Exactly. And you can even sell your game outside of Steam and still use Steam as the content distributor/updater for free. Valve only takes their 30% cut if you sell your game on the Steam store page.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Valve is blocking publishers from helping indies bypass Steam Greenlight
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
Exactly. And you can even sell your game outside of Steam and still use Steam as the content distributor/updater for free. Valve only takes their 30% cut if you sell your game on the Steam store page.
Sentenza
Member
I like what they suggested sometime ago: making a Steam API open to anyone who wants to use it, but then go back to a curated store, with no democracy involved.
And if you think that specific shitty game no one seems to care about should absolutely be on Steam, just go and make your own Steam-like front store where you promote it.
grimshawish
Banned
If Valve command a large majority of consumers then its a monopoly over the PC platform to developers. They control their access to them. Hence greenlight.
that's not a monopoly, that's just a competing service/existing userbase
You might say that Sony controls a monopoly over access to Playstation users but that's the same thing as saying "They have a lot of customers".
I'm not entirely sure what this would mean.
Would it basically mean that only Valve approved stuff would appear on the Steam store client but companies could sell games "through Steam" on their own website and it would appear in Steam libraries and function just like you bought it through Steam?
I don't guess I'd have a problem with that. Seems like a reasonable solution.
Sentenza
Member
Yeah, that's exactly the idea. And it's not mine, it's something Newell talked about in a couple of interviews in the past months.
No, that's bullshit.
It's not a monopoly even when you consider just Steamworks-enabled games.
And that's because you can still buy a Steamworks-game anywhere even without paying a single cent to Valve.
They take a cut just from direct sales.
Yeah no. They very existence of serious competitors changes the market drastically.
The bottom line is, as long as there are any games that don't get on Steam, the system will be a "failure." People whined and complained about the old system, they whined and complained about the new system, and they'll whine and complain about the next system.
You want a completely open storefront? It's called the world wide web. As long as there's a curated store of any kind, somebody's always going to get left out in the cold.
Always.
They can put in whatever fixes they want, they can start up a new process, but six months down the line we'll be in the same place we were six months after Steam got big and people started wondering why X wasn't on the store, or six months after Greenlight.
You want a completely open storefront? It's called the world wide web. As long as there's a curated store of any kind, somebody's always going to get left out in the cold.
Always.
They can put in whatever fixes they want, they can start up a new process, but six months down the line we'll be in the same place we were six months after Steam got big and people started wondering why X wasn't on the store, or six months after Greenlight.
Monopolies also occur when the supplier has a major share in the market, as well as a strangle hold on the goods and services provided. In this case Steam has a considerable market share and many games come out restricted to Steam by using Steamworks. Many consumers also feel attached to the service because many developers/publishers feel their only way to sell an item is through this service. Thus a monopoly in the market.
Other services like Origin and GOG do not have the market share or push like Steam does.
This is what it should be: http://www.lexaloffle.com/voxatron.php
The Humble Widget, except strapped with a bunch of Steamworks stuff. The Steam storefront remains curated and the entry process for indies becomes sales instead of some nebulous voting system.
If you really want X on Steam, buy it. It's on Steam for you (I don't buy PC games if they aren't on Steam problem solved). If enough buy it, it'll get a nice spot on the store.steampowered webpage as well (why is X not on Steam problem solved).
The Humble Widget, except strapped with a bunch of Steamworks stuff. The Steam storefront remains curated and the entry process for indies becomes sales instead of some nebulous voting system.
If you really want X on Steam, buy it. It's on Steam for you (I don't buy PC games if they aren't on Steam problem solved). If enough buy it, it'll get a nice spot on the store.steampowered webpage as well (why is X not on Steam problem solved).
The number of people willing to buy games outside steam is shrinking very quickly.
Yes, and despite flying to the Top 50 (and top 30 10 days later) in the short time it was added, it wasn't greenlit, despite being ahead of many of the greenlit titles. Which is BS.
I think this kills two birds with one stone. One one hand customers are happy as their games can have steamworks without a barrier and on the other hand Valve should have information on how well a game is selling outside their store which I would think would give them sufficient data on if they should sell the game on their store. And if the game doesn't sell well then oh well you might have a new customer or two using Steam but they won't get "ridiculed" at not providing it on their store. They've always said their plans for Steam was to make it fully automated so I could see this as being a step in that direction.
Many people buy games from places other than the Steam store. What people want is Steam activated or Steamworks games because its convenient to have everything tied to one account. Amazon, GMG, GOG, and even fucking Origin all do quite well and have sales that often beat the prices on Steam.
Content curation seems to be the one and only thing that Valve isn't good at.
