A sea of indie trash and Early Access games.

[phosTR]

This is what Steam has become. I want AA games back.

[DiceDsx]

Messaggio originale di Pierce Dalton:

Messaggio originale di DiceDsx:

Not perfect is an understatement.

It's funny you call Tree Simulator a screensaver, because the Wii beat it to the punch:

https://youtu.be/i2uQ0UakHY0

A game from 2010? Alright.

Yep, that's not a game too. Thanks again :)

You didn't answer my question, though: so there IS quality control on Steam?

There is:

What you shouldn’t publish on Steam:

Hate speech, i.e. speech that promotes hatred, violence or discrimination against groups of people based on ethnicity, religion, gender, age, disability or sexual orientation

Sexually explicit images of real people
Adult content that isn’t appropriately labeled and age-gated

Libelous or defamatory statements
Content you don’t own or have adequate rights to

Content that violates the laws of any jurisdiction in which it will be available

Content that is patently offensive or intended to shock or disgust viewers

Content that exploits children in any way
Applications that modify customer’s computers in unexpected or harmful ways, such as malware or viruses

Applications that fraudulently attempts to gather sensitive information, such as Steam credentials or financial data (e.g. credit card information)

Video content not directly related to a product that has shipped on Steam.
Non-interactive 360 VR Videos

Applications built on blockchain technology that issue or allow exchange of cryptocurrencies or NFTs.

It's not on the level you want, but it's there.

[Tito Shivan]

Messaggio originale di Pierce Dalton:

Messaggio originale di Tito Shivan:

Just like Steam's then.

Alright, so you're telling me there is quality control on Steam? Just confirm that, please.

Messaggio originale di Tito Shivan:

Messaggio originale di Pierce Dalton:

This kind of evaluation has nothing to do with quality... you can't call that quality control, my man.

It actually IS quality control.

It's just set at a bar you're not happy with.

[Pierce Dalton]

Messaggio originale di DiceDsx:

Messaggio originale di Pierce Dalton:

A game from 2010? Alright.

Yep, that's not a game too. Thanks again :)

You didn't answer my question, though: so there IS quality control on Steam?

There is:

What you shouldn’t publish on Steam:

Hate speech, i.e. speech that promotes hatred, violence or discrimination against groups of people based on ethnicity, religion, gender, age, disability or sexual orientation

Sexually explicit images of real people
Adult content that isn’t appropriately labeled and age-gated

Libelous or defamatory statements
Content you don’t own or have adequate rights to

Content that violates the laws of any jurisdiction in which it will be available

Content that is patently offensive or intended to shock or disgust viewers

Content that exploits children in any way
Applications that modify customer’s computers in unexpected or harmful ways, such as malware or viruses

Applications that fraudulently attempts to gather sensitive information, such as Steam credentials or financial data (e.g. credit card information)

Video content not directly related to a product that has shipped on Steam.
Non-interactive 360 VR Videos

Applications built on blockchain technology that issue or allow exchange of cryptocurrencies or NFTs.

It's not on the level you want, but it's there.

Oh, I've read that before. Thanks anyway for taking the time to bring it up.

I'll show you something later too... I can't do it now. I'm curious as to how that passed Steam QC ;)

[Pierce Dalton]

Messaggio originale di Tito Shivan:

Messaggio originale di Pierce Dalton:

Alright, so you're telling me there is quality control on Steam? Just confirm that, please.

Messaggio originale di Tito Shivan:

It actually IS quality control.

It's just set at a bar you're not happy with.

I remember that, just wanted to confirm if your opinion remains the same ;)

Yeah, you're right. If there is quality control on Steam, I'm definitely not happy with it, I wouldn't even call it quality control because some stuff here is just pathetic. Not for me, for everyone.

You need the evidence? Ok, I'll provide the evidence.

