Developers On Steam Can Just Lie About Release Dates?

[shrekfan246]

Hello, Escapambilidandoes.

I may just be seeing things, because I just had a kidney stent removed today and boy, did it knock the wind out of me for a few hours after I got back home, but when I went to the Steam store page I saw something curious.

Out There Somewhere [http://store.steampowered.com/app/263980/] is a game that was released in 2012. It was then rereleased on Steam in 2014. As of an update today, however, it is marked as a brand new release, and thus is back on the front page of Steam.

Some people are saying that the soundtrack for the game just released; I can neither confirm nor deny this, but would point out that Steam says I've had the soundtrack for going on six months, the same amount of time I've had the game itself.

This isn't entirely unprecedented: Batman: Arkham Knight officially had its release date altered due to being pulled from the store completely and essentially having a second launch. Early Access games tend to be listed as when they first hit Steam, and then get updated for their full launches. But that's still a bit of a different situation. Out There Somewhere has always been available, and it was never marked as an Early Access game or anything like that. In fact, if you look at Steam's current weeklong sales [http://store.steampowered.com/search/?filter=weeklongdeals], Out There Somewhere is still listed as having a release date of "May 21, 2014".

So, what does this mean?

Is there some loophole in Steam's system that essentially allows developers/publishers to game it and bring their titles back up to the front page, while also sidelining all of the Steam user reviews (which subsequently get marked as "Pre-Release" reviews)? Is this something that can be exploited by malicious intent, to crowd the front page with even more junk that people have already seen and/or bought? Is this actually not such a big deal and I'm just overreacting because I need some more painkillers?

Tell me your thoughts, they sustain my life energy

 

[DefunctTheory]

I'm gonna go with 'Automated system that can be gamed/goofs on occasion.'

Also, with 'overreacting.'

Perhaps its something Valve should look into, but I seriously doubt there's anything malicious to it, either from developers or from the platform itself.

 

[Elfgore]

Didn't Jim Fuckin' Sterling or TotalBiscuit make a video about this a while ago? I think it had something to do with the game Desert Gunner, which was announced as new in 2013 even though it came out in like 2004.

Personally I wouldn't think it's that big of a deal, but something I'd like to see fixed. It's getting to the point I need to research for a damn thesis just to make sure I'm not getting lied to about anything.

 

[shrekfan246]

Perhaps its something Valve should look into, but I seriously doubt there's anything malicious to it, either from developers or from the platform itself.

It's not so much that I think this was done with any sort of harmful intent (in fact, Out There Somewhere is a decent puzzle-platformer and very much worth the incredibly low asking price), but more the idea of the slippery slopes something like this could entail if it starts becoming seen widespread. Developers already abuse the hell out of Greenlight and Early Access, and publishers exploit their access to dump loads of (generally poor quality) games onto the platform on a daily basis.

It may seem alarmist, but Steam has already rolled down paths people thought it would never even take a second look at only a few short years ago. Valve has shown very little evidence that they actually care about the state of their store, with the only changes meant to address anything being small tweaks users can make to how they see the front page and the ability to follow curators (yet another good idea which has never seen any sort of update or follow-up since its implementation). This goof in the system may just slide through the cracks and go forgotten into the codes of time, but let's just say I wouldn't put anything past the scam artists that have been infesting Steam in the past two years or so.

 

[Elfgore]

Didn't Jim Fuckin' Sterling or TotalBiscuit make a video about this a while ago? I think it had something to do with the game Desert Gunner, which was announced as new in 2013 even though it came out in like 2004.

Personally I wouldn't think it's that big of a deal, but something I'd like to see fixed. It's getting to the point I need to research for a damn thesis just to make sure I'm not getting shafted on Steam

Wut? In what way is release date a contributing factor to 'getting shafted'?

Poor choice of words. Let me edit it.

 

[shrekfan246]

Didn't Jim Fuckin' Sterling or TotalBiscuit make a video about this a while ago? I think it had something to do with the game Desert Gunner, which was announced as new in 2013 even though it came out in like 2004.

This is a similar thing, but it doesn't have quite the same effect because generally speaking those games are technically new to Steam. It's still dishonest, but there's at least a kernel of truth behind it somewhere. I would say it's not any better than what I'm talking about, though.

Personally I wouldn't think it's that big of a deal, but something I'd like to see fixed. It's getting to the point I need to research for a damn thesis just to make sure I'm not getting shafted on Steam

I think this might be why it bugs me. Steam seems to make it all too easy for developers or publishers to basically toy with their customers, and while said customers will often push back (see any developer that tries deleting forum threads/user reviews), there's still no system in place to actually provide the customers with any sort of information or protection (aside from the only-recently-implemented refund policy, which I'd still say is pretty lacking even if it is a step in the right direction). Everything is dependent on what the seller says, and it looks like we just have to take their word that they're being honest and not trying to swindle or fool us.

 

[Bilious Green_v1legacy]

This happened with Raven's Cry; the devs released the game, it got horrid reviews, so they pulled it, changed the name and released it again. IIRC, Sterling did a video about it. Basically, Steam are asleep at the wheel on quality control.

 

[Aerosteam]

So I guess it's just reinforcing the fact that Steam really sucks at quality control.

 

[Bilious Green_v1legacy]

So I guess it's just reinforcing the fact that Steam really sucks at quality control.

"Caveat emptor" should be the Steam motto.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Didn't Jim Fuckin' Sterling or TotalBiscuit make a video about this a while ago? I think it had something to do with the game Desert Gunner, which was announced as new in 2013 even though it came out in like 2004.

Wasn't it all about reviews? A new store page meant entirely new reviews, meaning the negative reviews were gone. Arkham Knight did that when it re-released. New store page so all the bad reviews were gone and its 'Score' was completely reset.

 

[Something Amyss]

Perhaps its something Valve should look into, but I seriously doubt there's anything malicious to it, either from developers or from the platform itself.

If it exists on Steam, it's almost assured there's someone doing something malicious with it.

 

[kekkres]

Perhaps its something Valve should look into, but I seriously doubt there's anything malicious to it, either from developers or from the platform itself.

If it exists on Steam, it's almost assured there's someone doing something malicious with it.

I mean, the most malicious use of this would be free advertizing, the actual date a game came out doesnt really matter at all, and the consumer would get the same info they would if it was new, the only ones getting shafted would be the titles that might have otherwise been on the front page. Is it kind of skummy if it was intentional? yes, but in the grand list of Developer sins, this has to be pretty close to the bottem

 

[lacktheknack]

As someone with an almost-as-traumatic pelvic infection requiring copious painkillers, I'm on team "MOAR PAINKILLERS". And also that the client probably just accidentally goofed.

 

[FPLOON]

So, that's what that update was about concerning Out There Somewhere... Huh... *goes out to buy soundtrack* Oh wait... I already have the soundtrack as of January 18, 2016...

But seriously, the release date posted on Steam should be when it first appears on Steam on top of it's first non-Steam release if that happened either before the Steam release or before the update... I can see how this can be exploited if it's becomes more and more apparent from even the most popular game releases, but apparently due to Steam's automated quality control, it may or may not be taken care of as "right away" as we hope it will...

Other than that, since the game's on sale, it has a right to be on the front page of the Steam store... just not marked as a "new release" in the process...

 

[Something Amyss]

I mean, the most malicious use of this would be free advertizing, the actual date a game came out doesnt really matter at all, and the consumer would get the same info they would if it was new, the only ones getting shafted would be the titles that might have otherwise been on the front page. Is it kind of skummy if it was intentional? yes, but in the grand list of Developer sins, this has to be pretty close to the bottem

Well, unless your reviews get reset as previously mentioned, and you can use it to deceptively market your game as a new and different one (Jim Sterling's run across this).

 

[kekkres]

I mean, the most malicious use of this would be free advertizing, the actual date a game came out doesnt really matter at all, and the consumer would get the same info they would if it was new, the only ones getting shafted would be the titles that might have otherwise been on the front page. Is it kind of skummy if it was intentional? yes, but in the grand list of Developer sins, this has to be pretty close to the bottem

Well, unless your reviews get reset as previously mentioned, and you can use it to deceptively market your game as a new and different one (Jim Sterling's run across this).

I agree that is pretty shitty, however that is something a dev has to go far out of their way to do, they have to take the game down, and reupload the same game, usualy under a different name, or they might even just upload the game again to have it on the store twice. while there are legetamate reasons to take a game down and put it back, they are pretty few so that is almost always a bad thing. However from what i can tell thats not what happened here, when an update tricked steam (intentionaly or not) into thinking that a game was new again. Im personaly leaning on the side of it being a bug