Support NeoGAF

[QFNS]

I'd have zero problems with hiding the first 72 hours, especially for publishers who want their launch day sales to look mostly accurate. At least that has a purpose relative to the platform.

This is a great solution to both "sides" of the issue. Publishers worried that their product will be viewed poorly during the most critical period (first launch), and users/devs that want to see data on a game's ownership.

SteamSpy won't have to continually field requests about games numbers that haven't had a chance to be anywhere close to correct. The site freely admits the data is not useful until more time has passed even. Seems like a compromise solution if the publishers continue to throw a fit about this data being out there. If they really really don't like it being out there, they should be talking to Valve not SteamSpy/Steamcharts/etc.

 

[JP]

OK.

Re-reading our thread it looks like I didn't read your posts quite closely enough, started down the wrong rhetorical path and stubbornly followed through.

(Except the publishers-not-devs thing, which I was totally right about.)

SteamSpy are clearly inaccurate in stating that it was being done to help the developers, because as you would expect it would be the publishers that would benefit from this, if anybody did. Maybe he did mean that they were doing it to benefit the developers, I'm just not in a position to comment on whether they meant to say that or not, irrelevant of how inaccurate it seems to me and you.

 

[Par Score]

I'm on the side of this should all be public information.

I mean, this is all public information with or without Steam Spy's involvement in particular, it's just that Steam Spy currently does a singularly excellent job collecting, analysing, and presenting this public information.

 

[Turin Turambar]

That's NOT going to end well. I think it's silly for devs and publishers to ask Steamspy to hide their data, but they're in their rights to do so. Not complying is just going to lead to:
1. Legal action/threats against Steamspy
2. Valve doing something against Steamspy, maybe even by blocking their api or removing game list from public profiles if you aren't friends.

In both cases Steamspy and by extension, us, are going to get the short end of the stick.

Lol.

So bans to pollings for national elections coming in 3, 2, 1...

 

[charlequin]

You say that Valve would have no motivation to oblige calls for something to be done about SteamSpy's data gathering, but what motivation would there be for Valve to not act?

SteamSpy actively makes Valve look good (both by allowing them to claim the largesse of allowing it to exist, and by showing how many games are wildly successful on their platform) and has no real negative impact on any of their business partners -- you'd have to be looking at multiple publishers willing to sacrifice immense monetary sales in order to achieve a pouty, unproductive goal for it to register as a real "problem" for Valve to fix. Like I'm not saying that no one will do that, but it really is just petulant whining and most companies will put a brake on some point before they sacrifice revenue for that.

Look, I'm sure it is embarrassing for some devs to have their info out there. I've always been very transparent with my sales data before SteamSpy so I didn't mind at all. But the requested takedowns should have never happened in the first place. I couldn't blame him since I'm sure he didn't want to rock the boat too much, but man, that kind of censorship just showed how blatantly manipulative some of the companies that requested takedowns were.

Yup, I had been giving Kerbal the benefit of the doubt until I heard about their labor-force problems, but with that out in the open it's clear that every single request came from a publisher who wanted numbers removed explicitly to avoid accountability for their own performance in some area.

Should have never followed any of the requests in the first place to be honest.

Yes, it was a mistake to comply even once, because it led to a parade of increasingly questionable requests, but luckily these guys were blatant enough to get the whole thing tossed.

I'd have zero problems with hiding the first 72 hours, especially for publishers who want their launch day sales to look mostly accurate. At least that has a purpose relative to the platform.

Hell, give 'em two weeks.

 

[ROFISH]

I would absolutely post my earnings/net worth right here and now. Canada Revenue Agency is 100% aware of every cent of it, so I have nothing to hide. The cat's out of the bag anyway when your lifestyle is a pretty close reflection of your income. The damage to my personal relationships has already been done, if any. Now, I understand things might be a whole lot different in other societies, but like I said, I don't need to hide anything from anyone here in Canada at this time.

Which is a problem because I know quite a lot of people, who don't necessarily come from the best of families (or countries for that matter), that a minor windfall would really cause all kinds of personal trouble or even danger. And not even like a mega-huge hit here, an extra $20k can make all the difference in the world to some. Even if that's just living expenses, not everyone in the public can properly contextualize money. I've seen some nasty relationships ruined over those that managed to get a job at a local car factory and that's really not a lot of money.

I'm not arguing for the big corp, since there's plenty of good examples of shady practices here that makes sense; but I do want to stand up for those that come from lesser means and not-so-great families. Individual privacy is sometimes necessary for outright protection. It's not an ideal world and there are some really crappy people in it.

EDIT: I'm not saying all data should be private. It definitely should be publicized for a lot of different reasons too. But I can't, given my personal experiences, recommend 100% without-any-doubt, say that all "sales numbers should be published, end of story".

 

[JaseC]

SteamSpy actively makes Valve look good (both by allowing them to claim the largesse of allowing it to exist, and by showing how many games are wildly successful on their platform) and has no real negative impact on any of their business partners -- you'd have to be looking at multiple publishers willing to sacrifice immense monetary sales in order to achieve a pouty, unproductive goal for it to register as a real "problem" for Valve to fix. Like I'm not saying that no one will do that, but it really is just petulant whining and most companies will put a brake on some point before they sacrifice revenue for that.

