this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2024
112 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

37692 readers
365 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] randy@lemmy.ca 155 points 7 months ago (16 children)

If you want a preview of an uncaring and anti-consumer Valve, look no further than the company's efforts on Mac.

Valve never updated any of its earlier games to run in 64-bit mode.... Apple dropped support for 32-bit applications in 2019

Funny enough, the only platform with a 64-bit Steam client is Mac.

I don't disagree with concerns about monopoly, but the author's key example is Macs. And from the example, it sounds to me like Apple disregards backwards compatibility (dropping 32-bit support, moving to ARM chips) and Valve isn't investing to keep up. Meanwhile, Windows has a heavy backwards-compatibility focus, and Linux isn't too bad either, so no wonder they still get Valve's attention. So who is being "anti-consumer" in this example, Valve or Apple?

[–] DdCno1@beehaw.org 81 points 7 months ago

Agreed. This is a superficial history lesson masquerading as an article. While nothing lasts forever and Steam has its issues, the examples being cited are not supporting the not outrageous prediction that Steam might get worse in the future. It's just not very insightful.

Anyone who, unlike the author, actually had to deal with early versions of Steam can attest to the fact that in most ways, the platform has dramatically improved.

[–] Farias@lemmynsfw.com 30 points 7 months ago (1 children)

To be clear there’s only been a single generation (2006) of x86 based Macs that weren’t 64bit. They’ve been telling everyone since 2007 (well actually earlier even, the final PPC generation was 64bit), that the 32bit was going to go away.

I hate to defend Apple arbitrarily but all us developers had plenty of notice, and had to specifically reconfigure the default settings on their projects to only be 32bit. If developers ignore deprecation notices for over a decade, then is it really the fault of the other side?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org 13 points 7 months ago

I wouldn't say Apple disregards backwards compatibility, but they certainly don't prioritize it to the degree Microsoft does, or that the general open-source community does. For Microsoft, backwards compatibility is their bread and butter. Enterprise customers have all sorts of unsupported legacy shit, and it dictates purchasing decisions and upgrade schedules.

Apple gave devs and users a ton of lead time before dropping 32-bit support. The last 32-bit Mac hardware was in 2006 (the first gen of Intel Macs); it wasn't until Catalina's release in 2019 that 32-bit apps stopped running, and Apple continued releasing security updates for older OSes that could run 32-bit apps for a couple years after that. So that was basically 15 years of notice for devs to release 64-bit apps.

That was much more time than they gave Classic Mac apps under OS X, or PowerPC apps on Intel. I was much more annoyed when PowerPC support was axed. Only a matter of time until Intel apps stop running on Apple Silicon, too. That's gonna be the end of the world for Steam games. Ironically, it's already easier to run legacy Windows and Linux games on Mac than it is to run legacy Mac games.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 114 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

I have my criticisms of Steam, but I see no sign of it marching toward some kind of big anti-customer explosion as suggested in this article. Unlike most others, it's run by a privately owned company, so it doesn't have investors pressuring toward enshittification. We can see the result by looking back at the past decade or so: Steam has been operating more or less the same.

Meanwhile, the author offers for contrast Epic Games, a major source of platform exclusives and surveillance software (file-snooping store app, client-side anti-cheat, Epic Online Services "telemetry"), all of which are very much anti-customer.

AFAIK, only one of the other stores listed is actually better for customers in any significant way: GOG. (For the record, I mostly like GOG.) But it was mentioned so briefly that it feels like the author only did so in hopes of influencing GOG fans.

Overall, this post looks a lot like astroturfing. I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out to be sponsored by Epic or Microsoft.


Edit: I forgot something that has changed in the past decade:

Valve has spent the past five years investing in open platforms: At first by funding key parts (often the most difficult ones) of the open-source software stack that now makes gaming great on linux, and more recently by developing remarkably good and fairly open PC hardware for mobile gaming. No vendor lock-in. No subscription fees. No artificially crippled features. This has already freed many gamers from Microsoft's stranglehold, and more of us are reaping the benefits every day.

This is the polar opposite of what the author would have us fear.

