72 of game developers think Steam is a monopoly. However they have one good reason to keep using it

72% of Game Developers Think Steam is a Monopoly: Why They Still Rely on It

The gaming industry, a landscape constantly shifting under the weight of innovation and consumer demand, is no stranger to debate and contention. Recently, a survey has revealed a striking sentiment among game developers: a significant 72% believe that Valve’s Steam platform operates as a monopoly. This revelation, initially reported by Gamepressure.com on November 5, 2025, underscores a growing unease within the development community. However, despite these concerns, the vast majority of developers continue to rely on Steam for a substantial portion of their revenue. This dichotomy – acknowledging monopolistic tendencies while remaining dependent on the platform – highlights the complex relationship between game developers and the dominant force in PC game distribution. We delve into the reasons behind this apparent contradiction, exploring the benefits Steam offers and the alternatives (or lack thereof) available to developers striving for success in a competitive market.

The Monopoly Accusation: Examining Steam’s Dominance

The term “monopoly” is rarely used lightly, especially in the context of business and economics. For 72% of game developers to express this viewpoint suggests a deep-seated belief that Steam wields disproportionate power over the PC gaming market. Several factors contribute to this perception:

Market Share and User Base

Steam boasts an overwhelmingly large market share in the PC gaming distribution landscape. For years, it has been the go-to platform for gamers to purchase, download, and play digital games. This massive user base, numbering in the hundreds of millions, presents an unparalleled opportunity for game developers to reach a wide audience. No other platform currently rivals Steam’s reach. This sheer scale effectively locks many developers into the ecosystem, fearing that launching exclusively elsewhere would significantly limit their sales potential.

Network Effects and Lock-in

Steam benefits heavily from network effects. The more users who join the platform, the more valuable it becomes to other users and to developers. Gamers are drawn to Steam because their friends are there, because of the extensive game library, and because of the established community features. This creates a powerful lock-in effect, making it difficult for competitors to gain traction. Developers, in turn, are compelled to be on Steam to tap into this established network.

Curation and Discoverability Challenges

While Steam offers tools for developers to market their games, the sheer volume of titles available on the platform can make it difficult for individual games to stand out. Many developers feel that Steam’s curation algorithms and discoverability features are not always fair or effective, leading to concerns that some games are unfairly marginalized while others receive preferential treatment. The issue of discoverability is further compounded by the fact that Steam’s algorithm changes are opaque, leaving developers struggling to optimize their games for better visibility.

Market Power and Commission Fees

Valve’s position as the gatekeeper to a vast audience grants them considerable market power. This power is reflected in the commission fees they charge developers for sales made through the platform. While Steam’s 30% cut is the industry standard, some developers feel that it is excessive, especially considering the increasingly competitive landscape. This perceived unfairness contributes to the sentiment that Steam is exploiting its dominant position. However, Valve has recently introduced a sliding scale commission structure that reduces the percentage for high-revenue games. This change has been welcomed by some, but others argue that it does little to address the underlying concerns about Steam’s market power.

The Good Reason: Why Developers Stick with Steam

Despite the monopolistic concerns, the vast majority of game developers continue to rely on Steam. This is not simply a matter of inertia, but a calculated decision based on a number of compelling factors:

Unmatched Reach and User Base

The primary reason developers stay with Steam is its unparalleled reach. No other platform offers access to such a massive and engaged audience. For independent developers, in particular, Steam provides a vital pathway to market, allowing them to reach potential customers without the need for extensive marketing budgets. The potential for organic discovery on Steam, however diminished, remains a significant draw.

Established Infrastructure and Tools

Steam provides a comprehensive suite of tools and services that make it easier for developers to manage their games. These include:

This established infrastructure simplifies the game development and publishing process, allowing developers to focus on creating high-quality games rather than managing the technical details of distribution and community management.

Visibility and Marketing Opportunities

While discoverability can be a challenge, Steam also offers various marketing opportunities for developers, including:

These opportunities can be invaluable for developers looking to increase awareness of their games and drive sales.

The Steam Deck Effect

The release of the Steam Deck has further solidified Steam’s position in the gaming ecosystem. The handheld console allows players to access their entire Steam library on the go, creating a seamless experience between PC and mobile gaming. This has incentivized developers to optimize their games for the Steam Deck, further strengthening their ties to the Steam platform. The Steam Deck also provides a valuable testing ground for developers to experiment with new control schemes and game mechanics.

Alternatives to Steam: A Viable Option?

While Steam dominates the PC gaming market, several alternative platforms exist. However, none have yet managed to replicate Steam’s success:

Epic Games Store

The Epic Games Store has emerged as Steam’s most significant competitor. Epic Games has actively courted developers by offering a more favorable revenue split (12% commission compared to Steam’s 30%) and by securing exclusive deals for certain games. While the Epic Games Store has attracted a substantial user base, it still lags far behind Steam in terms of market share and features. Furthermore, its history of exclusive deals has alienated some gamers who prefer to have all their games in one place.

GOG (Good Old Games)

GOG, owned by CD Projekt, focuses on DRM-free games and offers a curated selection of titles. While GOG has a loyal following, its market share is relatively small compared to Steam and the Epic Games Store. GOG’s DRM-free approach appeals to some gamers, but it also makes it more susceptible to piracy.

itch.io

itch.io is an open marketplace that caters to independent developers and experimental games. It offers a flexible revenue split and allows developers to customize their storefronts. While itch.io is a valuable platform for indie developers, it is not a viable alternative for larger studios looking to reach a mass audience.

Direct Sales

Some developers choose to sell their games directly through their own websites or online stores. This allows them to retain full control over pricing and distribution, but it also requires them to handle all aspects of marketing, customer support, and payment processing. Direct sales can be a viable option for developers with strong brands and loyal fan bases, but it is not a realistic option for most indie developers.

The Future of PC Game Distribution: A More Competitive Landscape?

The gaming industry is constantly evolving, and the future of PC game distribution is uncertain. While Steam’s dominance is undeniable, the rise of alternative platforms like the Epic Games Store suggests that the market is becoming more competitive.

Increased Competition and Negotiation Power

As more platforms emerge and compete for developers’ attention, developers will have more leverage to negotiate favorable terms. This could lead to lower commission fees, better marketing opportunities, and more control over their games.

Cross-Platform Initiatives

The future may see more cross-platform initiatives that allow players to access their games on multiple devices and platforms. This could reduce the importance of platform exclusivity and create a more open and interconnected gaming ecosystem.

Blockchain Gaming and NFTs

The emergence of blockchain gaming and NFTs (Non-Fungible Tokens) could disrupt the traditional game distribution model. Blockchain-based platforms could offer developers more control over their games and allow players to own their in-game assets. However, the environmental impact and regulatory concerns surrounding blockchain technology remain significant challenges.

Conclusion: A Necessary Evil or a Symbiotic Relationship?

The relationship between game developers and Steam is a complex one, characterized by both dependence and resentment. While many developers believe that Steam operates as a monopoly, they continue to rely on the platform for its unmatched reach, established infrastructure, and marketing opportunities.

Whether Steam is a “necessary evil” or a valuable partner depends on individual developers’ perspectives and circumstances. However, it is clear that Steam plays a crucial role in the PC gaming ecosystem, and its influence is likely to remain significant for the foreseeable future. As the gaming industry continues to evolve, it will be interesting to see how the relationship between developers and platforms like Steam adapts and changes. For now, developers navigate this landscape by carefully weighing the benefits against the perceived disadvantages, seeking to maximize their reach and revenue while hoping for a more equitable and competitive future for PC game distribution.

You also may like 〣〣