359
this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2026
359 points (97.6% liked)
Today I Learned
30869 readers
925 users here now
What did you learn today? Share it with us!
We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If that's a nit, and not a main point, then why is that first line even there? Why mention profits again in the last line if the point is just "We should regulate them more!" When did directly disagreeing with a statement become a "nit" to launch a completely different main point?
And what do you mean "pretend it isn't their main product"? I'm literally telling you that Steam does more than you're saying it does, which is the whole basis of your disagreement with the OP above. I am sticking to the product in question. The only way to think I'm avoiding talking about Steam is if you really don't know what Steam does beyond offering a place to download games, and aren't aware of any of its features.
Whatever they are doing isn't worth close to what they are charging if gaben can spend 1 000 000 000 dollars on boats.
But yes, they mostly host downloadable content that they then charge 30% commission fee for whenever someone buys it. That's the lion share of their business. What are you even getting at?
I mention profits because it is about profits. The profit they are stealing from devs by colluding with other stores and offering a simple service at a massive cost. The profits they make that led to gaben being a billionaire. The disgusting profits clearly show we need regulations. Billionaires shouldn't exist even if they have a marketing team telling you this one is different.
Defend Bezos and Musk next please. It's the same arguments. Amazon isn't only a drop shipping company either, you know.
What I am getting at is that you are using another billionaire's disingenuous talking points uncritically while thinking you're being anti-billionaire. You heard something that sounded good but didn't verify or research any of it.
This whole idea of "Steam takes 30%, that's terrible!" is from Tim Sweeney's anti-Steam PR campaign. The 30% cut was always the standard retail cut, and has been part of every retail store until EGS made a big thing about their lower amount and their disingenuous PR campaign that suggested that only Steam was taking an exorbitant cut. The fact is that all stores took that same standard retail cut. Steam makes a bajillion dollars more than everyone else just from the sheer volume of sales they do. The idea that they make all this money because they take a bigger retail cut is a lie.
And, in case this hasn't been made clear enough to you yet: you don't seem to know what Steam is if you think it's only a service to download games and doesn't offer anything else to users. It has a huge amount of features for users, games, and communities beyond just that, far more than another other retailer or store is offering. It is completely disingenuous to pretend like Steam does none of these to force the argument that they are just taking money and offering the most basic of a singular service. So if you want to argue that Steam specifically doesn't deserve the 30% cut that every retailer takes, then you'll need to demonstrate how Steam offers less than every other retailer. If this requires ignoring all the features and advancements Valve and Steam have done, then that really shows the quality of that statement, doesn't it?
Taking a step back to assess situations fairly and accurately isn't a defense of anything. There's so much to criticize Valve and Steam for if you took the time to be informed, most notably with the lootboxes and gambling aspects (which is also where much of its profits come from). So if you're really as anti-billionaire as you claim to be, are you going to go and examine these assumptions you held and figure out why you got misled so deeply by another billionaire, and make sure it doesn't happen again?
You aren't actually reading what I'm writing lol.
It's the standard because of the collusion not because of the cost. All game stores make bajillions of dollars, not only steam. The only difference is how the profit is shared (stock holders vs a few individuals). Please don't start talking about the "standard retail cut" as well, as if physical products can be treated the same as digital ones. Steam isn't running close to it's cost, even if you pile on everything they do.
I know what steam is, but it's not enough to make me lick a billionaires boot. Steam being slightly better than other stores does not justify their collusion, soft monopoly and anti consumer businesses (like threatening to delist games if the dev puts it for cheaper somewhere else). Please name the feature you think is worth giving a billion dollars to one guy? Is it having a friends list?
You are nitpicking one thing and ignoring the rest.
The other game stores aren't the bar, it's all rotten. And it will stay rotten if everyone keeps thinking the best looking rotting fruit deserves to be defended. Even if you lick Gabens sweaty feet, he still won't let you own your games.
We need regulations not pathetic billionaire worship.
