-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Jimquisition: Salt of the Earth - A Steam Fail Story
- Thread starter inm8num2
- Start date
The Dutch Slayer
Member
...... :O that is one crazy story indeed,
But I do understand why this happens and I bet Valve gets about 200+ games like this a day to "approve" for early access, and most of them just get the stamp to get the pile as close to 0 at the end of the day.
Lets hope there will be a better system in the future.
But I do understand why this happens and I bet Valve gets about 200+ games like this a day to "approve" for early access, and most of them just get the stamp to get the pile as close to 0 at the end of the day.
Lets hope there will be a better system in the future.
The Dutch Slayer
Member
Problem is steam has 50+ million users and most of them don't do that kind of research (see ep buyers remorse), you need a certain quality on a digital store of people then to say (over time) "steam just has to much crap, I don't even look anymore".
The problem is with quality control is that whether or not a game is good is subjective.
For example, Goat Simulator, which a lot of people enjoy, let's be honest, is a bit crap.
Despite being crap though, it's got a following of people who enjoy it for what it is and who would happily pay $20.
While let's be honest, Earth 2066 definitely isn't worth diddly squat, it's hard to say "that crap game doesn't deserve to be on Steam" and "this crap game does"
Quality control is needed - but the lines need to be made clear of what is acceptable and what isn't.
And while it's not exactly honest to other customers - wanting to delete nasty things that people are saying is human nature. Especially when, this being the internet, people can be very cruel. It's difficult - especially for a (huge) amateur who doesn't know what can be and what can't be considered suitable for an "early access" release. I think intent to maliciously exploit customers may just boil down to ignorance and amateurism.
Which is why explicit guidelines and quality control is needed to make sure this doesn't happen again.
For example, Goat Simulator, which a lot of people enjoy, let's be honest, is a bit crap.
Despite being crap though, it's got a following of people who enjoy it for what it is and who would happily pay $20.
While let's be honest, Earth 2066 definitely isn't worth diddly squat, it's hard to say "that crap game doesn't deserve to be on Steam" and "this crap game does"
Quality control is needed - but the lines need to be made clear of what is acceptable and what isn't.
And while it's not exactly honest to other customers - wanting to delete nasty things that people are saying is human nature. Especially when, this being the internet, people can be very cruel. It's difficult - especially for a (huge) amateur who doesn't know what can be and what can't be considered suitable for an "early access" release. I think intent to maliciously exploit customers may just boil down to ignorance and amateurism.
Which is why explicit guidelines and quality control is needed to make sure this doesn't happen again.
So, Steam Early Access: Great idea, slightly dodgy implimentation.
We know, Jim. Caveat emptor. This just shows that, well, some games, early access or not, really are not worth peoples time. Another dev who thinks making a half arsed attempt at a game means they can act with impunity on the Steam forums, hardly new, alas.
Yes, Valve probably should do something about it, but in many ways, the community does a good enough job exposing these guys.
We know, Jim. Caveat emptor. This just shows that, well, some games, early access or not, really are not worth peoples time. Another dev who thinks making a half arsed attempt at a game means they can act with impunity on the Steam forums, hardly new, alas.
Yes, Valve probably should do something about it, but in many ways, the community does a good enough job exposing these guys.
CambriaRising
Member
They want $20 for this shit and people complained about Ground Zeroes. My word. Awesome video as usual Jim.
I wish there was an option on steam to hide all early access games from my view. I'm sure there would be developer outcry, but as a paying consumer I couldn't give a fuck less if their scam games gets noticed.
I wish there was an option on steam to hide all early access games from my view. I'm sure there would be developer outcry, but as a paying consumer I couldn't give a fuck less if their scam games gets noticed.
Please don't tell me you're using these two words in a Jimquisition thread of all things
But who of those people are even going to find a game like this? Early Access is no longer featured on the store's front page. It has no press presence. Most of the really questionable Early Access stuff you'd have to go out of your way to find, which generally means you're the type of person to do that research.
That's a really backhanded compliment. Ground Zeroes: Better use of your 20 dollars than this unfinished broken alpha that's probably a scam!
The Dutch Slayer
Member
Sure there is some truth to this but it remains for sale on a HUGE digital store, people will buy stuff on there.
