• CodeInvasion@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      206
      ·
      5 months ago

      Valve is a unique company with no traditional hierarchy. In business school, I read a very interesting Harvard Business Review article on the subject. Unfortunately it’s locked behind a paywall, but this is Google AI’s summary of the article which I confirm to be true from what I remember:

      According to a Harvard Business Review article from 2013, Valve, the gaming company that created Half Life and Portal, has a unique organizational structure that includes a flat management system called “Flatland”. This structure eliminates traditional hierarchies and bosses, allowing employees to choose their own projects and have autonomy. Other features of Valve’s structure include:

      • Self-allocated time: Employees have complete control over how they allocate their time
      • No managers: There is no managerial oversight
      • Fluid structure: Desks have wheels so employees can easily move between teams, or “cabals”
      • Peer-based performance reviews: Employees evaluate each other’s performance and stack rank them
      • Hiring: Valve has a unique hiring process that supports recruiting people with a variety of skills
      • Ragdoll X@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        102
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Kinda sounds like how worker cooperatives work tbh, but with Gabe still technically being the owner.

        I remember reading a news piece a while back about how the founder of a food company made sure to transfer ownership to the employees before leaving. While we’re talking about worst-case scenarios, let’s also hope for the best and hope that Gabe has a similar plan.

        • andxz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          27
          ·
          5 months ago

          Him being a pretty smart guy overall surely has at least some sort of continuity planned.

          • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            5 months ago

            It would be best to convert it to full employee ownership if it isn’t yet. As long as a steady stream of good employees keeps revolving in it should be a stable company that provides for its employees and customers.

      • Ech@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        38
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        PeopleMakeGames has a two part series on Valve that’s pretty interesting. The second part (here) dives into the structure of the company. It does have a bit of an angle, fwiw, so if you’d prefer something more objective, it might not be a great watch. Personally I think the issues they bring up are valid, but figured I’d mention it.

      • menemen@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        A little unsure about the “peer based performance review”, sounds like bullying might somehow have to be kept in check. Otherwise this sounds awesome.

        • JJROKCZ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          5 months ago

          Lots of companies have peer based employee reviews, cliques have the capability to cause harm in these firms but normally the peers reviewing you are rotated each review period to minimalise that and any bad actors can normally seen by management’s review of the peer reviews.

            • JJROKCZ@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              I don’t believe Valves claim of perfectly flat structure, Gabe is the owner, he if no one else is management and has the power. I’m willing to bet there’s a second level of reviewers for peers, if nothing else then it’s a second separate set of peers reviewing the first set’s reviews to watch for this problem.

        • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Fun fact: Former employees of Valve have said that is actually a huge problem in the organization and that its organizational structure seems to encourage bullying and high-school style “cliquishness” by design.

          • daltotron@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            5 months ago

            I mean it’s not as though that’s not a problem in normal companies. It’s just that normal companies can sort of use the guise of structure or professionalism to harangue whatever employees the clique ends up disliking. The cliques are baked in, in a normal company.

            • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              It can be a problem at other companies, but even worse than average at Valve by virtue of corporate structure. Both of these things can be true.

      • Takumidesh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Stack ranking is toxic and removes individuality from a given employees expectations in my opinion.

        People should be qualified to give proper unbiased reviews. Just because someone is an excellent engineer does not mean they are good at understanding other people’s expectations and work outputs.

        I worked at a company that had no ‘managers’ just the owner, and everyone else. I hated that I had no real way to settle disputes and every single disagreement has to ultimately be resolved by the literal one person who was in charge.

        I think there is merit to flat structures, but I don’t think the extreme is always the way to go.

      • Adalast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        This, and as long as the company is legally structured to prevent restructuring things will be fine.

    • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Do you know everybody who works there and what their ambitions are?

      Also, nothing is impossible when you can deploy thepower of acquisition lol i’m less worried about them internally polluting themselves and more about externally being destroyed. We’ve seen this over and over again.

      • efstajas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Apparently 50%+ of the company belongs to Gabe himself, presumably he would pass it on to some very trusted. That makes a hostile takeover pretty unlikely.

        • xavier666@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          5 months ago

          I really hope he is secretly investing in cloning so we can get Gaben (2) joining Valve soon. Or atleast invest some money in uploading his consciousness into a giant metal head 🗿

        • Sanguine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          He could just turn it into a nonprofit at some point with some specific rules in place about how certain things are handled within the company.

    • helenslunch@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Doesn’t really matter if none of those people have authority on the direction of the company, which they don’t.