So yes, steam is better than Xbox but it isn't good enough. Polished feces are still feces. Quality and price of games is directly affected by these vampiric mega corps taking 1/3 of the profits to buy boats. Grow up and stop being part of the problem.
Unless you're going to show that this price fixing was somehow agreed to and accepted by regulations decades ago with brick and mortar stores, and then there was an agreement from all the digital marketplaces to join onboard, you can't assume it must be a grand conspiratorial cabal except, somehow, for Tim Sweeney and Epic Games, who are standing against literally everyone else.
Nothing you have said about Steam seems to indicate you're aware of anything Steam does beyond distribute games. Even here, you're not demonstrating any knowledge of its other features. It says quite a lot you think there must be one singular feature that makes all the difference, it's like you have no frame of reference for how many other features Steam has compared to other stores and how they could all be of immense value together. You did, however, reference yet another piece of disingenuity: the bullshit MFN clause complaint. Yet another standard retail practice and agreement that someone is disingenuously claiming is unique to Steam. I'd chalk this up to another EGS thing but there's no proof they're connected to or, you know, colluding with this Dutch group behind the odd class action suit.
So much of this is just ignoring what the standards are and lying by saying they're unique to Steam and nobody else. Standards are standards. There are other agreements in place to keep digital pricing the same as physical pricing too, we should be talking about standards more, not less. There's no good reason to reject acknowledging and considering standards and how little they have been changed. This is Tim Sweeney's whole push about lowering the fee to 12% too.
Pointing out the basis for your arguments are wrong is not nitpicking. The premises are the foundation of the argument and directly lead to the point. You don't have a point if everything that leads to it is wrong. It's also not defending anyone to say that you, and specifically you, are working on false information. If anything, it's closer to being a attack on you than a defense of anyone else.
Speaking of not reading what is being written, you somehow missed I told you what you legitimately could grieve Valve, Steam, and Newell over and you somehow missed it entirely in order to keep up this lie that Valve or Steam are being defended by pointing out you've been played to believe something that isn't actually true because you have little to no experience with the services in question.
Speaking of billionaire worship, I notice a distinct lack of you questioning why billionaire Tim Sweeney would be manipulating public thought and argumentation against his competition in the exact same way that billionaires have been doing for the last decade, and how you fell for it. If you're really anti-billionaire, you should be mad that happened and actively untangling all of the bullshit away and moving on to more legitimate grievances and criticisms instead of doubling down on them by hoping yelling "collusion!" enough will make it real.
Jfc, tell me the feature you think is worth a billion dollars worth of boats. I'm saying I know the features but they 1. Are a drop in the bucket in terms of profit and cost compared to actually hosting the game files, and 2. It isn't enough to justify any of it.
Now who's nitpicking? My point was never that there was one killer feature that's worth $100b/yr. Again, it's weird you think there is one, a weirdness that can only be chalked up to a total ignorance of what Steam actually offers. The whole point is that the entire meme argument of "Steam doesn't deserve the 30% cut!" is based on flawed premises based on the PR campaign of a competing billionaire trying to take much of that capital for himself, there is not a single way to make a reasonable point in that direction unless the argument is that nobody deserves a 30% cut but, given the features provided compared to every other retailer out there, Steam would deserve the highest cut (even if that's something like 15% instead of 30%).
Accusing collusion, pretending Steam doesn't have any extra features compared to other retailers or digital platforms, ignoring market and industry standards, and accusing any pushback as being a defense are not reasonable lines of argument.
No one deserves a 30% cut for hosting virtual game files, even with the extra features included.
Steam, Epic, Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo are literally sucking out profit for something that has virtually no expense compared to that profit.
That profit could be going to the actual people making the product and all it needs is a minimum of regulation. We could be getting more and better games right now but instead Gaben and company get big boats.
All of them have fluff like friends lists, multiplayer frameworks and what not. Sure steam is better than the others but they are still part of the same club playing the same game. Even worse, with their small staff, steam probably has the highest cost to revenue ratio.
I'm trying to explain to you that the features don't matter and certainly aren't currently enough to justify robbing devs of literal billions.