace.
I will give it a try though. What prevent developers from pulling from steam. The answer is nothing except for a loss in potential revenue since that is where (75%) the majority of PC software is sold. There is also nothing preventing you from shutting off the power to your house. This doesn’t suddenly make your power company not a monopoly.
How would there be loss in revenue if it were only available through stores which have better profit sharing? You think the people who want that game would not purchase it through a different store? That’s literally how Steam got started. The reason developers don’t is because they like Steam. I know this intimately.
Whether someone likes or dislikes a monopoly has no bearing on the monopoly. Just because you liked IE in Windows didn’t mean that MS didn’t leverage their monopoly in an attempt to make it the Internet standard.
That’s because Windows was unfairly competing by having Internet Explorer preinstalled. That was what that case was about. I know because one of my family members works in Business Law and has extensive knowledge of monopolies and their standing in court with 20yrs of court experience. Did you know that if the DoJ evaluates a “monopoly” and finds consumers actually just prefer that product and nobody cares to compete, they’ll leave it alone?
Also, the antitrust bit. Steam requires you to sell your product for the same price even if a competitor charges less of a cut. You are not allowed to sell it for less to increase the sales on another platform that charges less. This is anti-competitive and a clear sign of a monopoly.
That is not antitrust as the developer could choose not to sell on Steam and use their own launcher and selling service. It would be antitrust if they applied that to other games. E.g. if EGS sells a game, not owned by Epic, for less than what Steam offer and Steam took actions against games on Steam owned by Epic, that would be antitrust and monopolistic.
What would it take for that company to compete. They can’t and that is the point. Even after Epic has thrown billions at the issue they have been unable to move the needle. This makes me laugh at your previous question about building your own steam competitor from scratch. Clearly you could do it in your basement with no help when a multi-billion dollar company can’t manage it.
Epic has thrown billions at it because they haven’t done shit to improve their storefront or community. They don’t have hardly as many offerings or community support. Funny how Valve is able to manage a larger community just fine with fewer resources.
Please don’t talk to me about court when you can’t even agree to a basic fact. While I am not a lawyer I have studied monopoly laws and cases for years. That is why it is crystal clear that Steam is a monopoly.
Ha! I guess my family member who’s gonna go to court tomorrow, was wrong about everything. Because I’ve been sending him our conversation. It is not as crystal as you believe.
Your statement about no one competing because they don’t want to is false, but if it were true that would definitely make Steam a natural monopoly which I alluded to earlier.
It’s still not a natural monopoly, because of other competitors in the same market space. This definition of monopoly is very difficult to define. Should Valve have to apologize for developers not offering their games on other platforms? Developers can use any storefront they want, but they mostly only use Steam, I wonder why? The option is there, consumers are very well aware of the options, yet they still choose Steam.
Does steam prevent you from downloading and using another marketplace. No, but Windows never prevented you from installing another browser either. Clearly you are grasping here and I think studying some monopoly cases could help you.
No, IE came preinstalled. That’s what that issue was. Stop acting like Windows gained market share fairly, as Steam has.
Keep in mind the US government, in particular, has given up on enforcing monopolies in the digital space as seen by their refusal to hold Google accountable for their many monopolistic practices. So don’t worry, me calling Steam a monopoly or you accepting this reality isn’t going to change shit.
The current climate of the DoJ, as well as, the past three to four decades of the DoJ, is far too intricate and complex to address and relate to Steam. Why you do that? So silly.
You questions asking what would happen if Steam was broken up are missing the point. There are numerous policies that could be passed to ensure competition or just regulate the rights of consumers and publishers. I would recommend that Steam’s anti-competitive policies be eliminated.
So, with your suggestion developers can under bid Steam however much they want? Congratulations, you just caused Steam to give away the game for free. They can do it. They have the market share to sustain the loss. You’ve improved nothing and demonstrated the knowledge you lack in part.
To answer your final question, because of Steams dominant market presence they keep prices high (despite their great sales) and take a disproportionally unfair cut for the work they do. This actively harms customers through lack of competition and anti-competitive practices.
They take 30% which is not unheard of in the mobile world. You can argue on whether a 70% cut for devs is enough, or not. I think it’s fine for the amount of service Valve has provided the community and developers.
