If I’m honest, I don’t disagree.

I would love for Steam to have **actual competition. Which is difficult, sure, but you could run a slightly less feature-rich store, take less of a cut, and pass the reduction fully on to consumers and you’d be an easy choice for many gamers.

But that’s not what Epic is after. They tried to go hard after the sellers, figuring that if they can corner enough fo the market with exclusives the buyers will have to come. But they underestimated that even their nigh-infinite coffers struggle to keep up with the raw amount of games releasing, and also the unpredictability of the indie market where you can’t really know what to buy as an exclusive.
Nevermind that buying one is a good way to make it forgotten.

So yeah, fully agreed. Compared to Epic, I vastly prefer Steam’s 30% cut. As the consumer I pay the same anyways, and Steam offers lots of stuff for it like forums, a client that boots before the heat death of the universe, in-house streaming, library sharing, cloud sync that sometimes works.

  • FireTower@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    148
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I trust a steam monopoly long before I’d trust epic. Epic is run to meet the needs of share holders and valve is run to meet the needs of Gaben.

    • Varyag@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      86
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Gaben isn’t going to last forever. But honestly the only other good games storefront is GoG. I’ll continue using Steam for as long as it’s still good.

      • FireTower@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve used GoG once for a game that wasn’t on steam but I have done much more. Honestly I acknowledge that this ephemeral moment in time where PC gaming is kept in balance by Gaben can’t last. But I really think the lens we should look at PC landscape today is one of appreciation. If EA ran the game in steam’s shoes we wouldn’t get things like summer sales or games at reduced prices long after their launch.

        Don’t be sad it will be gone be happy it happened.

    • Cabrio@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Gaben has been hands off at valve for a decade. He’s off breaking world records with research submersibles. Playing with his rubber duckies in the bathtub.

        • Cabrio@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          Just saying that trust in Gaben and trust in Valve are two separate things. Valve has been doing fine without Gaben at the wheel.

          • leftzero@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The point is that, other than Gabe, Valve doesn’t have any shareholders to put before their customers. A publicly traded company, on the other hand, effectively has no choice but to cause as much harm as possible to their customers and to society in general in order to maximize short term shareholder profits, leading to runaway enshittification.

            • Brawler Yukon@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              A publicly traded company, on the other hand, effectively has no choice but to cause as much harm as possible to their customers and to society in general in order to maximize short term shareholder profits

              Nobody is talking about public companies here. Both Valve and Epic are private companies.

              If you want to complain about profit motives, that’s a capitalism problem overall, not an issue with public vs. private corporations.

              • 520@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                1 year ago

                One of those companies is partly owned and heavily influenced by a publicly traded Chinese company.

    • Chobbes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      Both Valve and Epic are private companies. I still trust Valve over Epic, but I think technically Tim Sweeney has pretty much full control over Epic as well (for better or for worse).

      • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        He does, but not the stake Gaben has. Sweeny sold 40% to tencent. This still gives him control, but thats a very large shareholder that can push and pull when they want.

        • Brawler Yukon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          They can’t “push and pull” anything. With Sweeney owning 50%+1, Tencent and anyone else he sold shares to can literally do nothing - he will always have the final say. And since the company is private, there’s almost certainly an agreement/contract in place on those share purchases that if someone wants to dump them they have to offer them back to him/the company first. Since it’s not a public company they can’t just go sell their shares on an open market. The threat of a large shareholder is gone in a case like this - they can’t stage a hostile takeover and they can’t dump and run.

        • Zetta@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Another point for me at least, I actually put in effort to not getting made in China products where feasible. The same thing applies here, supporting epic is supporting China. I really just prefer not to support China, so no epic games for me.

        • Chobbes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ah that’s a fair point. I haven’t paid too much attention to this. Thanks for providing some more context :).

  • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I get like 99% of my news about upcoming or newly released games from steam. There have been so many games I’m not even aware exist, like last week I found out Saints Row got a new game a while back but it was epic exclusive so I never knew.

    Also being a Linux gamer steam has amazing support for Linux while epic has none.

