Which is hard to believe, considering how many times I've bought steam games on other (legitimate) platforms that were cheaper than on steam, that are still on steam today and werent removed for being cheaper on another platform.

[–] Rose@lemmy.world 22 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Sure, but Valve essentially reserve the right to no longer sell your game if it's offered cheaper elsewhere. See the quotes on pages 54 through 56 of the complaint.

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago (5 children)

Which is a dick move on valves part.

Remember folks, Valve isnt the peoples company.

All the good things it does, it does only because of regulation pressure or lost lawsuits.

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Remember folks, Valve isnt the peoples company.

No corporation is "the peoples corporation", but some corporations treat their customers with a lot more respect and fairness in pricing/policies than others.

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Yes, but people have to be reminded of that with "sweetheart" companies like AMD and Valve, because they get too deep in the koolaid and forget it.

[–] notamechanic321@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Fyi I like valve but im in no way sworn to them.

I think the justification would probably be that if they continued listing the item:

It maybe mislead consumers into paying more for the same thing
The reason why people pay more in that scenario is for convenience (IE all games in the same place) but that would be exersizing valves monopoly, so it may be safer to just remove to reduce complaints to steam about the higher pricing because there will be operational cost to processing those support requests and complaints

I don't feel like valve does everything because of lawsuits. Open sourcing proton wasn't due to a lawsuit. Releasing Cs2 as a free upgrade to csgo wasn't due to a lawsuit.

On the other hand and in response to your comment, I think the regulatory fix is that platforms must display their platform fee clearly and separately to the publishers price.

[–] deafboy@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Open sourcing proton wasn't due to a lawsuit.

Wine and dxvk was already opensource. They couldn't have closed it even if they wanted to.

[–] BURN@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Minor note about only a single point here

CS2 as an “upgrade” to CSGO has been less than well received from what I can tell. If they wanted it to be free it should have been a new game and left CS:GO in place. Removing a game many of us paid for in favor of a newer, different game isn’t something that should be praised, and should be called out as the anti-consumer move it was.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 8 points 11 months ago

It isn't the peoples' company, but nor is it a publicly traded company that is obligated to pursue profits above all else. It's Gabe's company, and he gets to run it as he sees fit.

Ultimately Wolfire's argument falls apart not because Valve is setting the terms, but because their claims about Valve's position in the industry and supposed abuse of power don't hold much water.

[–] theonyltruemupf@feddit.de 3 points 11 months ago

They also make nice hardware, but they don't do that out of the goodness of their hearts of course

[–] deafboy@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

TIL: valve is run by robots.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 7 points 11 months ago

All those Humble Bundles for a start.

[–] Spedwell@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

I believe it is in the Steam marketplace agreement, and applies to all games. Are you referring to sales on other platforms, or to the full listed price?

[–] spark947@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That hasn't been my experience, could be a regional pricing thing.

[–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago

HumbleBundle...

[–] sebinspace@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

Not only that, but games you’ve actually heard of, too