Let me put it this way. If you poured you life into a indie game project and made a million in sales, do you feel a 300k cut is fair? Clearly you would feel that is way too much and it is for a digital marketplace.
You absolute donkey. It’s 70% for the developer and 30% for Valve. Not only that, there are different tiers going up to 80/20. You dolt. You fool. It’s finished.
Don’t bother biting if you can’t chew your food. You will probably choke on your own hubris.
If you can’t see not going through the largest retailer as a possible revenue loss I suggest studying business some more and getting back with me.
You keep ignoring Valve’s anti-competitive policy. Let me explain it one more time. You can’t get a better price at another store if the game is listed on Steam. Your conjecture is pointless unless the developer does not list on Steam and misses out on the majority of the market. If business only cared about ethics and not money then perhaps your made-up scenario would make some sense, but it does not.
The fact that you know Steam intimately is kind of bizarre way to say things. I think I get your point, which amounts to bootlicking because Steam is just the gosh durned best thing for developers since IDE. Pardon me while I go throw up.
Your explanation of the antitrust case against MS is pretty poor. While one aspect related to having IE bundled, there are several other issues at hand that you ignore. Hey, I get it. It is complicated and perhaps you should just discuss these with your authoritative source to set yourself straight.
Please don’t tell me how the DOJ operates because it changes with every presidency and as I already pointed out, they don’t give a shit about the digital realm because frankly they don’t even understand it. They pretty much leave all monopolies alone and that is why we’re are in such a shitshow free fall right now. Regulatory capture is real yo!
You don’t get to decide what anti-trust is or isn’t. I am sorry, but you deny even the most basic of facts so I will kindly ignore your presumptuous statement. If you don’t believe me that is fine, but you present no evidence.
We can see Gabe lying through his teeth and surprise surprise, he doesn’t want anyone to touch his golden goose. Why you carry his water is anybody’s guess but I think it is just general bootlicking, as I alluded to multiple times, unless you have something to say about it otherwise. I also noticed you used some of his talking points, sus!
Your appeal to authority is ham fisted and frankly insulting. PM me your “lawyers” contact information and I will discuss this with them directly. Otherwise gfto with your bullshit.
Natural monopoly is not defined purely by lack of competition, although that can a big part of the definition. I never said that Steam is a natural monopoly, but it does bare a lot of striking similarities. Traditionally it would not be considered one and there is little doubt that I am taking liberties with that comparison.
I think you are correct about Valve pursuing legal and/or punitive action in order for the anti-trust to be legit.
We can see they did engage in anti-competitive practices. Seeing several lawsuits along with Gabe’s outspoken denial of being a monopoly kind of adds up you know. Maybe you think these lawsuits are frivolous or that you are smarter than lawyers who practice in the field.
You have failed to convince me Valve is not a monopoly. The only donkey here is a bootlicker who carries water for Gabe. You have been extremely foolish with your questions and have wasted my time. Cheers!
Confidence from the person who couldn’t even remember the proper ratio in which devs get paid. I’m impressed. I’m usually much more reserved when I’ve made such a ridiculous mistake in a debate.
So, in your scenario, developers should be allowed to open their game store, sell a steam key, at a discount lower than Steam to drive business? Of course that’s not allowed and nowhere near antitrust. Try harder.
I said I know, intimately, that a lot of developers like Steam and are happy with them. The fact that your reading comprehension got I know Steam intimately, is indicative of poor language on my part. For that, I apologize.
Of course, the Microsoft suit was significantly more complex. You trivialized it first. So, sorry I did too.
Okay, I won’t tell you how the DoJ operates. Weird because there’s a lot to it, that can’t be simplified the way you have tried, dismissively. But that’s what you’ve been doing this whole time. Go figure.
No, I don’t get to decide what antitrust is. Neither do you. Some judge will. Your article is hilarious. What prevents a software developer from putting out the game themselves? Just letting people buy it directly from the developer. Why is that not possible? Oh, right. Market share. I don’t want to lose out on all those people right? What if I have an exclusivity period? Sell the game myself for a year and then publish to Steam. Does Steam prevent that? Those are the type of questions that get asked in court. But you can’t think that outside the box, apparently.
