• lengau@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 day ago

      In this case, between Valve winning and Microsoft winning, a Valve win is good for consumers.

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Valve winning is less awful for consumers.

        Valve is still a multi billion dollar company, who had to be forced into compliance with lawsuit and regulation to get even the most basic shit like refunds for bad/broken/scam games.

        • lengau@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          24 hours ago

          Those are two orthogonal things, but they do both point towards Valve being the better choice between the two. But if there were a Valve vs. Microsoft duality where the choice that’s better for anyone that’s not the two of them is to side with Microsoft, I’d be disappointed with Valve, but I’d choose the Microsoft route.

          I don’t think that’s likely, as Valve have repeatedly made choices that are better for the consumer even when they’re not better for Valve, but I’m not ruling out the possibility.

    • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      As long as SteamOS doesn’t fail, yes. If SteamOS draws enough gamers for there to be a healthy amount on Windows and SteamOS there will be competition between the two OS-s, which will benefit everyone. If SteamOS does draw away the supermajority of gamers then we still benefit because the open source nature of Linux makes it much harder for Valve to have total control like Microsoft has.

    • Nalivai@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      People use steam because it’s better than alternatives, if it dies consumers will lose