245: Steam: A Monopoly In the Making
- Thread starter M.S. Smith
- Start date
Recommended Videos
What I wouldn't give to be valve right now. Anyways it's kind of hard to imagine valve being evil, even if they do get a monopoly. I mean they are quasi-independent still right? So it would be weird to see the little guy get such a huge advantage.
I'm looking into Steam as my next source of PC games so I would very concerned if it became pricey. I like Valve but if Microsoft assimilates it the gaming community will lose a great partnership. (No more Gmods... A bleak future indeed)
Wait just a damn minute. The guy from DIRECT2DRIVE is complaining about Trojan horses? The platform that effectively renders otherwise-moddable PC games extremely difficult to mod because of the blatantly verklempt way it handles content authentication?
Fuck him. Steam puts my game libraries where I can find them and tweak them to my heart's delight. If that's a monopoly, bring on Rich Uncle Pennybags.
Fuck him. Steam puts my game libraries where I can find them and tweak them to my heart's delight. If that's a monopoly, bring on Rich Uncle Pennybags.
In a nut shell : You cannot yell monopoly before the shait hits the hyper drive. Anti monopoly measures can be imposed only AFTER the market has been unbalanced.
As the other people mentioned before me this seems just a rant from the people who lost in the initial dick measuring competition. What is even more disturbing to me is the fact that people tend to ***** about how completion is kicking their ass instead of learning from others and applying in their own products. As a company that is worth millions how can you go crying to the state for help when the competition is kicking your ass? Ethics anyone ?
As the other people mentioned before me this seems just a rant from the people who lost in the initial dick measuring competition. What is even more disturbing to me is the fact that people tend to ***** about how completion is kicking their ass instead of learning from others and applying in their own products. As a company that is worth millions how can you go crying to the state for help when the competition is kicking your ass? Ethics anyone ?
For real?Khell_Sennet said:
DRM/Malware? That's a bit much don't you think? You know I hate being able to see what my buddies are playing and the ability to jump right into a game with them very quickly. I hate my games getting automatically patched without me having to dig around for the proper install. I hate being able to access my games, save games and keybinds on any capable pc, that really sucks. I really hate the stat tracking too, it keeps telling me that I've played 13 hours of BFBC2, as if I really wanted to know that. Those achievement things are so stupid too, who does that! PC's aren't consoles! I much prefer to alt-tab to google something while I'm playing a game, screw that overlay bullcrap. Oh yea, and eff any game that wants to be protected from pirates, DRM is bad all around, even if the consumer gets some "minor" benefits from it.
From what it seems, I suppose you hate consoles too? Specifically Xbox 360/LIVE?
Each time I buy a game on Steam I can't shake the feeling that I'm slowly digging my own grave.
I am for the most part a happy customer but there is one HUGE flaw that many people seam to forget. And that is it dosen't provide you with an installable backup of the game you purchase and now supposedly leagaly own.
Yes, you can download the game again and again for as long as you live , but beacause it's tied to your Steam account... what happens if for some unconceivable reason you get banned. Well then you can kiss all your games good-by. Not a customer friendly policy by any standard.
I am for the most part a happy customer but there is one HUGE flaw that many people seam to forget. And that is it dosen't provide you with an installable backup of the game you purchase and now supposedly leagaly own.
Yes, you can download the game again and again for as long as you live , but beacause it's tied to your Steam account... what happens if for some unconceivable reason you get banned. Well then you can kiss all your games good-by. Not a customer friendly policy by any standard.
Now that some games force you to activate through Steam, they will become a monopoly in the
future.
future.
I did another analysis based on monthly unique visitors which gives me a slightly different picture. While Steam still dominates with 50% there are quite a few others. Check the full analysis here: http://blog.deals4downloads.com/2010/04/07/market-shares-of-digitial-distribution-platforms/
Steam sets the baseline for what other distributors need to follow.
Publishers don't sell through Steam because they want to (hypothetically, it would be more profitable to cut out the middle man and force customers into their own proprietary system, but in reality that just isn't feasible. Not yet anyway.), they sell on Steam because it commands the market in online distribution, and that's where the money is.
The major points I love about Steam:
1) When I buy a game, I don't have to play around with crippling DRM or limited installs. Yes, I know about Steamworks, but that's actually fair DRM, and adds a layer of accountability that makes publishers want to sell through Steam.
This is, in effect, the best compromise solution to the whole nasty DRM business I think we're going to see now.
2) It's easy to maintain my game file structure. If I get a bad install, I don't have to worry about finding a (possibly scratched) disc.
If part of my game becomes corrupted, I can do a file integrity check without having to uninstall and reinstall (most of the time).
3) Sales. It's cheaper, and Steam periodically uses sales as an incentive to try lesser known titles.
Publishers don't sell through Steam because they want to (hypothetically, it would be more profitable to cut out the middle man and force customers into their own proprietary system, but in reality that just isn't feasible. Not yet anyway.), they sell on Steam because it commands the market in online distribution, and that's where the money is.