[–] TwilightVulpine@kbin.social 27 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I get the risks of putting all eggs in one basket, but whenever people argue for competition using Epic as an example, a company that is demonstrably more anti-competitive and anti-consumer, it shows that they just think of the matter of theoretical ideals of evenness as opposed to benefits to the customers. I don't see any good coming from Epic having as much or more marketshare than Steam.

Unlike GOG which only offers DRM-free games, a substantial advantage compared to any other store.

[–] stardust@lemmy.ca 11 points 7 months ago

Makes me think of a Walmart opening up in a town and people arguing that the residents should buy from there because it's competition. Company just existing doesn't make it good.

[–] Corgana@startrek.website 20 points 7 months ago

Well said, private companies are incentivized to make their customers happy. Corporations are incentivized to make their shareholders happy. Sometimes those goals align, but they are not the same.

[–] Kostyeah@lemmy.ca 100 points 7 months ago (3 children)

What a garbage article lol. The only two arguments I can pick out are 1. Old steam games haven't been updated to work on macOS and 2. Some games require 3rd party launchers. I think the author was just angry that his mac dropped support for a 20 year old game.

[–] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 25 points 7 months ago (17 children)

Agreed, shitty read. The 30% cut is crazy high though, and IMO the best point the article has. Steam DOES have a monopoly and that's inherently bad

[–] Nath@aussie.zone 50 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It isn't a monopoly though. Even ignoring the Blizzards, Epics and GOGs of the web, any developer can host their game on their own Web site and market it completely independently of Steam and keep 100% of their takings.

The monopoly on storefront argument holds water in mobile land where side-loading a game is not possible/easy. In the world of computers though, I don't think the same standard applies.

[–] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 7 months ago (5 children)

That's still a monopoly. The article says it too, if you don't put your game on steam, your sales suffer. It's similar to how spotify has a monopoly on the music streaming market.

[–] Kid_Thunder@kbin.social 31 points 7 months ago (3 children)

A 30% cut for steam games sold on steam and a 0% cut for steam keys sold by the publisher wherever they want with the caveat that they must give steam users the same sales at around the same time. They get their games hosted on Steam's industry best CDN, a page with support for images and videos, an API with features users like, workshop API for mod hosting and delivery, and other SteamWorks API stuff for stuff like multiplayer, patch management without charging a fee for it, forum hosting to hit the highlights. Pretty much all of that drives engagement and is mostly turn-key though you do have to programmatically interact with their API when it makes sense.

Steam provides a lot of benefit for a 30% cut of what is sold on their store front and a lot more benefit for getting all of the above for a 0% cut if they sell steam keys outside of steam.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] exanime@lemmy.today 11 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Steam DOES have a monopoly and that's inherently bad

Being popular does not make steam a monopoly... My son plays 80% steam games but has Epic launcher installed and plays rocket League regularly

There is nothing in Steam preventing or even making it hard for you to run PC games in any other way

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[–] Grimpen@lemmy.ca 13 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Can't you use Proton on Mac? I'd think that would solve most compatibility problems.

[–] Railcar8095@lemm.ee 12 points 6 months ago

The problem is that proton needs to translate direct X to Vulcan, but Apple doesn't allow Vulcan, it has to be their own thing, Metal.

So it's a lot of work for valve and fully dependent on apple not screwing them.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 83 points 7 months ago (7 children)

Valve won't stay that way forever—the company is not immune to the pressures of capitalism

I'm glad that the author recognized the actual root cause of their argument, which is that Capitalism is bad and ruins everything, but why blame Steam for essentially just existing in a Capitalist world? They didn't choose that, and they're certainly doing a hell of a lot more than almost any other company their size that I can think of to resist shitty Capitalist practices.

It really feels like this author is just saying, "they're resisting anti-consumer enshittification practices now, so the only place to go is down, ergo 'timebomb'!".

"Every person who isn't a murderer is just a murder away from becoming a murderer. Timebomb!"

[–] BarbecueCowboy@kbin.social 39 points 7 months ago

“Every person who isn’t a murderer is just a murder away from becoming a murderer. Timebomb!”

Never thought about it that way, welp, might as well get it over with.

[–] JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz 19 points 7 months ago

The difference between Valve and almost every other company that suffers from "capitalism" is that Valve is a private company, they don't have shareholders, investors and an outsider asshole CEO demanding enshittification in the name of exponential growth.

