Steam Greenlight

Help pick new games for Steam

Browse through the entries here and rate up the games you want to see made available via Steam

Submit your product
Welp, up to 20% of games being Greenlight. Well done fellas.
This service is getting increasingly ever pointless.
Developers now have a 20% chance of getting on Steam just by uploading a project here. Woo.
Any thoughts on this?
Showing 1-15 of 67 comments
< >
Depending on what the twenty percent is.
If it's projects that is actually good (Like Lambada wars) I all up for it.
If not then yes, it's pointless.
Graeme- Coarse Gentleman Jan 8 @ 3:15pm 
Well with every batch we get garbage and diamonds. It's just a little sad seeing every fifth game pop through- regardless of quality, content, or status.
-Z- Jan 8 @ 3:58pm 
"One man's trash is another man's treasure."
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."
-insert more adages about differing opinions here-
Graeme- Coarse Gentleman Jan 8 @ 4:01pm 
Quality
qual·i·ty
ˈkwälətē/

noun: quality; plural noun: qualities

1.
the standard of something as measured against other things of a similar kind; the degree of excellence of something.
"an improvement in product quality"

While I agree with you that some people may find what I think is trash as "amazingtastic" I am perfectly able to say it is low quality- something that has nothing to do with opinion.
-Z- Jan 8 @ 4:18pm 
Except for the part where everyone has differing ideas of the ways to measure quality, of course.


And, even then, I would take a quirky title that amuses me over a "high-quality" title that bores me. Being entertaining is a very important quality ( an essential or distinctive characteristic, property, or attribute - the basic character or nature of something - a trait or feature of personality...anyone can cite a dictionary) for games to have.
Last edited by -Z-; Jan 8 @ 4:24pm
Graeme- Coarse Gentleman Jan 8 @ 4:26pm 
Originally posted by -Z-:
Except for the part where everyone has differing ideas of the ways to measure quality, of course.
There is one literal definition of the word for this instance. I posted it above.
Your opinion that a RPG with choppy, pixelated visuals and a short generic story made in rpgmaker by a 9 year old in computer class is better than a unique RPG made by expierenced developers with a beautiful story and realistic crisp visuals is fine.

But comparing the quaity of each against eachother shows that your opinion on quality is wrong.

In the example I gave, we see, among others
Beautiful Unique against Generic short
Expierenced against inexpierenced
Pixelated choppy against Realistic crisp


While you may prefer one game to the other, the quality of the second game is clearly superior to that of the first.



Originally posted by -Z-:
Except for the part where everyone has differing ideas of the ways to measure quality, of course.


And, even then, I would take a quirky title that amuses me over a "high-quality" title that bores me. Being entertaining is a very important quality ( an essential or distinctive characteristic, property, or attribute - the basic character or nature of something - a trait or feature of personality...anyone can cite a dictionary) for games to have.

That's fine, once more that's a matter of opinion, you can like what you like.

While being entertaining is an important quality, I am not sure how we can measure the level of entertainingness of a project, considering this would also be an opinion(for example I can really love playing a minecraft clone, but hate playing Minecraft)
Last edited by Graeme- Coarse Gentleman; Jan 8 @ 4:29pm
-Z- Jan 8 @ 4:45pm 
Originally posted by Graeme- Coarse Gentleman:
There is one literal definition of the word for this instance. I posted it above.
And there are many more meanings of the word that are applicable, and I posted them, as well.


Your opinion that a RPG with choppy, pixelated visuals and a short generic story made in rpgmaker by a 9 year old in computer class is better than a unique RPG made by expierenced developers with a beautiful story and realistic crisp visuals is fine.
Telling me what my opinion is, are you? This should be fun.


But comparing the quaity of each against eachother shows that your opinion on quality is wrong.
Except in the portion in which you laid out "my opinion," "quality" was not a deciding factor. Further...


In the example I gave, we see, among others
Beautiful Unique against Generic short
"Beautiful" is opinion.

Unique v. Generic is only an issue depending on a person's level of exposure to what is deemed "generic," but that is a possible factor for measuring literal "quality, sure. However, the problem is that what is "unique" might not actually be objectively good.


Expierenced against inexpierenced
Daikatana. Or, in other words, "experienced developers can put out what is deemed to be absolute rubbish."


Pixelated choppy against Realistic crisp
This, again, calls upon "beautiful," and, as already said, "beauty" is opinion. This is a matter of aesthetic preference and not a factor of objective consideration.


While you may prefer one game to the other, the quality of the second game is clearly superior to that of the first.
Until you actually take time to consider what things you listed as being indicative of "quality." Then the distinction isn't actually clear.



That's fine, once more that's a matter of opinion, you can like what you like.
Indeed, and what you listed as indicators of "quality" in your attempted example are purely things that you like.

