Valve Discusses Charging Customers Based on Popularity
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
1984? On my Steam?
Serously, this is just too much potential for wrong. Valve installing themselves as law makers and giving awards to those they favor? I don't care how good Valve supposably are, this is just stuff waiting to be exploted. And it would also provide a goldmine of explotable data if of player actions and recorded behavoir are kept. If this goes ahead, expect "get out of jail free" hacks to start appearing for sale.
Serously, this is just too much potential for wrong. Valve installing themselves as law makers and giving awards to those they favor? I don't care how good Valve supposably are, this is just stuff waiting to be exploted. And it would also provide a goldmine of explotable data if of player actions and recorded behavoir are kept. If this goes ahead, expect "get out of jail free" hacks to start appearing for sale.
It could be a good idea, but we know that the assholes this is trying to deal with are going to do everything in their power to muck up the system rather than simply stop being assholes.
A classification system that has only one feature would do poorly, that is obvious, but if Valve added more data and trained a model on it. I think the classification would work if Valve had a large number of features and a large enough known data set to train on. Though both are a bit of an effort, I think it could be successful.Abandon4093 said:
its a nice idea but i think you said it wrong and too extreme, Gabe.
how about a discount of say 10% (instead of saying that the bad people pay full price, nicer spin)? its a small enough ammount that few would not buy the game, even if paying full price. and how about $5 for voice for everyone, except it may get waved after spending a while in the community.
the extremes you are talking about ($100 for voice for bad people) is absurd, you would remove the trouble makers in theory but in practice this will only go off a user based rating system, which will and has never worked 100% and therefore flawed, leaving a broken community, filled with idiots.
how about a discount of say 10% (instead of saying that the bad people pay full price, nicer spin)? its a small enough ammount that few would not buy the game, even if paying full price. and how about $5 for voice for everyone, except it may get waved after spending a while in the community.
the extremes you are talking about ($100 for voice for bad people) is absurd, you would remove the trouble makers in theory but in practice this will only go off a user based rating system, which will and has never worked 100% and therefore flawed, leaving a broken community, filled with idiots.
I've always had the impression Gabe Newell is an idealistic dumb guy. Until now, I don't feel I'm wrong.
Much, much too easy to cheat with this system.
Secondly, what if I make people leave the server because I'm handing them their ass, and not by being mean in any way?
This legitimately happens to many of the best players all the time.
You could shoot yourself and your community in the foot unless you're very clever implementing something like this.
Secondly, what if I make people leave the server because I'm handing them their ass, and not by being mean in any way?
This legitimately happens to many of the best players all the time.
You could shoot yourself and your community in the foot unless you're very clever implementing something like this.
THe problem here is that im not much of a social gamer. So people who make friends and get along with others online get benefits? All I do is just play, I rarely even use the chat feature. I dont like how they will charge people extra for certain features just because they act like dicks. In my opinion, if you pay for the game, you should be able to do what you want.
Also, if they start giving games away, itll probably have some sort of contract that Valve owns your soul or something.
Also, if they start giving games away, itll probably have some sort of contract that Valve owns your soul or something.
So If I kill steal someone and he is pissed he will be mad and hurt me. I've been rated bad on XBL because I forgot the controls to a game for a sec. Heck I had a negative rating for me and a friend chatting about random stuff on XBL during a halo match and the person who was complaining called is so many things I can't say here and blamed us for failing (how can you do that when you had a k/d worse the person your complaining about cost the match).
I'm all for innovation. I love seeing develeopers try new things even if it doesn't always work. But I believe this idea is far too open for abuse. If they do a voting system where players thumbs-up or thumbs-down people they play with, it won't work. Friends will vote each other up, people will vote others down just to troll, people will spam forums/games asking for votes up etc.
If Valvue chooses people specifically and marks them as 'nice' players or whatever, it would pretty much be restricted to competitive players, or people who contribute a lot of things to somehow get their name noticed. meaning a majority of the community would be unnaffected and still paying full price. I guess it might encourage the community to do more :S but they already give people like that small rewards don't they?
I read a comment above about charging people full price for the games, but rewarding players with 'points' that are redeemable for things in on Steam (At least I think that's what it was, I may have misinterperated it) Which i think sounds like a better idea.
tl;dr: Theoretically it's an interesting concept. Practially it's too open to abuse.
If Valvue chooses people specifically and marks them as 'nice' players or whatever, it would pretty much be restricted to competitive players, or people who contribute a lot of things to somehow get their name noticed. meaning a majority of the community would be unnaffected and still paying full price. I guess it might encourage the community to do more :S but they already give people like that small rewards don't they?
I read a comment above about charging people full price for the games, but rewarding players with 'points' that are redeemable for things in on Steam (At least I think that's what it was, I may have misinterperated it) Which i think sounds like a better idea.
tl;dr: Theoretically it's an interesting concept. Practially it's too open to abuse.
My only problem with this system is that it could potentially allow all the trolls out there to jack up the price of my games for me, or anyone really. Seriously, think about it. If you attract the attention of the less civilized sect of gaming you could easily wind up paying "a hundred dollars extra for a voice," in TF2, or any other game really.
How does it apply to single player games, I'm curious? I happen to not play very many online games, so I still get punished for this? As a system for reward, it's fine, but as punishment it seems a bit ridiculous.