Valve must defend Steam's pricing model in £656 million class-action case

[Skye Jacobs]

What just happened? Valve Corporation's near-two-decade dominance in PC gaming distribution is now under serious legal scrutiny in the United Kingdom. The company behind Steam is facing a £656 million (about $904 million) class-action lawsuit after a London tribunal cleared the claim to proceed. The case contends that Valve has used its market position to impose unfair pricing rules that harm both developers and consumers.

The lawsuit, filed by digital rights advocate Vicki Shotbolt in 2024, alleges that Valve's control over Steam's terms and conditions has effectively locked players and publishers into its ecosystem. Up to 14 million UK users are represented in the action, which argues they were overcharged for games and downloadable content over several years.

Shotbolt's claim – backed by law firm Milberg London LLP – asserts that Valve's commission model, which can reach 30 percent on game sales, unfairly raises prices and limits competition.

At the heart of the dispute is how Steam's platform architecture ties both sides of its marketplace together. Developers who wish to reach Steam's vast audience are reportedly required to agree not to sell their titles for less on rival platforms or to release them earlier elsewhere.

Meanwhile, players who purchase a game through Steam are required to buy additional content, expansions, or downloadable features through the same storefront. Critics say this "ecosystem lock" gives Valve a de facto monopoly on post-sale spending, from cosmetic upgrades to full expansions.

Valve declined to comment on the legal developments but had initially argued that the case should not move toward trial. The UK's Competition Appeal Tribunal rejected that position earlier this month, allowing the case to continue into its evidentiary phase.

Steam's size underscores the case's potential economic impact. Launched in 2003, the platform now accounts for the overwhelming majority of PC game sales worldwide. Data from VG Insights shows more than 19,000 games were released through Steam in 2025, generating roughly $11.7 billion in revenue.

The legal challenge also resonates beyond the UK. Valve is facing a separate consumer lawsuit in the United States, filed in August 2024, raising similar antitrust concerns. Both cases hinge on whether Steam's pricing structure and distribution terms amount to legitimate platform management or an abuse of market power.

For now, the tribunal's decision does not find Valve guilty but requires one of the gaming industry's biggest players to defend its business model in open court – a proceeding that could reshape digital game retail if the claim succeeds.

Permalink to story:

Valve must defend Steam's pricing model in £656 million class-action case

 

[themastergoose]

The claim is being pursued by the same person who works for a company that has repeatedly tried to bring a case against Valve. This individual also serves as a government advisor for digital programs in schools and advises Ofcom, the communications regulator, on enforcing the highly controversial Online Safety Bill.

She says she wants to hold corporations accountable for unfair trading and exploiting children specifically through game services and unfair developer platform lock in (raising prices), yet chooses to target Valve - a company known for being pro-consumer and allows off-platform payments if the dev so wishes - while seemingly ignoring Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo. Her motives appear to be financially driven as her company stand to gain as much as 70% of any payout, having little to do with protecting children from buying their next set of V-Bucks (from Epic, no less).

Hopefully, this case doesn’t progress any further through our overly sensitive legal system.

 

[Watzupken]

While I don't mind games getting cheaper, but I think this sort of pricing is not new and not limited to Valve. This is no different from supermarket earning a cut of the product sold to us as consumer. The more popular the chain, the higher the cost. Moreover, there are options such as EPIC in which people can buy games from. So I am puzzled where is this "monopoly"? You purchase a game on Microsoft or EPIC game store, the DLCs are similarly tied to that platform.

 

[jbc029]

Odd that there are concrete examples, easily found, that dispute both claims made. There have been a few high orofile cases of titles releasing exclusively on Epic earlier than Steam, so "don't sell it elsewhere earlier" clearly isn't true.

And you've been able to add external cd-keys for games and content for over a decade, making it permanently available in your library without Steam being part of the sale chain at all. I've used it personally many times.

Not sure where this is coming from, but it should be shot down in fairly short order.

 

[SirDigby]

You don't have to purchase DLC etc. through Steam, Humble Store and Loaded ?(fka CDKeys) both allow you to purchase DLC and redeem on steam via a key.

 

[Athlonite69]

. This is no different from supermarket earning a cut of the product sold to us as consumer

And when that cut becomes substantially more than inflation it becomes price gouging in the name of profits for shareholders and the customer be buggered

 

[PierreJG]

Piracy has always been a thing but it skyrocketed over the last couple years. I am not saying Valve/Steam is soley to blame but they do have part in it. If I pay around 1.2k in my currency, I expect a full game. Now you buy the game and within a few weeks a DLC drops with added characters/quest etc for anything between 500 to full price.

This is what I do not agree with. I paid full price for the game, there is no chance in hell I'll pay for that DLC. One DLC, maybe but they drop 5-6 DLCs so at the end a simple game cost close to 10k in my currency. My PC was cheaper than that. Personally I use GoG (old school gamer) and Epic as there is not many games I like on steam. I got the full Borderlands Collection as a Present. 6k package got it for 500 bucks. Other than that don't have many games on there.

 

[Milest]

And when that cut becomes substantially more than inflation it becomes price gouging in the name of profits for shareholders and the customer be buggered

No.

Price gouging is a term used for essential goods; things people need to live.
Video games are luxury goods.