143
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] whitecapstromgard@sh.itjust.works 15 points 9 months ago

Valve almost makes me believe in capitalism.

[-] M500@lemmy.ml 17 points 9 months ago

Just run the company in a way where you don’t really care about maximizing profit. As long as you’re not at a loss and are liked, you will be successful.

Valve could probably be much more profitable at the expense of being a bigger dick, but Gabe is chill.

[-] senoro@lemmy.ml 12 points 9 months ago

Also because valve is private, they don’t have any legal obligations to return maximise profit. They can purposefully lose money if they want and it’s not illegal. (At least to my knowledge)

[-] Justas@sh.itjust.works 7 points 9 months ago

It would be illegal if they did it to price out the competition, which I don't think is something they do.

[-] sadreality@kbin.social 4 points 9 months ago

Ton of public companies lose money...

As long as execs get paid, it is all good.

[-] altima_neo@lemmy.zip 2 points 9 months ago

Yeah, that's it right there. Not being public means they don't have to appease shareholders who want maximum growth and returns.

[-] M500@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 months ago

I’m guessing this is a big part of it. A private company can do just about whatever they want as there are not shareholders that you are working for.

[-] dudewitbow@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 months ago

Private companies can have shareholders(all nfl teams but the Packers), its just a game of finding shareholders who doesnt care about constant short term profit.

[-] rambaroo@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

But they do run it to maximize profit. There's just allowed to do it creatively instead of obsessing over short term gains.

I mean the company essentially gave up on AAA games for well over a decade because they were making more money from steam, and Gabe famously only approves projects that have a plan to turn a profit or expand Valve's market.

They didn't spread into Linux out of sheer principle. It gives them more control and influence over the market to separate themselves from Windows. And they've done tons of shady stuff with steam like refusing to give refunds until they were sued by state governments.

[-] Tilgare@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

I don't read it so cynically, yes it's in their best interest and a very smart play, but I don't read malice into it though. Good business move, but also good for the communities and projects they're contributing to.

[-] atyaz@reddthat.com 1 points 9 months ago

Just run the company in a way where you don’t really care about maximizing profit.

Our system of government makes this illegal for publicly traded companies.

[-] AnonStoleMyPants@sopuli.xyz 1 points 9 months ago

Yup. And the moment he steps down (or gets hit by the greed) everything will go to shit. As is tradition.

[-] M500@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 months ago

Since it’s a private company he can just appoint anyone he wants to be the ceo. Maybe his son will take it or maybe he will maintain ownership of it until I’m too old to care.

[-] poVoq@slrpnk.net 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Valve is far from a typical company. While technically not, they operate pretty much like a worker owned cooperative. Have a look at their employee handbook: https://www.valvesoftware.com/en/publications

(and Igalia, the company presenting in OP is really a worker owned cooperative).

[-] MonkCanatella@sh.itjust.works 3 points 9 months ago

holy crap I want to work there. I never had any idea they had such a radical structure (or lack thereof)

[-] roguetrick@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago

Valve is the prime example of rent seeking behavior. It's a private company that collects economic rents on a market thanks to that market being the biggest. They're a private company and their only goal is to preserve those rents. They do that by fostering goodwill. They're everything I hate about capitalism, but I don't hate them for doing it.

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I don't think Steam is rent-seeking because:

  • no cost to maintaining an account
  • no cost for keys if you sell stuff outside the Steam store
  • no cost for downloads
  • no cost for improvements to games

Valve's customers are publishers and devs, and they're charging a finder's fee for connecting customers to the games. To me, that's not rent seeking, that's a direct exchange of money for a service. If you don't think the service is valuable or think you can do better, then generate keys and sell them elsewhere and you won't need to pay Valve a cut.

Valve is capitalism done right imo. You only pay when you receive a service, and only when you profit from the service. Steam also has a fantastic refund policy as well, which is surprisingly rare in the digital goods market.

this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2023
143 points (96.7% liked)

Linux Gaming

14227 readers
135 users here now

Discussions and news about gaming on the GNU/Linux family of operating systems (including the Steam Deck). Potentially a $HOME away from home for disgruntled /r/linux_gaming denizens of the redditarian demesne.

This page can be subscribed to via RSS.

Original /r/linux_gaming pengwing by uoou.

Resources

WWW:

Discord:

IRC:

Matrix:

Telegram:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS