Report: Steam Has a Monopoly Over PC Gaming
The eventual release of Steam for Mac has apparently stirred up a little controversy.
The idea of Steam launching on Apple iMacs this month apparently has conspiracy theorists all in an uproar. After all, Valve Software's beloved PC gaming client has been around for ages, however the move to Mac has caused many to question its overall presence in the PC gaming scene. Namely, there's indication that an unfair monopoly over PC gaming is in play, and fingers are all pointing to Steam.
But various voices are coming to Steam's defense, saying that the service dominates the market because no other company has offered gamers anything better in terms of value. "The fact that Valve was there waiting for the switch [to digital downloads] isn't their fault--it shows they are savvy," said MCV's Michael French.
Naturally, rival services are quick to swoop in and cry anti-competitive. One unnamed source told TechRadar that the matchmaking system isn't open and thus feeds people back to Steam. "Even [Valve] being a developer and a publisher at the same time means that other developers feel like they could be second-rate citizens (or at best, on the same level as all the indie games on the service)," the unnamed source said.
TechRadar's entire article offers many different views on Steam, some of which point to its early entry into the market with Counter-Strike and Half-Life at hand. There's also an analysis on why Games for Windows failed, with EDGE magazine blaming the failure on the company's need to tackle piracy by locking saved games to online accounts.
Does Valve really have a monopoly on the PC market? Probably not. Eventually it boils down to content, presentation, and accessibility. Valve has spent many years perfecting the service, has amassed a wide user-base since its launch seven years ago. Of course, its popularity may be as simple as familiarity: PC gamers are familiar with Left 4 Dead 2, Half-Life, and the Valve brand. Will that still hold true ten years from now? Maybe not.
Does Steam have an unfair monopoly of digital distribution?
- Windows Phone 7, Silverlight is Business-Ready
- Sick of Apple News on Tom's Hardware? Read This
- Deals for April 7: HP 18.4" dv8t, Dell ST2010 LCD
- Two ''Pro Series'' Workstations from Shuttle Soon
- Iron Man Fanatic Builds His Own JARVIS
- How to Fix Windows 7 When It Fails to Boot
- Supernode Expands up to 128 Cores, 2TB RAM
- Researchers Bring Threading to Word Processing
- VOTW: A 2-year-old Goes Hands-on with the iPad
- Intel Not Shaken by Microsoft's Itanium Phase Out
- Windows 7 SP1 Leaks on Torrents; is Version 7601
- $259.60: Cost of Components to an iPad 16GB
- IT Software Vendor, CA, to Cut 1,000 Jobs
- Say Goodbye to the "I'm a Mac/I'm a PC" Ads!
- TSA: We Don't Need to See Your Netbooks, Tablets
- New IBM Platform Rivals Oracle's Exadata
- Business Warming Up to Windows 7, Cooling on XP
- Dell Adds New Business Notebooks to E Series
i actually quite like steam and if anything steam is having a positive impact on PC gaming. I too think that companies need to tackle piracy has helped kill off PC gaming but at least steam gives u something back, i love the fact that i dont have to go dig up a CD/DVD to install games and i also know that i cant brake or scratch a Disk i dont have.
For now they do good deals on games which cant often be beaten anywhere else so its hardly damaging for the customer
Its not really Valve's fault, there seems to be something about America that produces monopolies all the time.
MS own the PC OS market, Intel own the CPU market and google owns the search market.
Maybe the companies that are the most innovative over and over again are the parket leaders, maybe the US has weak consumer protection and corporate regulation.
smh
if only there was another browser like steam that offered similar services...right now theres nothing... and i didnt see valve buying out other services like it to maintain a monopoly.. and you can buy the games from the store.
they were first, thus have the largest share...
Well, I would hardly call it a monopoly, there are many games that are not available trough it (neverwinter series, supreme commander: forged alliance(1), sins of a solar empire...).
Some of there I got from Impulse (witch is one of the growing number of similar alternate services and also has an impressive portfolio of titles) others I couldn't find a digital provider so I ordered from amazon.
I used to pirate quite a bit but these days I usually buy everything and Steam was a BIG influence in the area. I can pay and get the game immediately, don't have to go to a store or order and pay delivery charges, there are a great number of awesome deals and most importantly.. I don't have to go hunt for old dvds and install a billion patches after I install the game.
So... No, I don't think its a monopoly.
If it wern't for Valve and their Orange Box pack I'd have never have gotten into FPS' plus the games they develop are quality.
And as already mentioned I can buy a game in the safety of my home (Zombie's outside) and let it install and update itself.
valve are evil.
£1 for psychonauts??? what's the world coming to.
oh and between counterstrike source, team fortress 2 and left4dead they have the best competitive, casual and coop multiplayer first person shooter's around.
curse valve!
I was more or less forced to use steam because Empire Total War, the latest version of my favourite games franchise, is only playable through Steam. However, I was pleasantly surprised. Like a few other companies in the computing world, Steam became a quasi monopolist because of the absence of worthy competitors rather than through its own brilliance or shrewd marketing or even monopolist practices.
