Technology

59534 readers

3195 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

1250

US Court Rules Google a Monopoly in 'Biggest Antitrust Case of the 21st Century'. (www.commondreams.org)

submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by ModerateImprovement@sh.itjust.works to c/technology@lemmy.world

222 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Voice Of America: Google loses massive antitrust case over its search dominance.

The Conversation: A US Court has ruled Google is an illegal monopoly – and the internet might never be the same.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 23 points 3 months ago (2 children)

it’s pretty much impossible to have someone join the market and truly be competitive against Valve, even if they offered a product with all the same features and more

(1) Many PC gamers simply wait for games to go on sale. Epic buying exclusive agreements isn't as dominating of a strategy as they think it is; even if it's expensive.

(2) Steam is the incumbent. You have to be better in order to be worth it to switch. As you mentioned, Epic is lacking in features

(3) Valve has not treated the desktop market the way Apple as treated the app store. Look at how far Epic has taken Apple to court; compared to their biggest rival, Valve

(4) Valve has put in alot of work in other layers; such as making open hardware and contributing to AMD GPU drivers on Linux. They work on the whole platform, even parts they do not directly make money off. This is called investment.

(5) What exactly would you break Steam into being? One app for reviews, another for buying, and another for launching games? Break the development studio into a different company? Even if Epic is throwing around money made from its game engine and games?

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 4 points 3 months ago

If Valve was the company getting the exclusive deals and preventing Epic from selling things then I'd be more inclined to agree with OPs point.

[+] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works -10 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That's the thing though, with their market share an hypothetical competitor could be better and people still wouldn't switch, Steam is where their games are, it's where their friends play, building everything from scratch elsewhere wouldn't be worth the trouble even if the alternative was better.

Store, development, forums, trading platform, launcher, online gaming services, hardware, streaming integrated into the platform, DRM... Valve has their hands all over the place and there's a single person at the top of that. Wanna wait until they start becoming bad before considering that maybe it's not a good thing that they have a hold on 70% of the market? Hell, just the fact that Newell could decide that they're closing their doors tomorrow and no one has access to their games anymore should be fucking worrying to everyone.

[–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

At what seams would you break Steam at? In this day and age those are just app store features. Is there anything you listed Sony, Microsoft or Apple don't have?

I do understand having a Steam library would make it harder to switch but most of us have a few GOG games and collect Epic free games as well (though, I haven't even looked at the free Epic games since Christmas).

People even download a launcher like Hero Launcher on the Steamdeck to run games from other stores. We have the freedom to use Steam in tagent with other stores and we do. You can buy a game off GOG and add it to Steam to launch it.

Steam is simply the better product, hands down.

Edit: To prove that I see your point but just don't agree with it: Here is a quote from an ArsTechnica article about a judge viewing Steam as a monopoly.

Despite those changes, Judge Coughenour once again dismissed Wolfire's argument that Valve had engaged in "illegal tying" between the Steam platform (which provides game library management, social networking, achievement tracking, Steam Workshop mods, etc.) and the Steam game store (i.e., the part that sells the games). Those two sides of Steam form a single market, the judge wrote, because "commercial viability for a platform is possible only when it generates revenue from a linked game store." What's more, the suit has not shown there is any sufficient market demand "for fully functional gaming platforms distinct from game stores."

Does this judge expect me to buy a game from Epic which is missing features and then pay Valve a fee to contact the developer through Steam? Will Epic cheapen their price by 30% so I can "enable Steam features." This would be unprecedented. I cannot go to Amazon to return/complain about a product I bought from Walmart.