[crunchyfrog]

Messaggio originale di Pierce Dalton:

Messaggio originale di Mr. Gentlebot:

An individual that is retired, buys games and plays them is by no means a "collector" unless they, themselves, choose to get games to collect them or display collection tendencies. However, being stated that the purpose is to buy and play games - due to being retired - and having all the time in the free world, just means it's someone that's playing a lot of games. Going back to replay them is also not 'collecting' them especially when buying games to play them.

If anyone wants to suggest a minimum/mandatory level of "quality" for a game to exist/continue being listed, make a thread about it, but it's open to criticism, feedback etc and should be kept to logical point vs counterpoint; not projecting labels onto other users, light name-calling, or other uncivil poking & prodding users. Keep it civil, or you lose the debate.

If you want to argue with each other, take it to Private Messaging instead of bumping the thread needlessly with unconstructive arguing.

OP wants less indie and more "AA" games, OP hasn't posted in here since June 27th. It's almost 700 responses & 46 Client pages and almost all of it is just arguing.

An individual that according to himself buys about 200 games a year, since the 70's, is by no means a collector?

Oh don't be silly, this is like saying I kissed thousands of men but I'm not gay lol.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a collector, but it is simply evident this kind of people priorize quantity over quality.

If our friend here could buy 365 games a year, I know he would. Maybe he did that already, in certain years. I don't find this healthy at all... but hey, it's your money, not mine.

What is light name calling? You're just proving my point here... you're so oversensitive. You know, the Internet is not a good place for people that feel offended so easily, especially the gaming community.

Yeah yeah, OP wants less indie games here, that's what some quality control would end up doing. If you really think this is unrelated to OP, well, you should think again.

"almost all of it is just arguing"

Welcome to the Internet, enjoy your stay.

Then demonstrate how as per your burden of proof.

You need to show WHY this somehow means I cannot evaluate games. That's the point.

And yet as I've put you and you keep ignoring, if this were the case, HOW DID I DO PROFESSIONAL REVIEWS THEN?

Answer that and stop being dishonest.

You're just making stuff up you think excuse me out of being able to poke holes in your poor logic. You have not even remotely demonstrated just how buying 200 games a year and playing them ALL somehow makes it that I cannot evlauate games somehow.

Show HOW this is, and stop repeating this nonsens as if it's fact.

[Pierce Dalton]

Messaggio originale di crunchyfrog:

Messaggio originale di Pierce Dalton:

An individual that according to himself buys about 200 games a year, since the 70's, is by no means a collector?

Oh don't be silly, this is like saying I kissed thousands of men but I'm not gay lol.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a collector, but it is simply evident this kind of people priorize quantity over quality.

If our friend here could buy 365 games a year, I know he would. Maybe he did that already, in certain years. I don't find this healthy at all... but hey, it's your money, not mine.

What is light name calling? You're just proving my point here... you're so oversensitive. You know, the Internet is not a good place for people that feel offended so easily, especially the gaming community.

Yeah yeah, OP wants less indie games here, that's what some quality control would end up doing. If you really think this is unrelated to OP, well, you should think again.

"almost all of it is just arguing"

Welcome to the Internet, enjoy your stay.

Then demonstrate how as per your burden of proof.

You need to show WHY this somehow means I cannot evaluate games. That's the point.

And yet as I've put you and you keep ignoring, if this were the case, HOW DID I DO PROFESSIONAL REVIEWS THEN?

Answer that and stop being dishonest.

You're just making stuff up you think excuse me out of being able to poke holes in your poor logic. You have not even remotely demonstrated just how buying 200 games a year and playing them ALL somehow makes it that I cannot evlauate games somehow.

Show HOW this is, and stop repeating this nonsens as if it's fact.

Are you ok, Sir? When did I say you cannot evaluate games?

If you can prove I said that, then please demonstrate with the proper evidence. Otherwise, I recommend you to not put words in my mouth.

