If I’m honest, I don’t disagree.

I would love for Steam to have **actual competition. Which is difficult, sure, but you could run a slightly less feature-rich store, take less of a cut, and pass the reduction fully on to consumers and you’d be an easy choice for many gamers.

But that’s not what Epic is after. They tried to go hard after the sellers, figuring that if they can corner enough fo the market with exclusives the buyers will have to come. But they underestimated that even their nigh-infinite coffers struggle to keep up with the raw amount of games releasing, and also the unpredictability of the indie market where you can’t really know what to buy as an exclusive.
Nevermind that buying one is a good way to make it forgotten.

So yeah, fully agreed. Compared to Epic, I vastly prefer Steam’s 30% cut. As the consumer I pay the same anyways, and Steam offers lots of stuff for it like forums, a client that boots before the heat death of the universe, in-house streaming, library sharing, cloud sync that sometimes works.

  • @DingoBilly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    19 months ago

    Why do people just want Steam as one store monopoly vs. Having two companies compete where Steam is one of them.

    It’s only good for consumers…

    • @Zetta@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      39 months ago

      I don’t think anyone has a problem with their being two big competitors, it’s just we don’t want it to be epic games. gog games would be a good competitor