Ursprungligen skrivet av Jakkafang:

just a few people who take off crap like water and tree simulater. would make greenlight SO much better.

It would also go against the idea of greenlight and render it completley pointless....

Just press "no thanks/not interested" and move on.

We are already this "dam", or at least the people who don't press the voting buttons randomly and who vote honestly.

Ursprungligen skrivet av GorlomSwe:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Jakkafang:

just a few people who take off crap like water and tree simulater. would make greenlight SO much better.

It would also go against the idea of greenlight and render it completley pointless....

Just press "no thanks/not interested" and move on.

i couldn't disagree more.

im going to copy something i posted in another thread here;
"greenlight is a business. its serious stuff and should be treated like so. there are people here who actually want to make a living out of selling good quality games."

"the problem is not greenlight, but the lack of moderation here. people post whatever they want and get away with it. and horrible scam games get greenlit every month because everything seems to be done by robots over here. "

greenlight is not a place to sell your hello world game or your half baked 2 weeks flash game. and most of all its not the place for joke-games.

want to make games? go study a couple of years. make lots of crappy prototypes (everyone goes through this). then when you have something interesting to show, come back here.

There IS a major lack of moderation and this is what's so funny... Didn't you know? Crap games are perfectly acceptable if the community says so.

Ursprungligen skrivet av fremachuca:

Ursprungligen skrivet av GorlomSwe:

It would also go against the idea of greenlight and render it completley pointless....

Just press "no thanks/not interested" and move on.

i couldn't disagree more.

im going to copy something i posted in another thread here;
"greenlight is a business. its serious stuff and should be treated like so. there are people here who actually want to make a living out of selling good quality games."

"the problem is not greenlight, but the lack of moderation here. people post whatever they want and get away with it. and horrible scam games get greenlit every month because everything seems to be done by robots over here. "

greenlight is not a place to sell your hello world game or your half baked 2 weeks flash game. and most of all its not the place for joke-games.

want to make games? go study a couple of years. make lots of crappy prototypes (everyone goes through this). then when you have something interesting to show, come back here.

Despite being incorrect this does not change or invalidate what I said.
Simply because what you are asking for is not greenlight.

The OPs suggestion would go against the idea of Greenlight. The idea of Greenlight is that we the community is the very FIRST gatecheck and that there is no moderation based on quality. That the only submissions that get removed by Valve are unlawful ones.

If you think there is a problem with greenlight, then that percieved problems lies in that you find a fault in how people answer the question Valve asks.

To me this complaint just sounds like you want Valve to take responsibility for what the community is responsible for. THat you want to be spoonfed what you should like and dislike. That Valve should be responsible for what games you buy because you can't bother to do proper research on them before you press a button.

It would still be a damn shame if Rock Simulator was greenlit... Not sure who would be responsible for the fiasco. Thank god it was banned, for now...

yeah greenlight concepts is filling up with spam even greenlight games is seeing some

im not sure why people are trolling greenlight

But WE are the moderators. If 10,000 people vote yes to something even if everyone else thinks its the worst thing in the world. Why can't those 10,000 people buy it on Steam? Doesn't bother me if people want to buy a rock simulator. BTW that would be quite interesting if it was sped up a million times you might see some interesting rock decay.

Ursprungligen skrivet av Paul:

Why can't those 10,000 people buy it on Steam?

You seem to be advocating that Valve let everything and anything on the store (since someone might buy it). Does this view come from the fact that you're also trying to get a game through Greenlight?

Ursprungligen skrivet av Skoardy:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Paul:

Why can't those 10,000 people buy it on Steam?

You seem to be advocating that Valve let everything and anything on the store (since someone might buy it). Does this view come from the fact that you're also trying to get a game through Greenlight?

Well it depends what Steam is for. Is it like an art gallery where only works of art deemed suitable and respectable are allowed to be shown.

Or is it more like a market place where it caters to all tastes?

I'm not saying one is right and one is wrong.

If 100,000 people want to put a poster of Justin Beiber on their wall, I'm fine with that. True, it wouldn't go in the National Portrait Gallery.

I'm not saying allow everything. But maybe if there if 100,000 people want it then even if it's not considered "high art" it should be allowed?

It's an interesting debate.

Ursprungligen skrivet av Paul:

Is it like an art gallery where only works of art deemed suitable and respectable are allowed to be shown.

Yes.

Ursprungligen skrivet av Paul:

Or is it more like a market place where it caters to all tastes?

Yes. By selling things deemed suitable and respectable (and by suitable and respectable, I just mean the stuff that people want more than other stuff).

Ursprungligen skrivet av Paul:

I'm not saying allow everything. But maybe if there if 100,000 people want it then even if it's not considered "high art" it should be allowed?

And if that 100,000 is the threshold for Greenlight, fine. However, by your phrasing of 'suitable', 'high art' and 'respectable' you seem to be making out that the generic democracy of Greenlight is somehow elitist.

Skoardy... did you just do a 180 from post #9? I have no idea what you are on about atm.

Are you asking for clarification or challangeing his views?

This thread: Implying Steam Greenlight is anything more than a popularity contest.

Just because most people vote "yes" or "no" on a title does not mean the game is gold or lacks quality.

Quality isn't even technically what Valve is asking you to judge when you vote. Valve is asking if you'd buy it.

Which is why you get some questionable releases from Greenlight.

Greenlight has nothing to do with quality.

Ursprungligen skrivet av GorlomSwe:

Skoardy... did you just do a 180 from post #9? I have no idea what you are on about atm.

Are you asking for clarification or challangeing his views?

No, his original view seemed to be of the 'if someone/anyone wants to buy a game, who are we to stop them' vibe suggesting that he could rationalise anything get through Greenlight if there was someone/anyone who'd like it, which I'm sure you'd be able to find for any game.

Then he seemed to move on to a claim that Greenlight was somehow holding popular games back with some kind of high brow standards, which I'm not even sure I understand how that would work.

Ursprungligen skrivet av Skoardy:

Ursprungligen skrivet av GorlomSwe:

Skoardy... did you just do a 180 from post #9? I have no idea what you are on about atm.

Are you asking for clarification or challangeing his views?

No, his original view seemed to be of the 'if someone/anyone wants to buy a game, who are we to stop them' vibe suggesting that he could rationalise anything get through Greenlight if there was someone/anyone who'd like it, which I'm sure you'd be able to find for any game.

I thought he said if ENOUGH people wanted to buy it. Which pretty much is the whole point of Greenlight as far as I can tell. He even gave you a number. 10 000 people wanting the same thing... which seems to be higher then the current number of yes votes needed to get into the top 100.
I'm not sure wher you got the whole "someone (singular) might buy it" from?

Then he seemed to move on to a claim that Greenlight was somehow holding popular games back with some kind of high brow standards, which I'm not even sure I understand how that would work.

No... he's still on the same line that if enough people wants it it should be allowed in. He is just using those terms to build a metaphore since you reacted to his first post, which made it seem like you wanted to prevent something (that is getting a large number of votes) to get in... He is trying to clarify and then you jumped on him for that...