[–] corbin@infosec.pub 14 points 7 months ago (3 children)

The issue is Steam and Valve being held up as the ‘one good company’, when there are plenty of examples to the contrary. Valve does many of the same practices as Epic, EA, etc., but there’s a double standard with Valve because it’s the default experience. The inevitable decline of Steam is going to be much worse after people spent a decade giving it a free pass on lesser issues.

[–] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 21 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

The inevitable decline of Steam is going to be much worse after people spent a decade giving it a free pass on lesser issues.

What specifically are you envisioning? If this is just a general kind of, "the bigger they are, the harder they fall" supposition, I don't think that really holds any water; it's just a platitude. If anything, Steam being so ubiquitous could more easily make it's eventual decline a catalyst for legislation to give software license ownership stronger consumer protections. The idea that we should either condemn it now or stop using it, before its decline, makes no sense to me. Is GOG better? Sure. Can it fully replace Steam? No. Is Steam better than Epic, Origin, UPlay? Absolutely. I'm just not sure what the real point of all this condemnation is when they're by far trying, by and large, to treat consumers well. It's just blaming Valve for not being totally and eternally immune to the effects of Capitalism.

the ‘one good company’

No one claims this. The only thing remotely close to that which people claim is that Valve is uniquely positioned to be one of the best digital games distribution platforms due to its private ownership insulating it against shareholder demands (which is by far the largest driver of enshittification), which is also true for GOG, but obviously Valve is still beating them out in capacity and capability currently.

there are plenty of examples to the contrary

Of course, it's a company. But it's still a billion times better than most of its competitors.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] wahming@monyet.cc 70 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

This is why beehaw needs downvotes. Crappy submissions like this article that don't make any sense

Edit: OP has been spamming his nonsense across multiple communities, and has hundreds of downvotes on each of them. Except here on beehaw...

[–] exanime@lemmy.today 16 points 7 months ago

Thank you.... I was reading and thinking "this makes no sense... Does the author know what a monopoly actually is??"

[–] Templa@beehaw.org 11 points 6 months ago (1 children)

No, Beehaw doesn't need downvotes.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev 69 points 7 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (5 children)

You forgot the Mac

Lol, fuck Mac. If Apple cared about gaming, they wouldn't have created Metal and collaborated on Vulkan. Fuck them. Valve went with Linux because they can change it to fit their needs. Can't do that with Apple.
Microsoft is only supported by Valve because it has large marketshare and can't be ignored, but it's clear that Valve is doing everything possible to get away from them: see Steam Deck.

In general, I agree with Steam wielding too much power and if they abused it, I'd be out. I have my gaming hours and can live without gaming no problem. They wouldn't get any more money from me as soon as they enshittified.

What would get me away from steam is an opensource gaming store with games that have no DRM and are predominantly opensource. Or another gaming store that worked on Linux and allowed playing games with my other linux buddies.
Get us that and I'm out.

Anti Commercial AI thingyCC BY-NC-SA 4.0

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] ShaunaTheDead@fedia.io 59 points 7 months ago

Looks like an article paid for by Epic.

Here's a repost of what I said the last time the Steam vs Epic Games Store "debate" was brought up:

My biggest concern with Epic is their insistence on kernel level anti-cheat which is just ridiculous overkill and probably being used as spyware let's be honest. They have many ties to China's Tencent which has a 40% stake in the company and is known to basically just be an extension of the Chinese government.

There's also the very odd fact that just having the Epic Games Store open in the background will deplete your laptops battery life by up to 20%. Is it just horribly optimized and uses all that battery even when idling, or is it doing something nefarious in the background? We don't know.

As for exclusives, they have bought exclusives that were mostly crowd funded from the start which is quite the kick in the teeth to the early investors that helped get the project off the ground. And there were even some exclusives that were already listed for pre-order through Steam, forcing everyone to need to get a refund.

Plus, any good will that they've purchased so far is just in service of making a good name for themselves. They've been losing around $400 million per year since 2019 just to bring in new users. They're going to suddenly turn around and start being cut-throat as soon as they think they can.

They are not consumer friendly, they want to dictate trends in gaming. Valve is already the king of that throne and they're fairly benevolent and have pushed trends that are good for gaming and consumers overall. I have serious doubt that Epic would be anywhere near as good for gaming as Valve has been if they should actually become profitable, and an industry leader. Especially when it's projected that they won't be profitable until 2027, which means they'll need to recoup their investment of nearly $3.2 billion since 2019.

