They were competing?
PC Gaming
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
I once playtested their MMO, I believe it was called "New World". It sucked balls. Didn't realize they were also trying to get going with game distribution.
I saw this posted a couple days ago which pretty succinctly summarizes the current state of the market.
Commented this a year ago, and its just as relevant today.
While this is funny, it is not true: Valve has contributed tremendously to the Linux environment (Mesa above all, and Proton) and based their own console on top of it, making it possible to play almost every game you own, both from their store and from elsewhere.
People at Valve have been cooking every day. Never sitting idle.
This without considering the countless features Steam already sports: friends, achievements, cloud saves, a curated front page.
Yeah really the strategy is chasing resilience and value rather than profit. And the strategy is called reasonable long term planning. Yeah they're throwing millions into Linux now, because the alternative is being at the mercy of Microsoft who is a competitor with a known monopolistic streak.
Adding features is choosing to stay ahead of any competition now or in the future and to maintain the skills of your devs.
In a parallel universe where epic came out with the Deck instead of Valve, things are probably quite different. But no, Valve announces steam deck and the first thing epic does is drop their already small support for Linux.
Yes, but that's beside the point. Most people use Steam not because of Linux support or because of BPM.
Valve hasn't revolutionized their business once Ubisoft, EA, Amazon, CDPR and Epic started to compete with them. They just kept doing what they were doing and eventually saw the bodies passing in the river
Its called "not having shareholders to maximise profits for". Everything turns to shit once they go public.
In the great us downfall of 2026, valve might just be the only big company left standing.
Then there's me on Gog buying DRM free games that I can download and keep at my leisure.
You're not the only one.
Whilst I do have a small collection of games in Steam, my collection of games in GoG is about 30x larger, because I prefer buying from GoG when I have the chance.
As the old saying goes "Possession is 9/10 of the Law" - when the installer of a game is in your hands (kept in storage media under your control) such as with games in physical media or offline installers downloaded from GoG, even if they wanted to take it away from you, they would have to take you to Court for it, whilst if the installer of a game is in somebody else's hands (in Steam's servers or in GoG's servers if you only ever use their launcher and don't download offline installers) they can take it way from you (even what happenned was that they just mistakenly locked you out of your account) and now it's your problem and you have to throw yourself at their mercy to get what's supposedly your stuff back and if that fails take them to Court (which for most people costs more than the games are worth).
It's hilarious that people think "Steam is great" because they don't often lock people out of their game collections or remove games from people's collections and when they do and people throw themselves at their mercy to get it reversed they're generally understanding, when Steam themselves were the ones who created a system where they have all the power and you have none, it's just that so far they've not purposefully abused it and are generally nice when their own mistakes cause problems which one wouldn't have in a different system - they're comparativelly better than most other stores because those other stores are so shit (except GoG, IMHO), but they're still worse than good old physical media when it comes to consumer rights.
Absolutelly, use Steam when it's worth it for you, just do it with your eyes wide open, aware that you're chosing to be at their mercy because the system they designed for digital game sales makes sure all customers are at their mercy, so they're definitelly not your buddies, just (so far) nowhere as abusive as most faceless companies out there.
PS: Back to the post of the OP, amongst all the digital stores with "it's not really yours" systems, with all the power over gamers than entails, Steam are by far the ones that least abuse it (I think they never did on purpose, though some people have been locked out of their accounts and couldn't recover access to them) so comparativelly are way above the rest, especially Amazon as demonstrated by their practices when it comes to digital books.
Valve wins by doing nothing... it's a tale as old as time.
Steam's market share is a huge factor in why their competition never succeeds, but it's hardly the only reason. Steam is a whole platform, not just a launcher or storefront. And they're also cognizant that the consumers are not just a revenue source to be milked, but actually long-term customers whose loyalty is important.
It really shouldn't be a surprise that when you enter an established market, you're not going to accomplish shit by providing a lesser service while simultaneously treating the consumer worse.
MBAs walk into this arena thinking they've got their quarterly agile reports synergized outside the box to the max.
Somehow none of them have learned the concept of long term customers
Gaben and Steam: does nothing, wins
It always baffles me when I see an established company fail to understand long-term customers and still expect any kind of meaningful growth.
It's because the stock market doesn't care about anything except the next quarter. Valve can think long term because they're privately owned.
The loyalty thing is what kept me.
I was wary of another gaming platform, there were so many and they all seemed the same, I never liked one over the other - they were just means to an end.
A few years back I really wanted to play RDR2 with my friends. It was expensive and I never pre-order, but as soon as it came out on (a small) sale I bought it for all 4 of us.
It was a lot of money for me, but I really wanted the story to play with everyone.
All was well at first, until we had each completed the tutorial and met up in open world. That's when we learned that the game was based on GTA and the devs do not care about hackers.
We had one fucking with us for over an hour, teleporting us into the air and dropping us, setting us randomly on fire, spawning space ships and so on.
I begged in voice for them to just leave us be, to no avail.
We are all older, we rarely have time to play together. I was crushed.
I was an hour over the return time on Steam, one of the other friends took a bit longer exploring and was even more than that.
I contacted steam anyway and tried to get a refund, and they granted it for all of us.
Later I learned this was a thing in RDR2 and there was now the ability to create private lobbies, but I just can't make myself try it and give Rockstar any money.
Steam however, won a lifelong fan. They didn't have to honour the refund, and they don't have to provide personal support that offers more than just the canned responses, but they do.
I hope Gabe lives forever, or finds another like him to carry the torch after he's gone.
Yeah my loyalty to them comes from the fact that they treat me like they value my business. Every company says they do, but they help when help is needed and get out of the way when it isn't. The only other businesses I feel that way towards are small restaurants and bars. It's not an unconditional loyalty but so long as they treat me right they'll keep my business.
Tim Sweeney shit on Linux gamers enough that I refused to ever give Epic a penny
They came out of the gate with anti consumer bullshit in the form of exclusivity deals. Trust was shattered before they even got going.
Gaben should sue Epic Games for monopolistic business practices - Epic keep making bad decisions that leave gamers with no good choice but Steam
Huh, did they make an alternative I don't know about?
The biggest advantage Steam has over other platforms:
- They're not publicly-traded, meaning they are inclined to look out for long-term success vs. short term profits.
- Steam is already on their systems, and may have been for 20+ years. Nobody wants a dozen fucking game launchers and Steam already has virtually every game in existence available there. Not to mention the "community" features, friends lists, etc. Every other platform is simply too late.
- They have 20+ years' experience learning what gamers want and implementing it.
Amazon could probably compete with them if they really wanted to, but that would involve a large, long-term, consumer-centric investment, which probably isn't a good use of their money.
#3 is the key I think. Valve's business model is figuring out what their customers want and then providing it to them. Amazon's model is to capture enough market share so they can start the enshitification process.
Valve can make some good calls, but do you guys -really- think enshittification is not coming for it ever? It's just a matter of time.
steam pros: a store that always has a sale or big holiday sale right around the corner, a social network, a library for game info and game modding, and a trophy case etc.
what was amazon offering? full priced games, no sales that beat steams (a free game offer now and then only if you give them $140 a year and forget about it), and shitty cloud streaming of few games? so they tried nothing actually meaningful, were all out of ideas, but shocked they lost
oh and also on a platform notorious for making e-books unable to work on pcs, forcing their proprietary hardware for a PDF. and now they're actually going in and changing/censoring whats written in books without authors consent.