IMO:

How would you like to forbid use of Steamworks as DRM when decision to use it is made by 3rd party (developer or publisher) and when there is no penalty for them to use something else? As long as Valve dont actively abuse its dominant position its prety much impossible to make real  antitrust lawsuit against them.

Last time I checked, we were talking about the PC here as opposed to closed platforms like consoles. Admittedly, I shouldn't have used the word "exclusive" since it unfortunately does not cover the entirety of the subject - ZehDon was kind enough to lay out the issue well.

Good questions, but I'm afraid Brad either has NDAs or there's hardly any interest in the service.

 

 

The Remedy I'd suggest is this: (and this is Stardock's system BTW)

 

Steamworks DRM is fine.  Valve must make a version of Steamworks DRM or Steam that does not link to the Steam store, so other DD companies can sell games with Steamworks DRM without hurting their own bottom lines.

 

I'd argue that them offering their DRM for free while other methods require money, could be construed as an abuse of their dominant position, as it forces other services to either discount (D2D, no one would be using them for Civ V if they were the same price), or not pick up the game.

 

 

While their competition might not like Steamworks integration, its not enough for antitrust lawsuit. Business isnt same as Olympic games - if you invest into creating technology which will make your solution better and your competitors dont, its their fault not yours.

Oh and it would be great if this forum allowed user to quote someone without such poor results...

You argue wouldn't hold up anywhere that mattered, unfortunately.  For anti-competitive legislation to apply, Valve must be using it's dominant position to prevent other companies from making a profit.  Companies, and services like Impulse, can sell Steamworks DRM-enabled games and make a profit.  If Impulse sold Left 4 Dead, for example, Stardock would still make a profit.  The problem comes with repeat customers.  That customer now has both Steam and Impulse.  Steam requires that it's in your face all the time for you to play your game.  Impulse doesn't even need to be installed on the machine it's are running on.  Realistically speaking, with Steam's ability to offer massive discounts, repeat customers for Impulse would be less.  This forces Impulse to canabalise their customer base in order to make a profit.

While this is obviously unethical, and with Valve moving into the Console Realm and brining Steamworks to the Playstation 3, their dominance is set to continue and expand.  While Valve make some terrific games and have worked damn hard to make Steam the success it is, they are placing themselves into a position that many companies have been placed it.
Microsoft, for example, enjoyed a period where it was the underdog and all the 'cool kids' used Windows.  Microsoft earnt it's customers respect and loyalty and published some industry leading stuff.  Their level of success was unrivaled as a result, and it placed them into a position of dominance - they then abused that position.
Activision was founded by Game Developers who were tired of getting the shaft, and wanted a share of the profits of the games they made, instead of a simply salary.  They published some incredible games and earnt their position as industry leader.  They now abuse their position.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.  Valve is placing itself as the bridge between gamers and their games in such a way as to create their own, closed platform.  This is unacceptable.

Civ 5 not being on Impulse, a DD service that disproportionately favors strategy gamers, is a sign that Stardock had its profits impaired by the tie-in between Steam and Steamworks. 

 

The fact that Impulse is forced to cannabilze is the anti-competitive impact to me.

To give more support to Alstein's argument, computer program makers don't HAVE to make programs that run on windows, there are other alternatives and tools they can go for, but since "everyone just has windows" they write their programs for windows.  That's been considered a monopoly by courts before, both in the usa and in europe. Only in europe something was done from it nonetheless, but still. 

Supporting the market leader is not considered anti-competitive behaviour, regardless of it's implications.  Valve was founded by ex-Microsoft employees, which in itself means nothing however it does give the situation an sense of deja vu.  The problem is no cares right now because Steam isn't abusing it's position.  When it does - and it will - people will turn on Valve like they turned on Microsoft and Activision.  The problem is that then - like Microsoft and Activision Blizzard - they will have enough of an established position that people will still give them their money.

Vista was a piece of shit, and everyone knew it - yet it still sold.  Modern Warfare II was worse than it's predecessor in every way yet it's the highest selling game of this entire generation of Consoles.  Once they reach this level, they have the ability to do whatever they want, because enough people want what they sell.  Abusing your customer base, raping them at every opportunity and selling garbage isn't against the Law.  Hell, with EULA's going the way they are, Valve could do just about anything they wanted and simply include the waiver in the Terms we all agree to when installing their software.  People won't care, because they still get their games.

Their press release makes a distinction between number of accounts (30 million), new user growth (178%), number of concurrent players (3 million) and and number of daily players (6 million).  They may very well have had over 100% growth in "active users", and remain congruent with their past statements.

[Insert Disreali/Twain quote about statistics here.]

Although even with an established position, not treating your customers well will still be costly, even though it might take significantly longer.  Lower quality does eventually leave a tarnish.  (And I don't think the quality of games today is better than it's ever been. )

Best regards,
Steven.

 

One counter-factor to that:  You have to look at the opportunity cost of supporting other DD platforms.  Unless you use steamworks DRM, there's no real cost to make a GG/Impulse version along with a Steam version. There are non-trivial development costs for making a game on Mac/Linux in addition to PC. 

