this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2024
274 points (97.6% liked)

PC Gaming

8625 readers
1157 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 7 hours ago

Steam came before it's time, while we were still on dialup. Once high-bandwidth internet became common then it made sense, as did many other cloud-computing and cloud-storage ideas.

Sadly, it still has problems, especially when end users can't get along with the customer-facing staff and lose access to their licenses. There's also the problem that has revealed itself with other game clients, when games shut down, when distro-clients go out of business (I still hold a grudge with Stardock / Gamestop) and when governments seize cloud storage without consideration for the end-users (as happened with MegaUpload). When Newell dies or retires, then we only can wait to see what becomes of Steam and our libraries and what company is going to attempt to buy (and exploit) all that responsibility.

It's going to be trading Robert Baratheon for Joffrey.

[–] Boozilla@lemmy.world 23 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

I hated it in the early days because I wanted to own physical media for my games, etc., and I just didn't trust an online games library that could vanish in a business deal or bankruptcy. Little did I know that CDs and DVDs have a shelf life. I learned to love Steam over the years.

Now I hate subscriptions-for-everything and love Steam even more for only charging me once to buy a game.

[–] Mongostein@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

As a patient gamer, I only buy older games on sale under ten bucks. I don’t replay games too often, so if I lose access it’s a big whatever.

[–] tfw_no_toiletpaper@lemmy.world 5 points 10 hours ago

My colleague (late 40s) is still like that. Buys only GoG or I guess physical, although it's mostly codes nowadays anyway? I mean good for him but he misses out on like 80% of games.

I don't think Steam will ever die but I hope it won't fall into enshittification at some point.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 15 points 15 hours ago

I was one of them. But I mean, back then most people either didn't have Internet or at least didn't have broadband. I had dial-up until like a month after it released.

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 79 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I remember Steam's launch and understand completely.

[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 32 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I hated Steam for a long time because of Half-life 2.

[–] ByteOnBikes 50 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

I mean yeah.

I had to install some program and connect online to PLAY A SINGLE PLAYER GAME? I have the CD already and entered my CD key. Why does it need validation?

This is surely the death of PC gaming.

  • me in 2005
[–] Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee 18 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Oh MAN. I forgot about those times, hand typing in a 36 character CD key that was spat out by a dot matrix printer with questionable typeset legibility…

[–] greybeard@lemmy.one 8 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

And importing foreign copies because they sold for cheaper in other countries. I still have a Korean box copy of Call of Duty 2. After buying one, my household needed a second so that I could play at the same time as my sibling, and didn't want to spend a whole $50 for the privilege. They would even send you a copy of the key in email while you waited on the physical box to show up, because the importers knew what they were doing.

[–] Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee 3 points 18 hours ago

I also may have had a Malaysian CD key or two in my time 😅

[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 10 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

That's if Steam was even able to connect so you could enter the key.

[–] ByteOnBikes 4 points 11 hours ago

This nightmare of the server being down on day 1 (and sometimes the whole week) is what trained me to never buy a game on release.

It still happens! To this day!

[–] IHawkMike@lemmy.world 4 points 19 hours ago

Same. I think Civ 5 was my gateway game.

[–] gitamar@feddit.org 26 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

I remember the uproar when CS 1.6 required steam. It was huge and everyone was angry. It took a lot of pull that CS didn't die because of steam, a lot of players stayed on 1.5 for a long time. But HL2 was too big of an argument to stay off steam.

[–] ByteOnBikes 24 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

I was finally convinced when steam sales were incredibly favorable.

I could either go to Gamespot and buy a used game for $20 + tax and have to deal with some sweat giving me shit about my gaming choices. Or buy that same game digitally for $10.

Around 2011, I remember not buying consoles anymore and continuing to grow my PC collection.

Around 2017, my pirating dropped significantly. I think I had like 1000+ steam games from buying so many bundles.

By 2020, I didn't pirate a single PC game, the games I bought 10 years ago still work, and I bought a game from the Microsoft Store, only to rebuy it on Steam.

[–] greybeard@lemmy.one 10 points 20 hours ago

It was Garry's mod that got me personally. I saw it somewhere and my jaw dropped, I had to have it. Steam didn't make a lot of sense to me at the time, but the thought of a physics sandbox was practically unheard of before that.

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 47 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I mean.... It was a gamble. Internet was still young. Speeds weren't keeping up with game sizes outside a few major cities. I was mailed a few large files because it was quicker than downloading them. Not to mention the desire for physical copies over a digital thing you can lose with a bad hard drive was at an all time high.

Then people realized the internet wasn't just nerd shit, ISPs slowly ramped up their DL speeds and suddenly the thing people mocked for not being feasible is doing well because of how convenient it became.

Gabe even admits he had doubts for awhile.

I wonder where gaming would be if he had listened to the doubters. There's no denying valve has had a major impact on modern gaming

[–] Illecors@lemmy.cafe 2 points 11 hours ago

Someone would've picked up the model. The execution? Doubt it.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 4 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

You forced it on people by demanding it for a must-have game... which came on discs. To some extent, even now, fuck you.

Other comments talk about great sale prices, which is often an anticompetitive practice called "dumping."

I'd be less blunt if people could admit it's a monopoly. 'Oh I never even consider other stores.' Uh-huh. 'I mean there's competitors, but they hardly matter. Even billion-dollar companies can't make theirs relevant.' You don't say. 'Valve can even afford to let devs sell keys wherever, and the customers still get their ecosystem!' Yeah, wow. We have a word for that. 'How dare you.'

[–] Virkkunen@fedia.io 1 points 4 hours ago

Steam is a monopoly surely, but it's a rare case, or maybe the only case, where it became a monopoly both because it is actually a good service that is not enshittified, and because the competitors kept shooting themselves in the foot.

I guess that's what you get when you don't have any obligation to shareholders.

[–] webpack@ani.social 6 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (2 children)

I think most ppl agree that it's a monopoly, it's just that they are a monopoly not because of anticompetitive practices but because everyone else sucks. steam does give a lot of value to small game devs cause it makes it easy for ppl to find your game (but I'm not sure if that's worth the 30% revenue cut). if there was a better platform that took less revenue then devs would simply use that instead.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 2 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I don't agree that being the best at a thing is a monopoly. Being the literal only thing is a monopoly.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works -1 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

No monopoly has ever been literally the only thing.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 1 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

there are thousands of government-granted monopolies where they are literally the only thing

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 1 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

SiriusXM is that kind of monopoly right fucking now. They are the only provider of satellite radio and have no direct competition after XM and Sirius were allowed to merge.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Wow, hopefully we'll invent some competing way to listen to music in a car.

But y'know what, sure, my absolute was overreaching.

Yours still was too.

Standard Oil never had all the oil. AT&T never had all the phone lines. The worst, most blatantly illegal monopolies had competitors. They were still monopolies. What the word almost always means, does not require 100.0% market share. Shit gets weird well before that.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

AT&T did have all the phone lines in a given area. They still do. Just like cable. The market isn't always as broad as the entire world, the entire country, or even an entire state. Comcast has a monopoly in many places by being the only provider of cable service in a lot of places, just as AT&T was the only provider of phone service to a lot of places.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 1 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

And if a single house in the county has DirecTV, it doesn't count. Right?

AT&T tended to have abundant small competitors, even since the 19th century. They just kept suing them out of existence or buying them.

All of which is really missing the fucking point - absolute monopoly is rare and weird. Most monopolies have competitors. They're still monopolies. They command overwhelming market share, which lets them single-handedly shape the market. Having that power is what makes them a monopoly - abusing that power would make them a trust.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 1 points 15 hours ago
load more comments
view more: next ›