• @kittenbridgeasteroid
    link
    87
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Any company that becomes publicly traded gets turned to the dark side. That’s the factor that does it because they have a legal requirement to do everything they can to maximize profits.

    Trying to sustain perpetual growth will always lead to companies fucking over their customers and employees.

    • @blindbunny@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2010 months ago

      While I feel this is true there are so few privately owned companies that prove this as fact. Holds breath that steam never fucks over its customers

      • @mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        10
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        I live Valve, but there’s always that nagging bit in the back of my mind reminding me that they can always turn evil in the span of a few years. And the recent debacle with Dolphin doesn’t help

        • @TALL421@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          810 months ago

          Dolphin isn’t really their fault though. That all comes down to the developers and Nintendo. The outcome sucks either way

          • @mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            310 months ago

            No, Dolphin was their fault. Valve reached out to Nintendo before Dolphin was added to the store. If Valve hadn’t asked Nintendo for permission first, Nintendo probably would have said nothing

            • @kittenbridgeasteroid
              link
              410 months ago

              Nintendo is required by law to do something or else they run the risk of losing their trademarks.

            • @LiquorFan@pathfinder.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              310 months ago

              It makes sense though. People can already install Dolphin wherever they want, including the Steam Deck. But Valve probably thinks they can get Nintendo to publish on Steam. It wasn’t so long ago that Sony and Microsoft maintained exclusivility on their platforms. Valve doesn’t win anything allowing Dolphin on Steam, but it can potentially anger Nintendo.

        • Nils
          link
          fedilink
          310 months ago

          Nintendo sent them a DMCA takedown request for the Dolphin Steam page. So I don’t think we can blame Steam for wanting to stay out of legal trouble

          • @mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            4
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            No. That is not at all what happened. No DMCA takedown notice was ever sent in this.

            What happened is that Dolphin applied to go on Steam and announced that. Then Valve emailed Nintendo asking for permission. Nintendo said they didn’t want it on the store, pointed to parts of the DMCA which were not actually valid for a theoretical case, and Valve blocked Dolphin from going on Steam

            • Nils
              link
              fedilink
              410 months ago

              You’re right.

              Sorry, I just heard somewhere Nintendo sent a DMCA notice and assumed it was right because that seems like a Nintendo thing to do.

        • NormalC
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -1
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Valve is already evil: they locked down their steam client (unacceptable in the times of GOG, and Epic Games) and allow developers to put DRM in their games. Outside of that they were the pioneers of digital gambling with CS:GO and TF2 and using anti-features as a way to entice people to purchase micro-transactions.

      • @kittenbridgeasteroid
        link
        310 months ago

        That’s likely in part due to the fact that they’d really like to he publicly traded.

    • @moormaan@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      310 months ago

      There is also the B Corp designation (short for Public Benefit Corporation) which allows a company to balance its responsibility towards the share holders with some other benefit it aims to provide where the share holders aren’t the (only) beneficiaries.