|
|
 |
| [Sep 05, 2012, 10:06 am ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
The recently launched Steam Greenlight program has a problem with its signal-to-noise ratio, as Valve has been flooded with legitimate submissions as well as joke entries from the collection of comedian known as the internet. To combat this, they announce they are adding a one hundred dollar submission fee, which will be contributed to charity. Here's word: Two things we’ve noticed so far. First, there are a ton of legitimate submissions that people want to see. Second, there is unfortunately a significant amount of noise and clutter being submitted, either as a joke or by fans not fully understanding the purpose of Greenlight.
So, with those things in mind, today we’ve made two updates to how Greenlight works.
The first update is a $100 fee for someone to post to Steam Greenlight. The proceeds will be donated to Child’s Play. We have no interest in making money from this, but we do need to cut down the noise in the system. (Note: Anyone who has already posted a submission to Greenlight will not have to retroactively pay for any existing submissions, but will need to do so for any future submissions.)
The second part of this update is to improve your window into Greenlight and help you find “your kind” of games. The next time you visit Steam Greenlight you’ll be shown a smaller, manageable list of games that you haven’t rated. This view is a mix of popular games and new games to Greenlight.
In the end, we’re very interested in maintaining an environment that is fair and beneficial to everyone involved, and one that fun and rewarding to join.
Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment
you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at
the bottom of the form.
 |
| 18. |
Re: Steam Greenlight Adding Listing Fee |
Sep 5, 2012, 14:28 |
Beamer |
|
|
Silicon Avatar wrote on Sep 5, 2012, 12:35:
Few tiny indies are going to fork out a hundred bucks just to enter a popularity lottery in hopes that maybe their game will be sold on Steam.
If you are an obscure indie author you might as well throw your hundred in the trash can for all the chance you will have.
Well, the $100 helps, though. Everyone thinks more choice is great, but when you get to a point more choice is a terrible thing. Two reasons:
1) People actually suck at making choices. There are a few very famous studies on the paradox of choice, which do things like feature two supermarket displays over 2 days. One has 3 jams on it, one has 20 jams. While the same amount of people go over to the display and try the jam, significantly more people buy from the 3 than the 20. People just make choices more readily with fewer options, after that it's rapidly diminishing and even negative returns
2) When the choice is mostly crap, everything gets buried. People get tired of looking for the needle in the haystack and stop even bothering to look. This is what cable is experiencing with its 400 channel offers - people only watch 3-8 and ignore anything else. In essence they watch less variety than when they had a more manageable number of channels
So, without that $100, the store becomes so cluttered no one bothers. With it the store is less cluttered and people are more likely to find that tiny little gem. But man, 757 games within a few days? That's more or less already way too many to search through. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Twitter 
