That’s art for you. Music, fine art etc I’d guess is even more lopsided.
Sales tend to be proportional to the marketing budget. You see this in every entertainment media. Movies and Music, in particular, will have marketing budgets equal or in excess of the actual production costs.
It isn’t simply that 1% of the games make 110% of the money. It’s that 1% of the games get a marketing allowance at all, while the majority of indie projects and first round game offerings just get spat out into the void with little more than a whisper.
And what percent of the “games that barely make anything” are asset flips and zero-effort slop? Like, “percent of new games that are trash” is going to be very high when the barrier to entry is “pay Valve $100 once”. This is a total junk statistic.
Like, store A where you can buy 100 good games and 1000 asset flips will score 10x better on this un-metric than store B where you can buy 10000 good games and a million asset flips. And yet nobody would ever argue that store A is a better store.
And yet nobody would ever argue that store A is a better store.
I would argue it. Store B is just Amazon. They’re the most successful retailer on the planet.
I don’t know if you consider them “asset flips” or not. But the number of anime/furry porn “puzzle” games released every single day, has to be throwing off the numbers.
An asset flip imo is anything where it’s basically identical to another game but with different art assets
AAA titles made by corporations are the trashiest of them all
And the smallest in volume. The number of games on Steam that cost a million dollars or more to make (owned by shareholder value generators) is much lower than other types. For every one Assassin’s Creed there are ten Peaks and Slay the Spires and lower quality “real, good indie games”. And for every real, good indie game there’s a hundred asset flips and ai slop “games”.
For every one Assassin’s Creed there are ten Peaks and Slay the Spires and lower quality “real, good indie games”.
I’ll spot you that for every Assassin’s Creed, there’s ten lower quality games. Probably closer to 100 lower quality games, tbh. But to suggest that there’s ten “Slay the Spire” games for every one AC? You’ve got to be kidding. Slay the Spire is exceptionally good as a deck-based rogue-like. I don’t know if I could find ten other games in the entire Steam store that compare properly. Absolutely in its own league.
And for every real, good indie game there’s a hundred asset flips and ai slop “games”.
Even games that aren’t asset flips or AI slop can be very hit-or-miss. There’s tons of mediocre JRPGs. There’s tons of Farmville-style endless click simulators. There’s puzzle games galore. There’s bad ports of older titles. There are games with crummy interfaces and miserable learning curves and needlessly graphic art.
I tried out Stellar Blade recently. And while I enjoyed the combat mechanics, the fundamental quality of the art was good, and the dialogue was… fine, I couldn’t get over the fact that I was piloting a woman in skin-tight lingerie against Dick and Ball monsters. Gave up inside the first chapter.
Tales of Arise had absolutely miserable writing. Monster Hunter: Stories was fun for maybe 5 hours before I’d figured out the mechanics and bored by the flat, unimpressive landscapes. Darkest Dungeon 2 failed to meaningfully improve on the original, while tossing in a bunch of extra mechanics that just made the game feel clunky.
Making a good game is hard even when you do it properly.
Slay the Spire and lower quality but still “real” indie games. That entire gamut. The best games ever made and “uhh it’s balatro but with throwing darts”. That’s all more numerous than AAA stuff and also dwarfed in volume by porn jigsaw puzzles, asset flips, and other actual zero effort slop “games”. AAA and “real indie games” are a tiny minority of the games on steam.
Twelve thousand “games” have been released on Steam this year as of July. That would mean the meaningless statistic in the article implies that 240 games from this year drive 85% of this year’s spending. 240 games in 2026 “worth spending money on” is not a dire portrait of AAA slurping up the market space. That “1% of games” is presented to look like “the top 1% fat cat games” when 1% absolutely includes not just the AAA and the top shelf indie (like Slay the Spire) but also the flashes in the pan and the trend chasers and the friendslop and the Balatro clones and the forever GAAS.
Those “not truly slop but” uninspired indie games like stardew clone #780 comfortably fit into the “top” 240 Steam games this year. Darkest Dungeon 2 is absolutely a “top percent” game when the overall pool includes so much actual nothing in it.
The best games ever made and “uhh it’s balatro but with throwing darts”.
Aside from being addictive, Balatro’s a popular game because it plays well on any medium. Deck-builder rogue-likes are phone friendly, PC friendly, and not entirely unapproachable on console.
AAA and “real indie games” are a tiny minority of the games on steam.