I started a thread asking about this a while ago and the answer that came out is that Valve's unique company and hiring structure basically doesn't mean they really have a position for "guy who makes sure what does and doesn't end up on Steam," in the same sense that other platform holders handle quality control. I think that at some point they may just have to suck it up and hire low-level employees specifically for that purpose. It's the one thing that doesn't really fit into their unique stricture that otherwise is excellent for developing games and features that people want.
I started a thread asking about this a while ago and the answer that came out is that Valve's unique company and hiring structure basically doesn't mean they really have a position for "guy who makes sure what does and doesn't end up on Steam," in the same sense that other platform holders handle quality control. I think that at some point they may just have to suck it up and hire low-level employees specifically for that purpose. It's the one thing that doesn't really fit into their unique stricture that otherwise is excellent for developing games and features that people want.
Even if you buy a Steamworks game elsewhere, you still need Steam installed for the game to work, no?
The theoretical market where someone who wants to play a digitally bought game needs to use Steam in some form in order for any game to work would be extremely damaging. That's my only real point here. Not who gets the money.
I'm not arguing that there is a monopoly, nor that there ever will be one. Only that the "Steam or bust" group are encouraging something that is unhealthy on the whole. No DRM free games, no games that work without Steam being involved in some way.
This is from someone with a very, very large Steam library, by the way.
You might be able to say that Steam has disproportionate market power or something and that they shouldn't be able to abuse that power, etc, etc, but it still wouldn't make it a monopoly.
No disagreement here.
Sentenza
Member
A lot of people buy games outside of Steam, even among Steam fans. What less and less people want is a different-service-than-Steam tied to the game, which is a very different thing and doesn't necessarily endorse a monopoly.
I rarely buy directly through Steam myself, for a start, but I'm surely going to pick a Steamworks-enabled game over any Ubisoft, GFWL or Origin bullshit.
Yeah, it would probably be a win-win for everyone in the PC gaming community.
The best service around would become the de facto standard, Valve would (likely) still have a very healthy business on their own, and yet every game would have a fair chance to use their infrastructures and -if it proves itself popular enough- even a chance to pop on the "official" store page.
Greenlight in idea form is a fantastic idea: whatever games get voted to the top will be allowed on Steam- giving people the ability to let popular games release on the service. People will vote for popular games, and the ones that aren't popular must be crap so they aren't allowed in.
Problem with that, of course, is that games are not always crap and a lot of people who use Steam aren't going to vote for a game to come out or not.
Thus, this creates a giant rift in what will actually sell vs. what people actually want.
An example of this is (surprisingly) American Idol. Many of the most successful people didn't win the competition. 2 more recent 1st place winners have done worse in the charts than William Hung (the She-Bang guy) that didn't even make it past auditions...
So obviously votes don't equal financial success- good products do. And letting a small portion of people give a say on whether or not a game is available will cause many games to fall under and never get published. Especially if they don't even allow another publisher to do it.
Problem with that, of course, is that games are not always crap and a lot of people who use Steam aren't going to vote for a game to come out or not.
Thus, this creates a giant rift in what will actually sell vs. what people actually want.
An example of this is (surprisingly) American Idol. Many of the most successful people didn't win the competition. 2 more recent 1st place winners have done worse in the charts than William Hung (the She-Bang guy) that didn't even make it past auditions...
So obviously votes don't equal financial success- good products do. And letting a small portion of people give a say on whether or not a game is available will cause many games to fall under and never get published. Especially if they don't even allow another publisher to do it.
GOG doesn't sell Steam keys, but in common games shared with Steam GOG has been improving their sales to be more competitive.
Macmanus
Member
This is borderline delusional. Valve is having growing pains with Greenlight - but it is still the number one platform for indie games by a country mile. Sony has done a fantastic job marketing their darlings - but their selection is barely a drop in the hat compared to what Valve offers, and their prices are still noticeably worse.
TheRedSnifit
Member
I love how Sony and Nintendo are becoming more indie friendly than Valve.
I submitted a game to GOG last year. I got a reply from one of the people there, and they told me my game wasn't a good fit for the audience they're targeting, that their release schedule was already very packed for the date I was targeting, and wished me good luck in the future. That was that. No hard feelings, I knew why they rejected my game, and I plan to submit more games to them in the future.
With Steam, before Greenlight I submitted a game and they told me it wouldn't be accepted on Steam and it is against their policy to further elaborate. I submitted two more times after my game got a bit more popular, both with the same boilerplate rejection notice. Now I have to get over thirty thousand people to tell me they like my game before Valve even glances in my direction.
It is not hard to fix this problem. It was never hard. Yet they've managed to turn it into the worst service submission process I have ever seen.
