If I’d say to my publisher „but I don’t want to publish on Steam“ I can look for another publisher. You don’t need to defend Steam, I didn’t attack it by stating that you need to publish on the biggest platform.

You’re right, the 80% figure I read was from a small poll, it seems 75% is the more accurate figure.

That’s honesty. You don’t “owe me a reply” but replying selectively is dishonest. It’s pretending you haven’t heard any contrary information, when you have.

Now given the 75 is quite close to 80, I think calling Steam a monopoly in the market of pc video game distribution is quite fair, don’t you? The honest thing to do would be to change your mind in the light of what you didn’t know before.

I can’t wait for your company to do the same. You know, because it’s not hard. Heck, I invite you to do the same with 10 employees, since it’s so not hard.

A lot of indie companies would not exists if there wasn’t a storefront like Steam that handles worldwide transactions, distributes the game and increases their discoverability.

There are other options, such as itch.io.

If you think Valve’s cut should be lower, you’re free to make your own marketplace and compete.

I said it’s not hard to reach that high of a revenue per head measure if you don’t have 20k employees.
Google, MS and so much other mega corps have a similar revenue (dunno exact numbers), so they obviously have lower numbers.

So calm down.

That’s the whole point though. Most companies keep hiring to make more money. Staying lean takes discipline.

Levels.fyi data from 1 October 2025 reveals senior engineers at £206,000 ($375,000) total, but Valve’s equity-heavy model amplifies this, drawing top talent without micromanagement.

This article was here the other day and made it sound like employees are treated very well.

I was going to just downvote and move on, but you seem unable to properly understand that a lack of a reply can mean different things, and you just assume that the person not replying to you agrees with you and is just too afraid to say so. Let me be clear… you are moving the goalposts and I see no point in having a discussion with someone who is not just dishonest in the conversation, but insists that it’s others who are acting dishonestly.

Steam does not have a monopoly on gaming. If you want to narrow that down to PC gaming then you’re changing the subject, but even then, they do not have a monopoly on PC gaming because they are not the only sellers. They don’t even have a monopoly on Linux gaming because they have put their resources there into open source projects which others have also benefited from, which is how I’m able to play Rocket League (yet another wildly successful game not available on Steam) on my Linux computer. Bringing other ‘classic monopolies’ into the conversation makes no difference on the discussion we’re having. And those other monopolies were not taken down because they were monopolies, they were taken down due to their anti-competitive practices - something that Valve has actively and successfully tried to avoid.

And no, I don’t think that because you feel that one number is ‘quite close’ to another number that they should be equal. I think that’s just another sign of you being dishonest and moving the goalposts and then assuming that you’ve made a valid point.

And finally, respond to this or not, I don’t care, but I said, multiple times, all that I need to say on this subject and to you.

you seem unable to properly understand that a lack of a reply can mean different things, and you just assume that the person not replying to you agrees with you and is just too afraid to say so.

If you say “the earth is flat”, then someone replies with evidence of how the earth is not flat, then in another thread, you say again, “the earth is flat” without ever replying to the evidence, that is dishonest. If contrary evidence won’t get you to change your tune, what is the point in talking to you?

Steam does not have a monopoly on gaming. If you want to narrow that down to PC gaming then you’re changing the subject, You were the one who insisted this conversation be about gaming in general. The person you replied to did not specify the market, and was clear the moment the discrepancy arose what I and everyone else was talking about.

but even then, they do not have a monopoly on PC gaming because they are not the only sellers.

You have already been shown that monopoly does not literally mean “the only seller” but instead means “the dominant seller”. By this point it’s downright weird that you keep insisting this is the meaning without even admitting that the counter-examples in textbook usage exist.

Does anyone know how Valve rate on privacy? Do they aggressively data mine and sell it in the surveillance economy?

The lowest earners making the company work aren’t mentioned here. It’s probably an external company cleaning the toilets, for hourly rates you probably don’t want to know.

Microsoft has 228,000 employees. Holy crap

If you think Amazon’s cut should be lower, you’re free to make your own marketplace and compete.

The market is already captured.