Looks like Polygon is still not happy that Valve doesn't want game journalists being able to enforce what people can play on steam.
I actually gave this article a click instead of just reading the excerpts like usual, and I'm already feeling dirty even with the polygon no ad script.
It exceeded my expectations. It's like an anime recap episode with the top 10 best of hit piece talking points from earlier times they attacked Valve (or Nintendo, for that matter).
Even the political stuff made an appearance in the article ("free speech is m'kay
but" blabla "and if you take a cut from that content you endorse its message" which really doesn't seem to be about asset flips) They really can't help themselves with the freudian slips even in the middle of a deflecting parallel construction argument to attack the same thing from a different angle.
It's particularly disingenuous from gaming journalists. Just look at the Nintendo situation.
They called for strict curation because the Wii U and 3DS were "too open", then Nintendo applied a very strict curation system for the Switch's first year. Then Cosmic Star Heroine, by a like-minded friendly developer to them didn't get through that curation process.
Game journalist answer? Run articles for weeks about their select indie darlings from their social circle and how shameful of Nintendo not to allow them in, and how callous to deem their games not big enough, complete with very negative comments by the developer about Nintendo. Expecting Nintendo to give a VIP pass to this developer, of course.
Nintendo then drops curation, completely. That developer got in as a side effect. Some other developers were highlighted on a direct of their own. Then guess what, game journalists are calling AGAIN for curation to be reinstated.
Remember curation lead to situations where Treasure had to cancel a release, and the Chinese company who did Steam releases for Falcom games could not even get in. Because they were not "established enough". This Polygon article is actually lamenting the steam greenlight days explicitly at one point.
Game journalists, it's almost as if they want curation systems designed to work based on how much outrage is drummed for specific games to be approved or retroactively retracted, so that they hold more power over not only developer's sales and review coverage, but their
ability to release the game at all. (neat survival tactic?)
The itch.io platform already made it clear they will "BAN" developers from their platforms in cases of journalism outrages, but it's clear how much it is supported (coincidentally? it's promoted in this Polygon article as "actually doing something with their 10% cut" as opposed to "Valve not doing anything (sic) to be worth their 30% cut"), so let the players and the developers decide how attractive that offer is.