But if they subsidize the hardware, non game users will purchase the hardware and use it for non game use-cases, where valve cannot recoupe the costs.

A interesting scenario would be to sell the hardware at cost, but include a 30% off ticket to the steam store (up to a few hundred dollars, in savings).

Instead they made the right choice and subsidise the software. Valve has been sending patches for Linux for over the last 10 years as well as giving SteamOS out for free for other hardware now.

If you don't want to play games, why would you buy a steam machine? Even with a subsidized price, you could get a mini PC with no GPU for half that or less.

If Valve subsidizes PC by $200 why would people not buy for office, art, video editing? And gaming is not only Steam, there is also GOG, EGS, Microsoft Store.

> If Valve subsidizes PC by $200 why would people not buy for office, art, video editing?

I already said why, but you ignored my second sentence out of two sentences...?

Let's say Valve subidizes it down to $800. But you can get a good office/art PC for $300, and a steam machine isn't particularly good for video editing. So why would you pay $800 and pick the steam machine if you're not gaming?

> And gaming is not only Steam, there is also GOG, EGS, Microsoft Store.

Why are you bringing up a whole different argument now? Yeah Steam won't get their cut for all games. But they'd get their cut for most games. If they have 75% market share then reduce the subsidy they could reasonably apply by 25%. Well, less than 25% because most people are leaving Steam OS on there and are even more likely to buy on Steam.

We have entire handheld lines for console emulators. More performant GPUs useful for Dolphin, PPSSPP, RPCS3, Ryujinx. GPU used for 3D modelling and sculpting, video editing, encoding. Steam machine subsidized by $200 PC would be used for anything but Steam, payed by Steam users.

You've ignored "art, video editing" and you claim that your point ignored? Why do you type words at all if issue is their consumption?

> We have entire handheld lines for console emulators. More performant GPUs useful for Dolphin, PPSSPP, RPCS3, Ryujinx.

Those people are gamers! If they want the steam machine it supports the argument I actually made before you brought up something entirely different (most of them buy steam games too btw).

> GPU used for 3D modelling and sculpting, video editing, encoding. Steam machine subsidized by $200 PC would be used for anything but Steam, payed by Steam users.

It's not a particularly good GPU. I don't think you'd get a lot of those users.

> You've ignored "art, video editing" and you claim that your point ignored? Why do you type words at all if issue is their consumption?

What are you talking about? I addressed both of those.

Use ctrl+F if you need to.

You've gone beyond skipping what I said to gaslighting me about it.

Entity asks question, unable to comprehend answer, claim any gaming leads to Valve revenue, discards video editing and art examples. Please stop wasting bytes.

I didn't fail to understand your answer, I disagreed with it and said why.

While you showed an inability to read my sentences twice.

But sure blame me if you want, bye.

Steam take 30% of the purchases made via the Steam Store. If you sell a game on Steam, you can redeem as many Steam Keys for your game as you wish. Those keys are sold at 100% profit to you, Steam dont take any.

Interesting. So you can freely sell keys outside of Steam and they don’t mind?

You have to sell it for the same price, but yes. Most games on the Humble Store give you Steam keys, where Humble takes 25% and Steam gets nothing.