this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2024
810 points (99.2% liked)

Games

32165 readers
1318 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
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 213 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Also, take note how they actually tell you, clearly and concisely, what has changed. Most ToS are intentionally made difficult to read to, you know, discourage people from reading them.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 29 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It made me smile when I saw it this morning.

[–] Adalast@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Same. I initially had the sinking dread then I saw that they actually fixed the arbitration clause and I became quite elated.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AlligatorBlizzard@sh.itjust.works 169 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

I was kinda worried when I saw the subject line of the email.

Steam is actually pretty decent, by company standards.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 80 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Yeah, but Gabe is down to 25% ownership.

He could be pushed out at anytime. It's this weird situation where if a serious challenger to Steam really takes off, the 75% may demand Steam gets shittier to make more money.

But Gabe won't last forever anyways, who knows what will happen without him. Which means people do want some kind of challenger to prevent a monopoly, but that just makes the other scenario more likely

Steam is already a huge outlier

[–] Roflmasterbigpimp@lemmy.world 33 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 56 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Not sure, apparently the 25% figure is really new, Wikipedia is sourcing something from 2017 that says he has 50+.

This is the most up to date I can find that attributes a source

https://www.guru3d.com/story/microsoft-reportedly-readies-billion-bid-to-acquire-valve-steam/

Insights from Dior, a prominent figure in the Counter-Strike community, reveal that Gabe Newell owns less than 25% of Valve. This suggests that a significant portion of Newell's wealth is tied to his equity in the company. The decision to sell Valve wouldn’t rest solely with Newell; numerous employees who likely hold stock options could also have a say through a voting process if an offer were made.

So it sounds like a lot was given to employees from the beginning, which track with Gabe.

Then he may have cashed out a couple times, but I doubt that when he could just do the billionaire thing where he borrows against his stock counting on the value increasing enough to pay off the last with a new?

But then again Gabe is different and might not do that out of principle.

It's not publicly traded, so I guess we don't really know unless Valve discloses who owns what. Which I just realized is pretty concerning on its own.

[–] eerongal@ttrpg.network 67 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

AFAIK, most of valve's stock is held by employees, not private investors. It's usually a pretty hard sell of "make the company you work at shittier to make more money", especially since most of the employees probably know gabe personally (valve has less than 400 employees) and likely approve of his leadership.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 36 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

It’s usually a pretty hard sell of “make the company you work at shittier to make more money”, especially since most of the employees probably know gabe personally (valve has less than 400 employees) and likely approve of his leadership.

And most of the ones with the high percent have been there since the beginning, probably close to Gabe's age, looking towards retirement. They make good money, but retirement is expensive.

I mean. That link from this year said Microsoft was thinking 16 billion. 1% of that is 160 million.

Or they may die and their kids see dollar signs when a vote comes up

Steam is great now, it's not debatable. But its naive to expect it indefinitely. 10 years, 20 years from now? It wouldn't be surprising if Valve was a lot shittier than it is today

It won't last forever

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 weeks ago

I would expect that Gabe is trying to hedge his bets and make the company more of a co-op, where several key figures in the company as well as himself, own the majority, so that there's accountability in what everyone decides.

That way if someone's kid ends up inheriting stock in valve, there's a way to block them out of major decisions if there's a need to.

If that's indeed what's happening, then it's a very long-term play by Gabe. He's looking so fast ahead, so that long after he's departed the company, the values that make valve great (and successful) will endure.

[–] gregor@gregtech.eu 23 points 2 weeks ago

Not just decent, it's one of the best companies to exist

[–] Goronmon@lemmy.world 22 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Steam is actually pretty decent, by company standards.

They aren't doing this because they are decent. It's because they were getting reamed on fees through people choosing the arbitration. I believe it was a law firm basically encouraging people to request arbitration because they would get paid every time a claim was submitted, regardless of the outcome.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/legalindustry/column-mass-arbitration-target-valve-accuses-law-firm-litigation-funder-2023-12-08/

[–] GrundlButter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 weeks ago

I kind of did the opposite. I assumed the change would be negligible or in the customer's benefit based on Valve's track record. I hope this never changes.

[–] apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world 99 points 2 weeks ago (12 children)

I appreciate this. That said, I was playing a game on my Steamdeck last night when this popped up over the game, while the game was running. Subsequently I died in the game. Kinda shit.

[–] Xanis@lemmy.world 29 points 2 weeks ago

That is shit, but also just a little funny.

Then again I love Dark Souls so this may just be the ptsd talking.

[–] skulblaka@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 weeks ago

I got mine smack in the middle of a boss fight in Remnant 2 lol, but my build is stupidly tanky enough that I was able alt-tab close it fast enough to not even die. Felt a little proud of that.

[–] slaacaa@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago

Time to sue!

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Same, during a boss fight in Elden Ring. I died.

[–] Trail@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You'd have died either way most likely. Git gud.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TrousersMcPants@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

I had it pop up while I was in the middle of a raid boss in WoW, lol

load more comments (7 replies)

Is that what that was? I got a grey box with no text in it that popped up over Satisfactory and my mouse control went from the POV to moving a cursor. I was building and it was a brief interruption. I got the actual text via email.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] penquin@lemm.ee 50 points 2 weeks ago

Wow. Say what you want about them, but that is some good shit right there. I've been getting emails for months from some random fucks telling me about arbitration agreements, and steam releases this. One more reason to love the company.

[–] obinice@lemmy.world 40 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Those bastar.... Wait what?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] lowleveldata@programming.dev 27 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

IANAL, what does this mean?

[–] kamenlady@lemmy.world 90 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

It means you love anal.

Sorry, it's Friday and i am silly.