      • xantoxis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yeah the scenario we’re being asked to consider is what if someone else gets control of the company, so whatever power employees nominally have now, they won’t if he dies without deeding the company to a collective.

    • InputZero@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      24
      ·
      5 months ago

      Realistically, it’s only a matter of time until Steam becomes as enshittificated as any other services. There is profit to be made from Steam selling advertising space and customer data. They can either choose to capitalize on the profits that are in front of them, or allow another company to and take that capital from them. For a business it’s not a matter of what’s right and wrong anymore but consume or be consumed. If Steam isn’t willing to do that someone else will be willing to play the long game and do it. Then it’ll be only a matter of time until Steam gets acquired by another company and then it’s game over.

      • efstajas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        64
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        This doesn’t make any sense. The reason Valve hasn’t been acquired is because it’s privately owned and not up for sale, not because it doesn’t have “enough profit”. In fact it’s extremely profitable, for all we know.

        Sure, another company could come along and build a competitor. It’s happened already multiple times, and Steam is doing just fine despite some major titles these days being exclusive to other platforms. Unless Steam drops the ball on something big time, it’s unlikely that people will move to another platform en masse, especially one that is less focussed on consumer interests. No-one can just come in and “take capital away” from Steam, whatever that means, by building a competitor that sells advertising space and “monetizes user data” — they need users first.

        … And then there’s the fact that Steam is already “selling advertiser space” today. Games don’t just get featured on their storefront because Gabe likes them. They make deals with publishers for this.

        • Bookmeat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          I don’t have the article on hand, but there is a publication from a steam store employee explaining exactly how to get your game onto the front page. The gist of it is that you don’t have to pay Valve. It’s about community engagement (your publisher, I guess).

          • efstajas@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            I’ve read that, IIRC. It was about getting featured organically though. Steam runs promotions for certain game series or even publisher catalogues frequently, with large custom graphics and usually a sale. Obviously I have no way to know for sure, but I can’t imagine that Valve doesn’t get itself paid for those.

        • daltotron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          The idea is less that someone makes a competitor and then they actually compete. The idea is that a competitor service is able to lock away one or several big titles, like, say, overwatch, league, fortnite, or whatever else, behind exterior launchers that are maybe more free to do data harvesting. Then, that competitor theoretically eats away more and more of the largest market share, and tries to drive those users from just using their platform for a single game, to maybe using multiple games, maybe with something like a games pass or with free weekend deals or whatever. Once they have that market share, they can give developers better margins, since they’ll be selling customer data at a profit and steam won’t be, maybe with some sort of exclusivity contract baked in, purposely undercutting steam. Then, steam’s been put on the back foot, and the rest is just kind of what has happened to streaming services.

          It’s a market, markets trend towards short term gains strategies over long term gains strategies because having faster short term gains means you can more easily crush your competition. It’s like age of empires 2, the first couple minutes of the game is the part that matters the most. That being said, steam has been around for quite some time, and has a good amount of brand loyalty and goodwill built up, and that doesn’t seem to be slowing down anytime soon as they keep one-upping their competition with actual improvements to their platform, like family sharing, screencasting, big picture mode, increased controller support and reassigning, and a full standalone version of linux, that basically all their competitors seem incapable of. So maybe steam has enough of a headstart that, even with a long term gains strategy, even with a, basically, non-evil mentality, they can stay afloat. Who can say.

          • efstajas@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            You’re of course right with the exclusivity argument — that’s a very real possibility, and yet Microsoft has tried it with Call of Duty, one of the most popular franchises ever, and saw very little success with it, resulting in them putting it back on Steam years later. If I were to guess why attempts like this have failed in the past, I would say that Steam is so dominant over the PC gaming market today that not even large franchises going exclusive attract enough of a user base to offset the loss of customers that aren’t buying games only because they’re not on Steam. Add to this the additional overhead of developing and maintaining a competing store front, and the cost-benefit analysis leans clearly towards just being on Steam and accepting their cut of sales. The exclusivity tactic clearly failed even for big titles like CoD, so it definitely won’t work for smaller ones. And we’re not even talking about cutting into the indie game market, which would require making very attractive exclusivity offers to many smaller studios, all for acquiring exclusivity on titles in the hope that they’ll be the next big hit — a very high risk strategy that likely results in a lot of sunken cost short-term.

