Zhukov said:
Eh, I tend to think of Steam as something like the postal service.
They deliver games from developer/publisher to me and take a cut for the service.
I don't really hold them responsible for quality control.
I wouldn't be heartbroken if they scrubbed the crap away, but it being there doesn't hurt me. I like to think I know crap when I see it (Who bought Brink brand new? Me? Never!) so I just don't buy it.
Psh, how dare you, Zhukov! How dare you not hold Valve responsible for every bad experience you've ever had with any game you purchased through their "service"! How dare you not insist Valve remove every game you personally don't enjoy. How dare you not project your own opinions onto what games other people should and shouldn't have access to.
You disgust me, sir.
DoPo said:
Yup, same here.
It's the same thing I did 5 years ago. And 10 years ago. And 15 years ago. That'd be, roughly, before Steam was "flooded" with games, before Steam was a big thing and before Steam was even a thing. Shit games have existed before Steam, and will continue existing regardless of it. With that in mind, I've always taken care. Steam, if anything, makes it dead simple to see what's worth your time (and/or money) or not. Assuming you spend between 30 seconds and 2 minutes or so.
Two whole minutes?! My gods, DoPo, that's practically an eternity for today's on-the-go gamer!
If we can't tell what games to throw all of our money at by just glancing at the Steam Storefront, then there is something fundamentally broken with the entire system. Steam should only house games we love, not those we hate.
What's that? Not everyone enjoys the same games? Poppycock. Don't spread such lies.
Maximum Bert said:
Skins are a thing, but I'm not sure of the best place to find 'em. I don't use them.
Though, I do agree, somewhat. I like
most of the interface, but aspects of it could be improved. (especially the Overlay)
and the fact my games are tied to a client on PC.
Unless the game uses Steamworks, it's not
actually tied to the client. Quite a lot of games on Steam can be launched without Steam running.
Here's a (mostly) up-to-date comprehensive list - http://steam.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_DRM-free_games
bdeamon said:
Don't forget, Valve still has investors to keep impressed
They're a privately owned company. They are not publicly traded.
They have no investors, save for those actively employed within the company. (i.e. coders, engineers, artists, etc)
AccursedTheory said:
A wipe? No.
A guy hired just to comb through Greenlight and trim some of the worst garbage, from asset repackaging to obviously fraudulent games to renamed titles that have already been booted? Probably would be a good idea.
I think the worst problem right now isn't that crap games make it through, but that crap games have pushed a lot of people away from Greenlight, making it harder for the interesting stuff to get through. It seems like the only stuff that makes it these days are the ones being spammed through with bots/idiot mobs, or the rare game that gets a 'celebrity' (Youtuber) champion to help push it through. I think more people would be willing to participate in Greenlight, and thus improve it, if Steam put just a little bit of effort into ensuring that the gems were a bit easier to spot then they are now.
Bingo. However, you still run into the possibility of them 'trimming' a game they deem 'of too poor quality' that the users actually want to play.
It's a catch-22. Do you open the gates and allow the good
and the bad in and risk alienating those users who demand only the games they enjoy being present, or do you attempt to filter out the 'bad' and run the risk of alienating the users who wanted to play those games?
It's not an enviable position. Still, I do wish Valve would be more...prudent with how they deal with blatantly fraudulent game uploads. They do 'deal with' those sorts of games, but I do wish they'd be a bit more expedient about it.
