Is Steam a Store or a Kickstarter?

[The Brown Hornet]

When I first joined Steam which was not that long ago it did in fact seem like a STORE, a digital store with awesome PC titles and amazing sales. But now with the addition of EA and even Greenlight it feels more like a doner Kickstarter service. Steam in my opinion has definitely begun to blur the line between Store and FUNDRAISER, I dont know if it can be both, is this right direction for the platform....it almost doesn't even seem legal.

In the PC world the term "Indie developer" sounds nice, honest, and innocent but what happens when you open the flood gates and let every "Indie developer" talented and NON TALENTED into the "Store" all begging for community time, funding, and support? For me it has actually become annoying, I'm literally fed up with all the low quality games popping up seemingly in the dozens everyday...

The truth is I haven't actually purchased any EA or Greenlight products so I haven't truly loss anything but nevertheless it has affected me in the sense that I no longer like or enjoy the STORE that use to be STEAM. For a time I use to spend a lot of money here but now its rare I buy anything. I personally dont trust all these drive-by-night Indie developers who pop up like flies on a daily basis. I use to look forward to visiting the Store when I logged on Steam, now I cant stand to look at it cause its full of bloatware and shovelware...slap the word "Indie" on it and thats suppose to somehow make it all right? Bloatware is bloat and I wish Steam would get rid of it or regulate it to different areas of the platform.

I have tried to customize but the crap titles keep popping up, nothing you can do about it....my view is that "Indie" aka Early Access, aka Greenlight, aka Kickstarter, aka GoFundMe, have taken over Steam and its a lesser experience as a result. I know the bottom line is making money and I know Steam is doing a good job of that but over the past year or two there has been a tremendous drop in quality. I want Steam to go back to quality over quantity and/or create some other outlet for the blight.

[supertrooper225]

Escrito originalmente por username12121:

Escrito originalmente por supertrooper225:

It can. But your critique needs to be informed of the development process. If it is stuff like "the frame rate isn't as good as it could be" or "there is not enough content" or " the mechanics aren't fully fleshed out"......the answer is kind of "duh". The game isn't finished.

Nevertheless, when you buy an EAG, you're buying something that "may or may not change further" so a completely candid and factual review is completely justified in the interests of the purchaser who is warned not to buy the game unless they are "excited to play this game in its current state".

Morning all!

Of course. Never said that it wasn't. But when the game gets released, those reviews are pretty much null and void most of the time, unless the dev really didn't do much with the game. That is why they get marked as Early Access.

[Tux]

gaming as a service

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

Escrito originalmente por The Brown Hornet:

Red Faction Guerrilla has the best real time environmental destruction I've ever seen in a game, Crysis pushed the system to the max and popularized the military sandbox fps without abandoning a story, L4D2...props to Valve for creating a nice, smooth engine that makes their games a joy to pick up and play with no technical frustrations....Homefront, well most think its a bad game and I understand why they shun it...linear, short length, predictable cliff hanger ending, dated graphics, no environmental damage...

Funny thing is they say the game is unfinished and didn't meet its promise or potential. If only Early Access was around back then, Homefront to this day could claim it's in Beta, safe from criticism, safe from quality control.

Well, that's not what I see. Crysis is that thing that graphics nuts keep crowing about being oh so great despite the fact that it just looks vaguely blue-grey all the time, Homefront looks like just another gritty military game, and Red Faction looks like just yet another gritty shooter thing. And L4D2 I've actually tried and the controls feel loose and weird compared to TF2's much tighter controls.

Meanwhile, I've played Potatoman Seeks the Troof about 30 times and I really like how it's a bite-sized platformer that I can get through in about 10 minutes and add some color to my day with its lightly wacky humor (and memorably bizarre trailer!)...and then it even gives me a little permanent in-game record in return for my trouble (plus a leaderboard for speedrunning, for a game small enough to actually make me willing to practice at it). Stealth Bastard Deluxe is hilarious in its dastardly traps and similarly mocking background messages, while having interesting puzzle platforming as well as a level editor with tons of user-created content. 100% Orange Juice has both a unique strategic approach to randomness (a focus on rolling with the RNG's punches and playing the long game rather than trying to stomp out any randomness at all) and a very friendly playerbase that isn't filled with overly-competitive gits. RefleX has a really interesting reflection-shield feature that's fun to use and easy to pick up but which is used in lots of creative ways throughout the game...and the more you play of it the more you'll discover the surprisingly dark story that serves as its backdrop. And fault milestone one is a visual novel with a very, very beautiful story, one that's far more satisfying than most movies I could see in theaters -- and even then it's only the first part of a series with more set to come.