 

D2D selling the Steam games to me is not anti-proof but proof, because the only way they can sell anything on D2D that's Steamworks is to make it cheaper- which implies a competitive advantage.

 

 

Given the fact that Impulse can still sell Civ5 and make profit, Steamworks isnt preventing Impulse from making profit, which IRL means that it would be pretty mcu impossible to base antitrust lawsuit and Steamworks current implementation. Monopoly itself isnt illegal - abuse of monopoly is what MS and Intel were sued for.

When Impulse Reactor is released it will offer most of the features in Steamworks - also, remember that its developer/publisher who decide which service he wants to use - and nobody prevented Impulse or D2D or others from creating service like Steamworks before Steam did it - innovation cannot easily be considered (by court) as anticompetitive. That would be like suing Intel for creating better FABs for its processors.

Impulse is not the only competitor to Steam, and the online market cannot possibly be seen as completely disconnected from retail sales.

Obviously it's a smart move by Steam to take on Civ5, a game they know will see huge sales, without making a profit on it. We've seen this behavior from Steam before, where the goal is not to make a profit but to attract users for the Steam software (I believe the free Alien Swarm game was the latest). Arguably, the "weekends" with lower price may be seen to serve the same goal. Not to mention the multiplayer service they're providing, embedded with their DRM (games now announcing that they're going to be released with Steamworks WAY ahead of release).

I think what they're doing can, in the long run, mount up to a monopoly. However, on it's own, Civ5 is barely a case of predatory pricing (since there are more competitors). In the meantime, Steam stands to make an increasingly large profit from the market.

As a consumer, the best thing you can do is purchase games elsewhere.

As a consumer, the worst thing you can do is request that new games be available through Steam (unless you like paying higher prices).

Well, I almost never pay full price for games on Steam (only exceptions are all Valve games and very few others). Developers and publishers are competing for customers money so I am not too worried - I can always wait for game to be 75% off during Weekend deal.

^This.  It always amazes me that there are so many people who actually want their games locked down with Steam DRM and tied to a single account that may one day not be accessible to them.

Vista sold poorly, and was overwhelmingly rejected by business customers. Microsoft in response hurried Windows 7 to market because customers demanded something better.

MW2 outside of PC circles is pretty popular and I know people who consider it to be a better game then newer stuff like Medal of Honor. I don't understand why, but then I don't understand why absolute garbage like 'reality' TV is popular either. But there's a market for it, and that's what matters.

Steam is very convinient + cheap games during sales. Before I started using Steam it was major PITA for me to manually update all my games. I also never had any problem accessing my account, except once when I screwed up change of password - Steam Support reseted it in less than 24 hours since I submited my ticket.

Vista was also unpopular because of bugs in drivers and apps of other companies - mostof that was resolved in first 12 months - but by that time it became "in" to hate Vista. Win7 is only minor upgrade from Vista SP1 and people love it .

Because MoH tries to be both MW2 and BC2, and fails on both counts. The shooting in it is more like MW2, where you point is where you hit, and scoring kills is ridiculously easy. But the class system and maps "try" to be like BC2.. only with 1 less class, very little class variety besides what weapons they can use, fewer weapons and on top of that there are few maps and they all pale in comparison with the maps in BC2. So, it's basically a Frankenstein game and doesn't really do any of those things well. Anyone who loves MW2 shooting mechanics might as well just stick with MW2 because it has more customization and more weapons. Anyone who loves BC2 maps and game modes and classes might as well just stick with BC2 because it's better on all those counts.

Steam is an excellent app - as you said, support, automatic updates, weekend sales, community, all good.

Just don't buy games from them (outside sales). Not just because you'll almost always find cheaper elsewhere, but because of the monopoly they're creating.

I'm not arguing Steam's quality, though I could.  My main issue with Steam is that I dislike their anti-consumer policies, poor support, and unstable servers.  I prefer Gamersgate and Impulse for those reasons

 

I'm arguing that they are engaging in what is POTENTIALLY predatory, anti-competitive behavior.

 

What anticonsumer policies?

No resale - not allowed in game licences, so I dont see any reason to expect being able to resell PC games.

Almost no refund except of preorders - try getting refund for opened PC game in retail - almost impossible. Also in my experience if you provide good enough reason, Steam Support often offer that if you buy other game with same or higher price in next 2 weeks, price of disputed game will be substracted from it.

Poor support?

My tickets get response within 1 business day,which is IMO very reasonable.

Unstable servers?

What the hell are you talking about? Their servers have very good uptime and even when their servers were down for 5 hours (to upgrade their infrastructure) I was able to play Civ5 without any problem.

 

regarding predatory pricing: Let me know when you see antitrust lawsuit for predatory pricing against Wallmart

http://www.newrules.org/retail/news/walmart-charged-predatory-pricing (last among many)

impulse cares but steam seems just to money grab you and your friends... damn X has invited you to play Y click here to join  sorry you need to buy the game to play.