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.
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.
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.