    • Decoy321@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Rest assured, you didn’t miss anything with the latest Saints Row. It was decent fun for about 20-30 hours, but it felt like much less of a game than any of its predecessors. I got the impression that the idea was to restart the franchise back to square one with minimal features so they could sell them back to us in future installments.

    • markon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Linux gaming has come so far. I don’t even run Windows anymore. Especially with how much open source AI stuff I use.

    • Lesrid@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Friends are shocked to hear Kingdom Hearts is on PC. But it’s Epic exclusive.

      • yamanii@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s surreal that it still is an epic exclusive, must be the only game that isn’t just a timed deal.

  • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    valve might be the closest thing i have ever seen to an actual benevolent dictator, even if said dictator is very lazy and only deigns to do anything significant once in a while.

      • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        1 year ago

        i said valve rather than gabe for a reason, gabe mostly leaves the company to its own devices at this point while he focuses on realizing holodeck technology or whatever the hell he’s doing now.

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          There was a recent update that addressed the back button. Since then, I’ve noticed clicking games in my wishlist and then going back returns me to my scroll position and a few pages that were missing in the back button (like it would back past them) are now there.

          • Chailles@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’ve been told there’s been an update for the back button since like a day after the new UI was released. Doesn’t matter whether in Beta or Stable, it’s still broken for me such that I get sent back to the library.

    • hh93@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s because you are not in a position to produce and sell a game.

      As a user it sure is the case but as a developer you are in a position that you either have to take their 30% cut or accept that you are selling way less

      The fact that pretty much immediately after epic launched their store steam lowered the cut for big publishers tells you that they are fully aware that 30% is too much to be reasonable but they completely could get away with that because Devs just didn’t have a choice.

      Because of epic that now changed since even if you don’t actually sell more games you at least can get a guaranteed profit as if you sold those games that you miss out on by not being on steam.

      Sure the way epic is doing it is not good but I really don’t see another way how a significant number of buyers would ever come to another store. That didn’t work for EA, that didn’t work for Ubisoft, that also didn’t work for GOG where you actually own the game without DRM and not just a license to play it as long as the server is allowing you.

      People are fundamentally lazy and hate changing their routines - that’s why forcing them into buying at your store is necessary if you want to get them to switch.

      • beefcat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Because of epic that now changed since even if you don’t actually sell more games you at least can get a guaranteed profit as if you sold those games that you miss out on by not being on steam.

        how long do devs think this is sustainable?

        to me it seems like devs are trading long term sustainability for short term profitability. sure, your game Cracksnot was profitable because EGS paid out the butt to make it exclusive. now hardly anyone has played your game, how many people are going to get excited about Cracksnot 2 in a few years? will epic still be willing to pay you upfront for Cracksnot 2 exclusivity?

        if egs never really takes off (which so far, it hasn’t), eventually epic will cut their losses and stop throwing money at it.

        • Cybersteel@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s what everyone is doing nowadays. Trading long term “potential” for short term gains. Let’s face it, the earth isn’t gonna last forever, it’d be a neverending hellscape in like what 40 - 50 years. Better to enjoy it while you can by getting the most of what you need right now.

  • Silverstrings@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    My biggest issue with Epic is them very clearly doing the classic tactic of selling goods at unsustainably low prices in order to drive out competition before jacking them back up again. Their whole free game shtick can’t possibly last forever and they know it.

    • Viper_NZ@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      This and the paid exclusives mean I haven’t, and won’t use EGS out of pure spite.

      • phx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve picked up a ton of their free games. I’ve yet to actually install their client and actually play one

        • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I could always get one of those games off the high seas and pay the same amount. I’m not going to give Epic the engagement numbers to get investors with.

          • YeastInspection@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I believe these Indy devs get paid when you boot a game you got for free, so I’m happy to install stuff and boot it once just to support gaming in general

    • aesthelete@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I believe it used to be illegal to sell things at less than cost because the original monopolists did this too. Why did we make that legal again?