All of those things came onto Steam through Greenlight.

(Oh, by the way, you know what predates Greenlight? Bad Rats. By three years.)

[username12121]

Escrito originalmente por supertrooper225:

Escrito originalmente por username12121:

Nevertheless, when you buy an EAG, you're buying something that "may or may not change further" so a completely candid and factual review is completely justified in the interests of the purchaser who is warned not to buy the game unless they are "excited to play this game in its current state".

Morning all!

Of course. Never said that it wasn't. But when the game gets released, those reviews are pretty much null and void most of the time, unless the dev really didn't do much with the game. That is why they get marked as Early Access.

Hmmm? Unless the dev didn't do much with the game? Oh yes, that's right, that's one of the available courses of action that Early Access devs are allowed to take. I forgot about that.

[WhiteKnight77]

I have never stated one cannot criticize a game in Early Access. The only thing I say is that what one perceives as quality, someone else may think garbage. I dislike RPGs and think they are such, but the other 99,999,999 other users on Steam may not think like I do and as such, I do not think that they should not be able to buy them via Steam. I want the same consideration.

If I find game X in Early Access is to my liking, I should be able to buy it without great difficulty even if someone else does not like it or thinks it is garbage.

I ignore most of Steam. Every once in a while, I might search for a game, but it is rare. I do not have a large list of games. Even on physical media I do not have a large number of games. I just ignore what I am not interested in and let others buy what they want. I don't demand that a store remove things I dislike.

[supertrooper225]

Escrito originalmente por username12121:

Escrito originalmente por supertrooper225:

Of course. Never said that it wasn't. But when the game gets released, those reviews are pretty much null and void most of the time, unless the dev really didn't do much with the game. That is why they get marked as Early Access.

Hmmm? Unless the dev didn't do much with the game? Oh yes, that's right, that's one of the available courses of action that Early Access devs are allowed to take. I forgot about that.

LIke I said, you don't know much about games development. The games where devs don't do much are games like Air Control...which are removed. There is nothing easy about games development and your ignorance of that is where issues like these stem from.

I want to make my own decisions. I don't want you or anyone else making them for me. As far as I am concerned...let them release whatever. I don't care. I don't buy bad games. I do my own research. I am perfectly capable of filtering out crappy games without affecting anyone else. I don't want you or anyone else speaking for me.

[username12121]

Escrito originalmente por supertrooper225:

Escrito originalmente por username12121:

Hmmm? Unless the dev didn't do much with the game? Oh yes, that's right, that's one of the available courses of action that Early Access devs are allowed to take. I forgot about that.

LIke I said, you don't know much about games development. The games where devs don't do much are games like Air Control...which are removed. There is nothing easy about games development and your ignorance of that is where issues like these stem from.

I want to make my own decisions. I don't want you or anyone else making them for me. As far as I am concerned...let them release whatever. I don't care. I don't buy bad games. I do my own research. I am perfectly capable of filtering out crappy games without affecting anyone else. I don't want you or anyone else speaking for me.

Ignorance is something of which you know nothing.

What I do know is that all but the highest standard of professional people in most creative industries such as writing, music, film making, visual arts etc. aren't offered the same opportunity to sell their works while they're still "in progress", nor do they carry on about it as if they expect it should be their right to do so.

Early Access should be seen as a privilege which comes with serious responsibility. I'm not going to say whether I think that some dev's are abusing this privilege, but I will say that Early Access appears to me to be far too loose of an arrangement where too much risk is placed on the consumer, and too little responsibility is placed on the developer. I am not surprised in the least when I see people who defend the scheme blindly without acknowledging its flaws being treated with a good deal of skepticism.

Having said all that, I repeat that I like the Early Access program and I think that in many cases it has achieved and continues to achieve what it has set out to do. I even agree that it MIGHT contribute to a better standard and variety of games in the future. My major objection to it is that Early Access games have been introduced into the Steam store without providing an option for them to be hidden from those who don't wish to have to see them. Defenders of EAG's are often more than happy to claim that customers are idiots. I don't agree, but if it were so, idiots need to be protected from making risky purchases, not exploited by them.

