Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 55

Thread: Is Valve's Steam antithetical to Linux and the very core of the open source spirit?

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nevertime View Post
    a steam monopoly is better for us than no games at all. So in the short term Steam is a very good thing for Linux
    Desktop Linux, and gaming on desktop linux is growing for reasons that are much larger than Valve/Steam:

    - iOS/Android are huge. The Microsoft monopoly on client devices has been broken. Years ago, most game developers were fine to use Microsoft exclusive tools that produced apps that were Windows exclusive. Recently, that has really changed, and there is a much stronger push towards platform neutral APIs. For things like 3D graphics, sounds, and keyboard/mouse input, there really is no reason to use a non-portable single platform API over a platform neutral one.

    - Linux in general, is in way better shape than it was years ago. Today users get can get the latest and greatest web browsers like Google Chrome, rock solid Flash/YouTube, and "it-just-works" installation and hardware compatibility (mostly). None of these things were true in the past. Years ago, Linux wasn't practical compared to Windows for many usages. Today, beyond cost and ideology, it is just a better product for many productivity uses. Anecdotally, I see many programmers and tech types are switching and are surprised by how much better it is. The command line is *way* better, the software repo is awesome and makes it easier to install zillions of tools like python and git and keep everything patched and avoid malware/adware. For command line centric programming tools like python, ruby, octave, java, scala, git, etc, Linux just makes more sense. I would even say that things like Microsoft Word that locked a lot of people into Windows have been somewhat replaced by markup tools like markdown and TeX.

    Now that people are using Linux in larger numbers as their main work/school productivity machine, games are sure to follow. Linux doesn't need a Steam at all for games.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanLamb View Post
    This is the main retort. People are excited about Steam because it's a popular brand and bandwagon and lends credible popularity, even if it isn't doing anything interesting technologically and even if it isn't principled and expects to take a large share of revenues without logical justification. Those sound like weak reasons to support it and strong reasons to oppose it.
    I think you're underselling steam. Running a content delivery network with user access control that size of steam is an interesting technological problem, which is one of the reasons you didn't see many of them when steam was released and still, there are few with the reliability of steam at this time. Everyone would have a store like steam if it was easy, but most of what we see is people making a grandiose mess with their attempts just like the majority of clouds.

    Valve have earned their place in the market by being forward thinking while offering added value to your experience. There is a significant amount of logical justification for them to take their cut, which most people will point out is siginficantly less than publishing via bricks and mortar would take from you. Unless you can argue valve employees should work for free, I doubt many people are going to lose sleep over the fact they're making money from giving us what few else would.

    Still, feel free to buy games direct from the companies that offer that. It's likely the ones that don't are happy with the agreement that valve have with them.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Yes, to OP's headline. It's also malware and DRM.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    87

    Default

    The drm is bugging me a lot and i also miss 64bit support.
    If the game is available on Desura i rather buy it there even if it costs a lot more (DRM free and 64bit support).
    If i buy a game on steam and later buys a bundle pack i can't give away or sell the stand alone game, and that feels like fraud.
    Why can't i give a game i bought to a friend if i buy a bundle (first game and the sequel), i bought the game and should be able to do what i want with it.
    Last edited by Nille_kungen; 04-07-2013 at 11:54 AM.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Santiago, Chile
    Posts
    242

    Default

    It's not like Steam forbids you to run Desura, or to install those packages through your ordinary package management system.

  6. #46

    Default The communities greatest strength

    .. is that the GNU zealots can go use gnusense and leave everyone else alone. So go do that and allow the people that want to use Steam to enjoy their freedom to use Steam.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ownagefool View Post
    Everyone would have a store like steam if it was easy
    Steam definitely isn't easy, but it's primarily not a technical issue. Similarly with Facebook and Twitter. There is real technical craft and excellence in those sites but they are really entrenched due to their user base and there is no room for a competing service that merely offers technical competence. Of course various other entities could build a DRM + auto-patch + social network service like Steam but there isn't room or demand for another service like that. Maybe Desura or Ubuntu's store front could take off on Linux.

    Quote Originally Posted by ownagefool View Post
    Valve have earned their place in the market by being forward thinking while offering added value to your experience. There is a significant amount of logical justification for them to take their cut, which most people will point out is siginficantly less than publishing via bricks and mortar would take from you. Unless you can argue valve employees should work for free
    This is the worst logic, that Valve has somehow "earned" a rightful competition free monopoly on taking a revenue cut on games completely developed and funded by others. For games that Valve funds/develops, sure they should get revenue for those.
    Last edited by DanLamb; 04-07-2013 at 11:48 PM.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Setlec View Post
    Valve has NDA to hide their special contract deals with Devs whom want to distribute their game on Steam. But I dare you (DanLamb) to prove that Valve is coercing Devs over their games to be distributed on Steam. Also what would be their reasons?
    I don't think Valve coerces developers to use Steam at all. Some community members do: I read users saying they won't buy a game unless it is offered through Steam which is pressure/coercion.

    I suspect Valve employs coercion related to pricing. A pure choice approach would be for devs to offer their title through every distribution option: Steam, Desura, Ubuntu, Amazon, direct purchase -- and then pass the cost of each service along to the customer to leave it up to the customer to choose if the added value of the service is worth the cost it imposes. The fact that I don't see Steam games offering this type of split pricing structure, and the fact that Valve has it's terms hidden, suggests coercion.

    In other words, if a distribution service requires a flat X percent revenue cut, and the dev sets the raw price of the game at Y, then passing the cost to the user would price the game at Y/(1-X) through the distribution service.

    What would be their reasons? This is obvious: if the cost of the distribution service was so openly and transparently visible to the users and there was an obvious alternative to avoid the middle man surcharge, people would avoid services like Steam.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    233

    Default

    From Randy Pitchford:

    I love Valve games, and I do business with the company. But, Iím just saying, Steam isnít the answer. Steam helps us as customers, but itís also a money grab, and Valve is exploiting a lot of people in a way thatís not totally fair. Valve is taking a larger share than it should for the service its providing. Itís exploiting a lot of small guys. For us big guys, weíre going to sell the units and it will be fine.
    What he is saying is just wildly obvious. Some devs are happy, because Valve could use their notoriety to generate hype and therefore revenue, but this general mindset that Valve has rightfully "earned" a substantial, secret share of other developers games and there is this group think that they should have a monopoly on doing so is ridiculous.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    576

    Default

    Buuuut... Steam is awesome, right? All the real gamerz are praising it. Open source games suck, they look like games from 1999 at best and only beardy Gentoo users play them (2 of them right now).

    Sent from a Dell PC with an HD 5450.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •