Watter wrote on Jun 7, 2018, 09:48:
Prez wrote on Jun 7, 2018, 08:09:That's the first argument against this move by steam that was persusasive and didn't make me roll my eyes.
Steam does not have the power to determine that you can or can't purchase something nor should it. It has the power (and obligation in my view) soley to determine what it does and doesn't sell on its own storefront.
I see two ways to look at it.
1) Steam is still the defacto marketplace for PC games. That's changing, thankfully, but it still owns the lion's share of the market. Any curation effort will be imperfect and games that some people might be interested in will be left out of that marketplace. I don't want anyone narrowing my choices. As long as there are filters, which is in Steams own best interest to provide, let it fly. I don't think anyone should be limiting other people's choices - and again, given steam's position as the defacto PC games marketplace, if it's not on Steam, it's almost not in the PC games market.
We all have a tendency to believe that the items we don't care about, nobody cares about. Example: Goat Simulator? What they hell?!? That almost certainly wouldn't have made it past my own personal curation process in its initial rough form, but some people enjoyed it and given time it became something that even more people picked up.
2) Do people really have trouble finding things they're interested in? I use steam a quite a bit, and I don't recall having to sift through crap to find interesting games. It isn't in Steam's best interest financially to make it hard for me to find games I'm interested in and purchase them; however if I do want to go on a hidden treasure hunt for something more obsucre, the option is there.
3) We live in a bigger (and smaller) world than ever before. It used to be that a niche interest might have too small a market to make sense to provide product for, but no more. A "niche" might be hundreds of thousands (or even millions) of people. Even if you believe in limiting options, which I don't, how do you curate when niches are so varied and large? .001% of the market these days is still large enough for some people to make product for.
I frequently see people buying products (crap, in my mind) that I literally cannot fathom ANYONE ever buying. I can either believe that these people are dumb and need someone smarter looking out for them OR I can accept that there might be some value in those things that I just don't see and that those people are different enough from me that they want something else that I can't understand. The "live and let live" side of me just shrugs and moves on. As long as I can find what I want, let those folks get their kicks where they want.
All of what you wrote is something I can either agree with or at the very least see the validity of. While an inconvenience, on a personal level having to skip past a dozen different iterations of "Achievement Hunter" or "Bitcoin Simulator" games slapped together in an hour on Steam's new release list admittedly isn't the end of the world. It also isn't my main focus as to why I argue in favor of curation on Steam. On a larger scale than personal convenience the saturation of garbage on Steam is detrimental to the independent and mid-tier developers to the point that it is actively hurting the industry overall. AAA games from big publishers always get a lot of exposure so it doesn't affect the Middle Earth's, the Civilization's, the Total War's, etc. But as someone who follows alot of content creators (largely on YouTube) with insider knowledge of the independent and mid tier developer scene the problems that Steam's lack of standards causes for them is obvious. Basically, devs have shared with such creators that an independent or mid tier game lives or dies based on how much exposure via purchase and word of mouth buzz generated in its first 5 to 7 days following release. This becomes a problem when Steam acknowledges that a game's sales drop off exponentially once it is relegated to the 2nd or 3rd page of the New Release section on its storefront, which given the amount of utter garbage that makes it onto that list by the hour can happen in less than a day. See the problem here? A game that a developer invested a huge portion of their available resources into can quickly become effectively invisible to the buying public once it is buried by the influx of crap. This can and reportedly has forced developers to give up on and leave the business. It has gotten to the point where only huge publishers and cynical cash-grabbing asset flipper developers find it financially viable to continue to release games on Steam because the former have huge coffers and the latter spends next to nothing doing what they do. This effectively eliminates a critical part (and I would argue the best part) of the games industry. That to me simply does not bode well for the long-term health of the PC market.This comment was edited on Jun 7, 2018, 11:38.
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi