Triggerhappytel
Member
It's certainly sketchy in Europe. Although I don't know if there are any real processes for redeeming your money spent on a broken digital product.
-
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.
Jimquisition - Steam Needs Quality Control
- Thread starter Intheflorsh
- Start date
It's certainly sketchy in Europe. Although I don't know if there are any real processes for redeeming your money spent on a broken digital product.
I can't watch it right now, are we talking about filtering broken, unfinished and overall objectively bad games so people can't get fooled into thinking it may be good and wasting their money on a broken piece of shit? If so, I guess that's a good thing.
If we're just talking about not letting games most would agree are bad into Steam, then it gets a little more complicated.
If we're just talking about not letting games most would agree are bad into Steam, then it gets a little more complicated.
dr_rus
Member
Yep. But that being said they do need better community recommendations engine.
As far as I can tell that is two videos in the last month lamenting the fact that Steam isn't guarding unsuspecting gamers. I have no idea how often you post videos but I thought it was weekly so the ratio of "daddy save me" videos to whatever else you put out there is high enough as to be too high.
It makes zero sense for Steam to artificially limit their available inventory. The best part of digital access is that it frees distribution from physical constraints. If I want to buy Darkest of Days for all of my friends, I can! There is no benefit to Steam playing quality cop.
My tangentially related complaint is that the user experience is pretty shitty and by looking at Enhanced Steam, not incredibly difficult to improve greatly.
The only point that had some merit was Valve handing over complete control over the forum to the developer, cutting off an avenue for people to get feedback before purchasing the game.
The rest felt like an knee jerk response to being forced to play Rekoil. Frankly, I bet people would be pissed if Deadly Premonition was weeded out by the Steam overlords for being fucking awful.
The rest felt like an knee jerk response to being forced to play Rekoil. Frankly, I bet people would be pissed if Deadly Premonition was weeded out by the Steam overlords for being fucking awful.
I would agree that it is in Valve's interest to find a way to promote the best games, as it improves their marketplace, but that's what Steam reviews do a fairly good job of already.
Personally, I would rather have more options than not.
As many have already said, I hope we get to the point where Valve has a curated store front, but lots of places can be "Steam stores" by linking to Steam's API, and there is very little limit to what can get on. That is the best of both worlds.
caveat emptor. Look at reviews, how many of your friends own the game, how many people are playing it. It's not hard. I think that gamers are smart enough to know what they want to buy. If someone buys a crappy game then they can live to learn from it. We don't need someone else telling me what I can or cannot buy to protect me from myself. Thank you very much.
Jim Sterling
Member
Again - Early Access vid was aimed more at devs, not Valve. And today's was aimed more at Valve helping ITSELF than looking after customers.
So ... try again.
TheRagnCajun
Member
It leads to a smaller ratio of good games:bad games. This makes it harder for the consumer to discern which ones are the good ones.
Another problem is knock-offs. It is almost always the case that the original concept creator for a game is better than the knock-offs. Minecraft, Kairosoft games, dwarf fortress, TF2, and Counterstrike come to mind. Following a new sub-genre is one thing, but there are a lot of games in greenlight which are blatantly piggy-backing.
At the end of the day, a consumer has to visit the store page of a game on steam and spend at least 2 minutes reading about the features and checking out the trailer/screenshots. This becomes a more time-consuming process as the volume goes up. I used to check out every new game released on steam, not anymore.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Errr, not quite. Steam has always let bad games on Steam backed by publishers. Moreover, "how did a game like Takedown make it onto the store?"--well, it's on XBLA as of next week and it's on PSN, isn't it? Aliens: Colonial Marines is on Steam. Rogue Warrior is on Steam. Tons of crap is on Steam. Nothing has changed at the publisher level, nothing has changed from Early Access. What has changed is the degree to which Indie titles can get on the store.
And the issue with that isn't that people are buying bad games and getting burnt. That would be "Steam needs quality control, and is squandering their reputation". Mostly people are not buying the garbage games, and mostly they're not buying the sort of semi-amateur games. Look at the concurrent players for any of those games--no one is playing them, no one is buying them. No one bought Revelations 2012. It came out and people immediately said "lol what a pile of shit".
The actual issue here is that when you have so many games that people can't tell good from bad, they avoid buying both and stick to safe titles. The worry is that someone who releases a great indie game gets no visibility, because he released the same day as 8 other titles. Someone who releases a great indie title faces an uphill battle to get noticed in a way that they didn't before.