That’s all true. But even if we cut out the click-bait and the slop, lots of games fail on their own merits.
240 games in 2026 “worth spending money on” is not a dire portrait of AAA slurping up the market space.
Yeah, I absolutely agree. Adding in the denominator counts for a lot. I might caveat that with the question “Are those 240 games any good?” Because it’s very possible that slop games are what pull in all the revenue, while quality titles flounder. But, again, that would require some real actual journalism instead of click-bait rage-bait headlines.
Incidentally, has anyone asked about the state of game journalism recently? What are those stats looking like?
Yeah, and do you think those games will be part of the 1% that make 84.5% of revenue?
No, it will be the AAA games.
“Real games” (AAA, top tier indie, low tier indie) can easily be as low as 1-2% of “steam releases”. 12k games were published on Steam over half of this year. That would mean, if you want to care about this meaningless statistic of “x% of games drive y% of revenue”, that there’s room for over 240 “worthwhile” games to have released in 2026 without disrupting the scary 1% metric at all. Two hundred forty games this year. AAA releases are what, ten or twenty a year? Less? That’s not 1%, it’s 0.08%. The other 99.92% of the 1% are free to be indie games or GAAS or whatever else.
AAA titles made by corporations
arebecame the trashiest of them allBe fair. It was better many moons ago. And still valid for (many) non-US AAA.
The only reason it was better before is because before only AAA games existed.
You couldn’t make a SNES cartridge without tons of money behind it.
There is more than consoles… There always were indie-games. Just maybe not on every console. I could name a ton of excellent AAA from the good-old-times.
And yet nobody would ever argue that store A is a better store.
apple begs to differ
Apple’s customers don’t get a choice of stores in the first place.
I’d argue that that is entirely a good thing overall.
It means that Steam is very open to Indie devs (something we already know) that don’t make as much money but are passion projects for the creators.
If they’re making enough from the…let’s call them prestige titles…to be able to afford to give indie devs a place to host their passion projects and maybe get more eyes on it, than I see no problem with that.
No idie dev is going into it thinking they’re going to be next giant thing. They just want to share their work and maybe make a few bucks. And Steam gives them that, PLUS the chance that maybe they’ll be a Rimworld or a Hollow Knight; something that sparks a giant success for them.
No idie dev is going into it thinking they’re going to be next giant thing
I would argue that a significant amount of them are but that’s not the point.
I’m not sure how they started, but Brotato came from a very small studio, and rose up to top-played on Steam Deck and some other charts. It made their creators a lot of money, because they were lucky, sure, but also because they made a very good game and had a platform to sell it from.
As far as I know, Valve’s monetisation scheme for developers is also quite fair. I might be one of those fanboys, but I think they deserve it to some extent. There’s much worse players out there, and with the money Valve is making and the market share they have now, they could absolutely be one of the bad ones and not care.
Is it luck though?
It’s hard to make a game. It’s much harder to make a good game that pushes all the right buttons.
I play some of these games that probably make well under average, and there are very distinct reasons why they didn’t take off.
I believe that there’s always luck involved to some extent. You have a very valid point, though, if a game is THAT good, at some point success becomes the only plausible outcome. So definitely not a hill I would die on.
If they’re making enough from the…let’s call them prestige titles…to be able to afford to give indie devs a place to host their passion projects and maybe get more eyes on it, than I see no problem with that.
Valve is a for profit company, you have to pay to upload your games there and they take a cut of any sale. The article literally say that most games don’t make anything.
Sure. You have to rent a stall at farmer’s market if you want to sell your corn, too instead of selling it to a larger distributor. No body is saying otherwise.
The point is that having Steam as an option as an indie dev rather than having to connect to a larger publisher in order to get your work out there, is a good thing. The fact that some titles don’t make money isn’t part of it. It’s the fact that Steam at least allows these devs to cut out the middle man (the publisher). Maybe it’ll work and be a hit. Maybe it won’t. But at least they have the option to try.
No dev should consider releasing their game on the private store/platform of an evil corporation that promotes gambling to kids and who’s ceo is a billionare with a fleet of megayachts. Many devs have no better option because they are trying to make a living and catch up with life (unlike valve ceo who makes billions through questionable practices). If the market is so much centralized around certain publishers and distribuition platforms you can thank greedy corporations that for decades shaped the system to be what it is.
