this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2026
81 points (94.5% liked)

Games

48856 readers
1361 users here now

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

Rules

1. Submissions have to be related to games

Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.

This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.

2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.

We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.

3. No excessive self-promotion

Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.

This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.

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

This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you're submitting before posting to see if it's already been posted.

We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.

5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.

No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.

6. No linking to piracy

Don't share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.

We don't want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.

Authorized Regular Threads

Related communities

PM a mod to add your own

Video games

Generic

Help and suggestions

By platform

By type

By games

Language specific

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 1 points 23 minutes ago

When the 30% fee gets lowered prices won’t come down. The market has already shown that consumers are willing to pay for the games at the current price level. Publishers will just pocket the increased revenue, instead of passing it on to the consumer.

[–] richardwallass@sh.itjust.works 1 points 46 minutes ago

You can like Valve but you cannot deny it's dominant position in the market. It is a monopoly. It's a fact.

[–] PieMePlenty@lemmy.world 10 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

I don't want to be a steam shill, but does the prevention of selling games cheaper (if this is true or effectively enforced) even do any good? I have over a thousand games on Steam, but I doubt I bought 10% of the games from them. Heck, the latest game I remember buying at release was Oblivion Remaster, and I got it from GMG because it was 17% cheaper on release day then on steam. This happens constantly.
If we are to objectively look at the problem, why would lifting this rule automatically mean games would be cheaper elsewhere? One of the biggest slogans in favor of Brexit was something along the lines: "of EU membership costing 350m pounds per week, we could spend it on the NHS instead".
We are paying $70 for games because of Steam, we could be buying them for $55! That **could **there is holding the whole thing up. And its not even real. Its a word on paper. Effectively today; cheaper games than on steam are available, where steam gets a 0% cut and it stuck with the bill of hosting and delivering the game for free. This is the reality. Consumers arent the ones crying here.

If there is a fight worth fighting, it is the one to be able to transfer digital ownership of game licenses. This is a fight we can take to everyone including Steam. This would be an actual win for consumers. Not bickering about something that in the end wont effect any consumer anywhere. The above is a fight between publishers and distributors...

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 8 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Why not go for a bigger company first?

Apple does the same thing with ebooks. When I put my book up for sale with Apple, the terms stated that I could not list it for a lower price at another store. So no, that is not a new form of price fixing.

Also interested to hear what other digital goods stores charge less than 30%, aside from Epic who definitely wouldn’t maintain that if they had the monopoly position.

[–] richardwallass@sh.itjust.works 1 points 51 minutes ago

Apple ebook market share is not 85%

[–] Nugscree@lemmy.world 20 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

It's not the gamers, it's a commission and there is a lot of misinformation on their website (it can be viewed in English). https://gameclaim.consumercompetitionclaims.com/

Also tweakers.net a Dutch tech enthusiast website had a good post about it, most of the commenters do not agree with this as well https://tweakers.net/nieuws/249010/steam-laat-klanten-te-veel-betalen-voor-games-volgens-nederlandse-massaclaim.html (Dutch only so you'll have to use a translator if you want to read it)

People keep forgetting that in the olden days, the left over cut for the publisher was about 40% of the game value, the rest went to warehouse, shipping, and the retailer all got something. The rough estimate left over cut for the developer was 10~15%.

Now a days as a developer you can sell directly to the customer through Steam, and you don't need a publisher or a network if you only sell on Steam. So that 10~15% cut went to 70% (till x amount of revenue and then it gets lower).

Next to Steam not being a monopoly and Valve providing all the other companies the blueprint for a success in the PC market, none of the competitors follows it, or compare to the customer service of Steam. And it seems that none of those other billion dollar competitors (Microsoft, Amazon and Epic) wants to invest in a solid platform to stand up to Steam.

[–] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 7 points 3 hours ago

Not even a commission (which would be governmental), it's purely litigational... See my other comment on who is behind it...

[–] gmtom@lemmy.world -2 points 2 hours ago

The man children who think Gabe Newell is their best friend are going to be very mad about this.

[–] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 21 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I’m curious who’s bankrolling them for this one.

They are not the same as Noyb who actually are very transparent and actually « believe » in something : these dudes are closer to insurance claims chasers from what I read about them.

Also I love their Q&A that states that they don’t get money from this

No. The Consumenten Competition Claims Foundation is a non-profit foundation.

Someone is absolutely paying them for the action it’s literally 5 questions above and is Winward NL. And they go back to my ambulance chaser parallel since it’s just a company doing litigation finance.

There’s nothing showing links from those guys to broader financial interests but that would not be out of the possibilities.

[–] chameleon@fedia.io 11 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

A different FAQ item mentions Winward NL Limited is in the Cayman Islands, which is a really nice place if you would want to hide such links. But yeah, could also be a bunch of individuals just looking for some extra yachts (bonus irony if they buy them from Gaben's yacht company).

[–] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 5 points 6 hours ago

Indeed.

From their page (https://www.winward.uk/about) they are funded by Rocade Capital. Rocade Capital itself links to EJF Capital and Barings.

It all could be unethical gambling based on the last Epics shenanigans... Maybe the chances to get a jugement favouring them is now statistically higher than against them.

[–] ski11erboi@lemmy.world 71 points 16 hours ago (3 children)

Is there any actual proof of valve taking actions to limit competition or are they just popular because they have a good business model?

[–] gmtom@lemmy.world -1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I know from experience valve coerces developers into participating in their sale events, basically saying there game won't get promoted on the store or in searches unless they agree to sales.

Which considering they already take a massive 30% cut of developers earnings, is very scummy. Lots of indie Devs that already struggle to make money and already sell their games for super cheap are basically forced to cut their profits even further just to get some visibility on the platform.

[–] Datz@szmer.info 2 points 2 hours ago
  1. I believe you, but they were asking for proof. Sources.

  2. If 30% is massive, what do you propose the cut be? Epic said their 12% cut was unsustainable already.

[–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 0 points 3 hours ago

Yes, but all the valve fanboys will argue anyone who mentions the multiple price fixing lawsuits (which are not related to using steam key sellers, but they'll endlessly post that TOS clause anyway) against Valve into oblivion.

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 38 points 16 hours ago (16 children)

They don't limit competition, but it's a more open question whether they are engaging in a form of price fixing.

[–] Holytimes@sh.itjust.works 27 points 14 hours ago (7 children)

The problem is if valve is price fixing then it would mean any company that limits the use of their service to others via fixed pricing agreements would also be price fixing.

If a company is no longer allowed to have control over their own service when used by others then functionally you cant have second or third parties anymore. It would basically break the very concept.

Cause yes valve does prevent you from selling your game on other platforms at a cheaper rate, so long as you are doing so via steam key or when valve servers will be the source of distribution. This keeps coming up over and over and its wild that people seem to think that valve should not be allowed to limit the abuse of their own servers.

The only example ever floated of them doing this with out steam keys or them being the distribution source was a single email from steam support to a developer. That has been proven over and over to have been a miscommunication and not actually an enforced policy.

Theres a lot of questions on how healthy it is for valve to be so dominate in the market and to have such a wide reach. But the fact is that other companies keep leaning on valve for distribution or build their entire company around it either legitly or though majority theft cough g2g cough.

Everyone else MADE valve into the market dominator either willing or via ignorance and bad business. It valve ever does turn fully evil we are fucked yes. But no one ever seems to want to actually try to fix the problem of everyone else being stupid as fuck. Instead just trying to legal valve into oblivion.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›