Some love it. Some hate it. Steam has seemingly become the one-stop shop for everything PC games. With many other digital distributors offer Steam keys for sale, and the lack of any strong competition, Valve has created what appears to be a monopoly for PC games. Is this really true? Has Steam become a monopoly in the PC gaming digital distribution landscape? We give our opinions and then ask for yours.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Steven Smith – PC Gaming Columnist
Steam is about as close to a monopoly as a company can get without actually crossing the line. A monopoly is defined as – “the exclusive control of the supply, or trade, in a commodity or service.” Let’s break this down as it applies to Steam. Do they have exclusive control over supply? Well in the case of many titles, such as Call of Duty, ARMA 3 or Civilization 5, the answer is “Absolutely!” Sure you can go to a site such as GamersGate or Amazon and purchase the games there. Except these other outlets don’t actually provide the games for you. You must still obtain these Steam as they control supply. Essentially these storefronts are little more than Steam outlets. What about games like Mass Effect and Battlefield which are sold only through Origin?
Surely this means that Steam has some competition, right? I don’t think so. You see two stores do not really compete unless they sell the same products. Since each of these digital distributors has their own exclusivity deals they can both operate without negatively impacting one another. Even factoring in sites like GOG and Desura you have very little direct competition as there is minimal overlap in game catalogs.
Basically, if you want Game A you go to Store B and for Game X you go to Store Y. And this is the loophole that keeps Steam from being a true monopoly. For legal purposes all games, regardless of the title, are classified as the same commodity. No store has exclusive rights to digitally distribute all games, that would be a monopoly. Instead certain stores have exclusive rights to select titles only. If you consider games like Dishonored, Diablo 3, Bejeweled and Farmville to all basically be the same thing, then Steam is not a monopoly. Yes they control the distribution of most AAA games, have poor customer service and like to irrevocably attach their brand to much anticipated new releases. But don’t call them a monopoly, they get off on a technicality.
Phil Cordaro – TPG Cast Co-Host
If we’re talking about whether a monopoly on digital distribution is good for gamers, then the answer would be “of course not”. These types of “only one possibility” scenarios virtually never work out in favor of the consumer. I get the impression that the PC gaming community has had a mostly positive experience with Steam, but that possibility of things going south is always there and it’s a huge concern when we’re talking about the only game in town. If you listen to our podcast (which is totally coming back one day and not gone forever I assure you), you might have heard some of my gaming horror stories from living in Germany. Among other things, I had a lot of trouble with everyone’s favorite digital distribution platform, Origin. If you were in Germany, there was no way to access the store in English.
Furthermore, you were locked to German versions of games with German prices (which are of course insanely high), and you had to pay with a German credit card. Basically, that means anyone who is living abroad for a job or traveling or anything like that is effectively locked out of buying games. What if this happened with Steam? What if Steam really was the only game in town? Of course my situation isn’t exactly common, but the fact that you could effectively be left unable to use a platform is pretty worrisome when that platform is the only way to play games.
Sure, we currently have alternatives and Steam is nowhere near the ridiculous botchfest of Origin, but the experience really made me wonder about the shortfalls of putting too many eggs in one basket. That being said, I am a complete hypocrite that doesn’t adhere to his own rules. When it comes to the practical side of things, I’m not really sure how other Steam-esque platforms could be viable. Imagine a fictitious scenario in which Origin got huge, and a few other publishers launched similar “All-in-one” gaming platforms.
Everyone would be trying to scoop the competition with exclusives, so you’d be required to have accounts with all these different services if you actually wanted to play everything. That means having half a dozen different clients and services installed, keeping track of which games you’ve bought on which, having different sets of forums for tech support and discussion, different friends lists, different in-game functions… the list goes on and on. Theoretically, I suppose some third party could develop a gaming version of Trillain or Pidgin that would integrate all of these accounts into one, but it would never work as well or be as sleek as the interface specifically developed by one of the digital distributors themselves. So I guess this is a case of me wanting to have my cake and eat it too. Idealistically, I think competition ultimately benefits the consumer. But I’m also lazy and prefer using a single client for everything, and I think it would be hella lame to juggle with a whole bunch. Maybe that just makes me a jerk who refuses to sacrifice any personal comfort.
David Queener – PC Gaming Columist
The thing with Steam as a monopoly is that it isn’t, but it has great potential for such. The thing with monopolies is they are well loved until they become one, then they are mistrusted until they violate their power. As a user, I like having a nice frontend for launching games. I don’t care for games intersecting with IDEs, text editors, media players, diagnostic tools, and so on. I like having them set aside (for this reason I didn’t care for the transition into Windows 95 and later as games started installing themselves in Program Files), and my favorite games are still accessed through Run or the command prompt.
The real factor comes in the form of games I want to play relying on Steam functionality. I can go and pick up the latest Call of Duty at nearly any location, but ultimately I activate it on Steam. This funnels me back toward Steam. I can launch Quake via Run, but I won’t have my Steam Friends overlay unless I add it to the library. It doesn’t matter that I almost never need this data during Quake, or that I can just Alt+Tab over to irc for the same people, Steam has become part of my idea of games. I want the social presence of Steam in a rather narcissistic way. “Oh, you’re playing Bioshock? Pfft, I’m playing Quake. That’s right, the original. Not the fancy one with the shaders.” Steam is in a respect my hipster glasses, only I actually wear glasses.
