- I can see an argument for PSN and to a lesser degree Steam being anti-competitive. But from this article they seem to be implying a major point is them being digital markets pushing out “traditional” game sales, which sounds silly to me. - I’ve never really understood the need to hold digital sales back to physical goods sales. It’s like complaining that Costco is cheaper because it skips the traditional store front. 
 
- How Steam? - Steam is the 800 lb gorilla in the PC gaming sector. It sort of is the biggest offender as far as Poland’s argument is concerned. - According to the game sales industry, providing a useful service is anticompetitive behaviour, because you might steal customers from the platforms that are screwing everyone. 
 
- Poland blames steam reviews for cp2077 doing poorly on release, probably. 
 
- It’s odd that they would mention two competitors in a comment about being anti competitive - Why is that odd? - Because any competition exists means anticompetitive behaviour doesn’t exist… Right? - I think the issue is the same as Apple being anti-competitive about the AppStore. Sure, techically, both Steam and the PSN are platforms for selling games, but they’re each restricted to specific non-overlapping platforms (respictively PC and PlayStation) where there they have a (near for Steam, absolute for PSN) monopoly. Hence, anticompetitive behavior. - Steam is not anticompetative at all. On every device steam works on you can download and install a game outside of steam’s control with no concern. Hell even on steams actual devices (steam deck) you can install whatever you want. - PSN on the other hand. There is no other source of software outside of the PSN network available digitally for the consoles. 
 
 
 
 