So in your mind, no one who is self-publishing a book should put it on Amazon. No one who is trying to sell their product on etsy should use PayPal. No one who is just trying to get rid of a few things around the house should use Facebook Marketplace… etc…
Welcome to reality. Sometimes the best of a bunch of bad options has to do. Should these companies all be put int he ground. Yes. But if we let perfect be the enemy of good, we never make any progress.
So in your mind, no one who is self-publishing a book should put it on Amazon. No one who is trying to sell their product on etsy should use PayPal. No one who is just trying to get rid of a few things around the house should use Facebook Marketplace… etc…
Exactly, don’t use these platforms they belong to evil corporations who among other things are helping israel government in a genocide
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_companies_involved_in_the_Gaza_war
Welcome to reality. Sometimes the best of a bunch of bad options has to do. Should these companies all be put int he ground. Yes. But if we let perfect be the enemy of good, we never make any progress.
You are on lemmy defending corporations, ask yourself, are you making progress?
I’m not defending anybody.
I’m saying that if you’re an author (for example) that wants to self publish instead of trying to find a big publisher to accept your manuscript, what are you going to do? Email a copy to anyone who wants to buy it? No…of course not. Similarly, if you’re a dev who wants to release a game without going through a big publisher like Activision or Bethesda or whatever…what are you going to do? Other than Steam and Itch.io, there aren’t many places to do that.
Does it suck? Yes. But the reality is that if we want to get our work out into the public, regardless of monetary concerns, we have to roll around in one mud puddle or another. Our only choice (until that changes) is how deep of a puddle we choose to get in.
if you’re a dev who wants to release a game without going through a big publisher like Activision or Bethesda or whatever…what are you going to do?
I write about it here on lemmy
Other than Steam and Itch.io, there aren’t many places to do that.
Why there aren’t many places to do that? How was it in the past? What changed? How you can improve that?
Does it suck? Yes. But the reality is that if we want to get our work out into the public, regardless of monetary concerns, we have to roll around in one mud puddle or another.
To me it sounds like the reality is that you are choosing visibility over doing what is good
Nobody is forcing games to be released on Steam. In fact some of the biggest games played today are not on Steam. Roblox is not on Steam. Fortnite is not on Steam. Minecraft is not on Steam. Any game made by Riot games is not on Steam. Even smaller indie titles can easily get by without being on Steam. Vintage Story is not on Steam, Hytale is not on Steam. There are more titles whose name I can’t remember off the top of my head that are doing just fine without being on Steam.
Most devs put their game on Steam because not everyone wants to handle the stuff that comes with setting up your own game delivery platform and, whether you like it or not, Steam actually helps with visibility. I can give you an example right now. I had never heard of “The Black Grimoire: Cursebreaker” until Steam recommended it to me a few days ago. It’s been out for 2 years and I’ve probably not heard of it because there’s barely anything about it on the web. Now it’s in my to play list. An indie dev just made some money because Steam advertised that game to me. In fact there are a lot of indie titles I’ve picked up due to Steam regularly promoting games through things like the Steam Next Fest or themed sales. I’ve also found games through the Steam Discovery feature but I don’t use it that much because it tends to mix in popular games I’m not interested with games I am interested in and most of the time I find what I want to buy without even needing to use it.
So your “evil greedy corporation” spiel only works when you ignore all the things Steam does that end up beneficial for indie games.
Nobody is forcing you to have a computer, buy gasoline or even own an house.
I had never heard of “The Black Grimoire: Cursebreaker” until Steam recommended it to me a few days ago.
Have you ask yourself why you never heard about it? Read my previous comment.
So your “evil greedy corporation” spiel only works when you ignore all the things Steam does that end up beneficial for indie games.
I believe you are ignoring all the evil greedy shit they do, such as promoting gambling to kids.
Nobody is forcing you to have a computer, buy gasoline or even own an house.
Of course not. Having a computer is a convenience thing, owning a house should be a fundamental human right but under the capitalist system it’s also turned into a convenience. Gasoline is also a convenience and as a matter of fact I don’t regularly buy gasoline because I avoid driving a car whenever possible. You might not even understand that you’re actually arguing against your own point here. The developers all have other options than Steam and just like me picking what conveniences I’m okay with they simply pick Steam because it’s the most convenient option for them. And just like my moral code makes me pick the less convenient option when it comes to gas so can devs pick a less convenient option when they’re not okay with Steam, I even brought examples of developers choosing to not be on Steam and still be successful. The idea that they have to use Steam to make a living is ridiculous.
