Amazon.com used a series of illegal strategies to boost profits at its online retail empire, including an algorithm that pushed up prices U.S. households paid by more than $1 billion, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission detailed in a new court filing on Thursday.
I remember an article ages ago that showed that Amazon, undoubtedly a monopoly, was on the right side of the law because of the “consumer welfare standard”.
This was back when they were in growth mode and still unprofitable, but it seems obvious with this and their now record profits that they no longer pass that test. Time to break it up.
That’s exactly why I don’t understand people defending Steam just because right now they are only using their monopoly against the developers but not against the users. One day that will change and move will have seen it coming.
Same with Google abusing YouTube creators for years but only now when they start pushing against adblock people look for alternatives.
Too many people are just lazy and complicit
Valve isn’t publicly traded company, so Gaben is a BDFL.
Who knows what happens after him. But sure, if there is any other game provider with comparable service, nobody will complain.
It’s just there aren’t any
You’re completely right. People suck steams dick are ridiculously hypocritical and blond.
I was mocked for defending Epic trying to compete withs steam. They’re doing great work for Devs and gamers. But sadly, blind gamers (who claim they hate monopolys) aren’t self aware enough to see the trees through the forest.
You’re right. It’s good they’re competing. But to say they’re doing a good job for gamers? The thing is horrible (atm) :
I hate steam’s monopoly. Truly. But at least they’re offering a solid framework.
Epic, just like gog galaxy, had an initially cool start and then… Nothing. All the years and they’re still as horrible as bad then. No effort. I can understand gog, but not epic.
Windows would still be the only viable option for most PC gamers if not for the investment Valve has made in proton/wine. You can say it’s self-serving (steamdeck) and you would likely be right. But we have two (three if you count standard Linux desktops as distinct from steamdeck) viable PC gaming platforms thanks specifically to Valve.
deleted by creator
I’m sure the fact that that happened at the same time as Microsoft pushing their Game-Pass and their own Store is just by chance…
don’t kid yourself and think that they did that just for the benefit of the users and not to be able to get games and users away from Microsoft if that’s necessary…
The whole point of the conversation is that the other platforms arent doing any work for the consumer.
To this day, epic doesnt even launch on linux officially, and requires a 3rd party launcher to even play its games. Epics first party games are on the list of games that dont work on linux.
There’s clearly one company who puts more effort onto the consumer front than the other. Epic doesnt even need to make a custom OS like valve does, it just needs to get their own launcher working, and their own games working, which they dont and refuse to.
To say that Epic is doing better for the consumer is disingenuous (however it does better for the developer though)
It’s as if you didn’t read what I wrote.
Doesn’t matter whose benefit it was for. It’s here now. I can use proton without Steam if I want to. If Valve goes full satan tomorrow, they still enabled viable PC gaming platforms where before there were none, and someone else can take the source and run with it.
Lots of us refused to run Windows just for games even before the MS store. We made do with what we could get. Now we (mostly) don’t have to. Plus, people who were staying with Win solely due to gaming have a better chance of being able to ditch MS. Given where MS is headed in recent years, that’s a win for personal freedom.
You are arguing with a point I haven’t made.