A binding Arbitration would involve the submission of a dispute to a neutral party who hears the case and makes a decision.

Instead of solving the dispute in court before a judge and/or jury.

Filling fees for an arbitrator may be higher than filing a case in court.

Pre-printed consumer contacts with banks, credit card companies, automobile and home dealers usually use this.

Take it with a grain of salt , because also IANAL

[–] lowleveldata@programming.dev 22 points 2 weeks ago

Thank you fellow anal lover

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 19 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

arbitration pretty much provides zero benefit to the consumer and all benefit to the organization. a big piece is that if you sign off on an arbitration clause, then there's no such thing as class action lawsuit anymore.

some companies make you sign a handwritten letter through snail mail just to opt out, because they don't want anyone filing a lawsuit, and definitely dont' want a lot of them filing together.

this is another case of corporations saying "this option is best!!" while leaving out the "for us" part

this is why it's a big deal that steam said fuck that noise

[–] potentiallynotfelix@lemdro.id 12 points 2 weeks ago

Forced Arbitration is when a company puts something in their terms of service that forced the user to go through a process of arbitration as opposed to going to court. It is always rigged towards the company who forces it, because they are the people paying the arbitrators.

[–] slazer2au@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago (10 children)

If you have a dispute with Valve you have to hire a lawyer to take them to court. No "third party" mediation

[–] moody@lemmings.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

Most disputes most likely fall far below the limit for small claims, where a lawyer is not required, or even allowed in many cases.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 25 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

Forcing you to shut up or go to court isn't great either, though.

On the big stuff where they're liable for a lot of money and you might be able to get a pro bono lawyer, sure.

On the small stuff, though, the prospect of having to pay for a lawyer and likely have your case thrown out by a judge for not being worth the expense and effort of suing a foreign company is probably going to deter a LOT of legitimate claims.

If, for example, I want to return a game in accordance with the rules and they won't let me, I'm not gonna lawyer up and sue them from the other side of the Atlantic.

[–] madsen@lemmy.world 31 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

If, for example, I want to return a game in accordance with the rules and they won’t let me, I’m not gonna lawyer up and sue them from the other side of the Atlantic.

While supposedly being a lot cheaper than litigation, arbitration isn't free either. Besides, arbitration makes it near-impossible to appeal a decision, and the outcome won't set binding legal precedent. Furthermore, arbitration often comes with a class action waiver. Valve also removed that from the SSA.

I'm far from an expert in law, especially US law, but as I understand it, ~~arbitration is still available (if both parties agree, I assume), it's just not a requirement anymore~~ [edit: nevermind, I didn't understand it]. I'm sure they're making this move because it somehow benefits them, but it still seems to me that consumers are getting more options [edit: they're not] which is usually a good thing.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I think the US small claims court is meant to handle situations like this (although I know little about it). I wonder if it's available to litigants from other countries.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Xanis@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Good point.

What's the alternative?

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Let the user choose. Arbitration is great for small things, not huge damages. Court is better for that.

[–] yamanii@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If companies always try to force arbitration on users I have my doubts about how good it is for us.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tja@sh.itjust.works 24 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

As I saw in another post:

This is because a lot of individuals tried to start an arbitration process with valve and that got costly for Valve. So now they try to force everyone to do it in a different way.

More info in other posts:

https://lemmy.ml/comment/13944017

https://lemmy.world/comment/12586412

[–] voracitude@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

Arbitration is always cheaper and faster than the courts, because the courts are very backed up especially since the pandemic, and there's a lot of admin cost which doesn't exist in arbitration. That is why almost every other company is trying to force arbitration. So if the goal was to save money, forcing court would have the opposite effect.

[–] jim@programming.dev 7 points 2 weeks ago

My thought was that a lawsuit is more expensive than arbitration, but settling a class action lawsuit is cheaper than thousands of arbitrations.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] CodeHead@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So, remember... they just 'switched' from forced arbitration to going into the courts. Yes it is good, but note 'Good guy Gabe' didn't start this way.

Maybe consider 'why' he's making the change? It's actually because this forces the money question to the one suing them. It costs them less by doing this. Now I think this is actually good, but don't blindly fawn over the guy for this.

[–] tryp@lemm.ee 19 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Ars technica provided the two key pieces of context here:

"Zaiger targeted Valve and Steam users for its scheme precisely because the arbitration clause in the SSA [Steam Subscriber Agreement] is 'favorable' to Steam users in that Valve agrees to pay the fees and costs associated with arbitration," Valve said.

Valve said that Zaiger's "extortive plan" was to "offer a settlement slightly less than the [arbitration] charge—$2,900 per claim or so—attempting to induce a quick resolution."

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/09/steam-doesnt-want-to-pay-arbitration-fees-tells-gamers-to-sue-instead/

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] spacemanspiffy@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Can anyone ELI5 this to me? Arbitration is a big scary word that I don't understand.

[–] orb360@lemmy.ca 39 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If you and your friend get into a argument over something on the playground, instead of going to a teacher, you both agree to tell your stories to another friend you both agree will be impartial. You then both do what that friend says without involving the teacher.

[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 23 points 2 weeks ago

Actually explained like you would to a 5yo.

Awesome job.

[–] Tinks@lemmy.world 28 points 2 weeks ago

Instead of Steam forcing any disputes with them to go through an "impartial" 3rd party company they choose and pay for to oversee and rule on disputes, they are saying that disputes must go through the courts.

Basically forced arbitration has always been seen as anti-consumer and unfair because the company is paying for the arbitration and is thus considered more likely to be found in favor of. Steam is doing the opposite and as such this is seen as pro-consumer and a good thing

[–] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago

Good Guy Gabe strikes again.

load more comments
view more: next ›