Valve is profitable since they don’t spend money, they could make some games, but than they would lose the marketing, the games would never meet expectations either. Blah blah blah.
Basically valve works because they just sit on their pile of wealth hoarding it. The only thing they’ve done in a decade is the steamdeck. Big whoop, any other corp would be blasted for what they do. But they get a pass for some strange reason.
They have 2 successful e-sport leagues (DotA and CS)
They made and maintain steamvr, and released the Index not even 5 years ago, which is fully cross-compatible with older hardware like the Vive.
They develop Proton and Vulkan, which are open source, to boot
They still support TF2 with content and balance patches.
They’re developing Source 2 and just ported CS to it.
They released one of the best VR games on the market at the time in HL: Alyx
All of this, plus the steampowered ecosystem and the deck, and not counting all the R&D we know they do through interviews and articles which hasn’t manifested into commercial products yet.
There are valid criticisms of Valve, but them not doing things with their money is not one of them and just betrays how ignorant of their body of work you actually are.
no but they just don’t have the pressure to grow like public companies. The rest is a failure in tax law. So it’s on Americans to elect leaders to change the Tax Law to incentivize Valve to use it or lose it.
Stock market shareholders want constant growth from their investments. Enough of them also only care about short term growth, even at the cost of long term.
Valve, being privately owned, only answers to its own shareholders, no-one can just buy in and start demanding more profit seeking. They have collectively decided that slow but reliable growth is better. This results in them not actively pumping their customer base for ever more profit. They have no intention of killing their golden goose.
Valve, being privately owned, only answers to its own shareholders
Which is Newell controlled…. Privately owned means nothing, it’s actually worse since they can’t be audited so you don’t know the specifics.
It’s funny that people think a private company can line one persons pocket (or multiple), but not a public company… what’s the legitimate difference? Not just some excuse that is being used to justify it, what is the actual difference that makes it okay.
SpaceX is private, and musk gets ripped on, yet Newell does the same and he’s revered? Where’s the logic in that? Lmfao.
Both line pockets. The difference is the focus. The shareholders for valve have been invited. You can’t just decide to buy a bit of valve, then tell them what to do. Publicly traded shares mean that the people investing are often only interested in the value and dividends, anything that boosts that is good. If the company dies from it then who cares, they’ll jump ship and invest elsewhere.
Valve’s current mentality is that keeping the customers happy keeps the money flowing. It has now reached the point where compounding effects make up for the short term reduction in dividends.
Customers are happy, share holders are happy, and no-one can barge in, demanding a piece of the pie.
That would be incredible, doubt Sony would go for it though.
Sony does seem that they are into supporting PC. They know it’s not enough with PlayStation revenue with these big budget games.
Yeah but I’m sure they care more about VR software sales than actually moving the hardware.
I mean, warehouses cost money…
They’re not even into supporting their first generation of VR titles, hard to imagine they’d ever bother with PC
If the market was bigger because of PC, it might be worth it.
And cannot imagine that equation going anywhere but up.
Sony has already stated they are working on PC support and hope to release it this year: https://blog.playstation.com/2024/02/22/coming-soon-to-ps-vr2-zombie-army-vr-little-cities-bigger-wanderer-the-fragments-of-fate-the-wizards-dark-times-brotherhood-and-more/
More why would valve spend money.
Valve is profitable since they don’t spend money, they could make some games, but than they would lose the marketing, the games would never meet expectations either. Blah blah blah.
Basically valve works because they just sit on their pile of wealth hoarding it. The only thing they’ve done in a decade is the steamdeck. Big whoop, any other corp would be blasted for what they do. But they get a pass for some strange reason.
That’s just not factual, at all.
All of this, plus the steampowered ecosystem and the deck, and not counting all the R&D we know they do through interviews and articles which hasn’t manifested into commercial products yet.
There are valid criticisms of Valve, but them not doing things with their money is not one of them and just betrays how ignorant of their body of work you actually are.
Private companies play by different rules
So it’s acceptable for them to hoard their wealth? Strange distinction.
no but they just don’t have the pressure to grow like public companies. The rest is a failure in tax law. So it’s on Americans to elect leaders to change the Tax Law to incentivize Valve to use it or lose it.
Huh? Who’s pressuring public companies to grow? People take offense to them paying their ceos more money or hoarding it (like Newell…!?!? Himself)
So they move overseas and now you lost the labor they created too, good job.
Stock market shareholders want constant growth from their investments. Enough of them also only care about short term growth, even at the cost of long term.
Valve, being privately owned, only answers to its own shareholders, no-one can just buy in and start demanding more profit seeking. They have collectively decided that slow but reliable growth is better. This results in them not actively pumping their customer base for ever more profit. They have no intention of killing their golden goose.
Which is Newell controlled…. Privately owned means nothing, it’s actually worse since they can’t be audited so you don’t know the specifics.
It’s funny that people think a private company can line one persons pocket (or multiple), but not a public company… what’s the legitimate difference? Not just some excuse that is being used to justify it, what is the actual difference that makes it okay.
SpaceX is private, and musk gets ripped on, yet Newell does the same and he’s revered? Where’s the logic in that? Lmfao.
Both line pockets. The difference is the focus. The shareholders for valve have been invited. You can’t just decide to buy a bit of valve, then tell them what to do. Publicly traded shares mean that the people investing are often only interested in the value and dividends, anything that boosts that is good. If the company dies from it then who cares, they’ll jump ship and invest elsewhere.
Valve’s current mentality is that keeping the customers happy keeps the money flowing. It has now reached the point where compounding effects make up for the short term reduction in dividends.
Customers are happy, share holders are happy, and no-one can barge in, demanding a piece of the pie.