[QUOTE]When we consider any new features or changes for Steam, our primary goal is to make customers happy. We measure that happiness by how well we are able to connect customers with great content. We’ve come to realize that in order to serve this goal we needed to move away from a small group of people here at Valve trying to predict which games would appeal to vastly different groups of customers.
Thus, over Steam’s 13-year history, we have gradually moved from a tightly curated store to a more direct distribution model. In the coming months, we are planning to take the next step in this process by removing the largest remaining obstacle to having a direct path, Greenlight. Our goal is to provide developers and publishers with a more direct publishing path and ultimately connect gamers with even more great content.
What we learned from Greenlight
After the launch of Steam Greenlight, we realized that it was a useful stepping stone for moving to a more direct distribution system, but it still left us short of that goal. Along the way, it helped us lower the barrier to publishing for many developers while delivering many great new games to Steam. There are now over 100 Greenlight titles that have made at least $1 Million each, and many of those would likely not have been published in the old, heavily curated Steam store.
These unforeseen successes made it abundantly clear that there are many different audiences on Steam, each looking for a different experience. For example, we see some people that sink thousands of hours into one or two games, while others purchase dozens of titles each year and play portions of each. Some customers are really excited about 4X strategy games, while others just buy visual novels.
Greenlight also exposed two key problems we still needed to address: improving the entire pipeline for bringing new content to Steam and finding more ways to connect customers with the types of content they wanted.
To solve these problems a lot of work was done behind the scenes, where we overhauled the developer publishing tools in Steamworks to help developers get closer to their customers. Other work has been much more visible, such as the Discovery Updates and the introduction of features like user reviews, discovery queues, user tags, streamlined refunds, and Steam Curators.[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://steamcommunity.com/games/593110/announcements/detail/558846854614253751"]http://steamcommunity.com/games/593110/announcements/detail/558846854614253751[/URL]
Hope it's not just a rebranding, but they are not talking about reducing the shovelware and asset flips.
Oh shit. This is a huge deal, especially if the direct system can [sp]increase[/sp] the ability for backers to see the game before approving it for market.
[QUOTE=Stroheim;51804595]Oh shit. This is a huge thing.[/QUOTE]
I'm extremely worried they aren't tackling what killed it in the first place.
depending on the price, it could be a good thing
greenlight wasnt working as a filter at all, unless your game is unplayable it was going to eventually make it through (and even that was arguable)
$5000 seems a bit steep though, think $500 to $1000 is more fair tbh
I really hope they do something to remove all of the unfinished garbage and shovel/abandonware at some point
I'm fucking sick of people defending it too because idiots that DO defend it act as if fraudulently getting voted in isn't a thing
[quote]We will ask new developers to complete a set of digital paperwork, personal or company verification, and tax documents similar to the process of applying for a bank account.[/quote]
Sounds like it'll still be simple enough for real developers to put their games on Steam but now those shitty asset flips will have a lot harder time getting since most people that make those probably won't want to go through the trouble of setting up a real business or practice.
And it'll also stop those games that get voted through via bullshit methods.
[QUOTE=Untouch;51804629]depending on the price, it could be a good thing
greenlight wasnt working as a filter at all, unless your game is unplayable it was going to eventually make it through (and even that was arguable)
$5000 seems a bit steep though, think $500 to $1000 is more fair tbh[/QUOTE]
They haven't decided on the actual number yet, all they've said that they asked developers and studios on what the fee should be, and got answers from 100 dollaridoos to 5000.
Interesting, wonder if this will coincide with their UI overhaul if that turns out to be true
I think this is the only time i've been happy there's going to be a fee for something. Digital Homicide wouldn't exist if they had to put up 500-1000 for each of their crappy games
also wonder if itll be 5000 or whatever per game, I have a game on steam already
[QUOTE=simkas;51804642]Sounds like it'll still be simple enough for real developers to put their games on Steam but now those shitty asset flips will have a lot harder time getting since most people that make those probably won't want to go through the trouble of setting up a real business or practice.
And it'll also stop those games that get voted through via bullshit methods.[/QUOTE]
This wasn't a thing before? No wonder there was so much shit.