For things of objective quality, you should have been looking at things such as how well the game actually runs. Is it full of bugs? Does it do what it should do well (which could also call up an individual's opinion of what it should do rather than remaining purely objective)?


While being entertaining is an important quality, I am not sure how we can measure the level of entertainingness of a project, considering this would also be an opinion(for example I can really love playing a minecraft clone, but hate playing Minecraft)
Indeed. And, yet, this is still as much a matter of opinion as the distinctions you put forth in your attempted example.
Graeme- Coarse Gentleman Jan 8 @ 5:16pm 
Originally posted by -Z-:
And there are many more meanings of the word that are applicable, and I posted them, as well.
Really? You listed one last I checked. Something that had to do with the charactaristics of something, nothing to do with the level of excellence or being compared to something.

Telling me what my opinion is, are you? This should be fun.
Example. You can substitute "Your" for "Bill" if you feel like it, example stands.

Except in the portion in which you laid out "my opinion," "quality" was not a deciding factor. Further...
Try reading the next bit. Quality can have nothing to do with your opninion. You can love crap and hate greatness for all I care.

"Beautiful" is opinion.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, as you said earlier- Though please note it was implied that both perspectives were from the same person- listed as "You" - so the story would have been considered "beautiful" by them.

Unique v. Generic is only an issue depending on a person's level of exposure to what is deemed "generic," but that is a possible factor for measuring literal "quality, sure. However, the problem is that what is "unique" might not actually be objectively good.
That would be why "beautiful" was included. This is what happens when you break everything apart :p

Daikatana. Or, in other words, "experienced developers can put out what is deemed to be absolute rubbish."
That's entirely true. Though at the same time, we see expierenced(read: Paid professionals) producing higher *quality* products than their inexpierenced(read: Low paid or amateurs) counterparts. While it is possible for a first time indie developer to crush something made by a professional studio- this is far less common than the other way around.
This is why we see professional studios producing much higher quality content compared to inexpierenced developers.\
This is why we see games like Starbound crush games like Edge of Space in terms of ratings and sales. While Edge of Space is not a low quality game, Starbound has been proven superior time and time again. Which would you rather play?

This, again, calls upon "beautiful," and, as already said, "beauty" is opinion. This is a matter of aesthetic preference and not a factor of objective consideration.
Typically choppy is not something people want to see, just as crisp is something people would prefer. This is one of the reasons the highest grossing and top rated titles are dang near always "crisp" while low rated titles tend to be "choppy"
For an example, think DayZ visuals VS WarZ visuals. Got the picture?

Until you actually take time to consider what things you listed as being indicative of "quality." Then the distinction isn't actually clear.
Read above.


That's fine, once more that's a matter of opinion, you can like what you like.Indeed, and what you listed as indicators of "quality" in your attempted example are purely things that you like.
Evidently things the market enjoys as well. How many people do you actually think would take generic/choppy/inexpierenced over a unique/crisp/expierenced game?
Can you back this up with an example? Perhaps an instance in which a game that I would consider "low quality" has out performed a game I would consider"high quality" in the same market?
No?
Really.

For things of objective quality, you should have been looking at things such as how well the game actually runs. Is it full of bugs? Does it do what it should do well (which could also call up an individual's opinion of what it should do rather than remaining purely objective)?
We could consider the actual gameplay, and I considered mentioning it in the last post, the issue with Greenlight games being that you don't always have a product you can play.
But even with games you can compare, give me one example where an Early Access game had more polished gameplay than a professional title in a similar category. Again- it's not impossible, just unlikely.


Indeed. And, yet, this is still as much a matter of opinion as the distinctions you put forth in your attempted example.
Explainations above! Because someone broke a paragraph into over five different points! WOO!
Last edited by Graeme- Coarse Gentleman; Jan 8 @ 5:18pm
-Z- Jan 8 @ 5:37pm 
Originally posted by Graeme- Coarse Gentleman:
Really? You listed one last I checked. Something that had to do with the charactaristics of something, nothing to do with the level of excellence or being compared to something.
I listed three, and that should illustrate to you that the term "quality" is not purely about level of excellence. Further, it should show that "quality" is not actually an objective term.


Example. You can substitute "Your" for "Bill" if you feel like it, example stands.
Sure..until you tried to explain it. Then it fell apart.


Try reading the next bit. Quality can have nothing to do with your opninion. You can love crap and hate greatness for all I care.
Except, in the following, your list of "quality" was purely about your opinion.


Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, as you said earlier- Though please note it was implied that both perspectives were from the same person- listed as "You" - so the story would have been considered "beautiful" by them.
So...your "example" was formed as pure nonsense and thus proves nothing?


That would be why "beautiful" was included. This is what happens when you break everything apart :p
Breaking everything apart to examine the thing objectively is how you determine objective quality.


