274
submitted 17 hours ago by Sunshine@piefed.ca to c/pcgaming@lemmy.ca
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 1 points 7 minutes ago

I'm a bit surprised that someone hadn't already posted this

[-] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 2 points 21 minutes ago

Around the 2010's, both MS and Google were seen as "noble monopolies". Even if Steam is the better video game distributors, always stand on more than one leg when it comes to buying games.

[-] rainbowbunny@slrpnk.net 12 points 1 hour ago

"Buy" games on Steam? Sure wish they let you own them.

[-] Rooster326@programming.dev 6 points 1 hour ago

Obligatory GOG shill?

[-] HubertManne@piefed.social 10 points 2 hours ago

I get it but its not like they are buying up competition or doing bad practices to win unless doing what your customers want is being unfare. In this case I blame the competition.

[-] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 20 points 4 hours ago

Billionaires shouldn't exist.

[-] wpb@lemmy.world 16 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

An earned monopoly is still a monopoly. Anyone who feels that the power that Steam wields in the gaming market is not an issue, I urge you to think or learn about why monopolies are harmful -- not in relation to steam. Think about a manufacturer of gizmos completely cornering the gizmo market and what that would mean for the people wanting to buy gizmos, as time passes. Don't think in terms of the laws or definitions of some specific country, just think about the effect it would have on society. Worst case scenario you lose some time and gain some insight on monopolies

[-] Vex_Detrause@lemmy.ca 3 points 33 minutes ago

This gizmo maker is making the best gizmo that everyone loves, best delivery and best support for people that buys the gizmo. Why would you fault that company for delivering what majority of people wanted. They didn’t corner the gizmo market by buying out smaller gizmo makers, they didn’t block smaller gizmo maker by undercutting them, they didn’t even advertise to cut into other’s profit share. They win the capitalist market by making the best gizmo plus the best experience of buying and owning the gizmo.

[-] the_armchair_potato@lemmy.world 1 points 16 minutes ago

Somebody needs to make a better gizmo than I guess 😉. Americans seem to love capitalism....so than, capitalize.

[-] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 hours ago

Think about a manufacturer of gizmos completely cornering the gizmo market

If your monopoly in the Gizmo market is because you've actively fought other companies, lobbied governments, filed frivilous patent suits, etc... in order to KEEP people from competing with you, than you're a piece of shit.

If your monopoly in the Gizmo market is because despite there being no hinderance to them doing so, no competitor has been able to match your quality, than kudos.

In your example, you're effectively saying that governments should force people to use shittier services just to avoid a monopoly, even if that monopoly is earned.

If people want to buy Gizmos, and that first company is losing their trust, another company will come in and compete successfully because that first company isn't preventing them from doing so. If that second company does it better, great.

An earned monopoly and a forced monopoly are not nearly the same thing, precisely because an earned monopoly is on the whim of the consumers. If your product turns to shit, a replacement will make itself known. Whereas a forced monopoly is on the whim of the government and lobbyists.

[-] auzy1@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Oh no. They've made gaming accessible on Linux, games still run you purchased 20 years ago on the latest hardware and they're not a bloated pile of garbage

If anything, they've actually made things better for everyone

In contrast, if you purchased wii u games, you need to re buy for switch. Ps5, wii u and Xbox all basically are limited to what publishers can sell

I'd even argue they're not a real monopoly because they Don't control the hardware, and there are other platforms

[-] BCsven@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 hours ago

But other stores exist, they just don't offer what steam does (which includes Play on Linux).
It like if you bought an amazing vacuum that does everything (hardwood, carpet, car attachments, air filtration), and the competitor offers a vacuum that only does carpeted floors...its not a true monopoly, its the competitor not understanding what sells

[-] tidderuuf@lemmy.world 22 points 4 hours ago

Of course it's bad. For decades Valve has shown others why gamers value their game store yet most game stores still do stupid shit that drives gamers away.

The only one making an honest attempt is GOG. And their only issue is low purchasing volume which means they are slow to develop and improve their platform.

[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 2 points 1 hour ago

And a launcher that makes epic look good.

[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 5 points 4 hours ago

Of course he's not going to come out and say it, why even ask him?

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2026
274 points (97.2% liked)

PC Gaming

14767 readers
795 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. 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.)

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS