• InputZero@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    2 months ago

    Realistically, it’s only a matter of time until Steam becomes as enshittificated as any other services. There is profit to be made from Steam selling advertising space and customer data. They can either choose to capitalize on the profits that are in front of them, or allow another company to and take that capital from them. For a business it’s not a matter of what’s right and wrong anymore but consume or be consumed. If Steam isn’t willing to do that someone else will be willing to play the long game and do it. Then it’ll be only a matter of time until Steam gets acquired by another company and then it’s game over.

    • efstajas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      67
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      This doesn’t make any sense. The reason Valve hasn’t been acquired is because it’s privately owned and not up for sale, not because it doesn’t have “enough profit”. In fact it’s extremely profitable, for all we know.

      Sure, another company could come along and build a competitor. It’s happened already multiple times, and Steam is doing just fine despite some major titles these days being exclusive to other platforms. Unless Steam drops the ball on something big time, it’s unlikely that people will move to another platform en masse, especially one that is less focussed on consumer interests. No-one can just come in and “take capital away” from Steam, whatever that means, by building a competitor that sells advertising space and “monetizes user data” — they need users first.

      … And then there’s the fact that Steam is already “selling advertiser space” today. Games don’t just get featured on their storefront because Gabe likes them. They make deals with publishers for this.

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

        I don’t have the article on hand, but there is a publication from a steam store employee explaining exactly how to get your game onto the front page. The gist of it is that you don’t have to pay Valve. It’s about community engagement (your publisher, I guess).

        • efstajas@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’ve read that, IIRC. It was about getting featured organically though. Steam runs promotions for certain game series or even publisher catalogues frequently, with large custom graphics and usually a sale. Obviously I have no way to know for sure, but I can’t imagine that Valve doesn’t get itself paid for those.

      • daltotron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        The idea is less that someone makes a competitor and then they actually compete. The idea is that a competitor service is able to lock away one or several big titles, like, say, overwatch, league, fortnite, or whatever else, behind exterior launchers that are maybe more free to do data harvesting. Then, that competitor theoretically eats away more and more of the largest market share, and tries to drive those users from just using their platform for a single game, to maybe using multiple games, maybe with something like a games pass or with free weekend deals or whatever. Once they have that market share, they can give developers better margins, since they’ll be selling customer data at a profit and steam won’t be, maybe with some sort of exclusivity contract baked in, purposely undercutting steam. Then, steam’s been put on the back foot, and the rest is just kind of what has happened to streaming services.

        It’s a market, markets trend towards short term gains strategies over long term gains strategies because having faster short term gains means you can more easily crush your competition. It’s like age of empires 2, the first couple minutes of the game is the part that matters the most. That being said, steam has been around for quite some time, and has a good amount of brand loyalty and goodwill built up, and that doesn’t seem to be slowing down anytime soon as they keep one-upping their competition with actual improvements to their platform, like family sharing, screencasting, big picture mode, increased controller support and reassigning, and a full standalone version of linux, that basically all their competitors seem incapable of. So maybe steam has enough of a headstart that, even with a long term gains strategy, even with a, basically, non-evil mentality, they can stay afloat. Who can say.

    • ForensicFart@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      Speaking in inevitability isn’t very realistic regardless of the outcome as inevitably the solar system will collapse and steam will surely be out of business then, right?

      What we do know is that steam is exceptionally profitable, at least according to their own internal metrics, at nearly 800k per employee. So they have no need to pump more, except “because more” but all we can do is consider that they haven’t yet and hope it continues.

      I personally think Steam’s timeline to replacement is 100% based on how long they can maintain a positive relationship with their audience. I don’t disagree that a replacement will come, but we have seen other publishers spin up stores and largely fail because of shitty patterns so for now we are back to the “wait and see”. Their replacement will be the result of their own failures to meet and maintain a very vocal customer base

    • PoopDelivery@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’d drop Steam if that happened. There are other ways to get games and managers like Lutris make organizing them easy. I’m sure Valve knows this and with how long they’ve been successful, fucking with gamers would not make sense. Look how it’s working or for some of the bigger gaming companies recently.