That's entirely true. Though at the same time, we see expierenced(read: Paid professionals) producing higher *quality* products than their inexpierenced(read: Low paid or amateurs) counterparts. While it is possible for a first time indie developer to crush something made by a professional studio- this is far less common than the other way around.
This is why we see professional studios producing much higher quality content compared to inexpierenced developers.\
This is why we see games like Starbound crush games like Edge of Space in terms of ratings and sales. While Edge of Space is not a low quality game, Starbound has been proven superior time and time again. Which would you rather play?
I would rather play whichever piques my interest more. Fact is, the experience of the developer, alone, is not a deciding factor.


Typically choppy is not something people want to see, just as crisp is something people would prefer. This is one of the reasons the highest grossing and top rated titles are dang near always "crisp" while low rated titles tend to be "choppy"
For an example, think DayZ visuals VS WarZ visuals. Got the picture?
"The picture" being that you fail to grasp the concept of people having differing aesthetic preferences and that visuals alone are not indicative of objective quality? Got it.


Until you actually take time to consider what things you listed as being indicative of "quality." Then the distinction isn't actually clear.
Read above.
Reading above changed nothing.


Evidently things the market enjoys as well. How many people do you actually think would take generic/choppy/inexpierenced over a unique/crisp/expierenced game?
Can you back this up with an example? Perhaps an instance in which a game that I would consider "low quality" has out performed a game I would consider"high quality" in the same market?
No?
Really.
The original Super Mario Bros. New dev team puts out a rather generic, choppy, and pixellated game. Outsells everything they ever put out after gaining more experience with higher quality visuals.
Yes.
Really.


We could consider the actual gameplay, and I considered mentioning it in the last post, the issue with Greenlight games being that you don't always have a product you can play.
But even with games you can compare, give me one example where an Early Access game had more polished gameplay than a professional title in a similar category. Again- it's not impossible, just unlikely.
Are you aware that more games from Greenlight are released as full releases rather than as Early Access? Are you aware that more games in Early Access came from places other than Greenlight than those that did?

If you had any interest in objective comparisons, you should have asked for a Greenlight title that has been released rather than an Early Access title, as those are still in a Beta stage of development or earlier.


Explainations above! Because someone broke a paragraph into over five different points! WOO!
Explanations above failed and only further indicated the distinctions as being matters of opinion! The paragraph was broken up to deal with the individual points individually! WOO!


By the by, why couldn't an individual play both? Why do you present your case as though a person can only choose one of two?
Last edited by -Z-; Jan 8 @ 5:47pm
Gorlom[Swe] Jan 8 @ 6:12pm 
I lost track of what you people were argueing.

1) Graeme- Coarse Gentlemen is trying his hand at statistics... what is the point of those numbers exactly? What is it supposed to show us? Valves bandwith? How many games they want to sell? That only 1 in 5 games are of decent enough quality to be sold?
2) He is upset that games he has little interest in is getting greenlit? or why is the system pointless exactly?
3) Posters in this thread are unable to agree on a solid measuring stick for quality.?
(I thought the one provided by Z about ammount of bugs, how well it runs and how well it does what it set out to do seems to be a fairly decent and reasonably objective measuring stick)
Last edited by Gorlom[Swe]; Jan 8 @ 6:13pm
Graeme- Coarse Gentleman Jan 8 @ 6:16pm 
Originally posted by GorlomSwe:
I lost track of what you people were argueing.

1) Graeme- Coarse Gentlemen is trying his hand at statistics... what is the point of those numbers exactly? What is it supposed to show us? Valves bandwith? How many games they want to sell? That only 1 in 5 games are of decent enough quality to be sold?
Just that we will pass 1/5 of whatever is uploaded here. I am arguing that some of it is low quality and what quality is.
2) He is upset that games he has little interest in is getting greenlit? or why is the system pointless exactly?
Why the system is pointless. What purpose is there in our "filtration" if Valve just takes the top 20% and flies it through?
3) Posters in this thread are unable to agree on a solid measuring stick for quality.?
(I thought the one provided by Z about ammount of bugs, how well it runs and how well it does what it set out to do seems to be a fairly decent and reasonably objective measuring stick)
Basically- I agree with the amount of bugs, but there are others. Simply ones we can measure based on their Greenlight pages.
Graeme- Coarse Gentleman Jan 8 @ 6:27pm 
Originally posted by -Z-:
I listed three, and that should illustrate to you that the term "quality" is not purely about level of excellence. Further, it should show that "quality" is not actually an objective term.
My mistake- I suppose that's what happens when we edit things after they have been responded to.
Where have you listed these? I am only seeing one in your second post.


Sure..until you tried to explain it. Then it fell apart.
Care to explain how? Otherwise how is this a useful point?

Except, in the following, your list of "quality" was purely about your opinion.
Once more, you can love something that you find terrible, and hate something you think is incredible.
For example, I can enjoy a terrible movie because it's so bad it's funny. It's still low quality, but I may still enjoy it.

So...your "example" was formed as pure nonsense and thus proves nothing?
I'm not seeing what was difficult to understand here. If I say “You like a game with a generic story, choppy visuals, etc...” it's clearly implying that you know the game is generic. Have you ever had to take a reading comprehension course?



I would rather play whichever piques my interest more. Fact is, the experience of the developer, alone, is not a deciding factor.
Did I say alone? You're assuming that being generic makes a game low quality instantly. Same with the visual style and the experience of the developer. You can have high quality games with new developers, you can have high quality games with generic stories. It's when you put the factors together that make the game a tough sell.



"The picture" being that you fail to grasp the concept of people having differing aesthetic preferences and that visuals alone are not indicative of objective quality? Got it.
Once more, you fall into this simple logical error where you assume that since ONE quality is negative ALL the qualities must be negative. Even still, I will ask you for an example of a time a game with choppy visuals preformed better than one with crisp visuals in the same category. I believe if you're going to argue with me, you should at least provide evidence towards the same points I am providing evidence to. Else you have nothing more than a weightless opinionated sentance.


Reading above changed nothing.
Thank you for replying to this point. That furthered the argument significantly.

The original Super Mario Bros. New dev team puts out a rather generic, choppy, and pixellated game. Outsells everything they ever put out after gaining more experience with higher quality visuals.
Yes.
Really.
“Choppy visuals” being the best visuals they could have at the time? You're comparing it to similarly aged projects, not freaking Crysis.
Inexpierenced developers being Nintendo who had been active years before the release of Super Mario Bros? Yeah. That's inexperienced.
In addition to that Super Mario Bros total sales were dwarfed by Wii Sports sales- Oh, I guess Nintendo made those too. Not the same category, just a fun fact.
Not only that, at the time Nintendo had a massive chunk of the console market, with the NES outselling every other console in its period. More people with the console = more people who will buy games for that console.

Are you aware that more games from Greenlight are released as full releases rather than as Early Access? Are you aware that more games in Early Access came from places other than Greenlight than those that did?
You're right about that. What about those games that have been already released and are of low quality based on either of our definitions? Take Towns for example. We greenlit that, it was terribly low quality.

If you had any interest in objective comparisons, you should have asked for a Greenlight title that has been released rather than an Early Access title, as those are still in a Beta stage of development or earlier.
Okay, give me an example of a game that came out of Greenlight that was made by inexperienced developers that outperformed an experienced developer in a similar category? Maybe just doing that in addition to correcting me would have worked. Nah, that would have required forethought.


Explanations above failed and only further indicated the distinctions as being matters of opinion! The paragraph was broken up to deal with the individual points individually! WOO!
Great! Try again now!

By the by, why couldn't an individual play both? Why do you present your case as though a person can only choose one of two?
You could take both, never said you couldn't. Simply said that you could have a higher opinion of one, even if it was the lower quality title.


Just adding this in here- you can apply the same argument towards “buggy” games as you can towards “choppy, generic, first” games- I can love a broken to crap game, doesn't mean it's a higher quality game.
Skoardy Jan 8 @ 6:37pm 
Originally posted by Graeme- Coarse Gentleman:
Just that we will pass 1/5 of whatever is uploaded here. I am arguing that some of it is low quality and what quality is.
And that 1/5th is what people want to buy/play. Where's the issue?
Graeme- Coarse Gentleman Jan 8 @ 6:45pm 
Originally posted by Skoardy:
And that 1/5th is what people want to buy/play. Where's the issue?
I think we went over this before in another thread. I believe the majority of people who mash "yes" have no intention of actually buying the game. Honestly, for people to make good on their word saying they will buy this game, valve would be working with a simple "get x yes votes and get greenlit" system.
I'm just checking with a few people on exact numbers, would you prefer me to edit this comment when I get them, or PM you?
Gorlom[Swe] Jan 8 @ 6:53pm 
Graeme- Corse Gentleman: Didn't you once argue that Valve is a company that wants to make money or am I confusing you with someone else?
Originally posted by Graeme- Coarse Gentleman:
Why the system is pointless. What purpose is there in our "filtration" if Valve just takes the top 20% and flies it through?
To make sure we dont get the bottom 20%? I'm sorry, but is this a trick question or something?
Why would Valve not want to take as many games as they can starting from the top?
Why would we as consumers not want them to do that? It's not as we are forced to buy them? More options is usually considered a good thing, no?
Last edited by Gorlom[Swe]; Jan 8 @ 6:54pm
Showing 1-15 of 67 comments
< >
Per page: 15 30 50
Date Posted: Jan 8 @ 3:13pm
Posts: 67