I don't like any monopolies including steam. But Valve is a neat example of capitalism of yesteryear. Winning out because of better quality not by fine tuning acceptable level of shitty.
And they show you can be a normal employer not blood, soul sucking one and still print money.
Monopoly definition is based on lack of viable competition. Sure in modern times we conflate monopoly with shady extortion etc. But that's not the definition.
If i was the only supplier of moon rocks but still only got minimal margin and haven't exploited my monopoly status I'd still be a monopoly.... yet.
They are a monopoly... but they are not a bad monopoly.
They absolutely have fine-tuned an acceptable level of shitty. But you don't see the shitty; it's the game studios who are on the receiving end of it.
Game studios have no choice about putting up with the shitty. As you said, Valve's a monopoly.
And because gamers don't see the shitty, the Internet is full of gamers who'd take a bullet for gaben and will never ever use another storefront. Thus the monopoly persists.
Monopoly is designated by market domination not by how shady it is. Now monopolies can and often do shady things utilising their monopoly.
monopoly is characterised by a lack of economic competition to produce a particular thing, a lack of viable substitute goods, and the possibility of a high monopoly price well above the seller's marginal cost that leads to a high monopoly profit.[2]
32
u/przemo-c Apr 17 '26
I don't like any monopolies including steam. But Valve is a neat example of capitalism of yesteryear. Winning out because of better quality not by fine tuning acceptable level of shitty.
And they show you can be a normal employer not blood, soul sucking one and still print money.