I don't think Steam has a monopoly, I chose to use it because it's good and the service they offer rarely fails me, and when in the few times they have had problems, it's usually resolved quickly, their software and service as a whole is good, maybe this is why other than being the first they have retained a large share of the market.
I think Steam is good for PC Gaming, many shops near me just don't stock hardly any PC Titles on shelves any more, and Steam is the most convenient way to purchase games.
Steam may have the main market share, but it itself is exactly what the gaming industry needs to be in support of if it is to have a future (along with stardock's impulse among others),
It's convenient, cheap, almost wasteless and a good contributor to making piracy less of an issue. Some people will allways pirate games, but with gaming and reinstalling this easy and convenient it's sure hard to see why people go through all that pirating hassle.
gogogo Steam ^^
VALVe is, in ways, like the MS of the digital distribution platform. When VALVe started, there were a bunch of others, but VALVe beat them out (though, unlike MS, VALVe didn't steal any technology) and now VALVe has the best market share and is almost competitionless.
Honestly, I don't care. The second they raise their prices, everyone will leave. It's not like they're the only games outlet, hence they're not a monopoly.
I love steam, sure on first release it was mainly broken and tedious to use, but now it's extremely useful. The two best bits being ease of use, combining all of your games into one package is great, and also the social/multiplayer aspect, being able to build up a friends list then invite anyone you like into an active multiplayer game.
They might be building a monopoly, but hey, they deserve it.
It has a monopoly because it works unlike the sorry mess that is Windows Live. I like it because I don't need CD/DVDs in my drive and to remember license codes when swapping between machines. I would like to be able to license a group of machines so I can sometimes use my media center box and 50" plasma rather than just the 24" Dell, but hey you can't have everything.
It also means that I've stopped buying games that use Windows Live or have bad DRM (yes I mean you Ubisoft). I think gamers need to make a bigger stink about platforms and just walkaway from bad DRM. Its just not worth the trouble!
How can anything using the internet to distribute be a monopoly? MS tried and messed it up, no-one is stopping anyone else (Blizzard?) having a go...
How can anything using the internet to distribute be a monopoly? MS tried and messed it up, no-one is stopping anyone else (Blizzard?) having a go...
A monopoly would be in the sense that it has no competition and that competition will be unable to thrive in the ecosystem it is in. This is not true of Valve, since a new startup with a better system could overtake it. I can't name any online service examples right now, but it's possible to have online monopolies. Some might even say FB is on it's say way to being monopolistic.
Steam is fantastic, end their "monopoly" -like status is only due to them being good at what they do IMHO.
They are among a few companies today that treat pc-players with respect, without sucking up to console-nabcakes. Go Steam!
Steam is good, but by no means the only solution. Impulse from Stardock has a tonne of really good games and apps on it. I have both, and I find Impulse to be its equal in terms of usability. What's better is that Impulse doesn't do that nasty packaging thing that Steam does, so once you've got it, you've got it. You're not tied to the "Steam Format" for updates and downloads.
Then, there's always Direct2Drive bringing up the rear. So Steam isn't a 'monopoly' by any stretch, but it has a deserved place as "top dog".
That godawful Live Windows Games thing I got with Grand Theft Auto IV did nothing but screw up my PC and make the game unplayable. I'm glad it's dead.
The reason Steam is a Monopoly like Windows is that its just better to only have ONE games download service installed, so the more the grow the harder it is for any one else to break into the market.
Imagine - Fancy a game of COD 9 or GTA XII? Which of the dozen background processes running games services did you buy it from? Better to have a monopoly.
Where they differ from Windows is that they dont use their monopoly to raise prices (their cut sounds large, but its less than the App store or muscic download sites), they dont steal their ideas from other people and their service works well and is well written.
If only m$oft would follow their example...
steam is great - ill uses it as long as i can - the only small problem is pauing USD for games - i can go to a shop and pay $90NZD for a game or i can go to steam and get the same game on steam for $90USD - about $130NZD - plus i have to download it and pay for bandwidth - so while the service itself is nigh on perfect we arent all in the US valve and the exchange rate is kicking my head in!
fair point though I must say I buy the games on specials that make them so cheap it doesn't matter, I hate paying full price, especially as I'm too time poor to actually play them in the windows that its justified but thats a different discussion
so the general opinion here is, much like my own opinion, we don;t actually care if a so called "report" claims that Valve has a monopoly or not, we actually like Steam, mainly because IT WORKS, and doesn't mess with us. Long live Steam.
Here's a thought: Valve's move to include Mac will help break up MSoft's hold, thereby weaking a relative monopoly on gaming. I thought of this when MSoft required me to validate my OS (again) after moving from Raid 0 to 5(which I had to do by phone for some reason). So I see Valve's move as one of weakening a monopoly. And there is nothing preventing other companies from doing the same unless you consider a narrow business mindset, overprotective anti-piracy measures, and poor customer support coupled with poor multiplayer voice support to be a hinderance. Gosh, who would? ;-)