With Steam, before Greenlight I submitted a game and they told me it wouldn't be accepted on Steam and it is against their policy to further elaborate. I submitted two more times after my game got a bit more popular, both with the same boilerplate rejection notice. Now I have to get over thirty thousand people to tell me they like my game before Valve even glances in my direction.
It is not hard to fix this problem. It was never hard. Yet they've managed to turn it into the worst service submission process I have ever seen.
Steam being the best platform does not mean that they treat indies better, far from it in fact. They are the best platform for indie games based on their dominance in the PC digital download market, where indie developers already rule thanks to the significantly lower development costs. Other services in the same market exist which are far more indie friendly than Steam, such as Desura, but don't have the same market share and such are not the "number one platform".
I made my position far clearer multiple times in later posts that just like anyone else here, I consider Microsoft far worse. The only difference is that I don't think the distance is maybe as large as what people think. Certainly not delusional.
Sorry to break up this circle jerk.
Going to step back for a second, are people seriously going to act this ridiculous, because of something so insignificant and claim Valve is part of how Activision/EA act, because they aren't letting certain Indie devs bypass the Greenlight system?
Seriously? Some of the people in this thread are really acting moronic right now.
I just want to clear up some things. Even having a system such as Greenlight is taking initiative, is there room for it to grow and change, yes. Does Origin or some other DD's have this (Desura excluded)? No. I like Steam, but I'm not delusional enough to think they became some evil corporation because they didn't let one disgruntled indie dev (and maybe a few others that we don't know about) on Steam.
Going to step back for a second, are people seriously going to act this ridiculous, because of something so insignificant and claim Valve is part of how Activision/EA act, because they aren't letting certain Indie devs bypass the Greenlight system?
Seriously? Some of the people in this thread are really acting moronic right now.
I just want to clear up some things. Even having a system such as Greenlight is taking initiative, is there room for it to grow and change, yes. Does Origin or some other DD's have this (Desura excluded)? No. I like Steam, but I'm not delusional enough to think they became some evil corporation because they didn't let one disgruntled indie dev (and maybe a few others that we don't know about) on Steam.
Sorry to hear about your troubles with getting your game on Steam/GOG, friend.
This was my primary concern. It's like all these games are being judged by the public before being made. I know there are tons of games and developers out there, but I just don't trust the larger gaming community with this power of influencing the acceptance of games onto Steam.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
I wish they would just go to GOG instead and say FU to Valve for this kind of BS.
Or maybe ask for a PS4 devkit on twitter. I would def go for a crossplay douple plat w/mah Vita if they wanted to take things to the next level.
Or maybe ask for a PS4 devkit on twitter. I would def go for a crossplay douple plat w/mah Vita if they wanted to take things to the next level.
Macmanus
Member
I was referring to the content - both in caliber and breadth. How the different platforms actually treat the developers I'm admittedly quite ignorant of - but it is clear that there is room for improvement on Steam's part.
Greenlight is a necessity. Steam is way too popular to allow everybody to come out whenever they want. And paying a guy to check the games is even worst, as they can deny anygame this lone guy do not like. Steam is for the people and by the people. There is other services who will distribute your game, but if you want the ads and the popularity of steam, they have to put a system in place.
I know this, and I've bought a pretty solid amount of games from GOG. Having no DRM is a great thing, and GOG has really established itself not only as a competitor, but a complementary service to Steam because its library is so different.
GOG has done a great job at not only differentiating, but being very competitive with bundle pricing and offering no DRM, which you can't get anywhere else. The reason why people say "No Steam, no buy" is because the game is usually tied to some other service that's a hindrance. GOG is a legitimate standalone service because it doesn't have that problem.
rohlfinator
Member
The bolded is already true. People can vote on Greenlight, but someone at Valve ultimately has the final say.
That's why you create a group composed of a large variety of individuals. It's too much power in the hands of one man.
Commanche Raisin Toast
Member
wow, so first greenlight is a popularity contest that can be swayed by devs that can shell out for marketing campaigns, and now valve is blocking them from withdrawing and being published by a third party? yikes...
and Black Mesa Source STILL isn't available on Greenlight yet... despite being approved months ago, and already being available on their site. wow...
and Black Mesa Source STILL isn't available on Greenlight yet... despite being approved months ago, and already being available on their site. wow...
Basileus777
Member
Greenlight is a cancer, a worse approval process than any hardware maker has ever implemented. Valve's unwillingness to properly support their own platform despite its success is mind-boggling. I hope they do something, because if the current situation is left unchanged it's going to drive small developers away from the PC.