      • Neshura@bookwormstory.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        It isn’t (at least over here) but the “cost” for a game is really iffy to define because if you want to be pedantic the distribution cost for a digital game are cents and that only if you actually factor in infrastructure costs. So technically they can just price them however they want because technically a single game download has 0 cost.

        Technically because we all know that the production costs have to be regained somehow, just that with enough lawyer bs you can ignore that as a product cost on paper (for example if you label the entire production a learning experience or smth)

  • Rentlar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    1 year ago

    Steam is a legitimate value add for sellers and buyers/users, that justifies its 30% cut. Other than free games, Epic has a seemingly easy-to-integrate online networking system, that’s about it. Steam has a modding platform, broadcasting, remote “parsec”-like controller emulator, Linux support, content sharing, forums and a developer news feed. That’s quite a lot.

    What makes me stick with them is that they don’t preclude Steam and other gaming users from using alternatives but simply compete with their own well-made system… plenty of games have their own cross-platform mod-launchers that aren’t workshop for example. Steamworks DRM isn’t required and Steam networking services for multiplayer aren’t mandatory either.

    That said, itch and GoG are great alternatives where they have games available. I’d just like GoG to provide better Linux support.

    • TeoTwawki@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      Gog has support problems on some windows games too. Also they mark games run via dosbox as windows, which is annoying when you specifically want to find an older windows game that also had a dos release. Even with those issues, gog is still my goto because at least my games won’t be full of denuvo securom etc. and nobody else seems to remotely care about the really old harder to find games. I’d be scouring ebay fo old discs if not for gog.

  • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    How does that quote from Douglas Adams go:

    It is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it… anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.

    • Buttons@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wish we had a branch of government filled with randomly selected people.

      Imagine if we filled each house seat by randomly selecting 5 people, having the 5 people debate, and then people could vote for which of the 5 they wanted. We would then have a government filled with normal but likable people.

  • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Epic only has a lower cut because they’re leveraging their undoubtedly massive Chinese investments to gain market share. You can rest assured they would charge 30% if they could.

    I don’t like that Steam or Apple or Google charge 30%. I think it’s absurd. But also Valve is basically a saint compared to every modern corporation so I don’t think twice about it.

    • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      💯

      Although, I can imagine supporting Epic is annoying. Unlike even GOG, they don’t have their own support mechanism like a forum. I can see why someone would release on Steam (and hence stuff like GMG and Humble) and even GOG but not Epic. Example Baldur’s Gate 3, which released on everything except Epic. Although in their case Larian commented that the decision to not release on Epic was specifically to not show support for their exclusives-everything stance. Hence on everything except Epic.

  • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 year ago

    You know you made a really interesting point that they marketed to the sellers not the ultimate customers. I hadn’t really picked up on that before, but it does mitigate what should be a healthy dose of competition by altering the target audience a bit.

    • beefcat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      it’s the paypal problem

      sellers everywhere fucking hate paypal

      but they all still use it because buyers fucking love paypal

      • Neshura@bookwormstory.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’d say PayPal problem but in reverse, customers hate Epic but still have to put up with it to get to the exclusives.

        • beefcat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          sort of. the fact that egs is still not profitable on its own merits and that developers still shuttle their games over to steam once exclusivity is up tells me that not enough customers are taking the bait.

          if being on egs didn’t mean taking a huge hit in total sales, developers would be putting games exclusively on it without uncle tim slapping them over the face with a bag of money

    • hh93@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean that’s the same side that steam is using their monopoly for, too

      For the users it’s definitely the most relaxed option - but as a developer if you choose to not put up with steams 30% rule you are fucked.

      The fact that pretty much immediately after epic gained traction steam announced cheaper rates for bigger publishers tells you that they definitely are aware of how 30% is too much

      Personally that’s why I buy all my games on gog if possible even though I have a Steamdeck and that makes stuff more complicated.

      People denying steam has a monopoly are probably also denying other fundamental truths that would imply that they had to change their lifestyle (climate change anyone?)

