Jimquisition: Salt Of The Earth - A Steam Fail Story

Alterego-X

New member
Nov 22, 2009
611
0
0
Thanatos2k said:
You don't HAVE to accept the nuclear waste and just throw up your hands and say "It has to go somewhere, we might as well take it!"

You can say "Not here in our town. Take it over to Originville."
But if some of the nuclear waste can give you superpowers, and there is no simple way to filter that one in advance, then you are still better off letting in the whole package and take control of the whole area, dumps and parks and all, then giving Originville a chance to gain superpowers.
 

orangeapples

New member
Aug 1, 2009
1,836
0
0
Early access should only be in the hands of the most hardcore Steam Users.
Have used Steam for 5 years
Written reviews for games and the reviews are thought out and upvoted by the community.

After 50 of these Steam hardcore users say the game is good enough then the game can be put up for sale as Beta access.

Basically what I'm saying is that Steam would turn select members of the Steam community into Alpha testers.

Also, if an Alpha tester is found to be approving games that the larger community feels is crap and has a record of doing this a lot they lose Alpha testing status.

They do not pay into the alpha, but for being an alpha tester they get 25% off of beta access or something.

There should also be a limit on how much developers can charge for early access. I want to say 50% of the final release price. There is no reason why people should pay full price for an incomplete game. When the game comes out, the beta testers pay 50% of what they paid to upgrade to the final version. Let me give a few example:

Final price of the game: $20
Beta access: $10, upgrade to full release: $5, total: $15
Alpha testers
Beta access: $7:50, upgrade to full release: $3.75, total: $11.25

Final price of the game: $30
Beta access: $15, upgrade to full release: $7.50, total: $22.50
Alpha testers
Beta access: $11.25, upgrade to full release: $5.63, total: $16.88

An indie dev would have to have pretty big balls to expect to charge $60 for the game.

Because of these reductions in price, Steam would need to limit access to the Beta. Lets say, 500 people. If the developer wants more than 500, they have to prove how quickly they ran out of 500, and there is a lot of demand for the game: positive feedback, user videos, etc. and then they get 1000 more. If that still isn't enough then they get bumped up to unlimited.

This would still let the community be in charge of the whole crowd sourcing thing, but with more controls.
 

Alterego-X

New member
Nov 22, 2009
611
0
0
NuclearKangaroo said:
steam should at least take away the dev's ability to delete threads and posts
The best solution to let them have the ability to delete comments, but in a way that users can still see them if specifically chosen. Works against NSFW and most types of spam, but still gives people an option to reveal foul play.
 

PG

New member
Apr 2, 2008
54
0
0
Abnaxis said:
That's the thing though--the whole point of crowd-sourcing is that the crowd is supposed to make that decision, not Valve. Valve just needs to give gamers the proper tools to do our thing.

If the customers don't want anything other than instant gratification, with no interest in providing constructive criticism...then that's just how it is. Pre-order sales have existed for a long time, and customers get even less for them, so clearly it's a thing people want.
No it isn't, that's the point of Greenlight, a completely separate system. And people want to throw shit at old ladies for a laugh, doesn't mean we should let them.
 

Kitsune Hunter

What a beautiful Duwang!
Dec 18, 2011
1,072
0
0
I don't know whether I should laugh or be disgusted at the way Muxwell is behaving, he's acting like a child who got caught stealing from the biscuit tin before dinner. I just hope when the whole thing comes out, the critics including yourself Jim come down hard and show no mercy
 

Hutzpah Chicken

New member
Mar 13, 2012
344
0
0
I would not say that Steam is failing as a platform. Sure, they have a large sum of games that aren't worth purchasing (by the way, if one finds a terrible game, one does not need to purchase it) but Steam still has a slew of great games within their catalog. Steam is not going to fail because it is an open platform. It may lose some people who are foolish enough to continuously buy sub-par games, but that damage is no where near critical.

The very openness of Steam is a factor to its popularity. Quality control is something that should be left to the players. All one needs to do is see how others react to a game and proceed at their own risk. With an office of Quality Control, or however a company branded quality control organization is branded, the decision to make a game available is subject to a small group of people. The chances that this group of controllers share the same views as the larger Steam public is very slim. The rating system within Steam, the incredibly large community that reviews games, and the judgement of each and every one of us is a far superior method.

Remember, if there is a game that doesn't look good or is overpriced, don't buy it. If you do buy something that is terrible, then learn from your mistake and move on.
 

Abnaxis

New member
Aug 15, 2008
100
0
0
jehk said:
That could work. I'm not sure how I feel it tbh. My thing is about drawing a distinction between functionally complete but shitty games versus broken incomplete games.

