Dusk: Unpopular opinion: I'd rather pay Valve 30% and put up with their de facto monopoly than help Epic work towards their own (very obviously desired) monopoly

nanoUFO@sh.itjust.worksmod to Games@sh.itjust.works – 725 points –
twitter.com
476

You are viewing a single comment

Steam happily took money from unity asset flips and one level early access titles for years.

They have zero quality control and instead hashed out the curator system for users to do their job for them.

This is a lot like saying YouTube is evil for allowing anyone to upload videos to their platform

I don't want a curated store though and would rather have people be able to release games, and let users decide if it is something they want or not. I can access reviews myself and don't need companies deciding what game is or isn't worthy of being available. And users is who I trust more anyways, which is why for so long search term + reddit is what I've relied on.

I mean, isn't community self-policing and an overly tolerant attitude towards picking what type of games are allowed on your platform exactly what we want from them?

Quality control is another word for "high barrier to entry", and especially with their market position, being rejected by Steam for some arbitrary reason would effectively kill your project.

Not only should they not restrict the ability to sell your games there without a concrete reason; they shouldn't be permitted to do so. A company with that much influence shouldn't be allowed to be a gatekeeper of what constitutes a "good" game.

Their review system and strong return policy are more than enough.

5 more...