Slashdot Mirror


Valve Explains How It Decides Who's a 'Straight Up Troll' Publishing Video Games On Steam (vice.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: Wednesday, Valve, the company that operates the huge online video game store Steam, shared more details about how it plans to control and moderate the ever-increasing number of games published on its platform. In the post published Wednesday, Valve shared more details about how it determines what it considers "outright trolling." "It is vague and we'll tell you why," Valve wrote. "You're a denizen of the internet so you know that trolls come in all forms. On Steam, some are simply trying to rile people up with something we call 'a game shaped object' (ie: a crudely made piece of software that technically and just barely passes our bar as a functioning video game but isn't what 99.9% of folks would say is "good.")

Valve goes on to explain that some trolls are trying to scam folks out of their Steam inventory items (digital items that can be traded for real money), while others are trying to generate a small amount of money through a variety of schemes that have to do with how developers use keys to unlock Steam games, while others are trying to "incite and sow discord." "Trolls are figuring out new ways to be loathsome as we write this," Valve said. "But the thing these folks have in common is that they aren't actually interested in good faith efforts to make and sell games to you or anyone. When a developer's motives aren't that, they're probably a troll." One interesting observation Valve shares in the blog post is that it rarely bans individual games from Steam, and more often bans developers and/or publishers entirely. [...] Valve said that its review process for determining that something may be a "troll game" is a "deep assessment" that involves investigating who the developer is, what they've done in the past, their behavior on Steam as a developer, as a customer, their banking information, developers they associate with, and more.

77 comments

  1. Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by west · · Score: 4, Interesting

    98% of the total garbage disappears (as well as a few percent of the good). Of course "not terribly good games" will still appear, but it gets rid of the absolute garbage.

    Or if people are appalled at paying to appear on Steam, allow spending $10K for a Steam "check-mark of marketing", and allow users to filter to show only check-marked games.

    1. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they're willing to go through the effort of making a semi-functional game then the $5 per listing won't stop them. The amount of time it takes just to get a game listed on steam is probably > $5 worth of time.

    2. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think you may be off by a couple dollars.

    3. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Or you could grow up and just ignore what *you* consider to be "garbage" and stop trying to limit choices for other people.

    4. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course! Money is the answer! It's not like people would ever be paid to troll and just add $5K to their asking price!

      Oh, right, you didn't pay the $5K "listing fee" to Slashdot, so you must be a troll.

    5. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Oh yep. 5k should do it. Facepalm.

    6. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Choices"???

      Thirty-five (35) games were released on Steam today alone.

      Go fuck yourself.

    7. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      And if you had it your way, only a couple that you like would have been. Eat shit, little boy.

    8. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by mentil · · Score: 1

      Will never happen. There are way too many games like PUBG that would've never become Steam hits if they had such a policy. It only needs to be enough to make the trolls miss it/lose out with their scams; $100 would likely be enough.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    9. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by Escogido · · Score: 2

      Either would shut a lot of starting indie games developers out of the system, thus preventing said developers and the gaming industry in general from making future hits. Basically, all new games are either essentially reskins/clones of existing games, or trying new mechanics and/or interactions, and sometimes (rarely) stories and characters. Given the typical indie level production values are garbage, in general, only the ones that try to innovate actually do have some value for the industry. However, first, there's no good formal way to distinguish between the two (and for the last 5 years or so Steam no longer wants to be the judge). And second, since vast majority of games belong to the first category, the ones who do innovate would be scared off and not even bother with the platform. So I'm with Valve on this one - better to pick up bad apples one by one but still let the crowd spot the few jewels in the torrent of junk games.

    10. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Of course! Money is the answer! It's not like people would ever be paid to troll and just add $5K to their asking price!

      Oh, right, you didn't pay the $5K "listing fee" to Slashdot, so you must be a troll.

      No one has claimed that it's a complete solution. Even if it just removes 10% of the garbage, we're still 10% better off.

      And, you could perhaps also get a $5k cashback when the game has reached $50k sales (or $25k, or $10k ...).

      /Not a steam user

    11. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will never happen. There are way too many games like PUBG that would've never become Steam hits if they had such a policy. It only needs to be enough to make the trolls miss it/lose out with their scams; $100 would likely be enough.

      As I wrote in another post. Give a cashback of the amount when the game has reached a certain level of sales.

      Captcha: exposure

    12. Re: Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, it's almost like there is no "Slashdot", but opinions of different individuals, which might contradict each other.

      Just sayin'

    13. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      aww did you get hurt when people on slashdot said bad things about apple. awwwwww

    14. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by butzwonker · · Score: 1

      Right, make it harder for indie developers to compete and make it easier for EA Games to compete. Brilliant. /s

    15. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by butzwonker · · Score: 1

      Yes, the $100 yearly fee plus recurring hardware costs are the reason why I stopped developing shareware for Apple. (Technically, I'm still selling it, but not on the app store so discovery is down to zero.)

