misk @ misk @sopuli.xyz

Mastodon: @[misk@pol.social](https://pol.social/@misk)

---

Read more

Posts

1,818

Comments

1,446

Joined

2 yr. ago

Let’s move this convo to YouTube comments section, you’ll be more comfortable.

Me no waste time on people wasting me time. Valve good. Gib upvote.

Humble still has to charge you entire Valve’s cut this way. 30% is way more than the real infra cost.

Valve backend is effectively a public utility in this scenario. This thing has been proven to work and bring prices down fast. Actual free market.

I started to use user tags to make communication more efficient, I can adjust communication to members of the Valve tribe.

Me tag you in computer. Me know you Valve simp. Me pretend me Valve tribe. You know.

No. GOG, EGS, Humble and anyone else who wants to join in and offer a store that connects to Valve backend. That store calls backend to check who owns what, pays them for downloads (base/updates/dlc) and that’s it. It would make Steam monopoly crumble in an instant, prices go down because stores compete on things that matter to consumers. Stores need to compete for developers too. Win win win.

Like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local-loop_unbundling

Valve gets split into Valve backend (most rudimentary but common stuff so that owned games across storefronts in that backend carry over) and Valve store/developer/publisher. Other stores get access to backend, regulator stays at Valve backend to check if they don’t give preferential treatment to Valve store. Same rules for everyone. Then stores can decide how they utilise that infra, what features they provide and consumers make a decision on cost and benefits of those stores. You can make some transfer fee if needed because downloads are a variable cost.

Valve good, belong to tribe now, gib upvotes.

So Battle.net started selling third party games when? Man, think your argument through before committing to paragraphs.

Valve supports Linux just to safeguard their monopoly. They killed native ports because they pushed Proton so hard. Alyx supported Linux natively even but check now.

All of this is pointless for most of the consumers. You’re making an argument that because they care for this niche it’s worth paying 30% cut. Most people would be fine with something to download and update their games with.

You know that Proton is just streamlined and better funded Wine, a project with decades of history by now? If you’re looking for someone to thank for funding it, it’s CodeWeavers.

How’s your freedom to resell your games? Console gamers still have boxes and second hand market. Valve killed that on PC. Gamers ate Microsoft for attempting that, Valve somehow got away with it. At the time people said „but the prices are better” but how good are discounts these days?

Next thing you’ll tell me Android is good for Linux. How’s that working out for everyone?

I guess if MIG didn’t present itself as a pirated cart that wouldn’t be a problem? Skill issue.

Search -> (scroll all the way down) Filtered Search

UI design is my passion

Person in charge of this thing

They made a filter for that specifically on eShop :P

Cyberpunk 2077, Street Fighter 6, Yakuza 0, Bravely Default Remaster. All rereleases. Only Fast Fusion and Split Fiction are new but both are a bit of a niche thing.

What he’s saying is so blatantly wrong and easily verifiable that now you’re the contrarian.

Earth is round.

Great! Not everything’s available there unfortunately. Some games release on Steam only even. So you probably are affected either way.

90% of people buy on Steam. And they do that because their entire libraries are on Steam.

This is not how a monopoly is defined in any civilised country.

I don’t think that $80 price tag that’s causing this. There are no new retail games at this price currently other than Mario Kart and anyone interested got a bundle. Zelda rereleases make 0 sense to buy retail, I got a used copy of Switch release and Nintendo Online + or whatever it is called at half the price.

Why? They lucked their way to owning the infrastructure and got paid handsomely for that already. What are the negative aspects of breaking up Steam that way? I can’t think of any. I provided plenty of benefits both to consumers and developers.

„Same game released on 7 different platforms across at least 2 generations of hardware not selling well among early adopting enthusiasts who probably bought it twice already. Analysts baffled.”

And this is how people will explain why upcoming technofeudalism is a good thing. Our new masters have earned it :)

Lots of new EU regulations specifically target scenarios like this because that’s in the interest of consumers. Governments should work for the people, not winners with the most money.

[edit] You’d think you’d get more people against big tech on Lemmy lol.