Valve has addressed the pricing of the Steam Machine, which is now available to consumers starting at $1,049. The company acknowledged that the price is higher than initially anticipated, attributing it to ongoing supply chain issues impacting computing components. However, Valve also explained its decision not to subsidize the hardware costs, a common practice among traditional console manufacturers.
In a statement, Valve argued that subsidizing hardware, while seemingly a straightforward way to lower prices, does not align with their principles for building healthy ecosystems. The company emphasized its strong belief in open systems, stating that the openness of the PC ecosystem has been a primary driver of innovation in both hardware and software for decades, allowing anyone with a new idea to contribute.
Traditionally, console makers often sell hardware at a loss, recouping costs through subsequent sales of games, subscriptions, or accessories. Valve contrasts this with its own philosophy, asserting that when companies sell hardware below cost or secure exclusive content, they are actively creating a more closed system that limits consumer choice. Valve stated it does not desire such an environment for PC hardware and believes consumers should not either. They want the Steam Machine to be viewed as one option among many, rather than a mandatory purchase.
This stance was reiterated in Valve's Steam Machine launch announcements, where the company avoided characterizing the device as a traditional console due to the associated connotations of a closed ecosystem. Valve believes that while selling hardware at a loss might benefit a single business in the short term, open ecosystems are ultimately more advantageous for consumers in the long run. The company pointed to the history of PC gaming as evidence of this, highlighting how its openness has fostered innovation.
While Valve champions open ecosystems, notably through its contributions to Linux gaming via SteamOS and the Steam Deck, the article notes that this position should be viewed with some skepticism. The piece points out that Valve operates a platform often described as having a monopoly on PC game distribution, from which it collects a 30% commission on game sales. This commission rate, higher than some competitors, has implications for developers and publishers, potentially impacting the variety of games available on the platform if lower fees were in place.