The à¹ÛBronx
Member
And you failed and your arguments have been countered many times.
Where? You misunderstood my post and are being needlessly aggressive for some bizarre reason.
- -
To reiterate this was said:
Which implies that Valve take their store cut but doesn't feel a need to find other, more shady, avenues to go down. To which I said:But Valve doesn't take a bigger cut than any console platform holder (who is then also asking gamers to pay a fee).
As I see Valve as the opposite of a paragon for the argument that a company should use profits to better their service. I was then asked for examples, so I said this:Yeh, instead they pollute Steam with unnecessary bollocks to further their cash cow and refrain for as long as possible from doing anything to actually combat a number of the problems it has. Their cut may be the same but let's not pretend they haven't got shitty practices running alongside the cut from the store they get.
Cards, complete lack of a decent support system, little to no action against ratings abuse for a long time – and even then a band-aid fix, events that now seem to only focus on promoting things that give them more money relative to those they used to do, no consideration for moderation of the store and outsourcing it to players, and developers for the forums. There are quite a few elements of Steam that are unattractive.
To think me wrong would be to suggest that Valve doesn't look for alternative profits other than the cut they take from the store, and they have persistently bettered their service with the money they've accrued.