    16. Re: Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This guy publishes shit games on steam.

    17. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

      It's already $100, the bar is too low, $100 hasn't stopped asset flips and achievement spam. I looked last night though and there does seem to be an improvement in new release quality.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    18. Re: Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be overly redundant.

    19. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by fibonacci8 · · Score: 1

      So adjust the bar, make the median quality game EA produces the "troll" standard. EA producing crap should not be exempted.

      --
      Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
    20. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one has claimed that it's a complete solution.

      No, the GP just said it'd remove 98% of the garbage. I think that's optimistic.

      Even if it just removes 10% of the garbage, we're still 10% better off.

      Are we really? Because while it might remove 10% of the garbage, it might remove 20% of the good but unprofitable games. 7,672 games were released on Steam in 2017. Even presuming 90% are garbage (Sturgeon's Law), we're left with 767 games. If 10% are very popular (76) that leaves 700 that aren't. How many people on average buy each of those games? I know I don't even buy 76 games/year (not count ones in cheap bundles).

      And, you could perhaps also get a $5k cashback when the game has reached $50k sales (or $25k, or $10k ...).

      Or give 100% cashback for the first $7.124k (so they get the $5k back and are actually paid their 30% for the sales) and then run at the normal rate. I also considered this, but even that's not really enough. For large game makers, they probably will make back the $5k in long-term sales (ie, almost a certain thing no matter how badly the game performs) where most of their development cost will be paid in the first week. For smaller game makers, $5k/game is possibly so prohibitively expensive they'll never release more than a couple games and just give up because the listing burden is just too high.

      Meanwhile, campaigns in the US have ungodly sums of money and using games as a way to funnel money around (can you say money laundering for criminal organization?) and attack opponents, even with absolute crap games, is still cheap stuff, especially if a lot of other "garbage" games aren't listed. The barrier to entry just makes it better for any group that wants to spam which doesn't really need to recoup the money directly, and sadly that describes most companies.

      So, political and commercial ads will replace simply crap games and we exclude smaller studios that make good games but aren't profitable. Overall, it's not an actual solution.

    21. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hahahaha that other guy has a point. You're one of these shit asset flippers, aren't you? Please, please go and fucking kill yourself.

    22. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by west · · Score: 1

      Let's be honest, junk games (and not "bad" games that failed to hit the mark - truly "junk" games) have a cost to everyone involved.

      • They are at tax on you as Steam consumers as they force them to spend their valuable time sifting through them to get to something that has some hope of actually being pleasing.
      • They are a tax on other indie developers as they push people away from actually actually engaging in personal discovery. Instead developers now have to spend tens or hundreds of thousands marketing their games through conventions, media buys, etc. Steam should be one of the few ways that you can simply "build a better mousetrap" and have the world "beat a path to your door". Instead, tons of junk games by people who are essentially buying no investment lottery tickets have poisoned the well for developers.

      Of course, how to do we tell if a game is junk? Do we have an outside team do curation? Well, serious curation takes a ton of money, so let's take a simple route - does the developer herself believe in the game? And how does the developer prove it? After all, we have no idea if this is the developer's life's work, on something they spent 2 hours on.

      Well, the obvious way is to force the developer to make a serious commitment. $5K is less than two weeks salary for any competent programmer.

      I'll claim that there are very few developers who have committed the resources to make a serious game (which is likely to be tens of thousands of dollars of their time), who cannot find the resources to commit $5K.

      I'll also claim that the *vast* majority of people who are spending a few hours to churn out a game and put it on steam are not willing to back their joke with real dollars. They don't care the damage that they cause the Steam eco-system. If they're not personally paying the price of throwing garbage into the town square, why should they?. It's the tragedy of the commons.

      Of course, the reality is a little bit more blurry. There are real developers who truly don't have $5K to spend, and there is no doubt some deluded soul that thinks they've developed Half-Life 4 in a day and a half and are willing to back that delusion with real money.

      But I honestly feel that the easy ability to publish junk that's indistinguishable from Indie games worth examining is killing the Indie landscape altogether. The listing fee is an idea to try and *save* Indie development. The question is not "should we force developers to come up with $5K to be taken seriously?". It's "should we force them to come up with $5K or do we force them to spend 10 times that much on marketing just to be taken seriously".

    23. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by west · · Score: 1

      Steam is a town square of sorts. And if enough people are throwing their garbage in the town square because it costs them nothing to do so, then people will stop going to the town square to discover new developers. Instead, they'll rely on big names, and on indie developers that can spend the tens of thousands necessary to get media attention.

      EA and the rest of the big names are happy to see Steam become a dumping ground. No-one will ever have trouble finding *their* games.

      It's the serious indie developers that need to be rescued. And I'm pretty certain that most of the serious ones (who have probably spent hundreds of thousands on their project) would be willing to pay a lot to have a Steam store where customers might actually be able to discover their games simply through the store itself.

    24. Re:Just charge a $5K "listing fee" by west · · Score: 1

      > Yes, the $100 yearly fee plus recurring hardware costs are the reason why I stopped developing shareware for Apple.

