Hint: :q!
Community rules (click to expand)
sudo in Windows.Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.
Honestly, the secret is not being a publicly traded company. All the others have to make the shareholders happy while steam just does steam. If the line doesn't have to constantly go up you can pretty much do whatever you want as long as you're still making profit. And if what you're doing is already working you don't need to add gimmicks or advertisements to milk it as much as you can just to appease the shareholders.
Being a private company has allowed Valve to take some really big swings. Steam Deck is paying off handsomely, but it came after the relative failure of the Steam Controller, Steam Link and Steam Machines. With their software business stable, they can allow themselves to take big risks on the hardware side, learn what does and doesn't work, then try again. At a publically traded company, CEO Gabe Newell probably gets forced out long before they get to the Steam Deck.
Man Intel are so dumb for firing Pat. And they did it while seeing positive reviews for their second gen GPUs!
That's just what happens to CEOs of publicly traded companies when they have a bad year. And Intel had a really bad year in 2024. I'm certainly hoping that their GPUs become serious competition for AMD and Nvidia, because consumers win when there's robust competition. I don't think Pat's ousting had anything to do with GPUs though. The vast majority of Intel's revenue comes from CPU sales and the news there was mostly bad in 2024. The Arrow Lake launch was mostly a flop, there were all sorts of revelations about overvolting and corrosion issues in Raptor Lake (13th and 14th gen Intel Core) CPUs, broadly speaking Intel is getting spanked by AMD in the enthusiast market and AMD has also just recently taken the lead in datacenter CPU sales. Intel maintains a strong lead in corporate desktop and laptop sales, but the overall trend for their CPU business is quite negative.
One of Intel's historical strength was their vertical integration, they designed and manufactured the CPUs. However Intel lost the tech lead to TSMC quite a while ago. One of Pat's big early announcements was "IDM 2.0" ("Integrated Device Manufacturing 2.0"), which was supposed to address those problems and beef up Intel's ability to keep pace with TSMC. It suffered a lot of delays, and Intel had to outsource all Arrow Lake manufacturing to TSMC in an effort to keep pace with AMD. I'd argue that's the main reason Pat got turfed. He took a big swing to get Intel's integrated design and manufacturing strategy back on track, and for the most part did not succeed.
k
Does nothing? DOES NOTHING?! He spent the last few years ripping Microsoft a new a@@hole, rendering their operating system meaningless for gamers! ..but nice meme
Gaben has done lots of awesome shit. I fear what valve will become when he's gone.
I'm not actually too worried. He surrounds himself with champions.
"If you have the patience to sit by the river and wait, eventually, the corpses of your enemies will float by." Sun Tzu
You know sometimes I actually straight up FORGET that Steam is run by the same company that created Half-Life?
They:
When you do something well, people don't notice you've done anything at all.
I think the key was that Steam wasn't created to make money, but to solve problems they themselves had, like "How do we get new versions of Counter Strike out to all these players?"
Then as Valve wasn't the only company having these problems, the solution could easily be sold to others.
If the other companies really wanted to crack Steam's near-monopoly, the solution would be to tackle the problems associated with not having all your games on Steam. Work together on a open-source launcher supporting all stores, similar to GOG Galaxy. First make something useful that tackles an unsolved problem, then you can make money off it when it becomes successful.
Instead they go in just trying to make a buck, and end up just being worse versions of Steam.
That ended up being a bit of a rant, but I'm frustrated at their shortsighted market strategies :p
Oh indeed! And that's why I love GOG! I actually try to check GOG first just in case I can buy a game I want there before I go through with buying it on steam. I would actually gladly pay MORE for the GOG version because it removes bullshit like DRM!
I used to do the same, but I lost a lot of confidence in GOG after they retroactively restricted their cloud saves to 200 MB.
My hundred-hour Witcher 3 save is exactly the kind of thing I want backed up, but that's no longer possible. And the very low limit they set, and the urgency with which they started deleting the very data they were expected to keep safe, reeks of a desperation to save money that makes me hesitant to invest more in their ecosystem.
I really want them to succeed though, and I think they have the right idea with Galaxy. Even Epic giving me games for free doesn't make me actually use their client or store.
But somehow the obvious idea of forming a consortium to develop open standards and implementations for game clients, doesn't seem like something that will ever happen.
Private company with long-term strategy VS public company chasing short-term profits to pump stock prices for shareholders.
That's the primary reason I abhor the stock market. It no longer works for the creator/owner or the customers at all. It simply feeds the greed of the wealthy (special call-out to private equity here).
Just my two cents but as others have said, not being publically traded helps a lot. The focus on short term benefits that come with shareholders stops "master plans" when they come with mistakes. Learning from relative failures, like the steam controller and the like, ultimately contributes to major successes like the steam deck. Being able to stay committed to improving the software experience over time, instead of killing the product when it didn't immediately succeed, is fairly rare in the tech industry. And in all honesty, it would be better if they released a polished profuct, but being committed to it made it a success.
I feel like the pressure to have a majorly successful product day one means that smaller companies can't innovate the way they want to, so they have to find other ways to produce revenue. Huge companies, like Apple can afford to do both but still stumble, like with the vision pro. Maybe it'll be a success, but for now its not great and iteration makes it more difficult to maintain the original vision.
Idk. With that camera setup I imagine myself on a black leather sofa with a plain white wall behind it.
Gabe , what kind of movie are we making? Gaben?
Half life 3 : ReLoaded