Have you ask yourself why you never heard about it? Read my previous comment.
You mean this?
If the market is so much centralized around certain publishers and distribuition platforms you can thank greedy corporations that for decades shaped the system to be what it is.
So publishers and distribution platforms are the reason why the game has barely any presence on Youtube and really no other communities beyond a wiki and a Steam community. That’s a borderline conspiracy theory.
And a counter-question to you. If the publishers and distribution platforms have shaped the system in a way to make sure you see what they want you to see, why did a distribution platform recommend this game to me in the first place? And why 2 years after it released? I thought they were supposed to feed me only the games they want me to buy not the games I want to buy.
I believe you are ignoring all the evil greedy shit they do, such as promoting gambling to kids.
I’m not ignoring those things. I’m all for criticizing Valve for promoting gambling and trying to skirt the gambling laws (which would also make it illegal for them to let kids gamble). I’ve criticized them on this very point before and I don’t mind criticizing them on this point for as long as they’re doing it. That said.
This is simply not relevant to the current discussion because the money Valve makes from gambling goes straight to Valve and has nothing to do with indie developers. Unless you want to somehow drag indie developers into this gambling shit. Honestly you’d look less like a rambling hater if you could focus your criticism instead of lashing out at everything.
So publishers and distribution platforms are the reason why the game has barely any presence on Youtube and really no other communities beyond a wiki and a Steam community. That’s a borderline conspiracy theory.
In case you haven’t noticed if you search for a video on youtube you get 3 video results and the rest is all ads and sponsored content
That seems like a good distribution for digital art and entertainment.
Okay, but explain how consumer preferences are somehow Steam’s fault?
If you told me it was that way because Steam was boosting AAA games and suppressing indie titles, then okay, you have a valid reason to criticize Steam for that, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.
Okay, but explain how consumer preferences are somehow Steam’s fault?
Valve is a for profit company, they make money by advertising games and selling them, their website is literally an ad shelf.
doesn’t seem to be the case.
It seem the case to me that they are advertising the shit out of certain games with ads as big as the entire screen.
Even etsy creators advertise their more profitable products instead of things that barely sell. Apart from the top banner on the store page everything steam advertises is based on demand, calculated by sales numbers and whishlists, and relevance to your library.
Even decentralized platforms like Lemmy operate under this exact principal, a decentralised gamestore would show you the same games as steam does.
If you want to see everything, you are free to set your steam store to new releases. Have fun sifting trough hundreds of cash grabs and “garbage” first time passion projects to find a single interesting game.
Even decentralized platforms like Lemmy operate under this exact principal,
There are no ads on lemmy
“Walmart advertises some of the things they sell, but never advertise the off brand water” ok, and???
Walmart and valve are two corporations.
Ok, I guess its my turn.
And?
That’s basically the story of the whole economy.
Podcasts, music, film, paintings, novels…Linux distributions, ice cream flavor sales…literally everything.
Upvotes on lemmy posts…
You could indeed argue that lemmy follow similar patterns, for example threads posted in popular subs predates all other content. If you ask me this is a big problem and the result of a design shaped around advertising and content manipulation inherited from reddit.
Hell, the website I get knitting patterns from has the same situation. The top 1% of designers make all the dough. But it’s great to have a platform that anybody can submit patterns to. The top designers pay the bills and they keep people coming back.
The platforms also create the new top designers/performers by letting new talents submit for free.
Like live streaming, Twitch have no clue who’s going to become big and who’ll stay at 2 concurrent viewers. But you need to let everyone try, to be able to have the few that rises to the top
ice cream flavor sales
Strawberry’s fallen on hard times. We need to seize the means of chocolate production and distribute the wealth among all our fellow flavors.
Athletes, at least in the sports that make any money at all.
Would Pareto be ecstatic or rolling in his grave at this disparity?
What? You never played Monopoly before? What do you think the endgame is?
The Monopoly endgame is spending as much time in jail as possible to evade property tax and fees.
Yeah but you gotta own the best properties before you do that.
For profit centralized economy perhaps
Should they pool game sales earnings and distribute the money equally among developers? I can’t think of any other platform that based on my own tastes recommends me games that don’t even have double digit all time high concurrent players (at most just basic lists that end up burying old titles at the end of the queue) and that I end up buying.
There’s plenty of valid criticism for steam, I don’t understand why we should focus on nitpicking.
Behold the whole story of every economy
Pareto principle at work
I really dont get this, there have been and still are things you can very much criticise valve for but people come up with the most insane shit to criticise them for. “Uhh yeah this problem affecting the whole game industry is steams fault”. Also the top 1% are prolly aldo much much more expensive to produce so i dont think its as bad as it sounds at first but yeah.
Candy Crush makes about a billion dollars a year. GTA V makes about 500 million from selling shark cards. Whatever happening at the steam store to warrant an article like this isn’t on steam, its 100% on consumers being dumbasses.
It’s also just the fact that some games are better than others. For every Factorio and Hollow Knight, there are a hundred other games that aren’t as good that significantly less people buy.
It’s also on many people wanting to play AAA games and there not being many good AAA games so everyone plays the same few good ones
Barely make anything compared to multi million companies
Solo dev games can make a fraction of what those giant games and the dev can live a very comfortable life. Etc: balatro
Very pointless article.
But that’s the thing. It’s incredibly rare that a indie game becomes successful enough to sustain even a single developer. It’s like with every other entertainment industry. YouTube, OF, Twitch, TikTok, you are competing with millions of other people in exactly the same situation as you. I think it’s OF where you need to be in the top 25% to earn $1k per year.
Hard work and clever marketing can improve your chances of a success, but you still need to be extremely lucky to be noticed enough to make a living out of it.
I remember this talk about a developer making a living as a game dev. Not by making inspiring or “good” games, but by pretty much endlessly reskinning solitare games.
Have you ever considered the fact that these games suck?
as a hobby game dev (i made this game), i can confirm that most indie games do not reach the stage where they would be enjoyable by other players.
Talking about statistics is not pointless, it’s quite interesting sometimes even.
Games like Balatro or Stardew Valley are absolute unicorns. Most smaller teams and solo devs that have a constant stream of some revenue through Steam need to work on the side to earn a living.
The point they’re making is pointless. Should have clarified my self better. I think this is an issue of behemoth companies are eating the big chunk of market and not leaving anything for the smaller creators to make a living. Same like McDonald’s is everywhere squishing smaller burger shops.
This a market problem not steam. The article points it like it’s steam’s fault. IMHO steam does its best to support indie devs. they even patch their games so they’d have a smooth release (sorry its a Reddit link)
So what? The vast majority of games released on Steam are either hobby or student projects or just first time devs’ shitty pixel platformer. Many are low effort products, Steam will not even give those games “shelve space”. The algorithm will based on pre launch and launch metrics decide if it should push the game in front of customers in the recommendation sections of the store. If a game can’t even move the needle a bit after launch Steam will blackhole the game and basically make it invisible in the store unless a customer searches for it. Because even though it’s a virtual store, “shelve space” aka the recommendation section is still scarce.
The hidden gem games on Steam are rare. Every time I watch a dev’s postmortem on Youtube who talks about how little they sold I’m rarely surprised when I see the game.
Also Steam generates around $10+ Billion in revenue in a year. So the other games generate around $2 Billion. If that is generated by 2000 games that still averages to a million a game.
Also don’t forget all the shovelware low effort games for farming “achievements” achievements
1 in 11 games released last year has 0 reviews.
https://steamdb.info/stats/releases/
~21.500 titles released in 2025, we’ve seen more than 16.000 games released this year so it will once again break a new record for titles released in a year.
That data also shows which games never got out of the “limited game status”. Around 16200 of games released in 2025 have the limited games status. Meaning these games were not making enough money or nothing at all and had not enough player engagement to unlock profile features.
If you look at the numbers of games that unlocked profile features the growth is much lower. Those are the numbers that matter anyway. 5000 games made actual money. And if we apply the Pareto principle than a thousand games made the vast majority of the new release revenue that year.
So what?
So if you release a game on steam not only you are promoting a centralized closed platform owned by a billionare but there’s a good chance you are not getting much in return.
Good chance if your game didn’t do well on Steam that you didn’t make a good game that has high product-market fit in the first place and didn’t promote it properly. We are now in an era where indie devs have become millionaires from their $15 games. And I’m not just talking about Edmund McMillen and Johnathan Blow. Go back to the days of brick and mortar retail and that was nigh impossible when a small studio would earn pennies on the dollar for every sold unit.
