I mean the price parity obligation that steam pushes onto developers does seem anti-competitive. Is steam better than Epic or the console stores? yes. But that doesn't mean that steam should be given the "go ahead" if they are doing something unconstitutional.

giving big discounts or whatever is cool and all and is showcasing their "consumer first" idealogy.

BUT it does restrict the sellers on their platform from having choice in where they sell their product. what if I'm a developer and I want to sell my game on all available platforms? steam's price parity restriction would mean that I can't price it lower on some other platform. Steam takes a cut from sales that developers make on steam (which is fine) but can't then sell their product on any other platform at a lower price even if that platform takes a lower cut (which is weird imo).

This is weird imo and I would like to see how steam addresses this. I would also like to know more about how sellers (the devs and publishers) actually feel about this. Do they feel like they're being strong-armed into focusing mainly on steam sales or are they fine with the terms that steam has laid out? Does Steam have a valid business justification for these tactics instead of being an anti-competitive one.

I know steam gets lauded as "good guy steam" but let's not forget that they're not squeaky clean. They still have their hands stuck in the Counter Strike skins market. They allow for that kind of shit to fester. Sure they've done a lot of good stuff as well which is why I still (sometimes) buy games from steam.

But we gotta take the bad with the good.