[QUOTE=rndgenerator;51804670]This wasn't a thing before? No wonder there was so much shit.[/QUOTE]
greenlight is automated and based off of other entries
no votes didnt matter at all, so it was very easy to just exploit entries in a group (maybe publishers were doing this), so it wasnt really working out as a filter at all
God I fucking hope this isn't (another) red herring. They really need to get rid of the shovelware.
anything remotely near $5k would kill solo indie dev's chances like myself from breaking into the market.
Reposting my thoughts from the other thread:
[QUOTE=KingOfScience;51804624]This seems worse, honestly. It seems like it's going to promote people like digital homicide just buying prefab assets off of the unity store and submitting it. If they can afford to buy the assets, they can also probably afford the submission fee. And on the other side, it will also likely dissuade a lot of talented indie devs from submitting their high quality games, because they can't pay the submission fee of possibly 5000 bucks.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Untouch;51804683]greenlight is automated and based off of other entries
no votes didnt matter at all, so it was very easy to just exploit entries in a group (maybe publishers were doing this), so it wasnt really working out as a filter at all[/QUOTE]
Is there any more info about how that worked? I figured that most crap got through by just having a bunch of fake accounts vote for it or getting people to vote through methods, I didn't know there was a way to exploit it without even needing to get votes.
[QUOTE=simkas;51804693]Is there any more info about how that worked? I figured that most crap got through by just having a bunch of fake accounts vote for it or getting people to vote through methods, I didn't know there was a way to exploit it without even needing to get votes.[/QUOTE]
groups having ""giveaways"" where if you voted and said you voted, you were entered
$100 is way too low but 5k is way way too much, considering this would mostly be beneficial for small indie dev teams who might not have that kind of cash on hand.
Somewhere in the way of $800-$1200 would probably be a sweet spot where you're keeping the shit out since a majority of the trash is by literal children or like one or two people looking for quick cash but not too steep that small dev teams would be in trouble.
[QUOTE=General J;51804689]anything remotely near $5k would kill solo indie dev's chances like myself from breaking into the market.[/QUOTE]
I doubt it's going to be nearly that high, that was just the higher end of the spectrum of what the devs were telling them and I imagine those high numbers were coming from the much bigger indie devs.
[QUOTE=simkas;51804693]Is there any more info about how that worked? I figured that most crap got through by just having a bunch of fake accounts vote for it or getting people to vote through methods, I didn't know there was a way to exploit it without even needing to get votes.[/QUOTE]
[video=youtube;6tPLibNqNeE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tPLibNqNeE[/video]
I'd say $500 to $1000 is optimal.
Hey, this has always been what they've wanted to reach.
I seriously hope they won't push that fee beyond $1000. I mean, sure you'd see a lot less trash. But it would be at the cost of locking out a lot of potentially great developers who want to get their first game out there.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;51804733]I'd say $500 to $1000 is optimal.
Hey, this has always been what they've wanted to reach.[/QUOTE]
When did they first mention this being the end goal? Was it after the Orange Box was released? I seem to remember hearing about it around 2010.
[quote]Once set up, developers will pay a [B]recoupable[/B] application fee for each new title they wish to distribute, which is intended to decrease the noise in the submission pipeline.[/quote]
They're not keeping the money, you get it back.
[QUOTE=rndgenerator;51804670]This wasn't a thing before? No wonder there was so much shit.[/QUOTE]
the fee was about 100€ iirc
[QUOTE=ColossalSoft;51804794]They're not keeping the money, you get it back.[/QUOTE]
No it just means that devs should be able to earn that money back via sales.
[QUOTE=Pelf;51804848]No it just means that devs should be able to earn that money back via sales.[/QUOTE]
That's not what a recoupable fee is. When you're paying to start a company, they don't tell you the fee is recoupable because you'll make that money back. It's just a fee.
I hope the money is low, I definetly can't afford 5k €
What about games that got Greenlit but aren't released yet? I hope I don't have to go through that process again.
[QUOTE=Segab;51804932]What about games that got Greenlit but aren't released yet? I hope I don't have to go through that process again.[/QUOTE]
you get developer access and an appid when you get greenlit so nothing should change
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
