Circana Analyst Disputes Developer Claims: Steam Is Not a Monopoly

New insights into the PC game distribution market have sparked intense discussions within the community. A recent study revealed that 72% of developers view Steam as a monopoly.

However, analyst Mat Piscatella from Circana argues that the developers’ conclusions are flawed. He contends that a high market share does not equate to a monopoly. A true monopoly involves having a sole provider of a service or product with no alternatives and the ability to impose excessively high prices. The existence of multiple platforms such as GOG, Epic Games Store, Itch.io, and numerous regional stores demonstrates that competition is indeed present.

Piscatella also points out that many of the concerns regarding Steam are not new. Since 2010, critics have claimed that the platform would undermine the PC gaming market, yet the industry continues to evolve, with new stores regularly emerging. The challenge lies elsewhere: gamers often struggle to discover the titles they seek among the vast number of releases, with only a few games gaining attention.

The analyst believes a more compelling topic for discussion would be Valve’s «oligopolistic power»—the platform’s influence on the market amid significant barriers to entry. Although Steam does not directly set prices for games, its popularity and infrastructure position it as a key player.

Interestingly, the study found that 80% of developers expect alternative distribution channels to become a standard part of the market within the next five years. This supports the notion that the market is dynamic and competition is gradually increasing. Despite Steam’s dominance, developers still have genuine opportunities to reach other platforms and diversify their revenue streams.