安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
Which is the whole crux.
If one would be brutally honest they had to applaud some of these developers because they know their target audience exactly - people buying games to inflate numbers. If you can earn a dollar on a cheap +1 and you have low cost of living, any further effort is wasted. Why do a decent game with a chance to fail if you can just release five low effort ones?
Oh yeah, the inevitable COD bash.
You know, the one series that actually tries to innovate with gameplay elements and gets flak for it every time. Future setting? We no likey. Vertical combar? We no likey. Strategy elements? Not in my FPS!
You can only do so much if your playerbase actually wants the same game over and over.
No, that's a just dodging.
His point was correct. You were sweepingly naming stuff (wrongly) as shovelware, not only slightly misusing the term, but grouping all ills under the early access bandwagon.
That is either ignorant of early access or dishonest.
The fact remains that although early access has that ♥♥♥♥-off massive blue box above the add to cart button on EVERY game informing one of the terms, people still don't get it.
But if you truly believe it's as hyperbolic as you say, put your money where your mouth is and demonstrate clear evidence that the vast majority are as you claim.
The Top Early Access graduates this year: https://store.steampowered.com/sale/BestOf2020?tab=5
Especially Noita, Factorio, Risk of Rain 2, Hades and Deep Rock Galactic are good ones this year. Let alone the many games from the past years like Rimworld, Slay the Spire, Darkest Dungeon, Streets of Rogue, etc.
So are you incapable of exhibiting willpower? I mean again, early access is a choice. No one forces you to buy them, so if you are buying them and not liking them then you have only yourself to blame.
The facts are there are a lot of really good games that wouldn't exist if it wasn't for EA. That isn't even debateable.
Nor is it debateable that EA is optional and you have the option to completely remove them from the store if you wish.
So anyone with a crusade against EA games has a bigger psychological issue they need to address if they are physically incapable of checking off the box to hide EA games from the store and should probably get some help with that.
The rest of us can make our own decisions over what games we buy without other people having to tell us.
Oh and btw enjoy the other flops of released games that are just as bad, unfinished, and unplayable as EA but are called "finished"
OP said that early access can be a virus that kills the game, since developers get what they wanted and motivation can fade, some might just run away with the money.
Others claim that player can fully decide if they should buy a half built toy.
As a publisher, steam's job scope is to reach the mass target audience. The more commission they can earn per head the better. Therefore I think early access games will still be charged at high price. They probably will not publish videos and ads just to earn a few cents.
Next, "Don't support early access" is easily said than done. Loot box exists because our brain will always think of the positive side. "What if I happen to win something big". "What if this game will made it and if I purchase it now I'd get a special item."
I feel OP have accidentally provide the best solution. "To cap an early access price at $10". Why must it be steam who enforce the price, when it is the customer who decide on the price to pay? If it is a $6 early access, we can buy to show our support. If it's $20, then we should avoid. There is a small chance that the $6 'beta' could provide a unique experience and only in beta, before the arrival of boring and stable rules.
https://store.steampowered.com/app/284160/BeamNGdrive/
It's not a complete game yet but it's a decent sandbox environment.
To address the pricing thing - yeah, Valve CANNOT arbitrarily set a universal price as they don't own the IPs in question.
And that simply wouldn't be helpful anyway, as games are so differing in scope as to be absolutely useless.
Bottom line, the pricing should be evaluation on the user's part, which you should already be doing.
I quickly learned this back in the early 1980s. I take no tice of review scores which are utterly useless, and when I've invetigated reviews to get an idea of the game, I give it a rough guideline as to what I THINK it's worth, and only buy it if it ever reaches that.
So yeah, basically what you're describing is something that everyone should do anyway.
Your second mistake is saying its not easy to resist being greedy because you don't want to accept the reality that self control is possible and like its name suggests responsibility for it rests with the customer themselves not Steam.
Your third mistake is thinking Steam is the one setting prices when it isn't and acting like customers don't have the freedom to decide for themselves not to buy something if they don't like the price.
Just like the achievement games, or adult mahjong games... There's people out there willing to spend money in them. And Valve isn't going to run out of shelf space for games whether they add 10, 10 or 10.000 of those games to their game libraries.
We're talking entertainment products here. And there's as many tastes on what's 'entertaining' for people as stars are in the sky.
Shovelware was a word with a very defined terminology that's nowadays been run to the ground and emptied of significance to try to drive a hollow point home
I keep smiling at people's concept or 'complete' game. If they only knew how much stuff is scrapped and redone or tossed aside forever removed from the game in every game developed.
I never said anything of the sort. I never even began to say I don't see the masses of shovelware.
All I said was that the term shovelware is a largerly redundant term as it's meaning has been so diluted as to mean anything "I don't like". Then, I stated that this is hyperbolic - that the degree of these things aren't as bad as claimed and no evidence has been presented to claim it is.
Then, I said, the big blue box COMPLETELY overrrules a lot of the other arguments made here, because THEY DO.
But go ahead and make stuff up about what I've said.
If you were being honest, you'd note the other things I've pointed out - that of history and how many games traditionally get scrapped. It used to be around 50% back when I worked for certain magazines.
Now how about we actually defend REAL points and provide evidence for our claims and not hyperbole and dishonesty eh?
I thank you for trying to be negative, acting all high up while making a debate and using such disrespectful words, but steam is more than just a game developer since they also publish. They published half life games. New developers require their API platform to publish their games and in-game achievements. Like a comic book publisher that supplies paper, steam supplied servers, player reviews, developer support and more. The publisher therefore charged companies a big % of their product. They are not just a store because they don't purchase and set a price to sell games. They work as a publisher and content makers can decide a price.
Next it is easily said than done to not support big and popular early access titles. Your claim that self control is possible only works in theory. Of course a few people could do that, but when given a population of one million, can you ensure 0 people will stop buying early access? You idea is good but that's only common sense logic that self control is possible. You're naïve and ignorant to believe it will work. There is a big marketing campaign and many other factors. Similar to psychology elements in a loot box. "Oh as long as we don't buy it" yes, we can do it, but not everybody can do it.
Finally I did not say steam is the one setting prices. I said users can decide if an early access game is worth the price and they have freedom.
I have already ended my debate, yet you embarrass yourself for no reason by trying hard to roast people, fighting on the most mediocre and pointless details, all along giving such common sense, childish ideas to support your claim. It's as if you think nobody has common sense here.
If Steam would be a publisher, they'd have rights to the content or even to change the price. They don't.