That’s basically how art and media have always worked. This isn’t a function of Steam, or even the modern economy.
That’s basically how art and media have always worked.
No, that’s how advertising has always work.
There is always going to be more art produced than people want to buy - nothing Valve can do to change that. Hell, it doesn’t even require capitalism - a similar ratio was seen when most art was produced via patronage half a millennia ago. If anything, Steam with whatever faults it has, democratizes it more by making it easier to discover niche stuff with limited appeal.
There are also always going to be big ass ads on steam
So just replying with meaningless and unrelated word salad now? Got it.
So, yes?
Jesus, the gamesradar site is absolute ass
The data: https://weloveit.io/developers/steam-revenue-report/
The top 10% of games make 98.80% of all revenue. Woof.
That makes sense right? Aren’t 90% of games just kind of trash? If you open the store page and it says 14 Mostly Negative reviews of course you’re not buying it. Top 10% is a huge number and basically encompasses all the thousands of videogames I would ever want to actually play.
And even before all the AI slop flooding app stores we’ve had plenty of asset flip type games that barely counted as complete games.
Even before that. Atari kind of failed due to overproduction of bad games
Aren’t 90% of games just kind of trash?
Answer, per Sturgeon’s Law: “Ninety percent of everything is crap”
Right… Nobody is buying games with mostly negative reviews unless they’re under duress…
Or are huge fans of things like “Air Control”
almost suprised its that low, but I suppose “sex with hitler 2” has some audience
Really topics against Steam are getting ridiculous.
Like ok. Is Steam supposed to force players to buy shit games too so that the distribution curve flattens?
I’m gonna pump so many AI shit games so I can get my fair share 🥰
Really topics against Steam are getting ridiculous.
Less ridiculous than the people defending a corporation who makes money promoting gambling to kids and that is owned by a billionare with multiple private yachts
It’s really sad to see in this place among others so many people defending a for profit corporation that belongs to a billionare and his centralized closed third party software launcher. Anyone arguing this is the law of nature should take a break from videogames and go outside to enjoy nature.
In a vacuum it sucks, but we’re grading on a curve here. The nice thing about valve is that it’s asleep at the wheel. Yes they’re making ridiculous amounts of money but they could be making more if they decided to “develop” their platform, and it would be bad for everyone. Cthulhu sleeps and I for one would prefer the situation continue.
As for the billionaire…. I have no strong opinion about him, but again we’re grading on a curve here, it’s amazing how few countries he’s ruined or pedos he’s been in photos with, I have limited hate to spread around and I don’t have sufficient justification to smear any on him.
It reminds me of the manufactured hate on Taylor Swift.
Yea, she’s rich; but being rich alone, and using a plane, is not the direct cause of everyone’s misery. It’s often a red flag, yes, and can point to other things. We can argue they should pay more taxes, but even more we argue that they shouldn’t have intense control over our politics. And from what I see, Gabe and Swift don’t.
Yeah, if I had a lot of money, I’d probably buy a boat. Probably not 20 or whatever, but idk. I’d probably fly a lot of places. Probably not that many, but idk. Regardless, I 100% still would not traffic or rape children. Just the kind of guy I am, I guess.
Name one other company that’s doing more for open source and open platforms than Valve.
They’ve helped push gaming on Linux from a very niche process to basically having Windows native games work better on Linux than on Windows. They do this via Proton which they upstream into WINE (all open source and free to use by anyone).
They’ve silently funded an x86 to ARM emulator for years and it’s entirely open source (anyone can use it).
The Steam client is a 1st class citizen on Linux. It doesn’t matter that their client is closed source, because all the tools they employ is open source. The client is mostly just the store portion of their stuff. The actual tools that run the games are open source.
They’re also the only major games store that supports Linux natively (itch.io exists, and they’re great, but Steam is so much bigger).
Name a company that does even half of that. Just one company.
Name one other company that’s doing more for open source and open platforms than Valve.
Any non profit company who’s products isn’t a proprietary third party software launcher.
They’ve helped push gaming on Linux from a very niche process to basically having Windows native games work better on Linux than on Windows.
They have built a semi-monopoly on videogames relying for two decades on closed source products and windows, they are now looking at the linux share because microsoft in the past years made bullish acquisitions in the videogames industry.
The Steam client is a 1st class citizen on Linux. It doesn’t matter that their client is closed source, because all the tools they employ is open source.