Also no more early A games on the front page anymore?, really? DayZ and Rust etc where on the front page not to long ago.
Has something changed?
I'd forgotten about the scrolling pictures (Rust and Dayz are still there). But I meant that they're no longer featured on the new release list. And you can be certain that only the giant games like those two are in the pictures. The stuff like this game are never there.
I do feel sympathetic toward people that buy those games, sort of. I think they're a much more interesting target than stuff like this, as consumers could actually be tricked in cases like that.
Part of the success and the appeal was that it was curated. You couldn't just put anything in the store, for better or worse. Valve needs to go back to that, or find a way where users can flush out the bad games while supporting the good ones. Something better than Greenlight.
I don't get it... I mean you are getting what you pay for...its not false advertising, making it seem like its better than it actually is.
Don't get me wrong, I would be pretty annoyed if I spent $20 (I guess close to £15?), but at the same time, I would have seen that video and decided if I wanted to buy it based on that.
If I actually wanted this game based on videos/screenshots, (which I doubt), it would seem I got what I paid for, that and it is an early access build, so its not really totally fair to bash developers based on the early build, (since it should be a work in progress so he is working on it), though I believe it should at least be in a playable state if on Early Access.
That said, this developer doesnt seem like he wants to improve it, nor does he want to listen to criticism, espicially bad is that he calls his own fans, (People who bought his game anyway), trolls. Just really bad attitude and that sort of thing is already a massive flag to keep me away from him.
I think Early Access stuff just isnt on stable ground right now, its too open to exploitation and pretty much no protection for consumers, who are open to be essentially buying a game that doesnt work, (in this case it seems they are at least getting that, just it isnt particularly good), should just have a refund option, unless steam comes up with a way to protect consumers against this sort of stuff. Perhaps they should have a demo option for Early Access too, so you can at least judge the game before deciding to spend money on improving it and supporting the dev.
Don't get me wrong, I would be pretty annoyed if I spent $20 (I guess close to £15?), but at the same time, I would have seen that video and decided if I wanted to buy it based on that.
If I actually wanted this game based on videos/screenshots, (which I doubt), it would seem I got what I paid for, that and it is an early access build, so its not really totally fair to bash developers based on the early build, (since it should be a work in progress so he is working on it), though I believe it should at least be in a playable state if on Early Access.
That said, this developer doesnt seem like he wants to improve it, nor does he want to listen to criticism, espicially bad is that he calls his own fans, (People who bought his game anyway), trolls. Just really bad attitude and that sort of thing is already a massive flag to keep me away from him.
I think Early Access stuff just isnt on stable ground right now, its too open to exploitation and pretty much no protection for consumers, who are open to be essentially buying a game that doesnt work, (in this case it seems they are at least getting that, just it isnt particularly good), should just have a refund option, unless steam comes up with a way to protect consumers against this sort of stuff. Perhaps they should have a demo option for Early Access too, so you can at least judge the game before deciding to spend money on improving it and supporting the dev.
CambriaRising
Member
I thought Ground Zeroes was more than worth my money. It took me less time to Platinum InFamous: Second Son than it did to feel like I had exhausted GZ's content. I don't want to get too off topic though. I was just trying to say that maybe we should be directing our collective fervor at more things like this instead.
The whole reason we are where we are now is because Valve refused some games and people got super upset about it and said their system was unfair.
Anyways Valve has already said Greenlight will go away but it wont be going back to the old days..
Right now is actually something of transitional period. Sometime soon they will be moving to user generated stores. Anyone can create a store and users get a cut of valve's share based on the sales they create. I think the assumption is that with multiple people curating stores as well as publishers/devs and valve themselves, you should make finding shit games relatively difficult. I'm not sure if that stops those games actually existing on steam though, just a lot less visible. Apparently anyone could make a shit games store to really highlight those titles
The funny thing is, I think the same is true for me. Though, inFamous has more content. In MGS GZ, its easy to create content the way they did. Just have a tedious task to do, was more happy with how inFamous handled content compared to MGS GZ, that said MGS GZ did last me longer than I was led to believe it would, I suspect most people won't play beyond the main mission and perhaps each side mision once for others.
NoPiece
Member
They still curate the home page, so the people who care about it have a safe place to buy stuff. Personally, I don't need or want my hand held. The cost of curation is that tons of small devs will never have a chance, the benefit is that you are protecting idiots from spending their money on crap. Curation loses that analysis, IMO.
Some info: http://steamcommunity.com/app/290750
TC McQueen
Member
That wasn't a jump. I watched the Squirty Play of Earth 2066 and IIRC, something blew up under the player character and sent him flying off the map. I started laughing my ass off right before Jim did in the video.
There has to be a happy medium between iron curtain and free-for-all, right? I see Steam as a service and not just digital retail space. Anyone can digitally distribute games. It's doing it better than the other guys that makes something have longevity. When you toss the ball into the consumer's court for things like basic functionality, you lose the ability to influence whether or not someone has a good experience.
maniac-kun
Member
Well i think its okay to use unity store stuff in an early build of your game but i wouldnt dare to sell a piece of s*** like that for 19.99.
Valve has been accepting games that have the most votes, and it's not really that hard to play that system.
Not Spaceghost
Spaceghost
While this is something I agree with, the fact that steam allows shit like this to happen is still ridiculous.
After the whole War Z scandal I thought we would see more Steam proactively policing to make sure the games that go on their store are actually up to a certain standard. However as soon as early access went live, they essentially just gave a free pass for horrible sub standard games to be sold with a price tag.
I feel like Steam should have more restrictions with early access developers. Perhaps a price restriction based on level of "completeness" (though that's too hard to measure) and then a contract that they must continue delivering X amount of significant game updates for the next 12 months to remain under early access. Failure to deliver removes the game off the Steam store.
You could say that that's not fair to the developers because Steam isn't a publisher and they shouldn't be forced to work under Steams conditions, which normally I would agree with except that the very nature of early access is to use steam as a spring board platform to obtain additional funds to complete a game, so in a way Steam is sort of a hands off publisher to early access devs.
I wonder, since Steam already works as a DRM, would it be hard to implement a system when you can download and play any game for free but with a time limit (say 30minuts). PSN+ on PS3 already has that feature, right?
It would help solve a lot of such problems because people would be able to try the game before buying it.
It would help solve a lot of such problems because people would be able to try the game before buying it.
Interfectum
Gold Member
Steam is becoming quite the junk store. I didn't think it would get this bad. Looking at the new releases day after day is depressing and they haven't even opened the floodgates yet. :X
maniac-kun
Member
http://steamcommunity.com/app/290750/discussions/ <- This is the forum for this "game". There realy is a sub-forum called "Troll Tavern: spam,trolling,provocation"
Rodney McKay
Member
I don't know, the Android/iOS app store are even worse than Steam in most ways, but people seem to still use them.
I really don't think most people look at it as: "Damn, I bought a shitty game so Steam sucks." It's more like "Damn, I bought a shitty game which sucks."
The people who buy games without doing a lot of research are probably the ones who just see the big promoted items or the big games on sale. I doubt most people trawl through the newly released games list and pick up stuff like Earth: Year 2066, especially if they are informed ahead of time that games like that are in Early Access and not final products.
Not to say that Valves shouldn't always continue improving Steam, and improving Greenlight to be as effective as possible. There's always room for improvement.
GuitarAnthony
Neo Member
So, out of curiosity, if you pay for early access and then the game never comes to fruition in a stable form and playable, do you lose your money? Hell, what if the developer decides to pull up stakes and run, what happens then? Valve seems to have gotten way too big to worry about the cries from little customers.
Interfectum
Gold Member
People use the iOS / Android stores because that is the only way to get content for their devices. Apple and Google know this and welcome the stores filling up with garbage so they can play the numbers game when the time comes (ie "Over 3 million apps!!").
Basileus777
Member
I'm okay with the current approval process. I'll take junk slipping through if it means that the games I'm actually interesting also get in. It's better than before when good games were left outside.
Interfectum
Gold Member
Most games got on Steam anyway. And I'm not sure sacrificing so much of the Steam front page and potentially hurting the benefit of Steam sales (ie a lot of filler on daily deals instead of good stuff) is worth it just to get a few indie titles on that couldn't before.
People sure love to spout this crap in defense of unfinished shit games on steam, but it's never seen when people lambast EAs newest, unfinished, shit game.