      • systemglitch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I regret gog purchases now that I own a steam deck. I don’t see gog directly getting my money if I can get it on steam anymore.

        • Neshura@bookwormstory.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Valve really understands how to get people to stay. Proton is an absolute life saver for gaming on linux and Steam currently offers the best experience with it. You just click play and most of the times that’s it, game works. I have no idea how VR works without Steam but I can only imagine it being a giant pain in the ass given how easy SteamVR is to use (a couple of Linux Bugs aside)

      • Chailles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You say that as if Steam has unreasonably high rates. Sony, Microsoft, Apple as a standard all have the same rate.

        • wicked@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, those are all unreasonably high, which is why they have so many billions of dollars in profit. The cost of running their services is a pittance compared to their revenues.

          • Nefyedardu@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Is it surprising to you that Valve is a for-profit company, not a charity? Of course they profit from the 30%. Just like with any other product, you charge based on what people are willing to pay. If you charge too much, people won’t pay for the product and you have to readjust the price. Obviously since companies are willing to pay the 30%, it must not be too high. Somehow I doubt if the people complaining about this woke up as the CEO of Valve, they would be willing to massively cut their companies profits because… why? Just to be nice to a bunch of other corporations?

            • wicked@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              No, of course it’s not surprising that they’re not a charity. Sure, the big app stores exploit their near-monopolies with exorbitant fees.

              Good for Apple, Valve and Google, but I think it’s better that game dev studios and app developers get money instead. However, devs don’t currently have a real choice but to pay up.

              Competition can change that, so we should support technically worse stores like Epic so developers will not have to pay their unreasonably high fees.

              • Nefyedardu@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                “Exploit their near-monopolies”. Except Valve doesn’t “exploit” their near monopoly, I don’t see Valve buying exclusives do you? They just provide a better product. Most importantly, they provide a better product then piracy. That is the bare minimum a games store on PC needs to reach and Epic does not reach that. Epic isn’t failing because of Steam, it’s failing because why buy a $60 game on a featureless store that launches an .exe for me when I can just download the .exe directly for free? If Epic wanted to provide a better product, they have billions of dollars and hundreds of devs to make that happen. They just choose not to.

                but I think it’s better that game dev studios and app developers get money instead.

                This tired old argument… There’s absolutely no evidence that the extra money these companies get from the Epic cut doesn’t just go straight into a Bobby Kotick yacht or some shit. There’s a lot of grubby hands in-between the store platform and the actual dev teams and maybe I’m cynical but this “trickle-down” model of economics seems kind of far fetched.

      • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t really think it is. Steam hasn’t really tried that hard to get developers to use their platform because their users already demand their platform. They’ve made concessions on their preferred way in a handful of cases with very large gaming companies like Activision.

      • Neshura@bookwormstory.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean that’s the same side that steam is using their monopoly for, too

        Steam only has a monopoly because they have the absolute feature advantage. There is no other launcher that offers all of the features Steam does. Steams Monopoly is a natural one, it formed because every other choice was worse and developers don’t want to put the game on another 30 stores where it won’t sell anyway. Epic is trying to create an artificial monopoly where everyone uses Epic because the developers literally cannot sell the game anywhere else (at least for a time).

        Steam: Developers voluntarily restrict themselves to that single store out of convenience (99% of the customer base is there, why bother with another store). The customer base is there because the store is feature rich. Epic: Developers are artificially restricted to that single store. The customer base is there because they can’t get the game anywhere else.

        Given the above I predict that, unless Epic gets their Store feature equal to Steam (which won’t happen imo), Epic will have to continue forcing exclusivity indefinitely. The moment they stop forcing people to use their store their customers will migrate back to Steam for a better experience.

      • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, GOG is my preferred store if there’s feature parity, too. On that note, anyone here got AoW4 from GOG? Are all mods available through Paradox, or at least all you’d ever need? Or is most bound to Steam like back in the AoW3 days?

  • Lesrid@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s infuriating to me that only Steam and EA’s stores have gifting built in. Most of my games budget goes to buying small-squad multiplayer games like Deep Rock Galactic and Sea of Thieves for people.

