Sony patents PlayStation controller that could accept tap-to-pay from phones and credit cards

[u/Nullhitter]

https://www.techspot.com/news/113988-sony-patent-shows-playstation-controller-could-accept-tap.html

[u/CatOfTechnology]

A lot of it is actually them falling for the bait.

"Steam is a monopoly" wasn't a common sentiment until Sweeney started opening his mouth and a lot of people took the two parts of his strawman at face value.

The entire cohesive thought they have is that "Valve is situated in a position on PC where not releasing on Steam is almost suicidal for you company and Valve abuses that position to charge their 30% without doing anything significant to justify it, beyond simply being the biggest storefront."

Now, I don't have to spend the time explaining exactly why this is a stupid throughline of thought, anyone with half a brain understands that it's a bum's argument.

But without putting any thought in to anything, it's an incredibly easy sale for people who want to believe it's true.

[u/NZObiwan → u/CatOfTechnology]

They are definitely a defacto monopoly, the only question is whether that's a significant problem.

The answer is probably generally no, however they allegedly stop companies from listing their games elsewhere for lower prices (e.g. $100 on steam, $70 if you buy DRM free from the dev's website).

Steam claims not to do this but there have been so many unrelated reports of it happening that their credibility on the issue becomes questionable.

[u/Loinnird → u/CatOfTechnology]

Dude. You don’t have to have literally 100% of the market to be a de facto monopoly.

Take Walmart, for example. Sure it isn’t the ONLY shop in town. At first. But then mom and pop can’t compete so they close up shop, so buyers are left with no choice. Now they’re Walmart shoppers.

So Steam fans should be down on their hands and knees thanking Sweeney for throwing literal billions into the only storefront that keeps Steam as an illusion of choice.

[u/HornsOvBaphomet → u/Loinnird]

There's quite a lot of people who use GOG.

[u/Auno94 → u/HornsOvBaphomet]

Market domination is an issue, while Valve in 2026 is absolutely fine. Any and all market dominations shouldn't be protected or celebrated.

Take the company that bought my company, what did they do with even more market power? Raised prices overall, competition is good for consumers, market domination is always to the financial detroment of the customer

[u/Loinnird → u/HornsOvBaphomet]

There were “quite a lot of people” who had Apple computers in the 1990s, too. Didn’t stop Microsoft getting hit with antitrust suits.

[u/TheWiseAlaundo → u/Loinnird]

Walmart pushes Mom and Pop shops away because they negotiate lower prices for cheaper products and the other shops can't compete without going out of business.

Steam doesn't do that. They just say you can't sell Steam keys for lower prices than on their platform, but don't do anything to prevent lower prices on other platforms. They have the same 30% cut that nearly every other platform has.

It's the equivalent of opening a store next to another and having higher prices (as an example equivalence of less features like the Epic Store) for the exact same items and complaining that the first store is being unfair. It isn't, you just aren't offering a better store.

If Epic wanted to offer the same features as Steam then that's one thing. But saying Steam should be broken up because it is superior is like saying Apple should be broken up because the iPhone is better than other phones.

[u/Loinnird → u/TheWiseAlaundo]

LMAO in your SECOND paragraph you directly describe an anticompetitive practice by Steam that it can only enforce because of its market power.

What the fuck do you think monopolies do?

[u/TheWiseAlaundo → u/Loinnird]

They say you can't sell STEAM keys on other platforms for less than on Steam. Steam is a platform and they offer extra features that users want, and they're saying you can't undercut Valve by selling steam keys for your game for $10 on your website and then $20 on Steam, especially considering that Valve doesn't require the 30% cut for Steam keys.

To my knowledge, their policy is NOT that you can't sell your game for cheaper in general on another platform. You can sell your game for $10 on GOG and $20 on Steam and Valve won't care.

This is just good business practice to prevent someone opening a "Steam-lite" store where Steam keys are sold at a discount by the publisher (I know other sites exist that do this, but those are resellers) to prevent Valve from getting any money

[u/Loinnird → u/TheWiseAlaundo]

When you get technical, Steam sells Steam keys. They don’t “sell” games, because software is licensed between the developer/publisher and the user.

By preventing publishers from reselling Steam keys at a discount, they’re engaging in what’s called Retail Price Management. “Just good business practice” would be to charge their split on Steam keys provided to the publishers and avoid anticompetitive behaviour.

But, seeing as it took literal government intervention to get Valve to regularly issue refunds and stop geoblocking in the EU, avoiding anticompetitive behaviour isn’t Valve’s strong suit.

[u/NZObiwan → u/TheWiseAlaundo]

They just say you can't sell Steam keys for lower prices than on their platform, but don't do anything to prevent lower prices on other platforms.