Appeal to authority, fair. I got someone else for it, and I’ll take my lumps for it. I would never PM you their information and that is incredibly insulting to the profession for you to even ask. Lawyers do not say things like this with their name attached to it. The only reason he was even okay with it, was this is anonymous. He would never converse with a stranger about a topic that is highly related to his job and possible cases. Weird you don’t know that quirk about lawyers.
Fair enough, the natural monopoly was a misreading on my part. Apologies, as it’s late.
Wait, so I’m right or wrong about antitrust? I’m confused.
Oh, lovely. Another article, this time from Eurogamer. I love reading other peoples opinion. I don’t read cases, or laws, so I can’t make up my own mind. Do you realize the whole fucking point yet? THEY’RE SELLING STEAM KEYS YOU DOLT! Ya know, the things that work through Steam? That’s where price parity comes in. You can’t sell a Steam offering at a lower price than Steam. If it was only for their UPlay store, or whatever the fuck it’s called now, that’s fine. But that’s not what happened. They sold Steam keys at a lower price. That’s not competitive, that’s deliberately undercutting a high value competitor to try to gain a market share, while utilizing the resources of your competitor. But, wait, that’s starting to sound a little like antitrust.
Are you a paralegal? Cause you sound like one. You say I have wasted your time. But fool that you are, you can’t see that you chose your time to be “wasted”. I’ve enjoyed our conversation. I love a good debate and I like how we went back and forth. Folks don’t usually commit, but you, I like you.
Saying
you think…you are smarter than lawyers practicing in the field
is patronizing. For the record, the lawyers I know and have worked with, I do not think I’m smarter than them when it comes to law. You call me a bootlicker, but you’re the one ready to defend a lawsuit that will ultimately go nowhere from a company that just dealt with their workers going on strike. How’s that outsole taste?
Why would you feel a cut is way too much!? Because it is their cut… Oh yeah that is called reading comprehension something that you apparently lack, maybe it is a ESL thing. If so don’t worry English is hard otherwise nice way to burn yourself I suppose. If that is the case I do appreciate self-deprivation humor.
If you read the article that referenced the lawsuit you would see this is not about steam keys. Why you would think this shows a clear lack of understanding of what we are talking about.
I have restated several times what the anti competitive practice Steam has engaged in. I won’t say it again because it is getting annoying at this point.
When I said intimately, I was referencing to your deep understanding of development hence the IDE reference. I guess you didn’t get it because you are not a developer/programmer yourself. Or maybe it is the ESL thing.
I would agree that plenty of people are satisfied or even happy with Steam. Of course there are a bunch of people who don’t like Steam as well. I don’t like Steam, but I have used it so I am sure Gabe can wipe away his tears with the money I have given him.
Why would you feel a cut is way too much!? Because it is their cut… Oh yeah that is called reading comprehension something that you apparently lack, maybe it is a ESL thing. If so don’t worry English is hard otherwise nice way to burn yourself I suppose. If that is the case I do appreciate self-deprivation humor.
What are you talking about? Are you okay? I was just saying I must’ve been confusing, so I tried to add clarity.
If you read the article that referenced the lawsuit you would see this is not about steam keys. Why you would think this shows a clear lack of understanding of what we are talking about.
Umm, real quick; quote the part of the article where it says Ubisoft only sold the game as a part of Ubisoft Connect (looked it up, it’s called that now). Because if they sold steam keys too, which they most likely did, as it’s an option as a part of their native storefront page for a game, that’s a violation of the agreement with Valve.
I have restated several times what the anti competitive practice Steam has engaged in. I won’t say it again because it is getting annoying at this point.
Okay, but like, I keep proving you wrong. And you keep saying wrong things. And when you do respond, you have half-assed arguments. Come on, man. Quote the case at me, come on. Read the full NY case and actually argue with me.
When I said intimately, I was referencing to your deep understanding of development hence the IDE reference. I guess you didn’t get it because you are not a developer/programmer yourself. Or maybe it is the ESL thing.
Back to the ESL thing. Which is hilarious with your grammar. Regardless, your sentence structure, in the quote you’re referencing of yourself, is confusing at best. You quoted me as saying, “intimately know Steam”, that’s not what I said. So, I clarified and the rest of your message was an angry mess. So, sorry about not getting your little dig, or whatever that was. But to clarify, I studied Electrical Engineering and I have extensive experience in software development. But also, like, who doesn’t know what an IDE is? My wife did and she’s an accountant. Which…tracks…she’s a nerd too.