    Sure you can buy a key anywhere but I love seeing at a glance that an acquaintance has a particular DLC or game to surprise them rather than asking them first. And then there’s a small chance they thank you for the key and pass it on to someone else instead of just telling you they don’t like game, while Steam has a handy decline button.

  • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I prefer GoG to Steam. I will not install Epic, especially after killing off the Unreal franchise.

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yup. For some reason some companies seem to think throwing all your eggs in one franchise basket is a great idea. You would think with all the easy money Fortnite is bringing in, you’d diversify your library of games. Angry Birds developers thought they could ride that thing for 20 years. Sanrio is smarter then that. Hello Kitty is their reliable money maker, but they’re always trying something new.

        • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think it was more so that they needed those devs on Fortnite to scale it… Then when they got some breathing room to look at other projects, Quake Champions had already released and flopped … as has since Halo Infinite and Diabotical (which Epic partially funded) … AFPS is a genre that isn’t getting much love from consumers.

          So, I think Fortnite caused the project to get dropped, but it’s not the reason it wasn’t picked back up. I’d imagine Epic is working on other games, these things just take a while (and they’re going to want bigger profits than they expect UT4 could bring in).

          • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t think Epic is working on other games. If Fortnite wasn’t going to be their only brand, they wouldn’t have delisted Unreal and shutdown the master servers.

    • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Same, I always check whether GOG has a game first, and whether it’s patched up to par. Sadly, surprisingly often while games release on GOG they then lack features (although personally I do not really care about achievements) or worse, the devs give up on releasing patches for the non-Steam versions.

    • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh that’s another really good point: Epic trained the consumers to open Epic weekly to get free games, then close it again. It’s a weird thing to be known for.

      Sure, had them cornering the sellers market worked out - unrealistic as it was in hindsight - then having the buyers already all have the store installed for the free games would have been a genius way of getting more and more people onto the store. But it did not, and now it has just cemented the Epic store as a place you do not spend money on!

    • urshanabi [he/they]@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I have maybe 2 dozen and I haven’t played a single one. I downloaded titles a few times, forgot about it, then went on and bought the game on steam.

  • Buttons@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I was reading about the Unity debacle and thought thank God Gabe that Steam has never pulled shit like this.

    I think part of the problem is too many companies are controlled by venture capitalists, or private equity, or whatever you call it. The point is that a single entity owns multiple companies from the shadows.

    Companies are supposed to compete and the best company win, that’s good in theory. But when a single shadow entity owns multiple companies they’ll do something like squeeze customers of one company, which drives customers to their competitor, which, surprise, is owned by the same shadow entity.

    • Adalast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      You seem to know what you are talking about, so this is for those who don’t, the “illusion of competition” has become such a staple in the modern world. In the US (and much of the world as I understand it) eyeglass sellers are all owned by the same company. Pearl Vision, LensCrafters, and I think even the Walmart vision centers are all owned and operated by Luxottica. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxottica

      It is a vertical monopoly that controls everything from materials acquisition to sales, directly “competes” with itself, and lies to customers every day to make them think they are actually in control.

      Then you have companies like 3M, or Nestle, who control most of the entire industries. A good 85% of all food on the shelves in the USA is produced by one of 4 or 5 companies that definitely collude to fix prices and use aggressive tactics to protect their position. They also follow the “compete with yourself” model to make you think you are actually making a decision with your money. You aren’t.

      Then there is the big Ag companies. In Ohio they have actually gotten laws on the books that make it illegal to do Farm Shares, where you purchase a share of the crops they produce for the year and for about 8 months a year you get a big basket of fresh produce delivered to you. An ex and I got to do it for a year before we split and it was amazing. It was a ton of food and only cost us about $150 for the half-share we purchased. It would be amazing right now with prices and it would help local private farms, which is precisely why they pushed it out.

      I can rant for hours… So I cut here. This whole topic just infuriates me to no end.

  • Scrof@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    In Gaben we trust. Epic sold out to Tencent which is evil.