this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2025
180 points (98.9% liked)
Asklemmy
51047 readers
556 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You missed 3 times in a row.
The 30% cut thing has been industry standard since the dawn of time. Valve goes out of its way to make exceptions to this rule down to 10% in cases of very high volume but everyone only talks about the 30 since thats all they hear about. Only an Epic Games apologist would parrot this as a talking point. Plus, developers are not getting nothing for that 30%, especially games that use Valve's Steam networking services. Unlike Microsoft and Sony who also take 30% cuts, Valve doesn't charge $10,000 per game patch to have someone review and approve it to be published.
The regional pricing goes both ways. There was literally a game recently users were complaining about NOT getting it because the publisher opted out or something, where the regional pricing would have made the game affordable but in USD (Valves country of origin and therefore default), it was exhorbitantly priced. And this one wasn't even Valve's fault.
Valve did not censor games directly on behest of the Australian nutjobs, they fought back against them pretty hard, but Valve is ultimately beholden to the payment processors (who they also pushed back on). Once Visa and MasterCard started threatening to pull services, Valve was put in a "comply or die" situation. If they didn't do as they were told they wouldn't be able to accept money with anything but Stripe or Bitcoin. They literally lost Paypal as a payment option over this fight.
I think its very dishonest of you to frame these points as enshittification. This term means the intentional degradation of a product or service for the sole motive of increasing profits. For point 1, the whole industry literally started off like that. For point 2, it was literally an attempt at equity (valve may not get the deltas correct but in some countries they're losing money on games). And for point 3, you might be able to argue it but ultimately it wasn't for profits so much as it was survival.
If you wanted to shitsling at Valve, you should have mentioned how Valve invented lootboxes in TF2 and then exacerbated the issue in CS:GO/CS2, releasing that awful plague onto the industry.
Why are you trying to offend me? I didn't call you names, why are you doing that?
Visa and Mastercard aren't the only available payment options in Steam. Yielding to them was for profit.
Survival? Steam has enough profit to create it's own payment processor and make it popular.
He didn’t. He said people who parrot it are.
Unless you do, there is no reason to be offended. Up to you.
And no; realistically, if you lose Visa and Mastercard, you can close shop. Obviously it’s for profit, because a 99% reduction in turnover means all employees out of work.
Yes, I took that number out of thin air, but I know most people would never bother as that is what they have.
Maybe it’s different in your country.
Me:
Them:
You:
Confused noises.
Semperverus said anyone who says that 30% is too much is an Epic Game apologists, whatever that is.
Semperverus is insinuating anyone who says that 30% is amount taken by Steam is wrong, and saying that is parroting, and should be instead thought as "Poor Steam is forced to take 30% because this is industry standard", but Valve, and I quote here, "goes out of its way to make exceptions to this rule".
Doesn't change the fact that bending over backwards for Visa and Mastercard and banning some content because of their whims is enshittification. The service is worse than it was before, in the name of profit.
No, again, he said anyone that parrots it. If you keep repeating that argument over and over, then your are parroting it. That's what parrots do; they repeat stuff.
If you are offended, then it's time for some self reflection. That is not an ad-hominem, but a blanket statement and opinion.
And no, you're being selective with the truth. You cherry pick bits of what he said to present your argument in a better light. I don't entertain that, my friend.
Your last point is true, but again you are being selective with how you present it.
If I point a gun at you and say you die unless you do something against your personal morality, you'd most likely still do it. That is in the name of survival.
Yeah, you'll be able to go to work tomorrow and make money because you're not dead, but nobody can accuse you of doing it for profit. That is what you are in essence doing here and it's a bad take in every possible way except morally.
Steam fought back and lost. They could morally tell Visa and MasterCard to pound sand and die with their heads held high, but I'm guessing they like you as my potential murder victim above, chose to keep existing instead.