Business ethics ?

[Frogbottom]

Lately there has been an avalanche of releases of old games or mobile games with slim to none adaptaion to modern computers. In the case of mobile games you mostly get an android/iphone port 1:1 to PC or Mac at 2-4 times the price. Hardly a good deal and generating a lot of disappointed users. That the game is originally developed as a mobile app is rarely stated clearly.

In the case of old games you get a game from the 90:s or early 20:s that doesen´t even run on an modern computer. That the game is 10 years old or more is not clearly stated in the store.

I agree that some gems from the past i actually works and are worth the money but the majority of the releases of late does not. A further problem is that most of the companies that developed these games are longe gone so there is no support and no possibilities for any patches.

On top of this there are a lot of early access titles/ greenlight games that are sold where it seems like the quality and/or progress is not at all managed or at least checked for a minimum of quality.

As a long time customer i get worried by this develpment and i think this hurts your credibility and damages Steam as a gaming plattform.

Dear Steam or Valve, what is your take on this ?

[Satoru]

selling stuff you dont like != bad ethics

[Emperor Zombie]

Is helping children unethical? Steam Greenlight Submission Fee:

Publicado originalmente por Valve:

This one-time fee will grant your Steam account access to post and update as many of your games as you like within Greenlight. All proceeds from this fee (minus taxes) will be donated directly to Child’s Play, a charity dedicated to improving the lives of children in over 70 hospitals worldwide.

[Gus the Crocodile]

Publicado originalmente por psm:

That the game is originally developed as a mobile app is rarely stated clearly

Neither is it when a game is originally developed for Xbox or whatever. Judge games for what they are, not what other platforms they're on, and there's no problem. Obligating stores to tell you where else you can buy a game (for cheaper or not) seems a kind of strange suggestion.

Publicado originalmente por psm:

On top of this there are a lot of early access titles/ greenlight games that are sold where it seems like the quality and/or progress is not at all managed or at least checked for a minimum of quality.

That's because quality is subjective.What you might think is below a "minimum of quality", someone else might really enjoy. So rather than make you happy at their expense, if you simply choose not to buy that game, everybody can be satisfied.

Games that flat-out don't work is, of course, a problem if/when that occurs. Though you have to bear in mind that unlike consoles, "PC" is a massive variety of hardware and software configurations - most every game will be broken for some set of people. But if it's well known that, say, certain games don't work on certain operating systems, then that information should be included in the system requirements section.

[Ubernerd Lucas]

Publicado originalmente por Emperor Zombie:

Is helping children unethical?

Straw man argument.

I agree that it's unethical to sell games that will run poorly (if at all) on modern systems without any obvious disclaimer; it seems to be preying directly on people's nostalgia. While there is some consumer responsibility to research a product before buying, Valve should be much more obvious about releasing games that will likely not work.

For Greenlit games, people are asking for them on Steam, so (for the most part) Valve isn't responsible for their quality; instead, that's the responsibility of the developer, as well as the people who vote for it to be allowed on Steam.

For Early Access games, Valve is starting to see a lot of complaints, mostly about how a lot of developers seem to think "Early Access" means "Release a buggy, incomplete game." Overall, there needs to be a system that enforces some kind of development cycle on the devs; otherwise, the system should be phased out in the name of consumer protection.

[WhiteKnight77]

Publicado originalmente por Ubernerd Lucas:

For Early Access games, Valve is starting to see a lot of complaints, mostly about how a lot of developers seem to think "Early Access" means "Release a buggy, incomplete game." Overall, there needs to be a system that enforces some kind of development cycle on the devs; otherwise, the system should be phased out in the name of consumer protection.

Do you even understand what Early Access is about?

Those complaints you are talking about are due to gamers not knowing the reason why Early Access exists and that they will be buying games that are buggy. Games being buggy are part of game development, especially in the Alpha stage of development, that is stated on the game's store page in a box headed by a big light blue banner with white letters stating Early Access Game. Is it Steam's fault for giving the developer a place to state what is going on, what state of development and what buying into early access will get the gamer as well as what is expected of the gamer and that the gamer never reads said box? Of course not.

Steam provides the developer with the means to let potential buyers to explain what is happening as well as Steam providing gamers with a FAQ about what Early Access entails. It is up to the gamer to read everything carefully, check out the forums to see what is being said by both those who bought in as well as the devs. If a gamer clicks the ADD TO CART button without knowing what they are buying, their complaints will fall on deaf ears and rightfully so.

Early Access provides small and indie development teams a way to fund their games and sell them to gamers. Game development is expensive. Couple that with large, well known developers and publishers are not funding new IPs much less make new ones (there are the odd new IPs that show up on occasion) and instead keep making games that fit a formula that they know sell as well as not releasing as many new games a year as they once did due to the costs of development of those games.

Steam has already put Early Access games under its own banner and if you click on the Games drop down menu[www.whiteknight77.net] seen in pic I just posted, there is nothing else Steam needs to do.

Now that I have explained this for about the 200th time, now do you have an understanding that if Steam put a filter on the store, that you would only see 3 or 4 new games a year?

[RedLightning]

So if Steam doesnt shove the Early Access down everyones throats then we will only see 3 to 4 games a year? Wow that says a lot about early access..

If people want early access.. they will not use the filter.. If they DONT want it they will.

I think that Early access can be abused.. Release a half finished game.. rake in the cash.. and run away rich. The people that were shafted can only shrug their shoulders.. and all Steam has to do is say "well you bought an 'early access' game.. sorry."