This is the one claim that I think needs better verification. There have been reports of steam requiring price parity across separate stores even when it isn't steam keys being sold, and I think that's problematic.

The idea of requiring that developers don't sell generated keys for cheaper that the normal store makes sense though.

[u/CatOfTechnology → u/Loinnird]

Look, Valve and Steam are not perfect.

But I need you to do something for me:

Every time you think "Thanks, Tim Sweeney, for keeping Valve and Steam in check." I want you to remember that the EGS was such a massive, unignorable threat to the Steam ecosystem that it forced Valve to do nothing and win.

And then I want you to internalize that information and mull it over for at least 45 minutes before you open your mouth and make a fool of yourself.

[u/Loinnird → u/CatOfTechnology]

LMAO sure thing. Let’s imagine a world without EGS:

EU citizen: Steam is a monopoly!

EU: Yup, let’s break this shit up and fine it a bajillion dollars.

Gaben cockgobblers: WHat aboUT GoG!!??

EU: 0.01 market share is not competition you idiots.

[u/CatOfTechnology → u/Loinnird]

I love this because not only are you forced to pull a hypothetical out of your ass for it, but:

• It's Tim who started the Monopoly accusations.

• Literally no legal entity, the entire EU regulatory body included, agreed with him.

• E.U. Regulatory Bodies have no say over the day to day function of American companies anywhere outside of the E.U., meaning that, while they could levy fines or deny Valve permission to operate within the E.U., they have no ability to break up Valve as a company.

That you're struggling this much is something that I love for you. I think it's very fitting.

[u/Loinnird → u/CatOfTechnology]

1) Tim didn’t start the monopoly allegations; he was just the first one with money and market power.

2) Do you think Apple going to USB-C was by the goodness of their hearts? No, it was an EU mandate. Heck, Steam used to almost never give refunds until they were forced to by Australian law and even lost an antitrust suit in the EU for geocaching.

3) it’s very much within the EU’s power to dictate that Valve needs to create a European subsidiary again to continue doing business in the bloc, and they can dictate any divestments (say, separating the social media aspect from the storefront). They make the fucken laws, dude.

Got any other brain-busters stemming from your lack of regulatory knowledge?

[u/CatOfTechnology → u/Loinnird]

1: It's not a literal "First person ever", but I'll concede this one because you clearly need at least one win in your life.

2: Whataboutisms are hilarious. Apple being forced to convert to USB-C was strictly because of their monopoly over the entire ecosystem, being the only company allowed to make and sell chargers that worked with their phone was an explicit abuse of monopoly power. The rest of this point falls neatly under "Valve and Steam are not perfect by any means."

3: That's not what it means to break up a monopoly, you dolt. Breaking up a monopoly is the act of rendering a company in to sectional institutions that are place under differential leadership and barred from reintegrating. The E.U. does not have the authority to break up Valve, as Valve is a US based company and does not have to abide E.U. rulings in that regard. What you have instead described is what's known as Mandatory Joint Venture and would not serve, form or function as a way to segment Valve, only to give Valve the ultimatum of subjecting itself to E.U. Regulation via Proxy or be barred from access to the E.U. Consumer Base. Because, again, while the E.U. can tell Valve to accept it's terms or fuck off, the E.U. does not have the authority to order a segmentation of a company that falls under another sovereign country's jurisdiction. Otherwise, you'd be seeing shit like China ordering Microsoft to segment itself, or the US ordering Tencent to do the same in the name of protecting their local citizenry from 'hostile foreign influence'. In fact, the lack of a country's ability to directly control foreign assets, like corporations, is why countries like China and Vietnam enforce MJVs and Local Equity Requirements before they grant external companies access to their consumer markets, it's the only way that they can gain leverage on a company without full-stop denying themselves access to desirable goods and services.

But by all means, pat yourself on the back for getting me to teach you about these things. You're today's 1-in-10,000 who learned something new.

[u/Loinnird → u/CatOfTechnology]

Dude. Way to miss the point.

If Valve had to separate into Valve Europe and divest parts of the business in the EU, ipso facto it is no longer a monopoly in the EU. It doesn’t matter what kind of arrangement it’s defined as.

And if they demand an EU subsidiary, BY DEFINITION IT IS BREAKING UP THE COMPANY, because Valve (Global) is now Valve EU , whatever is divested, and Valve Rest of world.

Sure, Valve can tell them to fuck off. Valve telling the EU commission to fuck off in the geoblocking case didn’t stop the EU imposing a fine, it just aggravated it.

You’re gonna need more than a ChatGPT summary.