Sure, and I allude to this myself with the second half of the paragraph, but in this instance I don't see looking good winning over appeasing disgruntled business partners, should they seek to involve Valve, when Valve taking action wouldn't actually have any sort of impact on the company's public perception -- it's nice that Valve allows the website to operate, especially as it could be argued that doing so displays a flagrant disregard for the sales NDA that publishers are required to agree to, but there'd hardly be outcry if Valve were to put a stop to SteamSpy's data gathering in response to it becoming a growing concern among publishers. I mean, as decidedly unlikely as it is that the discontented publishers would actually respond to Valve waving the issue away as immaterial with removing their games from the largest and most popular PC DD service, I'd wager Valve keeping its content providers happy is nonetheless higher on the priority list than the continued existence of SteamSpy.

But, hey, although I am of the opinion that this manoeuvre isn't going to end well if it happens to annoy a sufficiently large amount of people, I'd love to be wrong and do hope that SteamSpy can continue gathering and analysing data unabated.

 

[DSix]

Good. Publishers trying to hide their bad performance to lure in investor/indies with lies is scummy.

 

[Steel]

Well, cool to see paradox sales back up. Interesting to see that Stellaris is their 3rd best selling game already. Good stuff. And I always thought that EU IV sold more than CK2, but I guess I was wrong.

 

[Xater]

Well, cool to see paradox sales back up. Interesting to see that Stellaris is their 3rd best selling game already. Good stuff. And I always thought that EU IV sold more than CK2, but I guess I was wrong.

Also by the amount of chatter about it I thought HOI IV might have performed as well as Stellaris, but that does not seem to be the case.

 

[KonradLaw]

Then shouldn't you respect developers' wishes?

No? As you can see those are mostly publishers that demanded the removal. For indie developer considering a publisher such data is extremely valuable. Lack makes deciding who to partner up a lot harder. Having data on how particular gamaes sell, how promotions affect their sales etc is priceless for any indie.

 

[SatelliteOfLove]

Sure, and I allude to this myself with the second half of the paragraph, but in this instance I don't see looking good winning over appeasing disgruntled business partners, should they seek to involve Valve, when Valve taking action wouldn't actually have any sort of impact on the company's public perception -- it's nice that Valve allows the website to operate, especially as it could be argued that doing so displays a flagrant disregard for the sales NDA that publishers are required to agree to, but there'd hardly be outcry if Valve were to put a stop to SteamSpy's data gathering in response to it becoming a growing concern among publishers. I mean, as decidedly unlikely as it is that the discontented publishers would actually respond to Valve waving the issue away as immaterial with removing their games from the largest and most popular PC DD service, I'd wager Valve keeping its content providers happy is nonetheless higher on the priority list than the continued existence of SteamSpy.

But, hey, although I am of the opinion that this manoeuvre isn't going to end well if it happens to annoy a sufficiently large amount of people, I'd love to be wrong and do hope that SteamSpy can continue gathering and analysing data unabated.

I'd hope so; I need it for my raw naked shilling threads!

 

[Purkake4]

Good on Steamspy, hope it stays this way. Devs and publishers are welcome to take their concerns up with Valve.

 

[Parsnip]

Good on him for not giving in anymore.

 

[charlequin]

Sure, and I allude to this myself with the second half of the paragraph, but in this instance I don't see looking good winning over appeasing disgruntled business partners

I don't think this is really worth engaging as a concept without agreeing upfront that any disgruntlement is gonna be driven primarily by pride and self-importance (since there's factually no material harm caused here) and that no publisher of significant size will ever quit Steam over SteamSpy's existence. Valve taking active steps to block it would be pretty embarrassing.

 

[xrnzaaas]

What's nice about this whole situation is that Valve is acting cool and it's not making harder/impossible for Steamspy to collect that data.

 

[GECK]

Well, cool to see paradox sales back up. Interesting to see that Stellaris is their 3rd best selling game already. Good stuff. And I always thought that EU IV sold more than CK2, but I guess I was wrong.

Not sure why, Paradox has admitted that CK2 was PDS' most successful game.

Also keep in mind, CK2 was originally released on Gamersgate. So the gap in reality is probably even a bit bigger.

 

[JaseC]

I don't think this is really worth engaging as a concept without agreeing upfront that any disgruntlement is gonna be driven primarily by pride and self-importance (since there's factually no material harm caused here) and that no publisher of significant size will ever quit Steam over SteamSpy's existence. Valve taking active steps to block it would be pretty embarrassing.

Well, sure. I mean, I've neither stated nor implied that frustrated publishers actually have a substantial case and they would play the "Listen to us or we'll go our own way" card. It was s_mirage who broached the latter, saying it's the only way they'd be able to "motivate" Valve, which was the crux of our disagreement. My belief is simply that if enough noise is made, Valve will respond with action rather than inaction as while SteamSpy isn't harmful, its existence doesn't benefit Valve in any tangible way, either.

What's nice about this whole situation is that Valve is acting cool and it's not making harder/impossible for Steamspy to collect that data.

It's only been two days. I wouldn't count your chickens just yet.

 

[ScientificPizza]

He should never have set the precedent of removing data to begin with