I would agree that plenty of people are satisfied or even happy with Steam. Of course there are a bunch of people who don’t like Steam as well. I don’t like Steam, but I have used it so I am sure Gabe can wipe away his tears with the money I have given him.
You didn’t mention anything about the Ubisoft strike. I was bummed. Also, ARE you a paralegal? This is getting really nostalgic for me. Lastly, let’s keep it going. I’m going to bed, but I hope you get James’ case out and come back with some good arguments. You are incredibly smart, and if you read through her case, you could have way better arguments. Instead, you opted for, arguably, sensational journalism that is no more than just gossip. No meat, no substance. See you in the morning!
Just fine here, I can’t say the same for you though. Yes, you aren’t just confusing. You are straight up mental. That is okay though.
Look, you brought up steam keys AGAIN. What a strange strawman you have constructed. I have never mentioned steam keys, nor has any article I referenced. That hasn’t stopped you though.
If you think you have proved me wrong then I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn. What is that? The bridge guy already sold you several bridges in Brooklyn. That makes a lot of sense.
Not sure what case your talking about, you did not link it or reference it. Honestly you are kind of spooky at this point, but not in a good way. So far your legal mind can be summarized by you not even understanding the one thing Steam has done that I have mentioned several times. I will hard pass on debating you.
To summarize Steam is a monopoly by definition. Thanks for coming full circle with me. It has been a wild ride because you keep jerking the wheel and sending us off road. What are a few bumps though when you eventually get to your destination. Cheers!
I get you are in denial they have a monopoly. For instance Microsoft only has about 65% market share and everyone considers them a monopoly
“A monopoly describes a market dominated by a single seller or producer that controls so much of that market share, anywhere from 50% to 100%, that it faces no meaningful competition.”
At this point you could even argue they have become a natural monopoly as they have not used a lot of anti-competitive practices. The only way to protect consumers is government regulation at this point since no competitor can reign them in.
Okay, So what prevents developers from pulling their games from Steam? Over 100,000 titles available on Steam vs. 4,000+ titles on EGS , which has better revenue sharing (12%). Surely, they dislike this monopolistic platform. So, why haven’t they at least offered their games elsewhere?
You still haven’t answered my question. If a Steam equivalent was released today. Had all the same features of Steam. But had better revenue sharing and even an exclusive feature that takes it over the top. Would that product be able to compete? That’s one of the questions that will be asked in court soon.
Another one could be, more directly related to monopolistic practices, does Steam take measures to prevent someone from downloading another marketplace and using it instead? The only discipline Valve could receive for being a “monopoly” would be is if the government wants to apply a windfall tax on their profits. Which has yet to happen.
Nobody is even trying to compete with Steam, cause no one wants to. So, what do you recommend happen? The entire Steam team gets broken up and has to develop new marketplaces? How does that work with a flat structure company like Valve? How would the employees, who are very happy feel? The consumers?
These are some of the questions one must answer when dealing with monopolies. Monopoly laws are there to protect the consumer. Therefore, the last question I will posit is this: What is Steam doing that is actively harming the industry and consumers?
Dude, I explained they are a monopoly. You have not provided anything other than conjecture that they are not a monopoly.
I suppose I could field your questions, but considering how resistant to basic facts you are I am not sure I could provide satisfactory answers for you.
I will give it a try though. What prevents developers from pulling from steam. The answer is nothing except for a loss in potential revenue since that is where (75%) the majority of PC gaming software is sold. There is also nothing preventing you from shutting off the power to your house. This doesn’t suddenly make your power company not a monopoly.
Whether someone likes or dislikes a monopoly has no bearing on the monopoly. Just because you liked IE in Windows didn’t mean that MS didn’t leverage their monopoly in an attempt to make it the Internet standard.
Also, the antitrust bit. Steam requires you to sell your product for the same price even if a competitor charges less of a cut. You are not allowed to sell it for less to increase the sales on another platform that charges less. This is anti-competitive and a clear sign of a monopoly.
What would it take for that company to compete. They can’t and that is the point. Even after Epic has thrown billions at the issue they have been unable to move the needle. This makes me laugh at your previous question about building your own steam competitor from scratch. Clearly you could do it in your basement with no help when a multi-billion dollar company can’t manage it.
