this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2024
482 points (99.6% liked)

Steam Deck

15024 readers
273 users here now

A place to discuss and support all things Steam Deck.

Replacement for r/steamdeck_linux.

As Lemmy doesn't have flairs yet, you can use these prefixes to indicate what type of post you have made, eg:
[Flair] My post title

The following is a list of suggested flairs:
[Discussion] - General discussion.
[Help] - A request for help or support.
[News] - News about the deck.
[PSA] - Sharing important information.
[Game] - News / info about a game on the deck.
[Update] - An update to a previous post.
[Meta] - Discussion about this community.

Some more Steam Deck specific flairs:
[Boot Screen] - Custom boot screens/videos.
[Selling] - If you are selling your deck.

These are not enforced, but they are encouraged.

Rules:

Link to our Matrix Space

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Noticed this update got pushed just now.

Edit: Seems they’re doing this to prevent costs from arbitration. Read comment below.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bassomitron@lemmy.world 180 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

They're only doing this because of the class action being brought against them. It's cheaper to let this go to court than to try and settle tens of thousands of individual arbitrations. In fact, there are plenty of companies now reversing course and realizing how badly forcing arbitration can backfire.

Edit: For those unaware: https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/video-game-giant-valve-hit-with-consumer-class-action-over-pricing-2024-08-12/

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 72 points 2 months ago (2 children)

It's a little hard to square "steam is over charging for games" with "look at all these games I bought for 80% off ($5) off", but I guess there's more to it.

[–] Daxter101@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 2 months ago (1 children)

After a short read, the case is specifically "Steam is prohibiting developers from selling their games to other platforms, at a price lower than that of steam, and then pockets the 30% platform cost, due to effective monopoly power".

Which, if true, is super bullshit.

[–] Orygin@sh.itjust.works 67 points 2 months ago (2 children)

It's false if I remember correctly. Steam prohibits you from selling steam keys outside the store for less than the price on steam. They don't forbid you from selling cheaper elsewhere

[–] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 38 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And that seems entirely reasonable to me. Unless I am missing something

[–] Grenfur@lemmy.one 16 points 2 months ago

Its this one. And the reason is that if steam sells a game at $10 and humble sells you a steam key at $5, steam gets no profit and is 100% responsible for the bandwidth when you donlload it, for hosting the page, for the market, etc etc. Basically steam doesn't want to assume all the work with none of the reward. Which I don't really see an iissue with.

[–] CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world 27 points 2 months ago

Ah that makes sense, it’s oddly suspicious they’d do this out of the blue. Though I am curious at the arbitration. Can they not include a clause that just says that the forced arbitration can be waived by them when they so choose? I feel like they would make carve outs for these big cases if they could to where they can still arbitrate on smaller cases which costs them less.

(Also updating my post text, thanks!)