            Once they have that market share, they can give developers better margins, since they’ll be selling customer data at a profit

            When we talk about “selling customer data”, I think we need to look in more detail into what this would actually mean in practice. It’s very unlikely that any online storefront could legally literally “sell your personal data” like address etc. that you would enter presumably as part of the payment process to third parties. That’s just illegal almost everywhere in the world, and certainly in the largest PC gaming markets. It wouldn’t lead to significant revenue either, because raw data like that just isn’t very valuable. Instead, I suppose what people mean when they say this (in the context of companies like Google or Facebook) is just the practice of selling advertising services that use the data they have on people to advertisers, who can then target their ads at highly specific segments, improving their return on ad spend. The actual private data though stays with the entity that collected it — because it’s what actually gives them the edge on the market; it allows them to offer better ad targeting than competitors.

            How would this apply to Steam or a potential competing storefront? Barely. I assume no-one is arguing that a steam competitor could launch a generic advertising network that could stand against Google or Facebook, so we’re probably talking about advertising within the storefront itself. Steam today already collects information on your interests and customizes the store based on that, plus presumably your location, age group etc. — so they’re pretty much already using your “personal information” to the extent possible in this context. How else could a competitor realistically monetize personal information?

            It’s a market, markets trend towards short term gains strategies over long term gains strategies because having faster short term gains means you can more easily crush your competition.

            I wouldn’t say that this is the case when we’re talking about trying to eat into the market share of a dominant entity like Steam. Sure, potential competitors can make short-term plays that cut away some market share, but such strategies are expensive, risky, and alone likely don’t lead towards a significantly improved position long-term (exhibit A, again: COD being exclusive to Battle.net).

            For better or worse (usually worse), toppling a near-monopoly like Steam is extremely hard for players with big cash, and practically impossible for independent competitors. This is especially true for products that are inherently sticky, like Steam, where people have curated large libraries over decades. The only reason Steam’s dominant position is not hurting the consumer is because their product works well and is in many ways very pro-consumer.

      • PoopDelivery@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        I’d drop Steam if that happened. There are other ways to get games and managers like Lutris make organizing them easy. I’m sure Valve knows this and with how long they’ve been successful, fucking with gamers would not make sense. Look how it’s working or for some of the bigger gaming companies recently.

  • CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    127
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    Proton is open source. Anyone can pull it together and integrate it. Gog have been doing DRM free games for a while, they’ll be quite keen to fill this niche. Epic probably won’t care. If none do, someone will want to.

    • brrt@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      62
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      What are you smoking? GOG Galaxy doesn’t even have a Linux client. In fact it has been one of the most requested features for years and nothing has happened.

      Edit: it’s also the reason I stopped buying from them when I got my Steam Deck.

      • zbb@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        They do provide Linux support in other ways though. They even troubleshoot me once with a game I tried to play on Linux and offered a refund.

        Gog Galaxy not on Linux is a shame, yes, but its DRM-Free and Linux installers are enough for me to continue to buy from them.

        Edit: Heroic Launcher makes a great replacement of Gog Galaxy, maybe even better than the Windows client, from what I’d tried. No multiplayer though.

      • CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        So you’re saying if Valve enshittified, they wouldn’t fork and try to capitilise on that market?

        They probably do not see the point right now as Valve have it sewn up. Lemmy grew when Reddit scored own goals. When Valve do, opportunities are there and would be taken.

    • puchaczyk@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      5 months ago

      Valve is a private company whereas GOG belongs to CDProject - a publicly traded company. GOG might want to fill the void but they’re more likely to do dumb, shortsighted decisions in contrast to Valve.

      • CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        5 months ago

        Maybe, but DRM free content isn’t exactly shareholder value…

        It’s better shepherded than Epic. They probably don’t fill the space because Steam do it better, but you invest more if the return is higher.

        The case I’m referring to is in the future if Steam badly enshittified.

    • pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Gog have been doing DRM free games for a while

      As far as I know GOG also sells drm content and Steam also sells drm-free content. So what’s the point

      they’ll be quite keen to fill this niche

      I also don’t remember them doing anything for Linux apart from releasing a broken port then badmouthing people who complained that the game they bought is broken.

  • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    122
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Gabe is helping, sure, but he isn’t holding up gaming. People were gaming on Linux before Proton even existed, myself included. Also, even if Valve went away completely, Proton is open-source and there are people like GloriousEggroll who work on Proton entirely as a community member. Proton will live on, specifically because it is open-source. All the progress made on Proton won’t suddenly disappear, all the games that were previously playable on Proton will still be playable on Proton.

