this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2023
203 points (89.8% liked)

Games

32356 readers
1927 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 41 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BURN@lemmy.world 84 points 1 year ago (3 children)

There’s no chance GabeN sells Steam. It prints money and only looks to increase their profitability over the coming years.

Microsoft can’t buy them anyways at this point I think. The regulatory bodies didn’t like ActiBlizzard, and this would be similar scale, if not larger

[–] CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml 38 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I do worry about what might happen when he gets too old/decides to step down though.

If Microsoft did somehow end up buying them I might have to just nope out of gaming altogether. Or just take to the high seas I guess.

[–] BURN@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I have to imagine he has something planned (inb4 GabeN AI Overlord) for after he’s gone.

He’s a bit crazy about prepping for disaster iirc. He lives in New Zealand now and has since the Covid outbreak. I’d be surprised if there wasn’t a very long document that lays out a lot of rules for if he’s gone and Steam is to continue

[–] Sabata11792@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do we get a free copy of the new Gaben AI wiafu?

[–] RoyaltyInTraining@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In the immortal words of Cave Johnson:

Brain mapping, artificial inteligence - we should've been working on it thirty years ago

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

Holy shit, what if Cave was based on Gabe

[–] Zetta@mander.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

Pretty sure he's back living in the US, so he can actually work at the valve offices

[–] redcalcium@lemmy.institute 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

At that point I'll probably too old and have lost interest in gaming anyway, so I'll just let the next generation of gamers figure it out themselves. Kinda like boomers leaving us to deal with high property price problem because it's no longer their concern anymore.

[–] master5o1@lemmy.nz 3 points 1 year ago

Nah it's still their concern too. They're mostly just on the beneficial side of it.

[–] HKayn@dormi.zone -2 points 1 year ago (6 children)

You do know that stores other than Steam exist, right?

And no, I'm not talking about the EGS.

[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nothing else comes close to steam in terms of market share.

[–] HKayn@dormi.zone 0 points 1 year ago

Isn't that a bad thing?

[–] BURN@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

GOG is missing a good portion of major games. Outside of that most of the options are much worse

[–] CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Also they seem really averse to Linux for some reason.

[–] brawleryukon@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Probably the miniscule market share coupled with the increased vocality of its userbase.

Supporting Linux will not bring them a significant uptick in revenue but will increase their customer support load.

[–] brawleryukon@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

EGS is really the only thing remotely close to what Steam does, though.

GOG will always be an afterthought as long as they have their DRM-free policy in place. They're super cool, but they're a niche and will never grow beyond that without losing what makes them cool.

Origin (or whatever EA's calling their store now) gave up pursuing third-party sales years ago. They still do it, but they clearly have no interest in actually making a go of becoming an actual competitor to Steam.

The Windows Store is terrible for a number of different reasons, even if it's better than Microsoft's previous attempts at getting into this space (coughGWFLcough). EGS is more likely to overtake Steam than Windows Store is to even rival EGS.

Uplay (or, again, whatever Ubisoft is calling their store these days) is like Origin - I don't even know for sure if Ubi is doing third-party sales, but if so, it's very much an afterthought for them.

And then everyone else just sells Steam keys. They're not in the same market as the others, so don't really fit into this conversation. If you're 100% reliant on the store you're "competing" with, you're not competing with them.

[–] HKayn@dormi.zone 1 points 1 year ago

A lot of games on Steam are DRM-free, but not (yet) on GOG. GOG isn't an afterthought just because of their DRM-free policy, it's also because they're so small.

[–] paholg@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

What else lets me easily play games on Linux, on my couch, without touching a keyboard or mouse?

[–] CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah but just the amount of games I own on Steam already (not to mention the Steam Deck), if all that ended up getting enshittified by Microsoft it'd be like having to start over from scratch pretty much.

[–] HKayn@dormi.zone 1 points 1 year ago

Which is why I buy as many games as I can from stores like GOG, that actually let me keep them no matter what.

[–] Neato@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago

Amazon kinda exists?

[–] Neato@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The regulatory bodies didn’t like ActiBlizzard,

But they did allow it, unfortunately. And MS could simply argue that it already has dominance in the PC space as 96% of PC gamers are Windows users. So owning Steam is just buying 1 out of many stores (here they tout Epic, Amazon, etc).
I mean it's a bad argument but MS made a lot of bad arguments to get their way and they seemingly worked.

[–] lorty@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Activision-Blizzard-King isn't a dominant company in any segment. You can't say the same for steam. Regulators would have a much easier time blocking such an acquisition.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Plus, at least from my perspective, Activision-Blizzard was already bad enough that if MS made it worse, it wouldn't affect me because they were already bad enough that I'd swore off their games. MS owning them was an improvement or at worst more of the same.

That's absolutely not the case for Valve. They are one of the few large companies that I respect plus they are playing a big role in breaking the windows stranglehold over OSes when you like to play games.

The level of popular opposition to MS acquiring Valve would be on a whole other level than the opposition to the blizzard acquisition. It might even rival the opposition to Nvidia acquiring ARM.

[–] Neato@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

CoD is dominant fps. It's why they made the concession about it

[–] echo64@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The regulatory bodies hand waved actiblizzard through. Let's not pretend anything else happened there. Microsoft can do whatever they want and no one is gonna stop them. Same as every other big company.

The only thing stopping Ms. is that valve is a privately owned company. But everyone has a price.

[–] lorty@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The same regulatory bodies that sued to block the deal without any convincing case "handwaved" it?

[–] echo64@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Yes, that is just how the American system works. The actual body here is the doj. The ftc tried to sue and was slapped back immediately. This was the ftc trying to show claws and the actual ruling body saying no, you have no power and Microsoft can do what they want.

It was a huge loss for the ftc that has been trying, and failing to fight big tech

[–] dingleberry@discuss.tchncs.de 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Chill. Valve is not a public company, so no risk of an acquisition.

[–] Cheesus@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Private companies get acquired all the time and hostile takeovers haven't really been a thing since the 1980s

[–] thethirdobject@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago

there was an interesting take about that on the wan show (not ms but steam). the emphasis was on steam's value, which is unknown but actually very high