I don't want anyone dictating what's a shitty or good game to me. Frankly, there's a number of games that most people would find shitty that I love.
Oh no, I don't think anyone should decide whether it's shitty--the decision is, whether it's used. Again with the shirt metaphor, if I buy a shirt--wear it for a day, get it dirty and stretch it out--and try to take it back, I think it's reasonable for the vendor to say "Hell no," because I already got what I paid for (though plenty of stores will still take it back even then). OTOH, if I buy a shirt, take it home, and find out the pants I wanted to wear with it clash, it's fair game because I never really "used" the shirt

By the same token, if I buy a Guise of the Wolf, boot it up, and find it an ugly mess with no redeeming factors after five minutes of play, I should be able to give it back. however, if I buy Mass Effect 3, play through the whole campaign, then get pissed off by the ending, I got all the hours of play that I paid for, even if I consider the product shitty.

Quality isn't really of issue, whether you've "used up" the product is. The problem with that is, hours of gameplay vary so wildly from title to title, so it's not easy to come up with a standard for saying "alright, you've gotten enough entertainment, now you're stuck with it."
 

Mydnyght

New member
Feb 17, 2010
714
0
0
GonzoGamer said:
I think I shall visit the Troll Tavern for a good laugh. Anyone else?
I just did. Sure takes up a good portion of your day.

So anyway, with all that shit piling up there, it's only a matter of time before Muxwell finally gives up and caves in. He can't hide behind that meme avatar forever, can he?

Also saw Sterling's "early access squirt" playthrough. My condolences to him for putting up with that garbage, from the lousy bullet visuals to the really loud and out-of-place motor revving and metal clanging... to that generic sky picture that gets mirror-imaged below the game map's plane.

Really.... $19.99 for... that? And how Muxwell is handling all this criticism.... I'd hate to think how he'd act if he ever came to this site.
 

NortherWolf

New member
Jun 26, 2008
235
0
0
So, let me get this straight. One asshole releases a shitty product. The fault is his, but the real villain here, the mastermind of madness, the dictator of darkness...Is VALVE! They(or , Steam as they've apparently renamed themselves) are the true blight upon PC gaming! They, as the owners of a gaming store should enforce draconian rules so as not to sully the genepool of the master race!

Why, of course this is so, just the other day I tossed excrement at a Game Shop employee for daring to carry a bad game. It is my duty as a Member of the PC Master Gaming Race after all. We cannot allow free choice...

Shame about you Jim, thought you had some good stuff for a while, but your "STEAM NEEDS TO ANSWER!" stuff is a bit tiresome. Steam is a damn store, the only thing Valve need to answer is refunds and keeping obvious scams gone. But people here seem to want for steam to crash so they can roll around in their own smug filth and go "Told you so! Filthy pleb!"
 

Glaice

New member
Mar 18, 2013
577
0
0
This game and others (Guise of the Wolf, Day One: Garry's Incident, etc) are clear examples why Early Access and Greenlight need to be fixed.
 

jehk

New member
Mar 5, 2012
384
0
0
Abnaxis said:
jehk said:
That could work. I'm not sure how I feel it tbh. My thing is about drawing a distinction between functionally complete but shitty games versus broken incomplete games.

I don't want anyone dictating what's a shitty or good game to me. Frankly, there's a number of games that most people would find shitty that I love.
Oh no, I don't think anyone should decide whether it's shitty--the decision is, whether it's used. Again with the shirt metaphor, if I buy a shirt--wear it for a day, get it dirty and stretch it out--and try to take it back, I think it's reasonable for the vendor to say "Hell no," because I already got what I paid for (though plenty of stores will still take it back even then). OTOH, if I buy a shirt, take it home, and find out the pants I wanted to wear with it clash, it's fair game because I never really "used" the shirt

By the same token, if I buy a Guise of the Wolf, boot it up, and find it an ugly mess with no redeeming factors after five minutes of play, I should be able to give it back. however, if I buy Mass Effect 3, play through the whole campaign, then get pissed off by the ending, I got all the hours of play that I paid for, even if I consider the product shitty.

Quality isn't really of issue, whether you've "used up" the product is. The problem with that is, hours of gameplay vary so wildly from title to title, so it's not easy to come up with a standard for saying "alright, you've gotten enough entertainment, now you're stuck with it."
That's a pretty good argument tbh. I think a standard could be found. Hell, a half hour with a game is usually enough for me.