D
Deleted member 102362
Unconfirmed Member
I could be wrong, but I think the BMS team is waiting to complete Xen/Deathmatch before the game ends up on Steam proper.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
You should prolly do a bit more research.
Delusibeta
Banned
How To Fix Greenlight
1) Look at the top twenty right now, and approve them immediately. Shut down Greenlight.
2) Is it available on GOG? Approve it.
3) Is it available on consoles (excluding Xbox Indies. There's enough junk on there to put on exception for it.)? Approve it.
4) (in case of iOS port) Has Apple ever given it free advertising? If so, approve it.
5) Open Steamworks API to everyone who paid the Greenlight fee, introduce a widget whereby it can be implemented easily on a developer's site, handle payment through Steam's servers and output a Steam key/instant addition to a Steam account, while Valve carries on creaming off 20% on top (less because it's not on Steampowered.com). Rebrand the Greenlight fee as "Steamworks access fee" and start keeping the money.
6) Use the widget data to invite the most successful games onto Steam proper, while the less successful games still get the money from the "no Steam no sale" guys. Everyone's a winner.
7) Oh, and start manually accepting games again, although most will probably be satisfied with step 5.
1) Look at the top twenty right now, and approve them immediately. Shut down Greenlight.
2) Is it available on GOG? Approve it.
3) Is it available on consoles (excluding Xbox Indies. There's enough junk on there to put on exception for it.)? Approve it.
4) (in case of iOS port) Has Apple ever given it free advertising? If so, approve it.
5) Open Steamworks API to everyone who paid the Greenlight fee, introduce a widget whereby it can be implemented easily on a developer's site, handle payment through Steam's servers and output a Steam key/instant addition to a Steam account, while Valve carries on creaming off 20% on top (less because it's not on Steampowered.com). Rebrand the Greenlight fee as "Steamworks access fee" and start keeping the money.
6) Use the widget data to invite the most successful games onto Steam proper, while the less successful games still get the money from the "no Steam no sale" guys. Everyone's a winner.
7) Oh, and start manually accepting games again, although most will probably be satisfied with step 5.
All the games I've voted for have been slowly making it through. As a consumer I think it's awesome. It definitely weeds out these truly low quality games, but at the same tome I also get frustrated with games like Rogue Legacy that keep getting bypassed. There are also games like the Tales of Alltynex that's currently on Kickstarter. It's being ported by Nyu Media who already have games ported on Steam and yet they still have to go through Greenlight. That kind of irks me.
DreadPirateRoberts
Member
What if, to fix Greenlight they made a "Greenlight Store" that anyone can submit games to (after the $100 fee), then after reaching a certain number of sales the game is added the the main store.
I think it's a terrible way of handling things. They really need to change that shit. Greenlight is flawed in the sense that it also allows assholes to vote on stuff.
I mean, this is fucked, but they are not even close. I don't know how you could come up with that conclusion.
It's still the same issue as the voting system. You create an environment where the most popular games are thriving and the simple act of getting your game in a store requires a boatload of marketing.
I can't figure out why Valve isn't changing Greenlight. It's bottlenecking Steam and is just a mess.
I'd assume this applies only to indies already on Greenlight rather than every indie.
As has been brought up, Gabe's said that Greenlight is bad in its current form, but of course we've no indication of when Valve plans to make changes or ditch it entirely.
By far the worst aspect of Greenlight is that some indie developers/publishers with an existing presence on Steam have been forced to go through the process, which is patently stupid. On the "bright" side, though, SCS releasing the original Euro Truck Sim through the typical channel after the greenlit sequel ostensibly implies that greenlit developers can leave the less-than-ideal system behind them.
As has been brought up, Gabe's said that Greenlight is bad in its current form, but of course we've no indication of when Valve plans to make changes or ditch it entirely.
By far the worst aspect of Greenlight is that some indie developers/publishers with an existing presence on Steam have been forced to go through the process, which is patently stupid. On the "bright" side, though, SCS releasing the original Euro Truck Sim through the typical channel after the greenlit sequel ostensibly implies that greenlit developers can leave the less-than-ideal system behind them.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
There were like 7 indie games released in a 3 day span from April 29th to May 1st.
There are 26 games under the Indie category released in April total. How many do they have to release for it not to be a bottleneck?
How is that a bottleneck in any way? How many "Indie" titles did XBLA have in April? How many did PSN? How many did literally any other controlled platform (as in not Apple) have?
In a sense the whole point of Greenlight is to have people figure out what is/isn't any good and is worth getting up, publishers are just a bigger body that can do that (and perhaps provide some oversight), but I guess it also depends on the arrangement publishers would have.
Though ideally they wouldn't NEED to go through publishers anyway.