121
Valve "played capitalism so well they broke it" and now Steam can't be replaced
(www.gamesradar.com)
this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2026
121 points (98.4% liked)
Hacker News
5692 readers
657 users here now
NOTICE: The bot occasionally has downtime, sorry about that. I'm working on adding better monitoring and error recovery so I can get notified faster.
Posts from the RSS Feed of HackerNews.
The feed sometimes contains ads and posts that have been removed by the mod team at HN.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If by technically you mean literally the definition then yes. It's not technically. It's just the thing. Its the actual definition.
But on the other point anti-competitive practices don't have to be part of a monopoly. They're the easiest way to become a monopoly, steam just did it the hard way. This is what a lot of people fail to get. It's only about the market share. Steam has an overwhelming insurmountable market share, which is kind of the topic of the post that people didn't read I'm guessing.
I'm glad people like Steam. I do too. It has absolutely nothing to do with the topic though. Steam is a Monopoly by definition.
You've avoided doing this built all your arguments on the very thing you refuse to provide, so I'll do it.
exclusive ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action specifically : exclusive control of a particular market that is marked by the power to control prices and exclude competition
The most popular and best does not mean only or exclusive. They made a better product, that's it.
Ugh. This is exactly what I was talking about. Every single fucking time.
MONOPOLY DOESN'T ACTUALLY MEAN ONE!
But you're right. I said i wasn't getting into it. That's enough.
Merriam Webster is pretty reliable when it comes to defining things, it's literally their jam.
Maybe you have a different hangup?