this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2025
42 points (100.0% liked)

Gaming

31234 readers
15 users here now

From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!

Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.

See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
remington@beehaw.org
alyaza@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org
gyrfalcon@beehaw.org
Whom@beehaw.org
The_Hunted_One@beehaw.org
chloyster@beehaw.org
42
Why doesn't Steam support Android? (feddit.org)
submitted 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) by Ulrich@feddit.org to c/gaming@beehaw.org
102 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Steam revenue estimated 2024: $10.8B

Google Play Store gaming revenue 2024: ~$31B

Why doesn't Valve want a part of that? I mean they already have an Android app. Several, actually. I realize there's some amount of investment but surely the payoff is worth it, and they have the necessary funds and skills? I mean if F-Droid can do it with nothing but volunteers and grants...?

Certainly plenty of games won't lend themselves well to the mobile experience but also plenty of them do.

From a personal perspective: I don't really care a whole lot for mobile games but I do like Balatro and want to play it on my phone, but if I want to do that I have to buy another license, which I can't even do because I don't run Google Play Services.

Epic got in on this already. Where's Valve?

Edit: my reflections on this conversation:

Valve could distribute their own app like Epic but they'd also probably have to remove it from the Play Store because now a cross-platform game would give them an Android version, thus breaking Google's ToS. So would doing such a thing outweigh lost sales from the Google version, and would it impact customer satisfaction? I wonder how many people are actually purchasing PC games in the Steam Android app...?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 7 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Sure, but Steam can leverage their already-massive 132M userbase, just like Epic has (only much bigger). Put an announcement on the Steam store and client pages. Show a pop-up when someone opens the website from an Android device, etc. I mean certainly they wouldn't achieve the same level of success as Google who has their store installed on literally every Android device, but even a tiny fraction of their revenue would be an enormous boon to Steam.

So if Steam starts to distribute games for Android, the Steam app would be thrown out from Google Play.

That's not how that works. They only throw it out if you use the app in the app store to distribute other apps. They don't ban the entire company from distributing any software.

[–] jarfil@beehaw.org 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

They don't ban the entire company from distributing any software.

They can do whatever, it's their store.

Keep in mind that Epic Games v. Google has made Google add features to allow alternative app stores on Android... which automatically removes the monopoly argument and lets Google ban anyone they want from the Google Play store.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

They can do whatever, it's their store.

No. They can't.

which...lets Google ban anyone they want from the Google Play store

No it didn't.

[–] jarfil@beehaw.org 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Read the case, the whole thing started because Google banned Epic from the Play store, and the only reason for it to become a case, was the monopolistic position. That's gone now, they're free to refuse service to whoever they want, whenever they want, for no reason at all... and if you don't agree, go sue them, they'll show you the precedent followed by the door.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

I'm very familiar with the case.

and the only reason for it to become a case, was the monopolistic position.

The reason it became a case is because Epic violated the ToS (intentionally).

That's gone now, they're free to refuse service to whoever they want, whenever they want, for no reason at all..

...what is gone, exactly? You think this settlement suddenly made them no longer a monopoly? That's not how that works. Further, companies that are not monopolies ALSO have to comply with their own ToS, so I'm honestly very confused about what you're trying to say here.

[–] jarfil@beehaw.org 1 points 4 days ago

what is gone, exactly?

By adding support for alternate stores, the monopoly argument is gone: everyone can build their own store now. Meaning, everyone with a store can kick out anyone else, and tell them to just build their own.

comply with their own ToS

...which they can change at any moment, but don't really need to; most ToS include clauses about refusing service without having to explain why. If you ever agree to a ToS, better make sure they're even supposed to notify you if they ever decide to cut you off.