PC Gaming

I don't think it's misleading, "generating" implies gross profit, not net. It's not explicit, but it's also not misleading.

It's not misleading, you've just purposely ignored the meaning of the words to instead imply your own.

Wouldn't surprise that much, as far as I've heard from as far as I remember Valve is a great place to work and by all accounts treat their employees well.

Valve moved into hardware long after its other ventures, so it's not surprising the hardware devs make less -- they're newer. Still, $430k/yr is an enviable salary...

I'd think it's marketing teams, HR, managers, the C-suite.

Those who manage people usually make more than those who dos tuff because they take on more responsibilities.

Yeah I know that's bullshit and that they shift responsibilities all the time, but good managers do shoulder bullshit so workers can work.

Interesting that first part... Respectfully, no one is entitled to sales on any platform. As a consumer, I've tried other launchers and stores. I hate them all. I choose to only use Steam (for the time being). It's simply choosing the superior option, but it is an option. I can't say the same for my internet, energy, or cable companies...

It would really help if the would-be competitors focused on consumer-facing features rather than... whatever it is they're doing. GoG is doing a great job of this, but EGS is still missing even the most basic features years later, because they keep trying to get market share through buying exclusives and giving away free games and that's sadly never going to work out. They just don't understand what the consumers in the industry they're trying to operate in want.

I know! There's this great game called Fortnite that no one has ever heard of because you can't get it on Steam. /s

You can sell your game on Steam, in addition to other platforms as well.

I think the difference here is that Valve isn't forcing a monopoly in the way our tech overlords like Google and Amazon do through acquisitions and regulatory capture.

Several companies have tried and mostly failed to compete with Steam, I'm primarily thinking of whatever the EA and Ubisoft launchers are. The two closest have been GOG whom I would argue is fairly successful considering what their goals are and Epic, whom I would say is much less so.

Technically Steam isn't a monopoly by actual definition.

What you, and others often mean with the term, is that they hold a majority market position.

Treat customers right and you get rewarded. They are the majority market shareholder because they have earned it, not through deceptive business practices but through being a great company.

If they were a monopoly they wouldn't allow other game catalogs on their systems, yet I have GOG and Epic on my Steam Deck. In fact, there isn't even a requirement for me to have Steam on my Steam Deck. Just because a company is the market leader doesn't mean they got there through unethical means.