If steam was for its customers first they wouldn’t try to break consumer laws in so many of the countries they do business in. In reality it is motivated by profit just like all the other companies with the main difference being the lack of business morals that steam consistently displays.

I'm thinking the only assurance that we have is Steam remains a private company under Gabe. With that said, he's getting older, and who knows what's going to happen to Steam once he's gone and the mantle gets passed to someone else. I've been thinking of moving to GOG but it's severely lacking in functionality compared to Steam (regional pricing and USD only currency are two main reasons that I can immediately recall).

引用自 Shreddy：

If steam was for its customers first they wouldn’t try to break consumer laws in so many of the countries they do business in. In reality it is motivated by profit just like all the other companies with the main difference being the lack of business morals that steam consistently displays.

Nope, that's not how logic works.

This assumes malice. You assume that they are making a deliberate decision to break such laws. They can be simply unaware of them. I know for a fact this has happened before.

And of course they are motivated by profit - there is no such things as a business that isn't. I don't know where people get these weird ideas from.

You can do both. But to assume that because they aren't foolproof or don't always match up to your personal ideas, they're against you is just silly.

Valve do NOT care for you, they harrass customers, lie and defend companies even when you are being legit scammed

Valve have always liked Microsoft, they refund Sony games even if people have 1000s of hours in them but refuse to refund broken scams made by Microsoft

Gabe bought a shipyard this year in the Netherlands that builds Super Yachts. He's not running this, his 2 kids are heirs and likely are. Gabe is building ships. Enjoy your retirement Gabe!

引用自 Legata Flavia：

Steam is here for players.

oh you sweet summer child, never change!

引用自 Shreddy：

If steam was for its customers first they wouldn’t try to break consumer laws in so many of the countries they do business in. In reality it is motivated by profit just like all the other companies with the main difference being the lack of business morals that steam consistently displays.

And yet you have never name those countries where you accuse Valve of breaking their consumer laws.

All businesses are motivated by profit, including Australian ones.

引用自 alumlovescake：

Valve do NOT care for you, they harrass customers, lie and defend companies even when you are being legit scammed

If you are referring to MFS 2020. You had 19.4 hours in the game back in 2022.

引用自 Legata Flavia：

That Steam never sellout to Microsoft, or other giga company.

Steam is here for players. Those other companies are there just for the shareholders.

this is a new illusion :3 cute in a way

引用自 crunchyfrog：

引用自 Shreddy：

If steam was for its customers first they wouldn’t try to break consumer laws in so many of the countries they do business in. In reality it is motivated by profit just like all the other companies with the main difference being the lack of business morals that steam consistently displays.

Nope, that's not how logic works.

This assumes malice. You assume that they are making a deliberate decision to break such laws. They can be simply unaware of them. I know for a fact this has happened before.

And of course they are motivated by profit - there is no such things as a business that isn't. I don't know where people get these weird ideas from.

You can do both. But to assume that because they aren't foolproof or don't always match up to your personal ideas, they're against you is just silly.

Yep, It's 100% how logic works. Companies that are driven by putting the customer experience as their first priority don't try to cheat their customers on refunds or flaunt consumer laws.

You are the one being illogical by attempting to strawman my argument with malice claims and stating that steam might not be aware of an issue that they have been to court and lost over, most reasonable and logical people would safely assume that a company knows when it has lost a court case and you are the only person who has mentioned malicious intent.

引用自 Shreddy：

引用自 crunchyfrog：

Nope, that's not how logic works.

This assumes malice. You assume that they are making a deliberate decision to break such laws. They can be simply unaware of them. I know for a fact this has happened before.

And of course they are motivated by profit - there is no such things as a business that isn't. I don't know where people get these weird ideas from.

You can do both. But to assume that because they aren't foolproof or don't always match up to your personal ideas, they're against you is just silly.

Yep, It's 100% how logic works. Companies that are driven by putting the customer experience as their first priority don't try to cheat their customers on refunds or flaunt consumer laws.

You are the one being illogical by attempting to strawman my argument with malice claims and stating that steam might not be aware of an issue that they have been to court and lost over, most reasonable and logical people would safely assume that a company knows when it has lost a court case and you are the only person who has mentioned malicious intent.

Just because you have a personal agenda, doesn't mean Valve broke any laws. They've been quite good at following and adapting to them actually, even if customers don't like it. Valve has to follow the law, no matter your feelings.

引用自 Nx Machina：

引用自 Shreddy：

If steam was for its customers first they wouldn’t try to break consumer laws in so many of the countries they do business in. In reality it is motivated by profit just like all the other companies with the main difference being the lack of business morals that steam consistently displays.

And yet you have never name those countries where you accuse Valve of breaking their consumer laws.

All businesses are motivated by profit, including Australian ones.

Any business that operates in Australia must follow Australian consumer laws, even the overwhelming majority that are profit driven. There is no Australian consumer law that allows for a business to only offer refunds for 2 hours or 2 weeks from purchase. Steam knows this and attempts to deny the refunds with their automated system but when pressed with manual refund tickets will always admit they are wrong and begrudgingly give the refund. This demonstrates that steam knows the law but still attempt to flaunt it. If they were an honest company that valued customer experience they would simply give refunds based on the laws of the countries they operate in without attempting to pushback and deny refunds.

引用自 Komarimaru：

引用自 Shreddy：

Yep, It's 100% how logic works. Companies that are driven by putting the customer experience as their first priority don't try to cheat their customers on refunds or flaunt consumer laws.

You are the one being illogical by attempting to strawman my argument with malice claims and stating that steam might not be aware of an issue that they have been to court and lost over, most reasonable and logical people would safely assume that a company knows when it has lost a court case and you are the only person who has mentioned malicious intent.

Just because you have a personal agenda, doesn't mean Valve broke any laws. They've been quite good at following and adapting to them actually, even if customers don't like it. Valve has to follow the law, no matter your feelings.

I'm not going to argue with someone who thinks I have a personal agenda simply because a company doesn't follow the law. It's just going to be easier to simply link the court cased that they lost for breaking consumer laws.

https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/valve-to-pay-3-million-in-penalties-for-misrepresenting-gamers-consumer-guarantee-rights

Sometimes it pays to do 5 minutes of research rather than launching into personal attacks and embarrassing yourself.

引用自 Shreddy：

引用自 Komarimaru：

Just because you have a personal agenda, doesn't mean Valve broke any laws. They've been quite good at following and adapting to them actually, even if customers don't like it. Valve has to follow the law, no matter your feelings.

I'm not going to argue with someone who thinks I have a personal agenda simply because a company doesn't follow the law. It's just going to be easier to simply link the court cased that they lost for breaking consumer laws.

https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/valve-to-pay-3-million-in-penalties-for-misrepresenting-gamers-consumer-guarantee-rights

Sometimes it pays to do 5 minutes of research rather than launching into personal attacks and embarrassing yourself.

Thanks for proving my point that they adapted to the laws, as shown in their current rules. I was hoping you'd be silly enough to post that as your only evidence. Bravo for the self toss.

引用自 alumlovescake：

Valve do NOT care for you, they harrass customers, lie and defend companies even when you are being legit scammed

Tf are you talking about?