If they don't like closeness, maybe release Steam (both app and server) under open source license?
If they're afraid of somebody coping them, use AGPL license.
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
If they don't like closeness, maybe release Steam (both app and server) under open source license?
If they're afraid of somebody coping them, use AGPL license.
I support their ethos but also can't justify the purchase.
Same and I don’t blame them for it, like I would if Apple or Microsoft did that.
Yeah it's just unfortunate market timing with the hardware shortages
Sony sold the PS3 at a pretty significant loss and had an "OtherOS" feature that allowed people to install Linux on it.
Between that and ots cell architecture, it turned out to be a super affordable way to build supercomputers. Sony eventually disabled the OtherOS feature to combat people buying them en masse and costing Sony their lunch, and they got a LOT of flack for it.
Valve is doing the opposite. They're keeping the openness, but charging enough money it's not financially viable to buy a bunch of Steam Machines to build cheap AI clusters.
Sony eventually disabled the OtherOS feature to combat people buying them en masse and costing Sony their lunch, and they got a LOT of flack for it.
And also tried to get Youtube to reveal the identities of everyone who watched George Hotz's PS3 hacking video so they could attempt to individually sue them. Don't forget that part.
Sony eventually disabled the OtherOS feature to combat people buying them en masse and costing Sony their lunch
By people I assume you’re talking about the U.S. Navy lmao
The Navy has people too!
i mean, yea?
the reason consoles are sold under cost is because they are trying to lock you into buying games in their ecosystem.
if valve is not trying to lock you into their ecosystem… then why would they ever sell the steam machine at a loss?
I've also read speculation that selling it at a loss could contribute to antitrust lawsuits against them. Basically if they sell gaming PCs below cost, and the gaming PCs incentivize Steam use over other platforms, there would be an argument that Valve was using their 30% sales cut to sell hardware others can't compete against, to further cement their monopoly. This would be partially countered by the open nature of the device, but not fully since it would still "steer" common users towards steam over other platforms.
This isn't an issue for console makers because there are multiple competing consoles with valid market share.
I mostly believe this, but I also believe it isn't a negative for Valve.
The hate towards Valve right now is so fucking weird. Is it perfect? No. Are they actively contributing to projects which can break the M$ coalition? Yes.
Don't let perfection be the enemy of progress, and accept the wins. When Valve actually becomes anticompetitive (big when), then speak up. Otherwise you have bigger fish to fry.
Here's one: Microsoft itself. So tired of hearing shit about Valve from people still booting Windows every day.
Its because most people have a childish understanding of complex issues that basically boils down to 'thing either bad or good', 'thing either perfect or evil'.
Fanboy/girlism applies to sociopolitical idologies too.
Its easier to perform purity testing to establish yourself as a morally/logically consistent person, its easier to criticize flaws...
... than it is to realize the fundamental strategy that has to be involved in achieving any kind of change from the world as it is, to the world as you'd prefer it to be.... than it is to think about broad patterns underlying decision making, as well as what those broad patterns could lead to, in a complex world with other actors who have other ideologies/behavior patterns.
You can argue that this kind of fast-food opinion/judgement formation is itself a personality aspect caused or exacerbated by the instant gratification of modern digital hypercapitalism.
Like, I don't think Valve or Gabe are perfect moral actors, I don't agree with literally everything they do or espouse.
An example of this:
Lootbox gambling is in fact bad, and that system needs to be at bare minimum, seriously reformed or reimagined. IMO, any game that a kid is capable of playing should not directly resemble the inconsistent reward structure of a slot machine, when real money can exist as either an input or output.
Of course ... if you applied that principle consistently, all gacha games should either be destroyed or massively reworked, which is literally half of the video game industry's revenue. I hold that position... if you criticize Valve on these lines, as I do... you should also hold the position that your gacha waifu pull is a moral abomination.
But... on net? In the big picture? Nearly every other major or even notable actor in the space is morally atrocious in comparison to them, and many things that Valve does are effective counter pressures to those much more atrocious things.
I'm certain a lot of bot farms by competitors are involved in spreading Valve hate. And this is happening to other companies, as well. Obviously, this is hard to prove so it's just speculation, but if I were a competitor (and an asshole) I would certainly try to manipulate public opinion using the tools at my disposal. LLMs make this kind of stuff easy enough. And we know that many many bots lurk around everywhere.
Especially since Valve is a major promoter of Linux with Proton, I could see Microsoft not being too happy with them.
Are antitrust laws enforced anymore? (At least in the US)
I know some massive merged conglomerates who would be prime targets if so.
Line Khan made incredible headway in actually enforcing the (actually pretty good) antitrust legislation that already exists, but alas, she's not in the role anymore (since Trump entered office, I think)
Despite this, I have no doubt that we'd see some pretty efficient antitrust stuff against Steam if they did subsidise the Steam machine, due to the efforts of the competitors to Steam.
The thing is, I do think that Steam has a monopoly, in that if they suddenly turned evil, it would have a disproportionately large impact on the overall gaming ecosystem. However, they only got to this position because they understood that piracy was a service issue, and did legitimately better than most of their competitors
I bet they would be (against Valve) if a competitor donated to Republicans. I mean, they're keeping a finished bridge they paid $0 for closed because the owner of a competing, tolled bridge donated to them. Of course they'll open an investigation into a smallish leftish leaning company if a large donor asked them to.
I guess Steam Workshop is a vivid hallucination of mine then.
Steam Workshop is more of a player-level storefront.
It’s a closed system that doesn’t allow owners on other platforms to access the mods (Valve actively shuts down anyone attempting to make it possible). Many mods are only uploaded to Workshop.