From the opinion piece:

Last year, I pointed out how many big publishers came crawlin’ back to Steam after trying their own things: EA, Activision, Microsoft. This year, for the first time ever, two Blizzard games released on Steam: Overwatch and Diablo 4.

  • Something Burger 🍔@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s not Steam’s fault if their competitors can’t make a good product. Steam is still the only one with Linux support.

    • The Hobbyist@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      9 months ago

      There is nothing exclusive to steam with respect to Linux support. All of the things required for games to run on Linux which valve support are fully open source and even existed before valve got involved. They just threw money at the efforts and turbo charged it (which is great).

      • woelkchen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        45
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        All of the things required for games to run on Linux which valve support are fully open source and even existed before valve got involved.

        Yes, which makes it even more puzzling that the competitors don’t even try to capitalize on the success of Steam Deck and publish their own store on Flathub, utilizing the very same FOSS technologies to make the games run.

        • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Maybe they’re making more money behind the scenes from another corporation that perhaps pays for them not to do so? Exclusivity deals, etc. etc.?

        • rambaroo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Because there’s no money in Linux. Valve can afford to target Linux for long term growth because they aren’t a public company that has to answer to investors every quarter. People mistake that for valve being pro-consumer, which they’re not.

          • woelkchen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            9 months ago

            Because there’s no money in Linux.

            You should have a chat with the CEOs of Red Hat, Canonical, etc. about that. They surely will value your opinion.

            People mistake that for valve being pro-consumer, which they’re not.

            As a consumer, I don’t care about their motivation, I care about the results. Steam Deck is more comfortable to use than Windows handhelds.

            • Cybersteel@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Companies focusing on long term growth is good for the consumers compared to the ones that only focuses on short term profits. Though why valve is able to do that and other companies like ea or abk can’t is beyond me.

    • Coasting0942@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Next CEO will literally just kill the program and pocket the money. Saying they need to focus on their core windows users, times are hard, “the economy”

    • rambaroo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Lol it is literally steam’s fault and they intended to be this way from the very beginning. They intentionally cornered the market with HL2. It’s incredible how people act like this just accidentally happened because valve made a supposedly good product.

      • Something Burger 🍔@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Epic is worth 5 times as much as Valve and EGS is still fucking garbage years after it launched. If anything, Valve is the underdog here, yet Steam is objectively better than every other store. It’s not their fault if competing products are trash. Valve is not responsible for UbiSoft being incapable of making software that works as advertised, of for Epic refusing to support Linux.

        • rambaroo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          You can’t solve this problem with money. People don’t want multiple game launchers. It’s like asking why Apple hasn’t cornered the desktop market when they’re one of the largest companies in the world.

          Valve 100% knew what they were doing with HL2.

          • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            You are sure an old head, you saw Half-Life 2 bound to Steam once and never forgave it. People don’t care that much about Half-Life 2 today, it’s not that which is keeping them there. Meanwhile today Epic not only makes their in-house games exclusive but games from other publishers as well.

            The gaming market is much more fickle than general computing, one generation Sony might be on top, and the next one is Microsoft or Nintendo.

            Sure people don’t want multiple game launchers, but a launcher that has their favorite game and does all that they need would be enough to get people to switch over. Epic got Fortnite and loads of players because of it. If their launcher did all that players wanted it to, maybe more people would make it their main platform. But Epic doesn’t care to add features to it. If I want to read guides, or listen to game soundtracks, or mod games, I can do that without leaving Steam. But other than exclusivity, you know, the thing that you denounce Valve for having done, there is nothing that Epic does better than Steam or any other store on the market.

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      32
      ·
      9 months ago

      “This product is worthless because it doesn’t cater to… Let me check my notes… Under 2% of the market and even less if we don’t count the Steam Deck!”

      Ok buddy

      • cottonmon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I really don’t understand this argument. Aren’t you basically pointing out that Steam is better because they cater to a demographic that most companies won’t consider because of the small market size?

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          16
          ·
          9 months ago

          No, I’m pointing out that it’s perfectly normal that other companies don’t see the point of spending money on it. Steam has 70% of the PC market which is 96% of the market and you think it’s a good idea to put energy into trying to capture some shares of less than 2% of the market where they have basically a 100% hold.

          Don’t start a business.

          • cottonmon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            I understand that it’s normal, but the argument still doesn’t make sense for the purposes of this discussion. For people who do use Linux, it is worthless since they can’t use it. I also can’t blame Linux users for not liking a company that has been hostile to them (i.e. removing Linux support from a game that had it.) You’re just reinforcing that Steam is a better option for them.

            • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              9 months ago

              The problem is that the complaints aren’t “It might be a good product, I can’t try it because they don’t support my OS of choice and that’s understandable considering the small user base” which is perfectly reasonable, the complaints are “Epic sucks because they don’t support Linux and [insert a bunch of stuff that hasn’t been true for years or that also applies to Valve as a company]” which isn’t reasonable.

              • cottonmon@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                It’s not just that though. A lot of people have already pointed out that Epic appears to be actively hostile towards Linux by removing compatibility for games that had it before. People have also pointed out that turning on Linux compatibility for EAC is fairly trivial, but they refuse to do it. For some games, Linux users have to go through extra loops just to make it work. So when it looks like a company is treating a certain demographic as something that’s worth less than shit for no apparent reason, I’m not surprised that they’ll have a negative attitude towards that company.

                And say what you want about Valve, but they have pushed Linux compatibility and it’s not surprising why Linux users have a more positive view of them over Epic. As I’ve already said, your argument reinforces this point.

          • Confused_Emus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            You have a comforting and appealing way of getting your point across that totally leaves the listener/reader readily open to considering your opinion. Keep doing that.

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Yes, but its only use (in the vast majority of cases) is playing games so it’s not comparable to Windows PCs (a versatile tool) which are 96% of the market and are comparable to Linux PCs. The people who buy a Steam Deck intentionally buy it to play PC games with a portable device and couldn’t care less what OS is on it, the people who run a Linux PC intentionally use Linux.

          Although now that I say that, I wonder how many Deck owners are just Linux users who bought it out of OS loyalty and wouldn’t have shown any interest in the equivalent product (ROG Ally, Legion GO)… When wouldn’t make them much better than the Apple fanatics if we think about it…

          • freebee@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I very specifically bought a steam deck because it can double as a Linux desktop. I’m sure I’m not the only one.

      • Vilian@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        that the difference, instead of getting their ass fucked for what ever stupid decision microsoft do, they created their own market, that btw already run faster than the microsoft’s one while windows is getting worse day by day, linux is getting better, an they are doing it in the most pro-user way

        Under 2% of the market

        more than macOS lol

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          “Already runs faster than the Microsoft one”

          Yeah so that article you’re referencing doesn’t have any credibility when you actually understand how sampling works.

          One computer setup, ignoring the games that don’t work at all, Windows offering marginally lower performance at peak but much higher fps stability… Let’s present it as a major win for Linux!

          Do you know what my stats teacher would have told me if I had presented a study based on a sample of one? They would have told me “See you in this same class next year, you clearly didn’t understand anything I taught you so we’ll try again.”

      • Katana314@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Caution, though, this same principle applies to the disabled, and soldiers; both groups gaming companies have made many direct attempts to support even if it’s just for a positive public image.