The major points I love about Steam:
1) When I buy a game, I don't have to play around with crippling DRM or limited installs. Yes, I know about Steamworks, but that's actually fair DRM, and adds a layer of accountability that makes publishers want to sell through Steam.
This is, in effect, the best compromise solution to the whole nasty DRM business I think we're going to see now.
2) It's easy to maintain my game file structure. If I get a bad install, I don't have to worry about finding a (possibly scratched) disc.
If part of my game becomes corrupted, I can do a file integrity check without having to uninstall and reinstall (most of the time).
3) Sales. It's cheaper, and Steam periodically uses sales as an incentive to try lesser known titles.
Steam gives you two options for an increasingly large number of games "do it our way or don't play". THAT, really pisses me off.
You know what the difference between successful bad guys and non-successful ones is? The former has good public relations, they make you think they're the good guys
You know what the difference between successful bad guys and non-successful ones is? The former has good public relations, they make you think they're the good guys
While I personally love Steam, I do think this is a legitimate concern, but the platform with the biggest potential to be as successful would probably be Games for Windows Live, but I've seen firsthand that it's less of a 'digital distribution and game service' than 'Microsoft griefing people'. And not in the funny Team Roomba way either.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that Steam's growth has been a result of market choice as opposed to nefarious practice on the part of Valve. Basically, they offered the best-of-breed in a digital distribution service, while everyone else simply sucked and continue sucking. Consequently, people voted with their dollars to choose Steam. This is not an unusual or sinister phenomenon in a free, open, and fair market. In such a circumstance, a monopoly is an inevitable consequence of successfully providing the best product or service offering over an extended period of time in the face of all other competition.
Further, having monopoly is not illegal, nor is it necessarily a problem. It's the abuse of being the position of owning a monopoly that is illegal and causes all the problems(i.e. the anti-competitive behavior such to maintain that monopoly). Our anti-trust laws do not exist to halt the formation of monopolies. They exist to halt the abuse of monopolistic power and position. Again, in a free, open, and fair market, even a monopoly can potentially be toppled by an upstart that provides a better offering.
Also, I think this author either needs to look up the definition of monopoly again or stop playing so fast and lose with that definition. Intent has nothing to do with a company being a monopoly.
Further, having monopoly is not illegal, nor is it necessarily a problem. It's the abuse of being the position of owning a monopoly that is illegal and causes all the problems(i.e. the anti-competitive behavior such to maintain that monopoly). Our anti-trust laws do not exist to halt the formation of monopolies. They exist to halt the abuse of monopolistic power and position. Again, in a free, open, and fair market, even a monopoly can potentially be toppled by an upstart that provides a better offering.
Also, I think this author either needs to look up the definition of monopoly again or stop playing so fast and lose with that definition. Intent has nothing to do with a company being a monopoly.
Steam comes with a lot of games from the shelves even if you don't want it. I'd rate that as kind of nefarious, but not unusual biseness sadly. It's successful for a reason at least.geizr said:
A monopoly can never be a good thing since it is abusive by nature, because it will want to stay a monopoly sidestepping the law one way or another. Without concurence there is no reasons to make better offers, while the temptation is great to makes offers discretely and gradually worse. Steam isn't a monopoly yet but it, or something like it, may become too hard to topple for any upstart if things go down a certain path.
Happy new year
Still pondering your answer to my last pm I hope. Currently I'm doing my best to see things your way and corner myself.
ps: noticed my old post not too far above yours ? lol was I angry, but I still think that way.
That is not nefarious. Nefarious would be for them to use their position to restrict game developers from distributing their games via any manner other than Steam.incal11 said:
A monopoly is not intrinsically bad, however, the abuse of monopoly position and power is. There is a very high probability for this abuse to occur only because the monopoly is controlled by human beings, hence the reason we have laws against such abuse but not against the existence of the monopoly(a lot of companies would have long since been dissolved, by law, if this were the case).incal11 said:
In fact, monopolies are a natural outcome of pure capitalism. If one wanted to eliminate the occurrence of monopolies, one would probably have to change to a more socialist or communist economic system.
Sorry, I have no idea what you mean here. It's coming across too garbled, to me. I think you may be using some words incorrectly here.incal11 said:
As best as I can tell, Valve has created a best-of-breed offering. Other companies are free to compete with that, but, to my knowledge, their offerings pale in comparison. One could possibly argue that Steam's insane promotional sales are actually anti-competitive in the sense it may be the case that no competitor enjoys a sufficient percentage of the market to be enabled to make such offers to counter Steam. In that sense, Valve could be being subtlety nefarious through pricing, which is, in fact, one of the anti-competitive practices of monopolies, setting prices so ridiculously low that no competition is capable of making a counter-offer. We, as customers, enable and encourage the practice when we purchase games during moments of such extreme discounting(it would be stupid not to, to be honest; the deals are seriously sweet).