[supertrooper225]

Escrito originalmente por username12121:

Escrito originalmente por supertrooper225:

LIke I said, you don't know much about games development. The games where devs don't do much are games like Air Control...which are removed. There is nothing easy about games development and your ignorance of that is where issues like these stem from.

I want to make my own decisions. I don't want you or anyone else making them for me. As far as I am concerned...let them release whatever. I don't care. I don't buy bad games. I do my own research. I am perfectly capable of filtering out crappy games without affecting anyone else. I don't want you or anyone else speaking for me.

Ignorance is something of which you know nothing.

What I do know is that all but the highest standard of professional people in most creative industries such as writing, music, film making, visual arts etc. aren't offered the same opportunity to sell their works while they're still "in progress", nor do they carry on about it as if they expect it should be their right to do so.

Early Access should be seen as a privilege which comes with serious responsibility. I'm not going to say whether I think that some dev's are abusing this privilege, but I will say that Early Access appears to me to be far too loose of an arrangement where too much risk is placed on the consumer, and too little responsibility is placed on the developer. I am not surprised in the least when I see people who defend the scheme blindly without acknowledging its flaws being treated with a good deal of skepticism.

Having said all that, I repeat that I like the Early Access program and I think that in many cases it has achieved and continues to achieve what it has set out to do. I even agree that it MIGHT contribute to a better standard and variety of games in the future. My major objection to it is that Early Access games have been introduced into the Steam store without providing an option for them to be hidden from those who don't wish to have to see them. Defenders of EAG's are often more than happy to claim that customers are idiots. I don't agree, but if it were so, idiots need to be protected from making risky purchases, not exploited by them.

The risk is stated all over every Early Access games store page. Users acknowledge that risk and that they are fine with taking it. So when people say that they dont' want the risk associated with it...all they have to do is not participate. But they don't. Instead they take the risk many times...then complain on the forums and demand someone else take responsibility for their decisions.

I don't defend it blindly. I know what the risks are. Because they state them on the store page. I am actually not big into buying them. But I also know that putting pages and pages of rules on the program will strangle any kind of a freedom an early access dev may have, rendering the program useless. Many people say the program is too loose....but they have no idea what they want in place either.

So people that claim they have no idea what the risk was before buying an early access titles apparently didn't read the store page. I have no sympathy for that person. What is actually going on most of the time is blind criticism with no clue of how game development works and no idea of how to possibly fix issues. And the ideas they DO have...typically would result in the program being useless anyway.

Customers make their own decisions. Nobody defends someone when they purchase a crappy vacuum cleaner and the video store wouldn't keep you from renting or buying a terrible movie. That is your decision. That is the way it has always been. Steam isnt' a defense force for users and their purchasing decisions.

[Herman Lim Ping Hua]

hi

[username12121]

Escrito originalmente por supertrooper225:

Escrito originalmente por username12121:

Ignorance is something of which you know nothing.

What I do know is that all but the highest standard of professional people in most creative industries such as writing, music, film making, visual arts etc. aren't offered the same opportunity to sell their works while they're still "in progress", nor do they carry on about it as if they expect it should be their right to do so.

Early Access should be seen as a privilege which comes with serious responsibility. I'm not going to say whether I think that some dev's are abusing this privilege, but I will say that Early Access appears to me to be far too loose of an arrangement where too much risk is placed on the consumer, and too little responsibility is placed on the developer. I am not surprised in the least when I see people who defend the scheme blindly without acknowledging its flaws being treated with a good deal of skepticism.

Having said all that, I repeat that I like the Early Access program and I think that in many cases it has achieved and continues to achieve what it has set out to do. I even agree that it MIGHT contribute to a better standard and variety of games in the future. My major objection to it is that Early Access games have been introduced into the Steam store without providing an option for them to be hidden from those who don't wish to have to see them. Defenders of EAG's are often more than happy to claim that customers are idiots. I don't agree, but if it were so, idiots need to be protected from making risky purchases, not exploited by them.

The risk is stated all over every Early Access games store page. Users acknowledge that risk and that they are fine with taking it. So when people say that they dont' want the risk associated with it...all they have to do is not participate. But they don't. Instead they take the risk many times...then complain on the forums and demand someone else take responsibility for their decisions.

