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
chris1980 Sep 27, 2013 @ 6:16am
Steam to pull plug on Greenlight
I expect Steam will pull the plug on Greenlight or at least change the way it works, you won't recognise it. I suspect it will become more of a steam app store. I think Steam have realised that the amount of rubbish on Greenlight kinda renders the point of voting moot. They may as well open the floodgates. Doing otherwise is artificial and will fail eventually.

Controlling the quality hasn't worked, in reality it was always going to be far too hard. So I expect Greenlight to not last another year as soon as they get around to creating a new platform for mass game distribution app store style.

Gabe Newell reckons the change would come in the form of a Networking API, with user stores.
Showing 1-15 of 113 comments
< >
.!.oO=Boney-Dog-Lee=Oo.!. Sep 27, 2013 @ 6:30am 
If it turns, I hope it may turn into some kind of quality assurance.

Given the future option of user generated stores renders Greenlight quite obsolete (edit: as 'gatekeeper/bouncer') because the store owners decide what to sell...

Furthermore Greenlight might become what it was supposed to be, a place for unknown developers to get in contact with the Steam community and build up momentum during development.
Last edited by .!.oO=Boney-Dog-Lee=Oo.!.; Sep 27, 2013 @ 6:31am
AusSkiller Sep 27, 2013 @ 8:10am 
Greenlight is fine, but as with all "democratic" processes the voters are just screwing it up. Sadly as long as idiots are in the majority it's impossible for the masses to make informed decisions and things like Greenlight will never be able to work the way they should :(.
C0untzer0 Sep 27, 2013 @ 8:20am 
Maybe that nice mr Murdoch will turn up to tell us all how to vote, then we'll know it's a proper democracy after all.
-Z- Sep 27, 2013 @ 8:38am 
Originally posted by C0untzer0:
Maybe that nice mr Murdoch will turn up to tell us all how to vote, then we'll know it's a proper democracy after all.
Not quite then, though. We'd have to wait for a few other groups clamoring for everyone to vote exactly the opposite way, sometimes attempting to appeal to emotions rather than granting reasoning. Of course, whichever way we'd vote if following either one, we'd end up with ultimately the same thing with maybe a very slight variation at best. >.>
-Z- Sep 27, 2013 @ 8:55am 
Originally posted by Mindwedge:
I'd like to start with a possibly controversial statement:

Idiots are more easily motivated.

I live in an area where the people I meet and talk to are quite the opposite of what we see being elected. It makes me wonder. I ask them if they vote and for the most part they say no. So I'm either to conclude the above statement, or that elections are rigged. It occurs to me that it only takes one software engineer to rig an electronic vote count. Who would know if they did?
Could possibly be both, although the rigging would be more likely to go unchecked at a lower level.

However, your statement, as controversial as it could be, is certainly true. It's much harder to motivate people who want to fact-check and know all they can about something before they decide to act.
C0untzer0 Sep 27, 2013 @ 9:13am 
Knowing who you voted for and what they stand for.
Ain't nobody got time fo dat.
Folks round here seem to vote for soundbites on a single policy and don't see or care what else is being passed on their mandate. "I don't approve of his Bart killing policy, but I do approve of his Selma killing policy..." People put more research into buying a new phone than they do into deciding who will be in charge of the country.
chris1980 Sep 27, 2013 @ 9:52am 
Things tend to resolve themselves naturally, I think Steam are not dumb and definately realise the flaws with voting. To my shame, I myself have voted for items I have no intention of buying just to "help someone out". I wish I could retract those votes but I cannot.

Whats clear is that Greenlight isn't working, Steam know this and are going to change the format. Personally I want to see an app store format, with no ridiculous voting where you just create an account an present your app as a download, how you market it is up to you.

If there were options that you could pay extra to have your app advertised/featured more that would be great too.
OpiO Sep 27, 2013 @ 11:15am 
yes yes
orb Sep 27, 2013 @ 11:56am 
Originally posted by Mindwedge:
You can. Just click the no button.
Unless they have been already Greenlit.
cübbeli Sep 27, 2013 @ 12:08pm 
loool
Sgt.Psycho Sep 27, 2013 @ 2:26pm 
Originally posted by Mindwedge:
Originally posted by -Z-:
Not quite then, though. We'd have to wait for a few other groups clamoring for everyone to vote exactly the opposite way, sometimes attempting to appeal to emotions rather than granting reasoning. Of course, whichever way we'd vote if following either one, we'd end up with ultimately the same thing with maybe a very slight variation at best. >.>

I'd like to start with a possibly controversial statement:

Idiots are more easily motivated.

I live in an area where the people I meet and talk to are quite the opposite of what we see being elected. It makes me wonder. I ask them if they vote and for the most part they say no. So I'm either to conclude the above statement, or that elections are rigged. It occurs to me that it only takes one software engineer to rig an electronic vote count. Who would know if they did?

Warning: Contains politics

I was interested to note that physical vote count was suspended in parts of the recent Australian election for electronic processing. This was still overseen by the AEC[vtr.aec.gov.au], an independent body that seems to work okay[www.aec.gov.au].

Myself, (/dons tinfoil hat) I'm concerned that the growth of trivial parties has led to such complexity in voting (up to 100 candidates!) that it means almost nobody votes below the line, that is distributes their preferences themselves, and leaves it to the party to decide preferences. Less than 5% of voters bother to exercise their full democratic rights, handing choice of government to parties and back-room deals.[www.news.com.au]

The funny part is that those preferences can be critical and result in strange election choices based on tiny amounts of vote preferences.[blogs.abc.net.au]

Reversing back up your reply, I agree with your statement, in that people can be easily persuaded to make a decision based on emotional appeal or base instincts, foregoing the effort required to actually think for themselves, the weigh up facts and opinion, do research, and come to a final, informed decision.

This more than anything leads me to think that the democratic system is broken. When you have a vast majority of selfish, unthinking sheeple what is the point of having elections?

Politicians know that everyone is in it for themselves (a natural point of view) so fall over themselves to offer more than the other candidate. So any thought of long-term growth, sustainable development, saving things for our children, taking care of unfortunate people or nation-building infrastructure is tossed aside for short terms gains - to be able to say at the next election "I gave you this, vote for me so I can give you more."

So if you care about the above and know that 146 other people don't, and this experience is replicated nationwide[vtr.aec.gov.au], what's the point in even bothering to participate?
Last edited by Sgt.Psycho; Sep 27, 2013 @ 2:27pm
BLOODLINE85 Sep 27, 2013 @ 2:44pm 
;)
C0untzer0 Sep 27, 2013 @ 2:56pm 
And every time there's a bunch of kids saying "Don't vote, it's what they want you to do, we'll protest by not votng, that'll show 'em!" because obviously that' a well thought out plan, right? the establishment types then get a much bigger majority than is representative (Except of course in Aus, where they always get a near 100% turnout.)
Sgt.Psycho Sep 27, 2013 @ 4:46pm 
Originally posted by Mindwedge:
Whew! We needed a redirect right there. Good timing Sarge.

I've heard it said that every democracy fails. Here we don't have that. Ours is called a democratic republic. We don't always elect by popular vote any more than Kroll does with Greenlight (though I'm sure that's where the USA parts with Greenlight).

Does either one work? In theory it should.

I'll answer your final question in regard to natoinal politics. If you don't vote, you're saying that whatever the takers want is okay with you. That's fine if that's your way, but be ready to open your wallet - they'll be back for more.

With regard to Greenlight, I'm not sure there is a point given what we know of Newell's overall plan. It's a diversion maybe..... I like to look at the purty pictures.

Yeah, as much as I rage against the machine, when I look at other countries, I'm saddened that other people don't even get as much say in the selection of their government as I have, nor may they have much faith in the system compared to mine. So as imperfect as it is, maybe it's the best of a bad lot.

I'm extremely fortunate that I happen to live in an area that is very evenly split, so each politician actually has to work extremely hard, or they will lose. In this case, my vote does count a great deal. Other areas are vast-majority single party, so what opposing politicians do or say is of little consequence, as they are doomed to failure. This leads to further voter apathy[www.smh.com.au]

Coming back to Greenlight (finally!) well we all know what Gabe's said, so no doubt Greenlight will change to fit that direction, or disappear entirely, who knows. I'd like to think that at least some measure of human curation continues, otherwise Steam will become just like every other app store - filled with bajillions of worthless contenders. The downside (not that having lots of things is bad in itself) is that finding those great small games will become immeasurably harder.

If you take an Amazon-style value allocation system based on sales, all the indie games will disappear into the void along with the rubbish and spam, by virtue of insignificant sales.

Imagine for a moment we got rid of voting, put everything back into Concepts, unbanned everything, removed the fee barrier and got rid of admins (let's not have any moderation or curation at all). Let us return to the heady days of early Greenlight a year ago. What would we see? Spam, trash, spam, spam, more trash, spam, trolls, a host of generic rubbish better suited to online flash games and maybe an actual decent game in there somewhere.

So what is the solution?

I can only think of one. Steam needs to move to an advanced trust and reputation system based not on simple sales/volume metrics but webs of relationships, niche interests, and delta movements on the micro, not macro scale. It must become everything to everyone, and a personal gaming assistant and mentor. Looking at systems like Reddit, Twitter and Google+ these are pretty awesome at delivering content tailored to me, connecting me to like-minded people, discovered relationships and connecting people to other people and communities, and referring and circulating items of interest to those communities. This is what Steam needs to do, and you see happening slowly, through Steam Communities and Steam Friends.

"That's all very well Sarge," I hear you say, "but how does it really work?"

Well if I knew that, not only would I be working for Google from my gold-plated Rolls-Royce chauffeured by an incredibly beautiful and multi-talented Swede, I would be hitting Gabe up in our Sunday night poker matches with tips on how to make Steam the dominant games (and now apps!) distribution for all desktop operating systems; and now lounge gaming via SteamBox.

I suspect that this would have to work through community allegiance, some very smart micro-trend analysis and Google-level target advertising, and most importantly, though trusted referrals and subscriptions.

So if I am (as Joe Mirobella says[www.towerofguns.com]) "a debonaire gamer with impeccable tastes" (proof[i.imgur.com]) and you trust my choices, when I am active in a game's sphere, you'll become aware of it, and vice versa. Then, to build the web I need to trust who you trust and so on and so forth. Getting that data isn't hard, but how do you distill it into a usable form that doesn't degenerate into mindless annoying commercial spam that makes poeple want to sign off the Steam network forever is? In Han Solo's words, "well that's the real trick isn't it?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbXbKDsI_ZQ&t=1m
Last edited by Sgt.Psycho; Sep 27, 2013 @ 4:47pm
C0untzer0 Sep 28, 2013 @ 12:24am 
Originally posted by Sgt.Psycho:
"That's all very well Sarge," I hear you say, "but how does it really work?"

I suspect that this would have to work through community allegiance, some very smart micro-trend analysis and Google-level target advertising, and most importantly, though trusted referrals and subscriptions.

Obviously it starts by expanding the steam "Friends" functionality. Right now you're either a friend or not. In reality this includes my actual friends, people I generally agree with and who talk sense in communities like this, people I can rely on to "Tank" for me in my token MMO time, and possibly other groups in there too.
edit: Yep, there're a couple of producers for GL projects I'm very keen on, and folks who give good deals on TF2 stuff.

If I was able to tag my friends into one or more of these groups, then the target advertising can be rather nuanced. Right now it's "Your friend favourited this " or recommendations. This is of very limited us (If you look closely, one of my recommendations is a warning against the game, and another is a notice of where to find patches)

Oh, and I already have a multi-talented Swedish driver. As well as being a cabbie, my mother-in-law is a stonemason with a degree in large-scale metalwork. (I think she's going to build a Menhir any day now)
Last edited by C0untzer0; Sep 28, 2013 @ 12:28am
Showing 1-15 of 113 comments
< >
Per page: 15 30 50
Date Posted: Sep 27, 2013 @ 6:16am
Posts: 113