you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 21 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Everyone is acting like this is purely for good intentions, but I'll point out they make most of their money from taking a cut of the sale price from games. Ad money probably would not go to them at all. This is almost certainly purely a business decision, not because they fundamentally don't like the concept or want to protect you from it.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Of course everything a company does is in the best interest of the company. Even as simple as "let's make excellent products with lifetime warrantees" benefits them by making people want to shop there.

    But that doesn't mean it isn't a good thing when companies realise the customers best interest are also their best interest. We should encourage that, not scoff at it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago*

    Of course everything a company does is in the best interest of the company.

    That is not true, but that is part of the problem and also why Steam is at least a little better for us customers. Most companies only do what is good for the stakeholders short term, Valve does what is good for the company/single owner long term. And happy customers are good long-term, but not so important short-term.

    It is still capitalism, and thus still terrible. But a tiny bit less terrible.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Yes, when something half good finally happens, let's complain it probably didn't happen for better reasons

    Why are we never happy again?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You can be happy about a decision while still understanding the business rational behind it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    OP didn't seem "happy"... in fact, they seemed mad people were happy and not outraged this one good step was here because it may have been made out of a business decision and not just Valve falling on its own sword (that's why I made the comment)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Removing choices to the consumer isn't good. It may sound like they're doing a good thing, but if a racing game can include non-intrusive ads and either make the game cheaper or make more content without harming the experience, that's good for the consumer. If a company makes a shitty ad ladden game, you can always just not buy it. They aren't defending you. They're defending their method of making money and ensuring you can't make money without paying them, while removing options for the consumer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    the state of current gaming should be enough prove for you that no, people cannot just choose not to buy them... same as you can probably not avoid AI in anything new you buy, they put it everywhere and you either eat it or give up X thing you loved

  • source
  • parent