You’re working off some random definition he found on some bullshit name site to argue why he should not just ignore the family that made the name famous, but take it away from them. Let’s not pretend like you’re not using “AIPAC Shakur” as a loose Tupac reference.

And now you’re likening being against this to somehow also thinking referring to codifying fictional character must mean it’s an insult to all people named Tom? You know that’s not an equivalent situation.

It’s possible to be personally offended by someone being so fucking obtuse and neckbeardy about justifying a shitty thing they said. Your amorality is not a good enough defense, and it’s downright stupid to not consider how trying to rip away a famous name from a famous family just so you can use a racially coded insult is perfectly okay.

It would have been infinitely more respectable if you demonstrated the capacity to take a step back and see what the mistake was rather than doubling down off the back of some stupid baby name meaning site as if it’s a legitimate source.

You said it was a baseless assumption but it is clear it is already enshitified and people don’t care and still have positive sentiment.

You still don’t know what the original statement was.

You were clearly disputing his attribution that Steam is a monopoly.

LOL I’d never argue that. Steam is a textbook natural monopoly.

You even said retail exclusivity when that is not what he said in order to deny they were a monopoly.

You don’t know what retail exclusivity is.

You accuse me of bringing random things when you did it to begin with which I pointed with examples. Once again, why are you having a hard time with this.

Its random because its not relevant to what was actually said. The hardest time here seems to be you trying to figure out what other people have said.

I don’t have to accuse. I know you have not read about this.

You literally have given zero indication you’ve read your own link.

Amazon’s situation is that they drove prices up artificially through browbeating vendors by leveraging their considerable power. Items that used to be $10 are now $50. Unless you’re suggesting Steam is really what are forcing AAA games to go up to $80, it’s not the same situation as Amazon.

Steam is a textbook example of a natural monopoly. It seems like people have forgotten about this concept. Exclusivity is always a choice for publishers. They do not ever have to only be on Steam, and most games aren’t. It’s also their choice to rely entirely on Steamworks instead of using alternative technologies.

You could always choose to buy many of those indie games on GOG, Itch, or on other stores.

That’s not what retail exclusivity is.

You claimed there was no enshitification.

How did you get this from telling someone nobody is ignoring Steam’s issues as much as that person said they were? Even my last comment says the opposite of “there is no enshittification”.

If you are being obtuse here I understand, if not then I am actually worried you might be incapable of connecting the dots. Steam is a monopoly that has already enshitified the market. The reason that there is not more competition is because of their practices.

I was asking you to connect the dots because this isn’t related to anything I said. It’s unclear why you felt the need to bring this up since it’s not in dispute.

Show the record that Steam Keys is an old talking point that is not applicable to what I am saying. You need to think a little harder here.

Asking for those records you said exist is not relevant to you saying it’s all on record? Seems like you’re hoping I think about this less, not more. It’s starting to seem like you lied about this.

Please, you have not studied this at all.

This accusation would hold more water if you actually argued about what it says instead of Gish galloping elsewhere. Again, that article says more than you seem to realize.

I made a statement that you have not been able to refute.

Because I don’t have any reason to refute the notion of AI games being invasive. I’m not here baselessly defending Steam. And it is still not what anyone was talking about.

It is a statement of fact

Without point or purpose?

Show that you are using some old pro steam propaganda that is unrelated to what is going now? Hard pass.

No, show those records you say exist. It doesn’t matter what I’m operating from.

Everything is pretty much an opinion. I will pick the side of lawyer’s opinions based on evidence and facts. As I said, you have not studied this. You have not read the testimony.

You don’t seem aware about half of what that opinion piece says. It’s not even factually rich, it’s pretty high level consideration of the complaint. There’s no testimony here, or mention of one. I’ve studied it more than you have it seems.

Baselessly defending Steam I see.

Considering you came in here arguing about something nobody said, I don’t think you have the best idea of what other people are saying.

They control over 70% of the Market which is considered a monopoly even in the more stringent federal courts.

What is this disagreeing with in my comment?

The Steam Key thing was debunked years ago and not what anyone is currently talking about. Steam is on record in court lying on the stand about this

Okay, show where.

It is clear you have not studied this.

It’s an opinion article about the complaint written from arms length, and it covers both the arguments for and against from that disconnected perspective.

You mean the current enshitification due to AI isn’t happening on Steam… Baseless!? Please

How do you read someone talking about how people in the comment section are so enamoured with Steam that they will ignore if they become way worse overnight, and somehow think they’re talking about this other matter entirely?

They don’t have to, they control the market.

They didn’t even when there wasn’t a market to control.

They are definitely guilty of price fixing though preventing other storefronts from offering better prices.

False. Minimum pricing is a pretty common retail policy and Steam’s specifically only applies to where ever Steam keys are distributed.

That’s still not Steam forcing retail exclusivity.

Unlike Steam’s actual exclusive deals they stuck with publishers to force Steam as DRM. Also preventing it being sold on other online distribution services (because there was a lot back in the day, even IGN had one).

This didn’t happen.

Or their current practice of not allowing publishers to sell a game cheaper on another platform.

Standard retail policy, and this only applies if they’re distributing Steam keys from those other storefronts.

They could enshittify dramatically tomorrow, and I think they would still have positive sentiment.

Baseless assumption on your part. Nobody is blindly trusting Valve and excusing their faults.

And Steam is the only storefront for so, so many games. For all of Sweeny’s toxicity, I honestly didn’t feel that particular outrage against EGS, as I was already concerned by how many games are Steam-only.

Steam doesn’t force retail exclusivity. That’s on publishers for not putting it on other storefronts, but also most games can be found for sale on other stores.

Valve are getting 20-30% of every sale. Other marketplaces - notably Google and Apple - are rightfully despised for this level of rent seeking

The contention is that you’re using Epic’s dishonest framing of this argument. Retail fees are not rent seeking, and the only “despising” of Google and Apple came from Epic themselves because they did not want to get any less than all of their MTX money from Fortnite on mobile.

The 30% cut is the standard retail fee. It’s the standard for all storefronts except for two: EGS and Microsoft.

That is rephrasing.

Because most people started using Steam when it became good, and not the clunky pile of shit it was before 2008.

Who is really denying or surprised by the idea that Steam is a form of DRM?

I don’t believe for a second a single person ever said that.