While many accuse Valve of monopolising the PC gaming market, others argue that Steam's dominance is simply the result of doing things right.
@[email protected]
link
fedilink
English
173d

It would likely result in endless corporate backstabbing, exclusive deals, contracts fights, and patent trolling

Which would likely result in horrid quality of life for the end user. Having to maintain countless accounts and subscriptions to have even fractional access to games.

It would likely also fuck over the studios and indie developers who would be shoved aside or relentlessly bought up in a ever growing attempt to grow.

More competition does not always mean things are better for the consumer. You can see the exact same thing played out with the recent rise and now slow descent to streaming services. As we went from one good one that turned into a horrible one as the sharehold is demanded it, then more rows and then things only became worse.

When you start operating at the sort of scale that the internet does, true, the whole competition thing being better for the consumer rarely works out.

You more frequently just end up with a bunch of greedy companies endlessly trying to one-up each other f****** over everyone in their attempts resulting in no one-winning, not the company, not the developers creators or middlemen nor and definitely not least the consumer.

True competition benefiting the consumer also requires there to be a connection to the consumer in a reason to actually service them. The companies need to be fighting for the consumer and not just each other. But that is all capitalism is turned into. The consumer is no longer the end goal. They’re just fighting each other to stomp them out so that all that’s left is themselves.

It’s been shown time and time again for decades now at at sufficient size competition just by itself does not help. The only thing that is repeatedly shown to be helpful is private companies with a good person at their home. Not trying to be a greedy f***.

And it’s showing time and time again. Every time that person retires the company sold their holders. Found public offerings made things just get worse.

The problem is not monopolies are bad. It’s not. The competition is good. It’s at public companies are a problem in the law forcing companies to do everything in their power to please. The shareholders is killing everything.

@[email protected]
link
fedilink
English
2
edit-2
3d

More competition does not always mean things are better for the consumer [cut], e.g. streaming services

I don’t believe this oligopoly is competing with each other?

(I’m not arguing with the rest of your post because capitalism bad :) )

Create a post

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
  • 1 user online
  • 158 users / day
  • 402 users / week
  • 932 users / month
  • 2.9K users / 6 months
  • 1 subscriber
  • 6.56K Posts
  • 48.3K Comments
  • Modlog