There is absolutely NO incentive to finish the game. If people recieved ther paychecks before the job was completed.. then people will feel less apt to actually complete the job. That happens every single day with contractors.,

If someone is investing their own money and time into a game there is an ultimatum to finish the game.. they dont finish.. they fail. With early access that "failure" is taken out of the equation.

Only my humble opinion.

[Ubernerd Lucas]

Publicado originalmente por WhiteKnight77:

Do you even understand what Early Access is about?

Yes, I do. I'm talking about games like Paranautical Activity, where the developer has repeatedly failed to deliver promised content updates (the most recent update was promised to be released by valentines's day, was "delayed," and nothing has been heard since). He's not the only dev that seems to have abandoned his "in-development" game. While many devs are using it correctly, there are those that are abusing the system with no consequence.

[WhiteKnight77]

Publicado originalmente por Ubernerd Lucas:

Publicado originalmente por WhiteKnight77:

Do you even understand what Early Access is about?

Yes, I do. I'm talking about games like Paranautical Activity, where the developer has repeatedly failed to deliver promised content updates (the most recent update was promised to be released by valentines's day, was "delayed," and nothing has been heard since). He's not the only dev that seems to have abandoned his "in-development" game. While many devs are using it correctly, there are those that are abusing the system with no consequence.

Do you think that large developers meet deadlines? Of course not. That these indie developers have to work a "day" job to keep a roof over their head as well as food on their table means that there may be delays due to "real life" events happening.

At least you have been able to name someone unlike all the others who have made claims, but cannot provide the proof asked of them. Thank you.

[Ubernerd Lucas]

I wouldn't suggest that devs need to hold to something strict such as a firm release date, but at least some small guarantee that continued development will occurr is needed. Or maybe a way to more easily see the release history of a game so that people can see the developer's progress. If some kind of reassurance was added, it would quiet a lot of the people who refuse to buy Early Access games because of their risk of becoming abandonware.

[Gus the Crocodile]

There's a section for updates on the store page of every Early Access game. I guess the developer probably isn't required to post there, but if they don't, and that concerns you, you're free to choose not to buy it based on that.

[Player One]

Nothing wrong with Steam expanding there catalogue with old & new games

That’s the great thing about the Pc - the backwards compatibility (For lack of a better term) - The fact that I can still play games from the 90's

What you might see as trash, someone else might absolutely love.

[Ubernerd Lucas]

Publicado originalmente por Gus the Crocodile:

There's a section for updates on the store page of every Early Access game.

Huh, I missed that. Always kinda assumed that was linked to the "Announcements" section of the community hub.

Publicado originalmente por DamageBot:

That’s the great thing about the Pc - the backwards compatibility (For lack of a better term) - The fact that I can still play games from the 90's

The issue at stake isn't the quality of the game. The problem is many of these older games won't run well (if at all) on many modern set-ups. For example, I purchased Disciples 2 a while back; the only way I can get it to run on Windows 7 64-bit is by launching in compatibility mode with a particular graphics configuration AND the sound disabled; otherwise it freezes up after launching. Yet the store page offers no hints that it might have any problems at all; it seem like Valve is operating in bad faith when they're willing to sell games with this

[Lootzifer]

There is a lot of crap on Steam and there's no quality control, at all, and there ought to be or this place will just become more of a haven for shovelware garbage. I do wonder what Steam will be like in five years from now. Already, we have to wade through 30 shovelware games to get to one AAA title.

Totalbiscuit and others have been railing against this practice for a long time. Whether something will be done about it is another matter. The announcement that Greenlight is to be no more is a step in the right direction. I've seen enough MS Paint and RPG Maker games, thanks.

All that being said, while there are obvious crappy games being sold, not all games you don't like are crap. Does that make any sense?

[Rhonda]

I dont mind EA games. It's a nieche for small companies to develop and sell games without a huge (and more often than not evil) publisher. The community on steam is vigilant and if a company tries to abuse this system they are quickly marked for that (either in forum or reviews).

I also appreciate the availability of older/classic games as introduced by GoG or steam, as long as they dont cheat on the release date. And more often than not you find a classic from late 90/early 00 tagged as released in 2014. This must not happen and hurts Steam's credibility.

[WhiteKnight77]

Publicado originalmente por Swamp Terror:

There is a lot of crap on Steam and there's no quality control, at all, and there ought to be or this place will just become more of a haven for shovelware garbage. I do wonder what Steam will be like in five years from now. Already, we have to wade through 30 shovelware games to get to one AAA title.

Totalbiscuit and others have been railing against this practice for a long time. Whether something will be done about it is another matter. The announcement that Greenlight is to be no more is a step in the right direction. I've seen enough MS Paint and RPG Maker games, thanks.

All that being said, while there are obvious crappy games being sold, not all games you don't like are crap. Does that make any sense?

Valve is not going to do any quality control or quality assurance on games that they did not develop, that is up to the developer of said game to do.Now if you are referring to Early Access games, of course they are buggy. They are either in alpha or beta stages. That does not mean the game is crappy or garbage.

Terms like crappy, garbage, bad, junk, good, great, trash, etc. are subjective terms based on a persons opinion. Just because you do not like something does not mean anyone else does not like it.

It also sounds like you do not understand what Early Access is about as well as understand that for older games, the actual release date is on the game's store page. As far as Steam calling it a new release, it is a new release on Steam due to it never being available through Steam before. Also, if a gamer buys a game without reading about it or checking out what others are saying including the devs if an Early Access game. then it is only the gamer's fault for clicking on the BUY button at checkout.