And the issue with that isn't that people are buying bad games and getting burnt. That would be "Steam needs quality control, and is squandering their reputation". Mostly people are not buying the garbage games, and mostly they're not buying the sort of semi-amateur games. Look at the concurrent players for any of those games--no one is playing them, no one is buying them. No one bought Revelations 2012. It came out and people immediately said "lol what a pile of shit".
The actual issue here is that when you have so many games that people can't tell good from bad, they avoid buying both and stick to safe titles. The worry is that someone who releases a great indie game gets no visibility, because he released the same day as 8 other titles. Someone who releases a great indie title faces an uphill battle to get noticed in a way that they didn't before.
Jim Sterling
Member
I'll have to remember all these people saying "caveat emptor" the next time EA does something we all hate.
Difference is that some games are just plain broken. At least will the shitty games run on your Xbox 360 or PS3
This issue ties back to Early Access and Greenlight. It's all interconnected.
Regarding the Wal-Mart analogy, the difference is that (as far as I know) Wal-Mart doesn't sell incomplete products. They might sell shit products, but that's different.
Seems like many of the games Jim is referencing were able to seep through the cracks without being properly tested for QC because of things like Greenlight or Early Access. That's his point - sell all the games you want, but make sure the games are complete and playable because in a digital games world without refunds, the retailer at least owes that to the customer.
Regarding the Wal-Mart analogy, the difference is that (as far as I know) Wal-Mart doesn't sell incomplete products. They might sell shit products, but that's different.
Seems like many of the games Jim is referencing were able to seep through the cracks without being properly tested for QC because of things like Greenlight or Early Access. That's his point - sell all the games you want, but make sure the games are complete and playable because in a digital games world without refunds, the retailer at least owes that to the customer.
It doesn't matter who you aimed it at. In both cases you feel the gaming public is too dim to sort out the good from the bad and feel that someone needs to do it for them.
As with all digital content (and hell, even physical content, Amazon is sort of a big deal) the benefits of providing a vast, exhaustive-with-the-goal-of-comprehensive , library like offering is of huge benefit to the consumer. The solution shouldn't be "we need someone to take away the things they unilaterally find "bad"" it should be "let's figure out a way to most efficiently and effectively sort this stuff and surface the good."
Intheflorsh
Banned
I think the real issue here is not that Steam sells bad games, but rather whether or not Valve does enough to inform their consumers about the quality of the games sold. I think they do, all kinds of critic and user feedback can be found on store pages. Bad games don't tend to sell well on Steam, Rekoil wasn't in the top 50 games sold the day it released.
The WarZ is another story, though.
Jim Sterling
Member
It does when you said I aimed both at Valve.
They might just need a better way to sort/search through available titles so that quality games don't get lost in the pile. The Indie Games service on Xbox Live suffer(ed/s) the same problem with many great titles being ignored due to getting lost in the shuffle of Minecraft clones and thrown together garbage.
Can't it be both? I was aware of the issues surrounding Battlefield 4, but I bought it on Black Friday for $25 because I was a huge sucker and jumped on a good deal. I was an informed consumer who allowed myself to make a dumb decision, and that's my fault.
Being able to buy shitty games on games on Steam is largely analogous to what I did. It's not like buying Battlefield 4 at launch and being blindsided by bugs unless you were on an intentional media blackout and bought a $15 game from an unknown team with expectations of a modern masterpiece.
This pretty much, some people may argue you should read reviews, impressions and what not, Truth is a lot of people doesn't have the time or simply don't care to waste time on specialised media to figure it out which one is the indie darling of the month.
For someone who doesn't follow specialised media, getting into the steam store must be underwhelming.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Like, here's what people are playing on Steam:
There are some games there that I don't necessarily like or whatever, but clearly those titles aren't the kinds of thing that Stirling is complaining about.
And here's Takedown: Red Sabre:
Revelations 2012:
There are some games there that I don't necessarily like or whatever, but clearly those titles aren't the kinds of thing that Stirling is complaining about.
And here's Takedown: Red Sabre:
Revelations 2012:
Baleoce
Member
If there should be no barriers to entry at all, then why isn't there some other popular digital distribution platform that just lets any old shit on? Because you (the developer) should strive to get your game on a platform that is actually visible to your consumer and considered somewhat exclusive. And you should be told when it's not good enough.
Just by design, there are no barriers to PC. You don't need DRM, you don't need a digital distribution platform. What that platform should provide however, is visibility and quality assurance. You want to make a junk game? Fine. But that doesn't mean a platform owner has to accept it, and nor should they. I completely agree that revisions should be made to Steams acceptance of games on their market.
TouchMyBox
Member
I don't know about that. Their solution to this problem by redefining what steam is as a concept seems like it could solve this problem.
Everything will have the right to access the Steam API, but only high-quality games will get visibility on the front page of valve's own storefront.
No matter what, building a perfect marketplace is impossible. And you're right, a more open market with less restrictions definitely has its' downsides.
I didn't say you aimed anything at Valve, I said you were looking for Steam to impose restrictions on available content. Unless you think developers will willingly decide to no longer meet consumer demand out of misplaced goodwill and fiduciary malfeasance? The two videos complaints would require Valve actively walling off Steam from certain products for any realistic "solution."
I'm absolutely convinced it's not the flood of games that is the issue. More games are better than less games, all things being equal. The problem is these stupid storefronts:
1) No one wants to invest the money it takes to provide a thorough search system to allow users to find exactly what they want.
2) Folks are still stuck in an old-school retail mentality. They like the idea of merchandising and trying to push sales to the user rather than giving full visibility controls to the user.
When I can do a reliable search that finds all games on the store that are strategy games with an average play time of 60 hours between the prices of $20-40 made between the years of 2008 and 2014 by developers based on the eastern U.S. coast and had John Jackerson on the dev team, then this will no longer be a problem.
1) No one wants to invest the money it takes to provide a thorough search system to allow users to find exactly what they want.
2) Folks are still stuck in an old-school retail mentality. They like the idea of merchandising and trying to push sales to the user rather than giving full visibility controls to the user.
When I can do a reliable search that finds all games on the store that are strategy games with an average play time of 60 hours between the prices of $20-40 made between the years of 2008 and 2014 by developers based on the eastern U.S. coast and had John Jackerson on the dev team, then this will no longer be a problem.
pants
Member
Yeah this. It's frustrating trying to sort the good from the bad in the sea of everything, I'm lucky my friends generally recommend what they think I would like and I have forums but it's not so easy for the general person.
Jim Sterling
Member
My issue is not with you criticizing what I said, and you're trying to turn it into that.
I'm bringing you up on the strawman of claiming that every video I've done recently has been about the exact same topic, when not a single one has been the same.
Steam needs some kind of money-back if you don't like the game guarantee, like the one GOG has.
But I have to admit that it could be easily abused as a chance to get free games.
They offer now at least a "cancel your pre-order function".
The Steam store is also kinda self regulating. If a game is shit, it will be called out in the user reviews and forums (if the devs don't delete them) and people will be aware of them. But the problem is that some people still have to buy those shitty games in order to warn us.
But I have to admit that it could be easily abused as a chance to get free games.
They offer now at least a "cancel your pre-order function".
The Steam store is also kinda self regulating. If a game is shit, it will be called out in the user reviews and forums (if the devs don't delete them) and people will be aware of them. But the problem is that some people still have to buy those shitty games in order to warn us.
chrominance
Member
Visibility for any particular game becomes more difficult as the number of games on a marketplace increases, which has an impact on everyone regardless of whether they buy The War Z--or whatever it's called nowadays--or not.
Clearly there needs to be some balance struck, even if Greenlight wasn't the right way to do it.
Steam is in the position it is in today precisely because people have much more freedom and fewer restrictions when trying to put new content on it than most other popular distribution platforms.
What Steam needs is even better visibility and suggestion mechanisms (look at what Amazon does for books), not a rigid QA process.
What Steam needs is even better visibility and suggestion mechanisms (look at what Amazon does for books), not a rigid QA process.
Visibility will always be a problem. Before, it was about getting someone at Valve to notice you. Now, at least it's more democratic.
it's a weird thing. i personally remember when valve took a far more curatorial stance in what made it through to steam and it led to many unpleasant limitations on what was available to buy, including some pretty savage shut-outs of perfectly good games.
the floodgates are seemingly open, but i'm a big boy now and i'm pretty okay with being the master of my own mispurchase destiny. i can see the issue of having shitgame: repocalypse's name broadcasted without prejudice to millions of cud chewing punters, but i think the key here is transparency and availability of criticism.
it's not talked about much, but i'm finding the steam review system pretty fantastic. you often get a wide spread of surprisingly eloquent and on-point critique right there on the store page - it only takes one scroll of the mouse wheel for any prospective buyer to discover that rekoil is a game nobody should buy in its present state.
such is steam's monopoly, for valve to start a process of stamping every title with their official seal of approval would be akin to censorship of the platform. it shouldn't be for valve to make the road any less dark and full of terrors, just continue implementing tools to help us navigate it.
the floodgates are seemingly open, but i'm a big boy now and i'm pretty okay with being the master of my own mispurchase destiny. i can see the issue of having shitgame: repocalypse's name broadcasted without prejudice to millions of cud chewing punters, but i think the key here is transparency and availability of criticism.
it's not talked about much, but i'm finding the steam review system pretty fantastic. you often get a wide spread of surprisingly eloquent and on-point critique right there on the store page - it only takes one scroll of the mouse wheel for any prospective buyer to discover that rekoil is a game nobody should buy in its present state.
such is steam's monopoly, for valve to start a process of stamping every title with their official seal of approval would be akin to censorship of the platform. it shouldn't be for valve to make the road any less dark and full of terrors, just continue implementing tools to help us navigate it.
I added FOX like qualifiers of nearly and recently. In reality it's just the two that caught my eye. I am ashamed at the hyperbole, only clowns lean on such a hackey rhetorical device.
I hear you're responsible for everything that is good in America?
TouchMyBox
Member
That's not true, they've all been about how people and publishers are poo poo heads.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
They do have some sort of quality control.
I guess Jim doesn't think it's enough? I find it pretty easy to spot stinkers and avoid them.
My best advice is to always check the forums for games that are relatively unknown.
I guess Jim doesn't think it's enough? I find it pretty easy to spot stinkers and avoid them.
My best advice is to always check the forums for games that are relatively unknown.
Jim, no offense, but you mention GOG there. Which has some stinkers in it's catalogue as well (Ultima 9? Might & Magic 9?).
Dark Matter (that game without ending) was released (and pulled from) both on Steam and GOG.
I really can't understand why would you fault Valve for doing something every other store/storefront does?
Dark Matter (that game without ending) was released (and pulled from) both on Steam and GOG.
I really can't understand why would you fault Valve for doing something every other store/storefront does?
Hey, why does Amazon list this shit? Their reputation is completely gone as far as I'm concerned. No self-respecting marketplace would sell something this terrible.
Do they have no shame? WHY IS THIS ALLOWED?!
Do they have no shame? WHY IS THIS ALLOWED?!
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
With that said, I think it would be cool if Valve ever implements their idea about having multiple storefronts on Steam. Pretty much allowing the community to curate their own stores from games available on Steam.
Jim Sterling
Member
My video is not simply about selling bad games. Every store sells stinkers. Not every store makes it this easy for games like Rekoil to launch the way it launch, for alpha builds to be sold as finished products, and for Revelations 2012 to happen.
Christ the amount of hyperbole in this episode is through the roof. Steam's quality state on par with the 1980 industry crash...jesus..there's some bad games popping up here and there but come on.
Valve are really in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation. Consumers clamoring for ever more games on steam, many people even refusing to buy games unless they come with a steam key. Meanwhile when valve tightens up quality control some games people actually do like will fall below their standards, this happened with Mutant Mudds if I remember correctly, and people bitched about that.
O.k. there probably is a nice medium somewhere between all or nothing. The system needs far more, almost contractually binding accountability on the developers end to make their games playable since in the current state the worst that happens is your game gets pulled from the store and it becomes a rarity for collectors.
Valve are really in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation. Consumers clamoring for ever more games on steam, many people even refusing to buy games unless they come with a steam key. Meanwhile when valve tightens up quality control some games people actually do like will fall below their standards, this happened with Mutant Mudds if I remember correctly, and people bitched about that.
O.k. there probably is a nice medium somewhere between all or nothing. The system needs far more, almost contractually binding accountability on the developers end to make their games playable since in the current state the worst that happens is your game gets pulled from the store and it becomes a rarity for collectors.
Yeah, that is an awesome idea.
AcceptableGhost
Member
I think Steam is in a pretty good position right now. They are no where near an app store nightmare. They greenlight enough stuff that they don't seem like arbitrary gatekeepers anymore either.
Markitron
Is currently staging a hunger strike outside Gearbox HQ while trying to hate them to death
I'm not a PC gamer so I haven't heard of most of those games but by god they look atrocious. Is it common practice for people to buy awful-looking indie games off Steam in the blind hope they are good?
No. See Stump's post above.
TC McQueen
Member
The only knock on Sterling I can give is that he got it wrong on the "any publisher can get their stuff on Steam" thing, and that's only because I saw a case where that didn't happen. Atlus/XSEED/one of the major JRPG localizers had to go through Greenlight for some reason, despite being established publishers outside the PC market. So I'm assuming that Steam/Valve works on some weird "Once you've shown you have games people want, we'll just let you do whatever" system and doesn't actually vet these people.
AHA-Lambda
Member
A tad hyperbolic, but yeah the sheer amount of stuff on Steam lately has become daunting and that alot of it has either been crap or early access is not helping matters.