The problem is the lack of due process. It is a valid point from the shovel “artists” that all of their “products” were approved, one – allegedly – on the very day they got banned. Steam, like Google and Facebook became quasi-monopolists of their fields. Unless you are a $100M+ giants like Blizzard who can develop and maintain a storefront, a launcher, server background for updaters and authentication, Steam is the only way to publish games. If Steam says they don’t like you, you are out of business – unless you happen to have $100M.
You can claim that “it’s a private company, they do as they please”, but can you imagine that all banks refuse to give you account or credit card because “reasons”? Or that hotels don’t serve some kind of people. Or groceries? Or electric utilities? In some fields there is government regulations (utilities must serve you with equal conditions as everyone), in other fields there is competition (grocery shop doesn’t serve you, you walk one street). But in the internet industry there is neither. Companies can drop anyone and everyone from existence at pleasure.
I don’t have answers. I don’t know what kind of protection would be good in this situation. Steam is still full of worthless games (I mean games that have very little content or unplayable due to bugs), some lives others get banned. The core problem is that – unlike real world industries – IT is very scalable. Serving 2x customers costs zero in development costs, you just rent some more server space and bandwidth, double your customer support staff (that’s a “hire today, train in a day” job) and you’re ready. A real world shop or factory has to invest serious money into growth, doubling operations costs nearly as much as the company is worth. So without regulations, all kind of IT services will be monopolies.
Gaming is of course the smallest problem. But exactly because of that, it would be a good place to start regulating. If something goes wrong, only some fun time is lost, not freedoms.