If the client doesn’t matter that much that’s even more reasons to release the source code.
Name a company that does even half of that. Just one company.
companies usually make money, non profit organizations help people
Any non profit company who’s products isn’t a proprietary third party software launcher.
You’re being disingenuous. You know full well the context of the argument precludes non-profits.
They have built a semi-monopoly on videogames relying for two decades on closed source products and windows, they are now looking at the linux share because microsoft in the past years made bullish acquisitions in the videogames industry.
You might want to check your math on that. Steam on Windows was originally released in 2003, and released on Linux in 2013.
And the reason for their interest has nothing to do with Microsoft’s game studio acquisitions, and everything to do with Microsoft’s attempts to lock down the Windows ecosystem back in the Windows 8/RT days.
If the client doesn’t matter that much that’s even more reasons to release the source code.
No one said it doesn’t matter. It’s their software/platform/service. They can do whatever they want, and it’s their right to do so. If you don’t want to use their platform, you don’t have to.
companies usually make money, non profit organizations help people
Usually. But the fact that Valve’s interests align with the benefits of its userbase isn’t a bad thing. Making money isn’t a crime, and making money while building a system people like also isn’t a bad thing.
You seem to have a strange hatred towards Valve for simply existing. Are you friends with Tim Sweeney or something?
And the reason for their interest has nothing to do with Microsoft’s game studio acquisitions, and everything to do with Microsoft’s attempts to lock down the Windows ecosystem back in the Windows 8/RT days.
Both of them.
If you don’t want to use their platform, you don’t have to.
Exactly, don’t use it
Usually. But the fact that Valve’s interests align with the benefits of its userbase isn’t a bad thing.
My interests are in free, open source and decentralized platforms. What about yours?
Making money isn’t a crime
Making billions is a crime because there is no good way to do it, you have to be greedy and use shady methods to gain so much money. Valve promotes gambling to kids and makes a billion a year on microtransactions.
You seem to have a strange hatred towards Valve for simply existing.
Billionares and corporations do not simply exist, they are built on the exploitation of others
Both of them.
Between 2003 (the launch of Steam on Windows) and 2013 (the launch of Steam on Linux) Microsoft acquired two game studios. Whereas in 2018 alone (the start of their acquisition spree) they acquired six.
Exactly, don’t use it
Well, I want to use it. There is no better game store with as many good deals, and that supports Linux.
Show me a game store that supports Linux with a good selection of games of modern and major game titles.
Also, Steam directly supports and funds a plethora of open source tools that benefit everyone.
My interests are in free, open source and decentralized platforms. What about yours?
Agreed, which is why I use Linux and support companies that also support Linux.
Making billions is a crime because there is no good way to do it
Billionares and corporations do not simply exist, they are built on the exploitation of others
You’re right about 99.99+% of cases. And I’m not defending Valve as some altruistic company. But lumping in Valve with the likes of Amazon, Oracle, Nvidia, Monsanto, Elon Musk, etc, simply on the amount of money they make is desingenous at best, but frankly is insane.
You’re one of those people that have a militant mindset when it comes to FOSS that gives open source a weird and bad reputation.
Open source literally cannot exist without companies using it to make money. The majority of funding for things like development of Linux itself comes directly from donations from for-profit companies.
Hell, the historically two largest distributions by install count (Ubuntu and Fedora) are developed and maintained by for-profit companies.
Say “hi” to Tim Sweeney. Tell him Canada is just fine without him moving here.
Show me a game store that supports Linux with a good selection of games of modern and major game titles.
I suggest you to not play proprietary junk that belongs to evil corporations.
https://libregamewiki.org/Main_Page
If you feel the urge to play to certain videogames and can’t resist you are probably addicted to these.
Also, Steam directly supports and funds a plethora of open source tools that benefit everyone.
So do other evil corporations like microsoft and google. They do more damage than good.
You’re right about 99.99+% of cases. And I’m not defending Valve as some altruistic company. But lumping in Valve with the likes of Amazon, Oracle, Nvidia, Monsanto, Elon Musk, etc, simply on the amount of money they make is desingenous at best, but frankly is insane.
Valve ceo owns more megayachts than bezos or elon musk and his company promotes gambling to kids and sell you games under DRMs.
They are just as bad
You’re one of those people that have a militant mindset when it comes to FOSS that gives open source a weird and bad reputation.
You are defending a billionare corporation, do you have any reputation at all?