    It’s a somewhat reasonable fear but it’s not a realistic fear. Proton isn’t going anywhere.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      72
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Proton will live on, specifically because it is open-source.

      Don’t just thank open source; thank copyleft for the fact that Valve couldn’t make a closed-source fork of it even if it wanted to.

      • KubeRoot@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Even if they want to open-source it, an issue is the amount of work of organizing the repository, making sure it’s properly organized and doesn’t have any files they don’t want to distribute, and then maintaining that with future versions.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          5 months ago

          What? Proton (i.e., WINE) has been LGPL Free Software since before Valve even touched it.

          • KubeRoot@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            5 months ago

            Sorry, what I mean is, if Valve wasn’t forced to keep it opensource, I think a big factor against would be the extra work

  • NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    120
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Obviously his death will trigger a worldwide AR Easter egg hunt, where the Steam user worthy enough to find the three keys first will become the new Gaben and Master Of Steam.

            • Shelbyeileen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              5 months ago

              I looked at the movie as a fun romp that’s a bit inspired by the book and that makes it bearable. The movie took the nerdiness down in a way that was very unrealistic, but understandable to the general public. Anyone actually in the nerd community knows that people find shortcuts and glitches, and do speedrun records competitively; but they removed the entire part about the first key being in the school area (where it would be attainable by all for free) and instead make it “Oh, I was supposed to drive backwards in this race that I need a very expensive car/weapons for”

              It’s a very pretty movie with a lot of fun Easter Eggs, but you’ve gotta separate and realize it wasn’t made for them to enjoy it.

  • trag468@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    109
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    I think Gabe has been getting healthy lately. Last picture I saw of him he was looking like he lost a lot of weight. Maybe repost this in 10 years and then we can panic.

    • squeakycat@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      I used to support them but when they opened the floodgates to trash games I didn’t get much reason to stick around. I miss and crave curation over volume. If both stores have heaps of garbage and steam has far better Linux support with valve actively contributing to and improving the Linux ecosystem… I’m going steam most of the time now.

      Sad as in theory I would support gog more but it seems like they’ve discarded what made them special.

      • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Could you expand on that pls?

        Im wondering how does the excess amount of games offered by a store affect your experience. How would you even notice that?

        And - that they were a more closed store was what made them special?

        Then I think of GOG I think about licencing, how I actually own a game purchased, how I have a key for it, how I’ll still own that game even of GOG stops existing. Thats not true for any of the other stores (outside of physical copies if some sell them, idk).

        • squeakycat@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          I notice it because the signal drowns out the noise. It’s so hard to browse or find interesting new games made by passionate devs because so much low-effort barely-games and hentai visual novels flood it all out.

          I’m all for adult sex games but jfc it’s just sad how awful and unending their presence is.

  • un_aristocrate@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    Français
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    Whenever you are afraid of the negative impact on your life of a corporation’s possible failure, it means that you have become reliant on someone you can’t trust. You must act accordingly.

      • Swallowtail@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        Probably not a popular view here but I’ve found my hobbies more fulfilling since I started doing stuff other than gaming. Native plant/food gardening, reading books, working out… all of this stuff can be affected by capitalism too of course but I’m less beholden to it. I still game a bit now and then but much less than I used to.

        • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Even when steam is gone, we’ll still have movies, books and music.

          Because of the analogue hole we can capture these and store these as long as unlicensed hard drive possession is allowed.

          Of course there are non-culture based activities but I think we shouldn’t tolerate regression from big tech and take steps to prevent them just out of shear principle.

          These facilitator middlemen think they can dictate how to live our lives and I think we should make them regret this position severely.

    • Moorshou@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Does this mean I should buy games from GOG? Or support physical media/indies?

      • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yes. GOG. itch.io. Direct from some other website. That’s right.

        Steam is very good; but the hidden cost is that you depend on them maintaining their service. If they turn evil, you’re screwed. You either have to bend to their will, or you lose your library of games.

        On the other hand, GOG and itch.io are arguably not as good as Steam right now, but they don’t have any kind of lock-in. So if they start to backslide, you can still walk away with your full library of games. I do think it’s a good idea to ‘not put all your eggs in one basket.’

  • Hazzard@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    70
    ·
    5 months ago

    For sure, valid to fear the enshittification of steam. But they aren’t killing proton. Maybe ignoring proton at worst. But Steam has profit motivations for not being reliant on Windows, which has actively been trying to supplant them with the Windows Store for years.