Please don’t talk to me about court when you can’t even agree to a basic fact. While I am not a lawyer I have studied monopoly laws and cases for years. That is why it is crystal clear that Steam is a monopoly.
Your statement about no one competing because they don’t want to is false, but if it were true that would definitely make Steam a natural monopoly which I alluded to earlier.
Does steam prevent you from downloading and using another marketplace. No, but Windows never prevented you from installing another browser either. Clearly you are grasping here and I think studying some monopoly cases could help you.
Keep in mind the US government, in particular, has given up on enforcing monopolies in the digital space as seen by their refusal to hold Google accountable for their many monopolistic practices. So don’t worry, me calling Steam a monopoly or you accepting this reality isn’t going to change shit.
Your questions asking what would happen if Steam was broken up are missing the point. There are numerous policies that could be passed to ensure competition or just regulate the rights of consumers and publishers. I would recommend that Steam’s anti-competitive policies be eliminated.
To answer your final question, because of Steams dominant market presence they keep prices high (despite their great sales) and take a disproportionally unfair cut for the work they do. This actively harms customers through lack of competition and anti-competitive practices.
Let me put it this way. If you poured you life into a indie game project and made a million in sales, do you feel a 300k cut is fair? Clearly you would feel that is way too much and it is for a digital marketplace.
Fuck it, I’ll bite.
How would there be loss in revenue if it were only available through stores which have better profit sharing? You think the people who want that game would not purchase it through a different store? That’s literally how Steam got started. The reason developers don’t is because they like Steam. I know this intimately.
That’s because Windows was unfairly competing by having Internet Explorer preinstalled. That was what that case was about. I know because one of my family members works in Business Law and has extensive knowledge of monopolies and their standing in court with 20yrs of court experience. Did you know that if the DoJ evaluates a “monopoly” and finds consumers actually just prefer that product and nobody cares to compete, they’ll leave it alone?
That is not antitrust as the developer could choose not to sell on Steam and use their own launcher and selling service. It would be antitrust if they applied that to other games. E.g. if EGS sells a game, not owned by Epic, for less than what Steam offer and Steam took actions against games on Steam owned by Epic, that would be antitrust and monopolistic.
Epic has thrown billions at it because they haven’t done shit to improve their storefront or community. They don’t have hardly as many offerings or community support. Funny how Valve is able to manage a larger community just fine with fewer resources.
Ha! I guess my family member who’s gonna go to court tomorrow, was wrong about everything. Because I’ve been sending him our conversation. It is not as crystal as you believe.
It’s still not a natural monopoly, because of other competitors in the same market space. This definition of monopoly is very difficult to define. Should Valve have to apologize for developers not offering their games on other platforms? Developers can use any storefront they want, but they mostly only use Steam, I wonder why? The option is there, consumers are very well aware of the options, yet they still choose Steam.
No, IE came preinstalled. That’s what that issue was. Stop acting like Windows gained market share fairly, as Steam has.
The current climate of the DoJ, as well as, the past three to four decades of the DoJ, is far too intricate and complex to address and relate to Steam. Why you do that? So silly.
So, with your suggestion developers can under bid Steam however much they want? Congratulations, you just caused Steam to give away the game for free. They can do it. They have the market share to sustain the loss. You’ve improved nothing and demonstrated the knowledge you lack in part.
They take 30% which is not unheard of in the mobile world. You can argue on whether a 70% cut for devs is enough, or not. I think it’s fine for the amount of service Valve has provided the community and developers.
You absolute donkey. It’s 70% for the developer and 30% for Valve. Not only that, there are different tiers going up to 80/20. You dolt. You fool. It’s finished.
Don’t bother biting if you can’t chew your food. You will probably choke on your own hubris.
If you can’t see not going through the largest retailer as a possible revenue loss I suggest studying business some more and getting back with me.
You keep ignoring Valve’s anti-competitive policy. Let me explain it one more time. You can’t get a better price at another store if the game is listed on Steam. Your conjecture is pointless unless the developer does not list on Steam and misses out on the majority of the market. If business only cared about ethics and not money then perhaps your made-up scenario would make some sense, but it does not.