I don't think it would ever fly though. Too many bigger corporations would lose their shit. Steam's basically giving their customers a mini demo. Extra Credits did a episode on that.
 

Thanatos2k

New member
Aug 12, 2013
820
0
0
Oh lord, I saw a thread on the Steam board where Muxwell admits that he couldn't charge more than $20 for an early access game.

He's basically admitting the entire game is a scam and he'd have scammed people for more money if he could.
 

Deadagent

New member
Sep 14, 2011
62
0
0
Mr_Terrific said:
I'm pretty sure that guy didn't read any of what you said to begin with
I did, but his wording was such that it definetly left that possibility there so I asked for clarification

and I find it comical that he somehow looped Sarkeesian into this.
I was only pointing out that Jim is perfectly fine calling out this Muxwell for his scam, but will defend another

He says "it's pc and there is no quality control on an open platform and that's ok" but then goes on about a woman that did a kickstarter to produce videos based on the works she's already started but that is somehow wrong because there's, apparently, quality control on the internet.
I never said that internet has quality control nor did I imply so either. Strawmanning ain't getting you anywhere. Also I am saying that open platforms tend to have more crap on them by default, thats just how it is. Valve specifically want's to open up steam for everyone, and if thats their goal then inevitably they will end up with more crap as well. Now trying to get that crap to sink to the bottom as quickly as possible is another matter entierly. But my point stands, steam dosen't need quality control. At least not traditional quality control

And the kicker is pretending like there was nothing but civil conversations and arguments against her views and then brushes off the hundreds of rape threats and terrible behavior like defacing web pages or calling her a scammer which really isn't the case. I find it shameful that there are people out there that are more offended by her ideas than the fools that threatened her with rape and murder.
I never brushed off the death threats, I fully acknowledged them, you on the other hand brush off everyone critising her as a troll. Civil discussion was happening and I even sent her a perfectly polite e-mail asking about what shes using the money for, unsuprisingly she still hasn't responded. Also death and rape threats are not a rare occurence at all. Anyone with an opinion on the internet has gotten their fair share of hatred, male or female. And yes that includes death and rape threats for men too. Why are you pretending that this is an issue of gender instead of being one of simple disagreement.

NortherWolf said:
So, let me get this straight. One asshole releases a shitty product. The fault is his, but the real villain here, the mastermind of madness, the dictator of darkness...Is VALVE! They(or , Steam as they've apparently renamed themselves) are the true blight upon PC gaming! They, as the owners of a gaming store should enforce draconian rules so as not to sully the genepool of the master race!

Why, of course this is so, just the other day I tossed excrement at a Game Shop employee for daring to carry a bad game. It is my duty as a Member of the PC Master Gaming Race after all. We cannot allow free choice...

Shame about you Jim, thought you had some good stuff for a while, but your "STEAM NEEDS TO ANSWER!" stuff is a bit tiresome. Steam is a damn store, the only thing Valve need to answer is refunds and keeping obvious scams gone. But people here seem to want for steam to crash so they can roll around in their own smug filth and go "Told you so! Filthy pleb!"
Thank you, my tought's exactly
 

PG

New member
Apr 2, 2008
54
0
0
NortherWolf said:
So, let me get this straight. One asshole releases a shitty product. The fault is his, but the real villain here, the mastermind of madness, the dictator of darkness...Is VALVE! They(or , Steam as they've apparently renamed themselves) are the true blight upon PC gaming! They, as the owners of a gaming store should enforce draconian rules so as not to sully the genepool of the master race!

Why, of course this is so, just the other day I tossed excrement at a Game Shop employee for daring to carry a bad game. It is my duty as a Member of the PC Master Gaming Race after all. We cannot allow free choice...

Shame about you Jim, thought you had some good stuff for a while, but your "STEAM NEEDS TO ANSWER!" stuff is a bit tiresome. Steam is a damn store, the only thing Valve need to answer is refunds and keeping obvious scams gone. But people here seem to want for steam to crash so they can roll around in their own smug filth and go "Told you so! Filthy pleb!"
I don't think anyone's saying that Valve is somehow being malicious here, just that their execution of Early Access has some pretty big holes that need to be patched up if it's going to continue. I don't think it would take the whole service down with it, it'd just get marginalised and everyone would adapt and ignore it, but Valve should probably aspire to better than that.
And treating it as some libertarian bastion of the industry isn't healthy either (not directed at you, just saying in general).
 

Pete_alreadyinuse

New member
Mar 27, 2014
3
0
0
I wonder what can be done about suppressing criticism by moderation. Maybe take the option to entirely delete a Post away, just collapse it instead and give users the option to read it anyway. That way you can't completely hide unwelcome opinions. However it wouldn't work well against massive amounts of spam. Moderation coming directly from steam would of course be a better option, but they would need to hire a massive moderation staff.