[–] dandi8@kbin.social 49 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Steam is a ticking time bomb but mostly for the reason that you don't own the games you purchase there and you can't back them up (mostly) so when Steam decides to ban your account or just closes down, you lose all of your games forever.

More people should push for DRM-free games with offline installers, like GOG and Itch offer.

[–] averyminya@beehaw.org 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Idk, there's a backup system that I've put on a hard drive with a very easy to find GitHub steam drm remover. Haven't had any issues playing my games without a steam account -- sans online services for some, but most of the time I'm on trips or without Internet anyway. That said, if the idea is that in some 5-10-20 years this will happen, I feel like a lot of the online services won't be around... For as much as I love Helldivers 2, I don't really expect it to be around in 7 years. Online games from 2013 aren't all around either, and those that are aren't super populated.

On the other hand, a lot of these online services do rely on Steam, so if it went down a lot of them would need the same unofficial online servers.

I'd be more concerned if Steam were to have extreme DRM, but it's so laughable that it's literally worth paying for the game just to have the streaming/per game notes/cloud saves and for current games to not have to deal with updates and online services. But a Steam Library of mostly single player games? Anyone who is concerned can get a $50HDD and install/backup their games with Steam to and then apply the patch. Of the issues Steam has, I think this particular one is low on the list. And per the articles issue, I would actually blame the OS more than the storefront. I used to game on Mac's from 2007-2013 and let me tell you, Steam was a freaking triumph. All the Mac game stores were truly short lived, had poor support while they were alive and had things like license activations per machine, so good luck past 5 computers (talk about 15 years). Back then Aspyer ports were really great too, always something to look forward to.

Back then Steams issue was that it didn't have refunds, Tuesday Maintenance, and sometimes it would just be buggy for a bit when trying to open (on OSX -- never really had an issue on Windows). Since then they've only made it more service oriented, doing things they absolutely should, but didn't have to, like refunds applying to everyone after the AUS lawsuit instead of just that region. Looking at Apple for this one.

I would implore the author of this article to go back in time, get their games on the macgames store and other similar storefronts for OSX and I would wonder how they fare today.

I have my accounts. I have no access to those games because licenses were activated too many times or because they no longer support the current OS. So I'm effectively limited to a previous version of OSX which cannot download the app because I need a new version of the OSX store. I don't have the right terms but it was hours of hassle to find out that my OSX copy of Borderlands, Assassins Creed II and Brotherhood, and a couple others are just gone. To add insult to injury, I had to log into the account every year to keep my "platinum points" that you got for buying on that storefront, to use for discounts etc. I didn't log in so byebye incentive!

My point? I had about 250 SteamPlay games that I bought and used on OSX as a Mac gamer, which seamlessly downloaded on PC when I switched to Windows for my desktop computer. None of this is to say that Steam doesn't or can't have shortcomings, but rather that it is a substantially better service than than pretty much every alternative right now, save for GOG probably.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dosse91@lemmy.trippy.pizza 44 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (15 children)

That has to be one of the dumbest articles I've read in a while.

While I personally use Steam very rarely (I prefer to use DRM-free versions of games), Steam has done very little to be considered on its way towards enshittification.

The macos situation is completely irrelevant because at this point its market share on steam is lower than linux and it makes no sense for them to invest only to be constantly screwed over by apple changing things on their platforms. My guess is it will be dropped within the next 3-5 years.

The author points out the deprecation of Steam on older platforms, but fails to mention the fact that this wasn't always their choice, for instance the recent drop of Windows 7 support was caused by the fact that there's an embedded chromium browser in it and google dropped support for Windows 7 around that time. A similar situation happened for Windows XP, which was dropped in 2019, a full FIVE years after Microsoft dropped support for it, and at this time Steam on XP was only used for retrogaming, it made no sense to keep supporting it, there are better ways to get old games on XP.

There's barely a mention of all the good things that Valve has done for Linux gaming, but the article complains about Steam being 32 bit (which is still a requirement for wine to run, at least until the new wow64 mode becomes stable, and steam comes with its steam runtime specifically to avoid distro compatibility issues); they could have made proton only work with steam, they could have made their dxvk and vkd3d forks proprietary like nvidia did, but instead it's all open source and very easy to build on all platforms and I use my own fork every day to play games without steam. Heck, there are even competitors for the steam deck that run proton.