The fact that you know Steam intimately is kind of bizarre way to say things. I think I get your point, which amounts to bootlicking because Steam is just the gosh durned best thing for developers since IDE. Pardon me while I go throw up.
Your explanation of the antitrust case against MS is pretty poor. While one aspect related to having IE bundled, there are several other issues at hand that you ignore. Hey, I get it. It is complicated and perhaps you should just discuss these with your authoritative source to set yourself straight.
Please don’t tell me how the DOJ operates because it changes with every presidency and as I already pointed out, they don’t give a shit about the digital realm because frankly they don’t even understand it. They pretty much leave all monopolies alone and that is why we’re are in such a shitshow free fall right now. Regulatory capture is real yo!
You don’t get to decide what anti-trust is or isn’t. I am sorry, but you deny even the most basic of facts so I will kindly ignore your presumptuous statement. If you don’t believe me that is fine, but you present no evidence.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2026-06-01/valve-s-antitrust-reckoning-over-steam-has-echoes-of-apple-google-app-store-sui
We can see Gabe lying through his teeth and surprise surprise, he doesn’t want anyone to touch his golden goose. Why you carry his water is anybody’s guess but I think it is just general bootlicking, as I alluded to multiple times, unless you have something to say about it otherwise. I also noticed you used some of his talking points, sus!
Your appeal to authority is ham fisted and frankly insulting. PM me your “lawyers” contact information and I will discuss this with them directly. Otherwise gfto with your bullshit.
Natural monopoly is not defined purely by lack of competition, although that can a big part of the definition. I never said that Steam is a natural monopoly, but it does bare a lot of striking similarities. Traditionally it would not be considered one and there is little doubt that I am taking liberties with that comparison.
I think you are correct about Valve pursuing legal and/or punitive action in order for the anti-trust to be legit.
https://www.eurogamer.net/valve-antitrust-lawsuits-ubisoft-warner-bros-report
We can see they did engage in anti-competitive practices. Seeing several lawsuits along with Gabe’s outspoken denial of being a monopoly kind of adds up you know. Maybe you think these lawsuits are frivolous or that you are smarter than lawyers who practice in the field.
You have failed to convince me Valve is not a monopoly. The only donkey here is a bootlicker who carries water for Gabe. You have been extremely foolish with your questions and have wasted my time. Cheers!
Confidence from the person who couldn’t even remember the proper ratio in which devs get paid. I’m impressed. I’m usually much more reserved when I’ve made such a ridiculous mistake in a debate.
So, in your scenario, developers should be allowed to open their game store, sell a steam key, at a discount lower than Steam to drive business? Of course that’s not allowed and nowhere near antitrust. Try harder.
I said I know, intimately, that a lot of developers like Steam and are happy with them. The fact that your reading comprehension got I know Steam intimately, is indicative of poor language on my part. For that, I apologize.
Of course, the Microsoft suit was significantly more complex. You trivialized it first. So, sorry I did too.
Okay, I won’t tell you how the DoJ operates. Weird because there’s a lot to it, that can’t be simplified the way you have tried, dismissively. But that’s what you’ve been doing this whole time. Go figure.
No, I don’t get to decide what antitrust is. Neither do you. Some judge will. Your article is hilarious. What prevents a software developer from putting out the game themselves? Just letting people buy it directly from the developer. Why is that not possible? Oh, right. Market share. I don’t want to lose out on all those people right? What if I have an exclusivity period? Sell the game myself for a year and then publish to Steam. Does Steam prevent that? Those are the type of questions that get asked in court. But you can’t think that outside the box, apparently.
Appeal to authority, fair. I got someone else for it, and I’ll take my lumps for it. I would never PM you their information and that is incredibly insulting to the profession for you to even ask. Lawyers do not say things like this with their name attached to it. The only reason he was even okay with it, was this is anonymous. He would never converse with a stranger about a topic that is highly related to his job and possible cases. Weird you don’t know that quirk about lawyers.
Fair enough, the natural monopoly was a misreading on my part. Apologies, as it’s late.
Wait, so I’m right or wrong about antitrust? I’m confused.
