this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2023
748 points (90.3% liked)

Games

16703 readers
938 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works
748
Dusk: Unpopular opinion: I'd rather pay Valve 30% and put up with their de facto monopoly than help Epic work towards their own (very obviously desired) monopoly (twitter.com)
submitted 1 year ago by nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works to c/games@sh.itjust.works
507 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Your whole argument to show that it isn't is based on ignoring their market dominance and referencing the DMA that hasn't even been used to analyze Steam's position in their market because the PC video game market as a whole isn't big enough to be covered by the DMA.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

You have no proof that it isn’t either 🤷

The proof, that I already mentioned, is the fact that no antitrust agency anywhere convicted Valve of anything related to monopoly.