this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2023
749 points (90.3% liked)

Games

16679 readers
877 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Aosih@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

It's not ideal, but I'd say the reason they require equivalent pricing is, so that people don't just use Steam as a marketing platform, while diverting all sales to their personal website where they sell the game for $X cheaper.

[–] Paradoxvoid@aussie.zone 5 points 1 year ago

Yeah I do understand the reasoning and honestly can't fault them for it - they are a for-profit company after all.

Doesn't mean that it's not a good example of them throwing their weight around (which is admittedly rare).

[–] rambaroo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's a perfect example of them abusing their position in the market. But since you're a valve cultist, you make up a bunch of weak excuses for it. If epic or ms did the same thing you'd blow a gasket.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Epic exclusives prove that developers are happy skipping Steam entirely.

[–] DrQuint@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Plus, it only applies to base price, not sale price. If a platform states "you can have your game on sale 100% of the time", and a game undercuts Steam that way, Steam wouldn't do anything about it. Well, they wouldn't have to anyways, it's illegal to have goods on sale 100% of the time, but the point is there.