Oh, lovely. Another article, this time from Eurogamer. I love reading other peoples opinion. I don’t read cases, or laws, so I can’t make up my own mind. Do you realize the whole fucking point yet? THEY’RE SELLING STEAM KEYS YOU DOLT! Ya know, the things that work through Steam? That’s where price parity comes in. You can’t sell a Steam offering at a lower price than Steam. If it was only for their UPlay store, or whatever the fuck it’s called now, that’s fine. But that’s not what happened. They sold Steam keys at a lower price. That’s not competitive, that’s deliberately undercutting a high value competitor to try to gain a market share, while utilizing the resources of your competitor. But, wait, that’s starting to sound a little like antitrust.
Are you a paralegal? Cause you sound like one. You say I have wasted your time. But fool that you are, you can’t see that you chose your time to be “wasted”. I’ve enjoyed our conversation. I love a good debate and I like how we went back and forth. Folks don’t usually commit, but you, I like you.
Saying
is patronizing. For the record, the lawyers I know and have worked with, I do not think I’m smarter than them when it comes to law. You call me a bootlicker, but you’re the one ready to defend a lawsuit that will ultimately go nowhere from a company that just dealt with their workers going on strike. How’s that outsole taste?
Why would you feel a cut is way too much!? Because it is their cut… Oh yeah that is called reading comprehension something that you apparently lack, maybe it is a ESL thing. If so don’t worry English is hard otherwise nice way to burn yourself I suppose. If that is the case I do appreciate self-deprivation humor.
If you read the article that referenced the lawsuit you would see this is not about steam keys. Why you would think this shows a clear lack of understanding of what we are talking about.
I have restated several times what the anti competitive practice Steam has engaged in. I won’t say it again because it is getting annoying at this point.
When I said intimately, I was referencing to your deep understanding of development hence the IDE reference. I guess you didn’t get it because you are not a developer/programmer yourself. Or maybe it is the ESL thing.
I would agree that plenty of people are satisfied or even happy with Steam. Of course there are a bunch of people who don’t like Steam as well. I don’t like Steam, but I have used it so I am sure Gabe can wipe away his tears with the money I have given him.
What are you talking about? Are you okay? I was just saying I must’ve been confusing, so I tried to add clarity.
Umm, real quick; quote the part of the article where it says Ubisoft only sold the game as a part of Ubisoft Connect (looked it up, it’s called that now). Because if they sold steam keys too, which they most likely did, as it’s an option as a part of their native storefront page for a game, that’s a violation of the agreement with Valve.
Okay, but like, I keep proving you wrong. And you keep saying wrong things. And when you do respond, you have half-assed arguments. Come on, man. Quote the case at me, come on. Read the full NY case and actually argue with me.
Back to the ESL thing. Which is hilarious with your grammar. Regardless, your sentence structure, in the quote you’re referencing of yourself, is confusing at best. You quoted me as saying, “intimately know Steam”, that’s not what I said. So, I clarified and the rest of your message was an angry mess. So, sorry about not getting your little dig, or whatever that was. But to clarify, I studied Electrical Engineering and I have extensive experience in software development. But also, like, who doesn’t know what an IDE is? My wife did and she’s an accountant. Which…tracks…she’s a nerd too.
You didn’t mention anything about the Ubisoft strike. I was bummed. Also, ARE you a paralegal? This is getting really nostalgic for me. Lastly, let’s keep it going. I’m going to bed, but I hope you get James’ case out and come back with some good arguments. You are incredibly smart, and if you read through her case, you could have way better arguments. Instead, you opted for, arguably, sensational journalism that is no more than just gossip. No meat, no substance. See you in the morning!
Just fine here, I can’t say the same for you though. Yes, you aren’t just confusing. You are straight up mental. That is okay though.
Look, you brought up steam keys AGAIN. What a strange strawman you have constructed. I have never mentioned steam keys, nor has any article I referenced. That hasn’t stopped you though.
If you think you have proved me wrong then I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn. What is that? The bridge guy already sold you several bridges in Brooklyn. That makes a lot of sense.
Not sure what case your talking about, you did not link it or reference it. Honestly you are kind of spooky at this point, but not in a good way. So far your legal mind can be summarized by you not even understanding the one thing Steam has done that I have mentioned several times. I will hard pass on debating you.
To summarize Steam is a monopoly by definition. Thanks for coming full circle with me. It has been a wild ride because you keep jerking the wheel and sending us off road. What are a few bumps though when you eventually get to your destination. Cheers!