    As another separate, profit-motivated company, with a gaming division and a lot to gain from eating Steam’s lunch, Microsoft is not Steam’s friend. Proton is a critical bargaining tool for them, and not having to include windows licenses for devices like the Steam Deck helps their costs too.

    • psivchaz@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      50
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      My fear is them going public or selling. If that happens, it’ll probably be Microsoft willing to spend any amount, and the government hasn’t really been in a “preventing monopolies” mood for a while now.

  • proceduralnightshade@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    ·
    5 months ago

    Yeah I do have a similar fear. Valve is something special. I tried to hate them, they’re filthy-rich corpos after all, but I can’t. Something of value will be lost when Valve finally succumbs to enshittification, which cannot be said of a lot of other big companies.

    But my fear isn’t necessarily about Steam. I have like 20-30 games in my library. Steam is simply the least shit way to play games you have/want to pay for.

    • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      I love valve, I have 1000+ games in my library. I also have every crack for every game I could fine. For the rest, I have live virtual machine snapshot of the running game. Of course anythibg live service will not work without a server simulator. To do that we need to, for each games, using wireshark, record all server and peer traffic while also saving all privaye encryptions keys used in the session.

      Once games start using TPM processor, they will become uncrackable. Make sure to use a compromised TPM in that case.

  • HaiZhung@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    What many posters in this thread fail to realize is that there is a very good reason why steam hasn’t been hit by the enshittification that otherwise permeates human existence in 2024.

    Of course, Gaben as their CEO has the last say in it. And he’s just a good guy. But wait, aren’t there other companies that have good guys as their CEO and yet the enshittification persists?

    The profound reason is that Valve is not a publicly traded company. They have no obligation to any investors to make number go up. They are a private company, they can do whatever the fuck they want. If they stay flat and keep paying their employees, that’s totally fine, and there is 0 pressure on them to change anything. THAT‘s why Valve seems like such a different company compared to everything else that’s out there.

    Of course it’s still a choice to go public or not, and they have made the right call (for us consumers).

  • The Hobbyist@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    I think there are important considerations to keep in mind.

    First and foremost, Valve is not a public company. I don’t know if it has investors, but it is not driven by profits like many typical public companies are. These companies tend to allow themselves longer investments without any clear visibility of immediate profits. They also do things for the greater good, even though it does not bring profits.

    But also, I think the whole of valve is a set of gamers and people who genuinely care about the gaming business and making great products. I think they all share Gabe’s values and goals. It’s not like Gabe is the only one holding everything together or else it would instantly crash into the profit driven company it could be.

    Both of these scenarios keep me hopeful that this is a longer lasting stance and doesn’t hinge on just one person. It’s not a proof it will never be a typical profit company but these are barriers which are not typically present. Let’s hope for the best and keep rewarding them for their contributions to gaming, open source and for their good actions.

    • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      I don’t understand where this myth came from that if a company is a public that they aren’t potentially ruthlessly profit driven.

      Valve is not special. Gabe is to a certain degree (though I would also caution people from deifying anybody period). We can never take for granted that the valve and steam experience we largely enjoy today will be there tomorrow. That’s a simple fact.

      • Crismus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        In the US, there are multiple Supreme Court precedent cases that force profit-maximizing. Shareholders can sue the CEO and board to maximize profit seeking.

        So yes, increasing shareholder value is enshrined in US law. Only private corporations can get around that rule. Also, a corporation cannot be forced to break the law to maximize profits, that’s just something most CEO’s are willing to do for fun.

        • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          I didn’t say people don’t redline publicly traded companies. I’m saying not being public doesn’t mean leadership won’t. I’ve personally seen it plenty of times.

          Also, “fiduciary duty” (the “Supreme Court cases” I’m assuming you’re vaguely referring to) does not mean a CEO needs to always slam the gas at all times to maximize every single red cent at the cost of all medium and longterm considerations. This is a commonly parroted assertion by people online without a basis. “Fiduciary duty” and other obligations to the shareholders simply mean they can’t make obviously bad decisions that will hurt the shareholders. They don’t get hauled off by the Investor Police if they make a single longterm decision at the expense of a little short term profit.

          All of this isn’t to say we don’t see it happen all the time anyway. But if it was so strict we’d see more CEO’s hauled off, not golden parachutes everywhere as they break their companies apart.

          • miss phant@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 months ago

            I think your original comment has a typo on “isn’t”, hence the confusion.

            if a company is a public that they aren’t potentially ruthlessly profit driven.

        • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          So yes, increasing shareholder value is enshrined in US law. Only private corporations can get around that rule.

          This is true, with one exception.

          There are non-profit corporations. They have to declare that they are non-profit at the time of foundation, though. They have to write that in the statute (idk what it’s called in English, it’s “Satzung” in German).

      • Shiggles@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s not that they can’t still be profit driven, it’s that they can’t be sued by investors for not being ruthlessly profit driven. Private just means that they have the choice at all

      • audiomodder@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Publicly traded companies are, by law, driven to make as much money as possible for shareholders. Privately held companies are not held to this same limitation. So while a company like Valve could be highly profit-driven (let’s be honest, all for-profit companies in a capitalist system are driven by this motivation), it doesn’t seem to be driven to maximize profits in the short term. This means that they can focus on things other than profit if they so choose.

        • blindsight@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          There is a common belief that corporate directors have a legal duty to maximize corporate profits and “shareholder value” even if this means skirting ethical rules, damaging the environment or harming employees. But this belief is utterly false. To quote the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in the recent Hobby Lobby case: “Modern corporate law does not require for-profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else, and many do not.”

          – Lynn Stout, professor of corporate and business law, Cornell University

    • Eylrid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      More important than who works there is who inherits Gabe’s ownership of the company. A new owner can completely change a company and drive out or fire anyone who doesn’t go along with the new direction. Look at what happened with twitter when Musk took over. Or his inheritors could take Valve public and introduce all the issues with that.

    • Yondoza@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 months ago

      It would be so awesome if they went employee owned. I get the impression the employees are people who are passionate about video games. I feel that they would choose leadership that is both good for the community and good for the long-term health of the company.

      • glimse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        55
        ·
        5 months ago

        That window is the only ad I purposely allow in my life. I know I can disable it but it sometimes informs me of games I want

      • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        5 months ago

        I actually don’t mind the advertising. Good way to know what games are popping off or are just released. I’m not great about keeping up with everything coming out every month, so it’s honestly one of my number one ways of knowing what’s being talked about/releasing besides specific reccs from friends and forums.

        I also find it’s a great way to know that a game I used to play a lot dropped some beefy DLC. It’s not like we all keep tabs on every game we’ve put down thinking that we might return to it.

        • kibiz0r@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          5 months ago

          Steam is so funny.

          Buying there instead of pirating is a joy, the ads actually feel like a benefit instead of a punishment, the analytics seem to be aimed at saving me time by highlighting stuff I’ll like instead of gaslighting me into emptying my wallet…

          The result is:

          I buy lots of games, watch lots of ads — share ads with friends even — go out of my way to give them more analytics data points, and trust their recommendations enough to shell out $2.99 for something on sale after only 10 seconds of research.

          Why are other companies not able to follow Steam’s approach?

    • slumlordthanatos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      5 months ago

      They’re far from perfect, I’d be the first person to tell you.

      But they’re still light-years ahead of anyone else, because they’re perfectly happy just making tons of money instead of trying to squeeze every last cent out of the storefront at our expense.

    • wonderfulvoltaire@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      29
      ·
      5 months ago

      They’re getting sued often because they’re greedy sloths suffering the ego trip just like epic did when Fortnite was on the top of the world second only to Minecraft of course.

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Aside from valve probably having a hit by bus plan, I’m pretty sure ownership of valve is actually split pretty evenly so it will likely fall to another senior dev who understands what to do.

    • FreddyDunningKruger@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      54
      ·
      5 months ago

      I’ve heard they’ve hidden three immeasurably invaluable CS:Go Knife skins throughout the platform, and the first person to find all three will unlock Half-Life 3 and annoint the winner as Gaben 2, God Emperor of Valve and owner of Steam. Also, they get a chocolate factory.

      • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        5 months ago

        Oompa loompa, doompadee doo, We’ve got a perfect riddle for you, Oompa loompa, doompadee dee, If you are wise, you’ll listen to me.

        Three precious knives, in Counter-Strike they hide, Find them all to claim your prize worldwide, The first to collect, in triumph shall stand, To unlock Half-Life 3, the game so grand.

        Oompa loompa, doompadee doo, Follow the clues and you’ll be through, Oompa loompa, doompadee dee, Just one more knife, and then you’ll see.

        A crown awaits, a throne so high, Steam’s vast empire, you’ll rule the sky, With Half-Life 3, your reign begins, All hail the gamer who truly wins.

        Oompa loompa, doompadee doo, The ultimate prize belongs to you, Oompa loompa, doompadee dee, Gaben 2, you shall always be.