I did not say you cannot evaluate games, I said you priorize quantity over quality. That is clear for anyone reasonable, because according to yourself you buy around 200 games a year since the 70s. If you have so many games (around 8k), it is safe to say you have some bad ones in your collection.

But then again, don't we all? :)

Let me ask you one thing, though: so you think there are no objectively bad games? Could you confirm that, please?

[Cryptic]

Messaggio originale di Mr. Smiles:

I prefer indie gems to AAA garbage.

Same

[Pierce Dalton]

Messaggio originale di Corrosion:

Messaggio originale di Mr. Smiles:

I prefer indie gems to AAA garbage.

Same

I think we all agree on that.

[crunchyfrog]

Messaggio originale di Pierce Dalton:

Messaggio originale di crunchyfrog:

Then demonstrate how as per your burden of proof.

You need to show WHY this somehow means I cannot evaluate games. That's the point.

And yet as I've put you and you keep ignoring, if this were the case, HOW DID I DO PROFESSIONAL REVIEWS THEN?

Answer that and stop being dishonest.

You're just making stuff up you think excuse me out of being able to poke holes in your poor logic. You have not even remotely demonstrated just how buying 200 games a year and playing them ALL somehow makes it that I cannot evlauate games somehow.

Show HOW this is, and stop repeating this nonsens as if it's fact.

Are you ok, Sir? When did I say you cannot evaluate games?

If you can prove I said that, then please demonstrate with the proper evidence. Otherwise, I recommend you to not put words in my mouth.

I did not say you cannot evaluate games, I said you priorize quantity over quality. That is clear for anyone reasonable, because according to yourself you buy around 200 games a year since the 70s. If you have so many games (around 8k), it is safe to say you have some bad ones in your collection.

But then again, don't we all? :)

Let me ask you one thing, though: so you think there are no objectively bad games? Could you confirm that, please?

Well if that's the case, what was the relveance of you dismissing the fact that I couldn't say your personal taste of what makes a ♥♥♥♥ game was off, because YOU asserted I was game collector?

If i'ts not that, then what?

You tried to use this as a shutdown SEVERAL times.

So what was the purpose then? Please tell us what YOUR assertion of me purely being a collector (which again, is demonstrably incorrect) means what exactly?

THe point is I do NOT have any bad ones in my collection because as I pointed out before, I haven't bought a single game whre I didn't know EXACTLY what I was letting myself in for in well over twenty years. Any of such before that I returned for refund or exchange.

So no I do not have such games.

You seem to fail to understand that when you have over 70 platforms going back to the 1970s, there's THOUSANDS of games that were made hat are good. I just take good time and care to make sure I know what I'm buying and I do not buy games that are poor to me. And yet again, when I'm retired and have all the time in the world, doing due diligence in finding out what games are about beforehand is a no brainer and easy to do.

Furthermore, I have a wide taste in games. There's really only beat em ups that just don't work for me and certain sports games. Everything else I'm into. And boy do I ever research - again when you've been around since the beginnning it's easy to find games that msot don't know about.

So again this is an assertion based on your lack of understnading, and it STILL doesn't demonstrate in anyway how YOUR assessment of games is better than mine or objective in any way.

So again, you still can't get where you want to go with this line of reasoning.

Oh and please again stop the veilied insulting behaviour like "are you ok sir?" there's no need for such ♥♥♥♥ behaviour.

[Pierce Dalton]

Messaggio originale di crunchyfrog:

Messaggio originale di Pierce Dalton:

Are you ok, Sir? When did I say you cannot evaluate games?

If you can prove I said that, then please demonstrate with the proper evidence. Otherwise, I recommend you to not put words in my mouth.

I did not say you cannot evaluate games, I said you priorize quantity over quality. That is clear for anyone reasonable, because according to yourself you buy around 200 games a year since the 70s. If you have so many games (around 8k), it is safe to say you have some bad ones in your collection.

But then again, don't we all? :)

Let me ask you one thing, though: so you think there are no objectively bad games? Could you confirm that, please?

Well if that's the case, what was the relveance of you dismissing the fact that I couldn't say your personal taste of what makes a ♥♥♥♥ game was off, because YOU asserted I was game collector?

If i'ts not that, then what?

You tried to use this as a shutdown SEVERAL times.

So what was the purpose then? Please tell us what YOUR assertion of me purely being a collector (which again, is demonstrably incorrect) means what exactly?

THe point is I do NOT have any bad ones in my collection because as I pointed out before, I haven't bought a single game whre I didn't know EXACTLY what I was letting myself in for in well over twenty years. Any of such before that I returned for refund or exchange.

So no I do not have such games.

You seem to fail to understand that when you have over 70 platforms going back to the 1970s, there's THOUSANDS of games that were made hat are good. I just take good time and care to make sure I know what I'm buying and I do not buy games that are poor to me. And yet again, when I'm retired and have all the time in the world, doing due diligence in finding out what games are about beforehand is a no brainer and easy to do.

Furthermore, I have a wide taste in games. There's really only beat em ups that just don't work for me and certain sports games. Everything else I'm into. And boy do I ever research - again when you've been around since the beginnning it's easy to find games that msot don't know about.

So again this is an assertion based on your lack of understnading, and it STILL doesn't demonstrate in anyway how YOUR assessment of games is better than mine or objective in any way.

So again, you still can't get where you want to go with this line of reasoning.

Oh and please again stop the veilied insulting behaviour like "are you ok sir?" there's no need for such ♥♥♥♥ behaviour.

How ironic, you say I'm the one "insulting" while you describe my behavior as fecal matter. Is that allowed here? Telling people their behavior is fecal matter?

Seriously, you're the funniest guy I've found here. First, you tell us you buy about 200 games a year since the 70's. That means you have aprox 8k games now, maybe more because I'm cutting some slack here. You also claimed having over 70 platforms.

Then I say you're a collector and you get mad? Why is that word so offensive for you?

You're also telling us you don't have a single bad game, which is a VERY bold claim, you know. That means you're either being dishonest or you're not so demanding with games because thousands are considered good by you. I believe you're an honest man, though. So thank you for demonstrating I was correct: your taste in games is too tolerant/forgiving, usually people wouldn't consider thousands of games good like you do. On the contrary, most of them would have a hard time listing thousands of good games because they're pickier than you. You claimed that "there's THOUSANDS of games that were made that are good". That's another bold claim, it is safe to say the vast majority of gamers wouldn't agree on that, especially EIGHT thousand like you claimed.

You clearly belong to a select group of gentlemen (maybe some ladies too) with a broader, wider taste in games, like yourself said:

"Furthermore, I have a wide taste in games."

Yeah, we can definitely notice that. It is more than obvious.

Your questions have been answered, so how about we go back to the topic? Trash games, remember?

I know, I know... one man's trash is another man's treasure. People have said that countless times in this thread. I guess they're forgetting something, though: radioactive waste is not good for anyone, right? Who likes that? No one sane wants to touch that thing.

We were discussing about Steam quality control. Does it exist or not?

Well, the truth is that is irrelevant, because in case it exists, it must be tightened.

But before I show you why, I'd like to ask one thing: imagine you owned a platform like Steam, what would be YOUR quality control? What would make you reject a game? What is your "this is unacceptable list"?

[crunchyfrog]

Messaggio originale di Pierce Dalton:

Messaggio originale di crunchyfrog:

Well if that's the case, what was the relveance of you dismissing the fact that I couldn't say your personal taste of what makes a ♥♥♥♥ game was off, because YOU asserted I was game collector?

If i'ts not that, then what?

You tried to use this as a shutdown SEVERAL times.

So what was the purpose then? Please tell us what YOUR assertion of me purely being a collector (which again, is demonstrably incorrect) means what exactly?

THe point is I do NOT have any bad ones in my collection because as I pointed out before, I haven't bought a single game whre I didn't know EXACTLY what I was letting myself in for in well over twenty years. Any of such before that I returned for refund or exchange.

So no I do not have such games.

You seem to fail to understand that when you have over 70 platforms going back to the 1970s, there's THOUSANDS of games that were made hat are good. I just take good time and care to make sure I know what I'm buying and I do not buy games that are poor to me. And yet again, when I'm retired and have all the time in the world, doing due diligence in finding out what games are about beforehand is a no brainer and easy to do.

Furthermore, I have a wide taste in games. There's really only beat em ups that just don't work for me and certain sports games. Everything else I'm into. And boy do I ever research - again when you've been around since the beginnning it's easy to find games that msot don't know about.

So again this is an assertion based on your lack of understnading, and it STILL doesn't demonstrate in anyway how YOUR assessment of games is better than mine or objective in any way.

So again, you still can't get where you want to go with this line of reasoning.

Oh and please again stop the veilied insulting behaviour like "are you ok sir?" there's no need for such ♥♥♥♥ behaviour.

How ironic, you say I'm the one "insulting" while you describe my behavior as fecal matter. Is that allowed here? Telling people their behavior is fecal matter?

Seriously, you're the funniest guy I've found here. First, you tell us you buy about 200 games a year since the 70's. That means you have aprox 8k games now, maybe more because I'm cutting some slack here. You also claimed having over 70 platforms.

Then I say you're a collector and you get mad? Why is that word so offensive for you?

You're also telling us you don't have a single bad game, which is a VERY bold claim, you know. That means you're either being dishonest or you're not so demanding with games because thousands are considered good by you. I believe you're an honest man, though. So thank you for demonstrating I was correct: your taste in games is too tolerant/forgiving, usually people wouldn't consider thousands of games good like you do. On the contrary, most of them would have a hard time listing thousands of good games because they're pickier than you. You claimed that "there's THOUSANDS of games that were made that are good". That's another bold claim, it is safe to say the vast majority of gamers wouldn't agree on that, especially EIGHT thousand like you claimed.

You clearly belong to a select group of gentlemen (maybe some ladies too) with a broader, wider taste in games, like yourself said:

"Furthermore, I have a wide taste in games."

Yeah, we can definitely notice that. It is more than obvious.

Your questions have been answered, so how about we go back to the topic? Trash games, remember?

I know, I know... one man's trash is another man's treasure. People have said that countless times in this thread. I guess they're forgetting something, though: radioactive waste is not good for anyone, right? Who likes that? No one sane wants to touch that thing.

We were discussing about Steam quality control. Does it exist or not?

Well, the truth is that is irrelevant, because in case it exists, it must be tightened.

But before I show you why, I'd like to ask one thing: imagine you owned a platform like Steam, what would be YOUR quality control? What would make you reject a game? What is your "this is unacceptable list"?

No I don't - you're utterly misconstruing things yet again.

I'm not mad at anytihng for a start. Im saying to you clearly that you keep saying my opinion sare somehow invalid because you label me a collector. I couldn't care less what you call me, I only care about the claim.

And when asked WHY my being a collector somehow negates me being able to argue the point, you dodge like crazy and refuse to explain why.

You kept asserting this is somehow objective, and that can't possibly be either. So againall this leads back to your claims that Steam is somehow wrong for stiocking as many games as they can with a infinte shlef space. ANd every time you REFUSE to address why.


As for insulting, there's a difference between personal attacks and saying your ideas are ♥♥♥♥. Your ideas are ♥♥♥♥ logic. But that is not the same as insulting YOU. I'm sorry you dfon't undersnta dbasic comprehension of language but agian, that's nopt my problem.

So again, demonstrate WHY my actions of having so many games and playing them is somehow a barrier to me being able to point out your claims about games are crap.
Stop dodging and address this.

[Adam]

This thread was quite old before the recent post, so we're locking it to prevent confusion.