Comment on Court rules Gabe Newell must appear in person to testify in Steam anti-trust lawsuit
Zozano@aussie.zone 11 months ago
Wow. I used to follow the development of Overgrowth, and now they’re suing Steam? What dickheads…
Comment on Court rules Gabe Newell must appear in person to testify in Steam anti-trust lawsuit
Zozano@aussie.zone 11 months ago
Wow. I used to follow the development of Overgrowth, and now they’re suing Steam? What dickheads…
Spedwell@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Wolfire originally operated Humble Bundle, and they have a very legitimate case. Steam uses anticompetitive pricing policies that makes it difficult for other marketplaces to compete.
Zozano@aussie.zone 11 months ago
If anticompetitive means “it’s your choice to enter into an agreement in which we host your game for 30%, and its distribute it on our platform, with unlimited patch updates, and unlimited user downloads, and a fuckton of features like community forums, guides, groups etc., also if your game is good we will promote it free of charge”
Then I suppose companies like Epic who choose to run at a loss, as opposed to providing a good service, have no chance, and Steam is anticompetitive.
The counter narrative exists though, Steam is just a good service, and if you want to compete with them, you need to provide a good service, like GOG.
spark947@lemm.ee 11 months ago
That us all fine. David is alleging that Valve is trying to restrict other platforms wolfire can sell their cases on. Valve needs to compete, not threaten to stop distributing a game if they don’t like how it is selling elsewhere.
Zozano@aussie.zone 11 months ago
I’ve never heard of Valve trying to prevent a developer from distributing their game on other PC store platforms, it’s quite an assertion.
Spedwell@lemmy.world 11 months ago
The Platform Most Favored Nation policy employed by Steam is the one at issue in this case. And yes, it is anticompetitive. It abuses userbase size to prevent alternative marketplaces from providing fewer services for smaller cuts
Zozano@aussie.zone 11 months ago
Again, it just sounds like Valve is offering a good service and other companies don’t want to compete. If it’s Valves fault for providing a good service and lots of users choose to use their platform instead of others, I fail to see what they could do to rectify that.
Kolanaki@yiffit.net 11 months ago
I love this new narrative that undercutting the competition is anti-competitive and not just competing.
Mango@lemmy.world 11 months ago
It’s not Steam’s price to control. It’s the developers’.
Kolanaki@yiffit.net 11 months ago
Not talking about the game prices, which are already set by the developers.
MrSqueezles@lemm.ee 11 months ago
I can’t believe that a company that puts out a device running Linux that gives you access to the OS in a few clicks and provides guides for how to install competing distribution platforms is more anticompetitive than Sony, Apple, Nintendo, Microsoft, Google. Valve and Steam aren’t perfect. It’s difficult to accept that having a store and charging for it is worse than, for example, Sony buying studios and paying millions of dollars for some games to be exclusive on their platform.
woelkchen@lemmy.world 11 months ago
You know that court cases are not competitions about who’s the most illegal, right?
Zozano@aussie.zone 11 months ago
They should be.
jimbo@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Spedwell@lemmy.world 11 months ago
It’s a certain policy publisher’s have to agree to in order to list on Steam, called a Platform Most Favored Nations (“PMFN”) clause.
Similar thing is used by Amazon, for equally monopolistic reasons.