this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2026
378 points (99.0% liked)

PC Gaming

14024 readers
1254 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The lawsuit aims to "stop Valve from promoting gambling features in its games, disgorge all ill-gotten gains, and pay fines for violating New York\u2019s laws."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] JillyB@beehaw.org 9 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

In this thread: a complete lack of moral clarity as gamers simp for one of the most profitable companies in the industry. Valve was a pioneer of loot boxes. When they got in trouble for CS:GO skin gambling, they did the minimum to make it look like they didn't allow it and allowed it to make an easy comeback. They sit back and make 30% off the sale of every game on the platform. People should be saying that Valve is very bad and Epic is even worse. Instead gamers feel this strange need to pick sides with a giant company that controls almost all PC gaming. No, we can easily say they're all bad.

[–] TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 hours ago

They need to get rid of Steam to begin rolling out cloud computing. They've already started the phase were people can no longer realistic build the rigs they could build a year ago.

You are right, they are all bad. Singling out any company isn't helping out. That's the problem with this lawsuit, it is not legislative, it is going only after one company under the telltale of politicization "it's for the children" with a fair amount of false accusations that "CS2 and other FPSs are causing kids to become violent". This is to build up Leticia James' political career by going after an easier target that does not have the political ties other marketplaces have and it will not fix the system, but just allow the competitors to thrive.

Now that doesn't mean she's doing as part of some conspiratorial shift to cloud computing, it just means that the parties interested in that shift generally encourage and do nothing to oppose this sort of intervention whereas in the past it might have been opposed to because of the hurdle of precedence they could help to establish - which no longer matters as much because half the Supreme Court is corrupt anyway and can just hallucinate the precedence away in an exercise of mental gymnastics in their opinion.

You don't think it matters, just look at the shitshow YouTube is increasingly becoming, because that's what a lot of rich assholes want to appropriate and coerce Steam into becoming. Fear the day Steam goes public.

[–] Smaile@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Reminder most vg marketplace charge 30% on sale on they're platform. Steam isn't charging much different then it used to.

[–] JillyB@beehaw.org 3 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Again, those other marketplaces are bad too. Saying Valve is bad isn't saying another company is good and calling another company bad doesn't mean I have to say valve is good.

[–] Agent_Karyo@piefed.world 4 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Not everyone has loyalty to Valve or any company.

[–] JillyB@beehaw.org 4 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Not everyone, but plenty of people in this thread do. And plenty of gamers in general excuse their bad behavior.

[–] Agent_Karyo@piefed.world 2 points 13 hours ago

That's true. I've gotten pushback for criticizing Valve and there is a lot to criticize.

They might be better in some way than other US tech companies, but that's doesn't mean much.

[–] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

You're a citizen in a village. The Nazis have come to your village and decide to destroy you. You attack the friendly village toymaker for hosting gambling nights for everybody.

Yes, it's wrong.

No, it's not the time.

Nuance is dead.

[–] JillyB@beehaw.org 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
[–] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

What do you think would be a more apt analogy, then? Maybe I'm painting them in an unfair light. But, my point is that they're a toymaker that makes and distributes entertainment for everybody, but also do this thing that kinda sucks.

[–] JillyB@beehaw.org 2 points 8 hours ago

Billionaire owned tech companies that controll a market so tightly they pretty much have a monopoly shouldn't be anthropomorphized so fondly. I want you to vomit up that Kool aid.