Also, can we mention the fact that Steam has not turned into yet another subscription service like some of its competitors?

If I had to point at something that Steam absolutely did wrong, I'd say it's allowing third party DRMs on the store, it's a consistent source of issues, especially for old games. I understand that when they made the choice we didn't have cancer like kernel level anticheat and denuvo, but still, Steam launching a launcher launching another launcher that launches the game is a trashy gaming experience and adds points of failure as we've already seen several times when big titles launch and their DRM servers go down, or when games get old and the DRM servers are shut down permanently.

While I'm sure Steam will eventually become enshittified, I don't see that happening any time soon, maybe after Gabe retires, and that's why you should keep a collection of DRM free games on your drives and not rely solely on Steam and other stores.

Just my opinion of course, feel free to disagree.

[–] derbis@beehaw.org 12 points 6 months ago

constantly screwed over by apple changing things on their platforms.

This was it for me. Like, you're going to blame valve because apple keeps pulling the carpet out from under devs and users?

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] Auzy@beehaw.org 40 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

Lemmy has gotten to the point everything is getting classed as enshittification or whatever

It's actually getting crappy being here

Like the whole section about macos. Apple constantly screws developers, and somehow, the author has seemed to blame Valve lol. There's a lot of reason lots of people don't develop for Mac, and they're mostly valid rather than political

Or GitHub. In the real world, developers don't have any issues. Only in Lemmy, where people are even focusing on stupid things, so a barely visible unobtrusive sentence on a table mentions copilot lol

[–] muhyb@programming.dev 17 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Apparently people at beehaw don't have downvote button, kinda explains this situation. The very same article on lemmy.ml is at -56 votes (at least that's what seems to me).

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] muhyb@programming.dev 37 points 7 months ago

Hahaha, this article mainly sucks.

[–] kbal@fedia.io 36 points 7 months ago (2 children)

So basically Steam is fine, has been for 20 years, and has competitors waiting to step in and take over the market if Gaben and co ever succumb to the temptation to cash in for a quick boost to corporate profits for a few years at the expense of ruining the business forever after, as impatient shareholders might demand if it were a public company, which it isn't.

It's true though, it could fall apart at any moment. So could anything. I expect piracy will be the big winner when it happens.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 18 points 7 months ago

Luckily it's not a public company and it seems its shareholders aren't interested in making a quick buck. If they were they'd have already made it obvious. If they decide to sell or IPO on the other hand (also sell), then quick buck will be the name of the game in no time.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ulkesh@beehaw.org 27 points 6 months ago (2 children)

The article in no way describes any actions taken by Valve that leads me to believe there is any impending enshittification. They simply have made decisions, a lot of which they have stuck with for many years.

Enshittification has to do with bait and switch, effectively. It’s luring customers into a false sense of loyalty and then abusing that to their financial gain (see: Reddit and Spez from 2023).

The article basically says “there are some decisions by Valve I like, and some I don’t.” That in no way provides any path toward some bomb going off. Perhaps time will prove the author right, of course, because any company can easily decide to screw over their customers, but the article is click-bait and completely speculative as to what may happen.

And due to all of the above, I think the bomb is about to go off where elephants will fly out of my refrigerator and steal my soda.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] gnuplusmatt@reddthat.com 26 points 7 months ago (6 children)

TLDR - Steam is shit because it's still 32bit?

[–] Xatolos@reddthat.com 13 points 7 months ago

More like it's because it doesn't support Mac as much as they want them to.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] stardust@lemmy.ca 18 points 7 months ago

This reads like an epic ad that expects people to buy from epic for just existing. Like arguing people should buy from the new Walmart that opened up in their town because it's competition.

[–] pythonoob@programming.dev 17 points 6 months ago

Lol at the last section of the article. Valve is actually bad guys! Just trust me!

Valve won't stay that way forever—the company is not immune to the pressures of capitalism, and there are already examples of anti-consumer behavior.

Eventually, the bomb will go off, and the full 'enshittification' of Steam will commence.

load more comments
view more: next ›