I don't defend it blindly. I know what the risks are. Because they state them on the store page. I am actually not big into buying them. But I also know that putting pages and pages of rules on the program will strangle any kind of a freedom an early access dev may have, rendering the program useless. Many people say the program is too loose....but they have no idea what they want in place either.

Customers make their own decisions. Nobody defends someone when they purchase a crappy vacuum cleaner and the video store wouldn't keep you from renting or buying a terrible movie. That is your decision. That is the way it has always been. Steam isnt' a defense force for users and their purchasing decisions.

As I said, my major objection to this is that Early Access games receive an equal level of exposure to fully launched games in the Steam store.

By the very fact that they come with a warning, EAG's are in a different category to all other products, and by the very fact that they've been placed in the Early Access category means that they are, at least for the present, unfinished in the eyes of their developers and Valve/Steam. To me this is reason enough that customers who have taken the warnings seriously and subsequently decided not to buy any EAG's on the strength of those warnings should be able to browse the store without being subjected to the advertising that keeps recommending them.

It is hypocritical to warn people of the risks of buying Early Access games, but then to continue to promote and recommend them to a customer who has said "no thanks".

[Extinction]

Steam needs some more testing of games. The game should be reviewed by a steam moderator, or they should get 5 or so game testers. This would prevent scam games with no potential. But removing all EA is bad, ive seen some great EA titles that are now finished or are getting huge content updates.

[Start_Running]

Escrito originalmente por supertrooper225:

Escrito originalmente por username12121:

Hmmm? Unless the dev didn't do much with the game? Oh yes, that's right, that's one of the available courses of action that Early Access devs are allowed to take. I forgot about that.

LIke I said, you don't know much about games development. The games where devs don't do much are games like Air Control...which are removed. There is nothing easy about games development and your ignorance of that is where issues like these stem from.

Actually i heard the dev voluntarily removed that one from steam. Not the other way around.

I want to make my own decisions. I don't want you or anyone else making them for me. As far as I am concerned...let them release whatever. I don't care. I don't buy bad games. I do my own research. I am perfectly capable of filtering out crappy games without affecting anyone else. I don't want you or anyone else speaking for me.

Bingo.

And brown Critiquing an Early Access game is like critiquing a painters construction pencil work.. SUre you can but if you're serious about offering reliable recommendation then you invariably must commit to re-reviewing it after the paint has dried, Now critiquing the Early access system.. well that's another matter . You can't really criticize the system when the fault lies in the consumer. THose consumers that complain the loudest are the ones who quite obviously did not pay attention to any of the warning information or the product descriptions.

They like you brown are the ones harbouring internalized ill-conceived notions of what Early Access is or rather what they believe it should be and then wind up rather shocked, disapoointed and angry when reality, which has been staring them in the face. does not match up to their internal delusions. You can't really fault a product for being exactly what it says it is. It's like faulting a chocolate chip cookie for having chocolate chips.

Escrito originalmente por Extinction:

Steam needs some more testing of games. The game should be reviewed by a steam moderator, or they should get 5 or so game testers. This would prevent scam games with no potential. But removing all EA is bad, ive seen some great EA titles that are now finished or are getting huge content updates.

Still wouldn't work. Everything has potential and strangely enough even bvad games have a lot of merit. Take The FLock for example. Succeed or Fail that game will create some new data, new data can be used to inform new ideas, so even if it fails it can show someone else an idea that they can do a better job with. Would Gone Home exist if someone else had not made 'The Stanley Parable'?

As for devs not doing much with the game. Well, that depends on the game. Depending on when one buys it during Early Access the game very well might not change much. Say if you bought it two updates before final release. You likely won't see much moe than minor changes. Doesn't mean the devs aren't doing stuff. as they say. the player is only aware of 30-60% of what is going on with a game. Optimizing the code and using better tricks to achieve certain effects.

I mean they may have used recursion instead of a do-while structure. They may have used chained or nested if's instead of a switch statement. These are little things that get done that have no visible impact to the player but have a big impact on the coding side of things.

[Sophiron]

I think it is a bit of both, but that isn't a bad thing.

[Tux]

I looked at 3 EAG games last night on youtube that are all new and they look friggin amazing!

[Start_Running]

Escrito originalmente por Tux:

I looked at 3 EAG games last night on youtube that are all new and they look friggin amazing!

DO share the links Tux