(I do not particularly care about a shitty overpriced early A game since preventing that simply is not what I want from a shop. I do prefer being able to get what I want over stream without having to hope that it got through their process. I don't expect amazon to not have shitty books either, I just expect the books to be physically intact and complete. And if they actively recommend something to me or advertise it I hope they do some QA. However giving a short time to try and return games again would be a nice feature.)
 

NuclearKangaroo

New member
Feb 7, 2014
1,919
0
0
Alterego-X said:
NuclearKangaroo said:
steam should at least take away the dev's ability to delete threads and posts
The best solution to let them have the ability to delete comments, but in a way that users can still see them if specifically chosen. Works against NSFW and most types of spam, but still gives people an option to reveal foul play.
well it would be atleast better than the current solution
 

softclocks

New member
Mar 7, 2014
221
0
0
NortherWolf said:
So, let me get this straight. One asshole releases a shitty product. The fault is his, but the real villain here, the mastermind of madness, the dictator of darkness...Is VALVE! They(or , Steam as they've apparently renamed themselves) are the true blight upon PC gaming! They, as the owners of a gaming store should enforce draconian rules so as not to sully the genepool of the master race!

Why, of course this is so, just the other day I tossed excrement at a Game Shop employee for daring to carry a bad game. It is my duty as a Member of the PC Master Gaming Race after all. We cannot allow free choice...

Shame about you Jim, thought you had some good stuff for a while, but your "STEAM NEEDS TO ANSWER!" stuff is a bit tiresome. Steam is a damn store, the only thing Valve need to answer is refunds and keeping obvious scams gone. But people here seem to want for steam to crash so they can roll around in their own smug filth and go "Told you so! Filthy pleb!"
Exactly what I was thinking.

Steam should certainly try to pick up on obvious lies and games that aren't playable (like the EA ones that were shut down), but this just seems like a bad game. Is he upset because people are going to be looking to him for reviews now? So that he might have to start doing his job? : 3

Game reviewers have been a joke the last 4-5 years now. They should be grateful someone's making them useful again.
 

shrekfan246

Not actually a Japanese pop star
May 26, 2011
6,374
0
0
Alterego-X said:
Whatever. If not for Steam, that guy could still do the exact same thing on his own website. PC gaming is an open platform.

It makes much more sense for Steam to grab for all of it, than to be a small walled garden somewhere inside of it. More like an universal marketplace for the whole platform, than a brand that's pre-filtered products you "trust".

If they would try to appeal to quality control and a reliable lineup, they would accidentally filter out at least SOME potential gems, and that would give an opportunity to other webstores to gain a foothold by gathering those. It makes more sense to let in ALL the developers, good ones and shitty ones, and let others build inner recommedation lists and branded lineups inside the platform they own.
That's exactly how the video game crash of '83 happened, you realize.

There was zero regulation on what was flooding the marketplace, leading to endless numbers of terrible clones and unfinished shovelware being pushed out and completely saturating the market, bursting the bubble and causing people to basically stop buying games because they couldn't put any faith that what they were buying was actually going to be good.

The exact same thing is now currently happening with Steam.

The problem with the complete lack of oversight put on Greenlight and Early Access is that consumers will support things based on an idea rather than any hard evidence. In an ideal world, that would be fine. But we don't live in an ideal world. When you combine that with the fact that Steam allows publishers to dump their entire back catalogs onto its service and how many publishers have recently taken to shoving mobile ports and Facebook or Flash-esque games onto the platform, it all coalesces into a horrifying congealed mess that makes Steam impossible to navigate and simply hides and takes publicity away from the games and developers who actually deserve it.

Or to put it more simply, it's just bad business for Steam to allow this. PC gaming is an open platform, but Steam is the biggest "storefront" you'll find on it. For the longest time, many games simply would not be successful on the PC if they weren't released on Steam. By allowing anything and everything to be released on Steam now, people will be burnt out on trying to sift through the sheer amount of complete crap found every day on the front page, and eventually they'll stop bothering. I know, it's already started happening to me. The weekly deals and daily releases on Steam are almost uniformly terrible and not worth even looking at, and at a point it becomes no longer worth trying to cycle through all of the crap to find the good stuff.

EDIT: And it has been confirmed by many indie developers in the past that being on the front page of Steam matters. It creates a huge spike in sales, and when their game moves off the front page they get a dramatic drop in overall sales until it gets discounted.