I don’t know how I feel about Steam as a potential monopoly. I use it, I find it useful. I also had to be dragged kicking and screaming onto the service. Now it has such a market share that it is cyclical, games need to be on it to do well, and if they do well outside of it, it is a phenomenal success story. But games are still able to be on other services and self-hosted. The issue with Steam is it offers the convenience of a hub, but at the cost of diversity. Steam is an example of the internet getting smaller, and more controllable. I understand that Steam is not inherently a danger, but part of me sees it as a warning tremor. It brings to my thoughts a desire for what one could call a simpler time, but was actually a far more complicated time – where patches were not automated, data was more fragile, and people were on dozens of services. But it also felt unstoppable, and in a way it was, but its momentum brought us to where we are now. Now if you will excuse me, I feel compelled to go find a game strictly through a website, not offered by any service, and participate in their forums, and join their irc channels (if they have any). Maybe I’ll see if I can sign into ICQ while I’m at it.
Armaan Khan – PC Gaming Columnist
Does Steam have a monopoly on PC gaming? Yes, probably. Is it bad for consumers? Again: probably. Do I care? No, not really. I’m surprised I wrote that. I was ready to spit fire and ice about this topic, but then I sat back and really gave it a think. When was the last time I logged into Steam? Eight hours ago, actually, at the time of this writing. I was considering re-downloading XCOM: Enemy Unknown, but decided not to go through the 8GB hassle. It’s a pretty crap game, anyway, more interesting in concept than execution. But that’s way off topic. The last time I logged into Steam before that? Probably months ago.
Steam might be a monopoly in general, but it’s not a monopoly to me. I actively avoid it, simply because there are better options available: like GOG, Humble, and the Mac App Store. These are places from which I can download and play games without logging into an ugly, intrusive client first. I value that and don’t mind paying more for the privilege. The only time I shop on Steam is when I have no other choice. That’s why I couldn’t really care if Steam’s monopoly on gaming is good or bad. Monopolies only pose a threat when they have power over you, and Steam has no power over me. All my favorite games are either not on the service, or available DRM-free elsewhere, so why would I bother going to Steam? It’s too much of a hassle for my tastes.
John Williamson – PC Gaming Columnist
Nowadays it’s difficult to imagine the PC gaming industry without Valve’s digital distribution client. Steam as a platform killed the retail PC space and pushed digital delivery services. This created greater revenues for developers and removed the second hand market. There’s a certain irony that a form of DRM revived the PC market and added to its player base. Currently Steam has over 65 million active accounts with 6 million recorded concurrent users at peak. The service is a force for good which offers pro-consumer benefits including Cloud Saves, Automatic Updates, Mod Support and considerable discounts.
What separates Steam from other DRM types is the lack of authentication and always only requirements. Unlike TAGES or SecuROM, Valve doesn’t make their service intrusive and ensures the user-experience comes first. Traditionally, the PC has been an open environment whilst consoles have adopted a closed approach. If Steam encountered zero competition they could in theory create a monopoly and hike prices. Competition from GOG, Greenmangaming, Gamefly, Gamersgate, Amazon, Humble Bundle, IndieGala and numerous other avenues prevents this from happening.
If we analyze the recent Steam sales, you could argue that 3rd party retailers have trounced Steam’s discounts which have progressively worsened. For example, 3 years ago, I purchases the GTA Complete Pack for £5 at 75% off which now costs £8.74 with the same discount. The RRP was altered from £19.99 to £34.99 which is odd considering the value of games decrease over time. It’s impossible to say whether inflated prices come from Valve testing the waters or a publisher seeking greater monetary gains. Steam keys can also be unofficially exchanged on forums or sold via market sites. Valve’s service possibly saved PC gaming from becoming insignificant and overlooked by many multi platform AAA developers. Providing other clients exist, the future is extremely bright for Valve and PC gamers.
Sean Freeark – TPG Dual Reviews
Steam is a benevolent monopoly I willingly support, both financially and spiritually. There, I said it. Sure, Valve maintains a stranglehold on mainstream digital distribution, and is perfectly content to allow the likes of GOG to focus on the more niche and/or nostalgic markets. Does Valve care that EA created its own distribution system to sell its games, even across multiple platforms? Not really. EA sold a lot of games on Steam before Origin was released, but I am not aware of any impending Steam apocalypse due to the loss of that business, and we’re now over two years removed from Origin’s arrival.
Why do I love Steam? Let me count the ways. First, I appreciate the convenience. The library is easy to understand, easy to use, and games are updated automatically. Second, I benefit from the selection. Steam has introduced me to hundreds of games I never would have known about otherwise, and as a direct result of this exposure, I have purchased several dozen of them. I am not the type to zealously keep track of which games are coming out and when, and Steam’s store does an excellent job of presenting titles across all genres and price points. Finally, I take advantage of their near-ludicrous sales. Why does my credit card balance spike in summer and around Christmas? It’s not because I’m taking trips or buying presents for friends and family – I am stocking up on games for the rest of the year, and I’m doing so to the tune of 25-80% off.
But what about Steam’s evil DRM, you might ask? Well, I really don’t care about DRM. Not even a little bit. The fact that I have to be logged into Steam, or even connected to the Internet to play most of my games has never bothered me. I understand opposing things on principle (I do that, too), but as a matter of practical application, Steam’s DRM has never caused me any hardship. Have I ever lost my Internet connection, and thus been unable to play Steam games? Certainly. But my life rarely falls apart in these circumstances. If I can’t play Steam games, or any video games, then I just whip out my smartphone and use my crappy 3G to browse TPG – so I get my gaming fix anyway. That, my friends, is called a win-win.
_____________________________________________________________________________
What are your thoughts on Steam and its impact on the current distribution model?
PLEASE NOTE: There is no need to use any login system in order to post your thoughts on any articles here at TPG. Simply enter a name, e-mail address (does not have to be real) and click “I’d rather post as a guest” to let your voice be heard.