      And that's reasonable response. There's no doubt listing fees would exclude a few "worthy" developers. But the question is how many? And how many compared to the number of junk developers?

      After all, it's *critical* to understand that published game has a cost to consumers (makes it harder for them to find things) and cost to other developers (makes it harder for potential customers for their games to find them).

      At some point, it's simply a matter of making developers pay the cost that they used to be able to foist off on the rest of the eco-system.

  2. Best New Feature by Kunedog · · Score: 1

    A second set of changes was focused on improving how you can ignore things you're not interested in. In the past you've been able to ignore individual games or product types (like VR, or Early Access) you didn't want to see again. But now we've added ways for you to also easily ignore individual developers, publishers, and curators.

    Imagine how much easier browsing Netflix would be if you could filter out whole franchises and showrunners. Of course, that might make it obvious how little on Netflix actually interests you.

    1. Re:Best New Feature by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Then they could charge a fee to shows that don't want to be filtered by you

    2. Re:Best New Feature by Archfeld · · Score: 1

      Sounds like Amazon, and the Kindle Library. No matter what you search, every 7th listing is a 'Sponsored' listing, and even if you specify a particular author or absolute title, you always get 10 or 12 additional 'bonus' items listed.

      --
      errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
  3. Early Access Garbage and abandonment by shendar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How about if a developer starts a EA Project and walks away (takes forever with no progress) they are banned from further EA? How about if they are banned from the store entirely?

    1. Re: Early Access Garbage and abandonment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Iâ(TM)ll bet developers tired of their spam would be perfectly fine being banned

    2. Re:Early Access Garbage and abandonment by AC-x · · Score: 2

      I'm sure the type of developer who does that would simply abandon their old label and create a new developer account to carry on.

    3. Re:Early Access Garbage and abandonment by mentil · · Score: 1

      "I'm sick of development, so here's version '1.0'."
      Also define 'forever' in a timescale that doesn't apply to Notch, Rockstar or Valve.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    4. Re:Early Access Garbage and abandonment by Calydor · · Score: 1

      Wait. I see what you did there.

      You mentioned three developers.

      CONFIRMED: Half-Life 3 is being produced by Notch and Rockstar!

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    5. Re:Early Access Garbage and abandonment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And get sussed out and banned again, this time without their money and likely legal action for fraud.

    6. Re:Early Access Garbage and abandonment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CONFIRMED: Half-Life 3 is being produced by Notch and Rockstar!

      Well, that would be entertaining.

      Half-Life 3 brings Gordon into a fully destructable (and reconstructable) world rife with gang conflict, extremely odd police threat escalation, and semi-passive aliens who hate being looked at.

  4. Great Yet Another Meaning For Troll by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

    Already May well be the most overloaded operator in the English language. As it seems to mean anything anyone anywhere takes objection to, or otherwise makes them feel bad.

    1. Re: Great Yet Another Meaning For Troll by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      The troll in me wants to say that "nazi" probably has "troll" beat ;)

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    2. Re:Great Yet Another Meaning For Troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's it for that troll game where you could rummage fjords, forests, mountains, lakes and cities of Fennoscandia, causing havoc and mayhem while protesting the end of a way of life caused by the expansion of developed areas. Also known as Battlefield "the nature strikes back" 6.

    3. Re: Great Yet Another Meaning For Troll by Falos · · Score: 1

      I'm partial to the number of puppeteers who have crammed their hand up Hacker's ass and doomed the population to eternal ambiguity. Special thanks go to lobbyists, clickbait, talking heads, etc.

  5. "developers they associate with" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Better hope you're on the right side of history so your game-shaped-object is declared art. That's where we are now.

  6. Re:OMG FREE SPEECH THO by tepples · · Score: 1

    Furthermore, unlike console and mobile platforms, Steam has very little switching cost. An end user can always just up and switch to Itch or Origin or GOG or Humble or wherever else.

  7. Steam wants the garbage by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    because there's no accounting for taste, and if you took away garbage there'd be no Goat Simulator. As the saying goes, one man's trash is another's treasure.

    Plus, a lot of good devs get their start making trash.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Steam wants the garbage by AC-x · · Score: 4, Informative

      because there's no accounting for taste, and if you took away garbage there'd be no Goat Simulator. As the saying goes, one man's trash is another's treasure.

      I'm sorry, but anyone with a functioning brain would see that infinitely more effort and polish has been put in to games like Goat Simulator than any of those garbage "asset flips" that litter the Steam store.

      Yes the difference between a good and bad game is subjective, but broken zero effort trash is much easier to agree on...

    2. Re:Steam wants the garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a moron.

  8. Steam's progression by Luckyo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So Steam started as "shove it down their throats" Counter Strike 1.6 launcher. Evolved into highly curated game store over about a decade.

    Then decided to suddenly drop all curation and allow anything and everything on the platform. Got flooded with garbage. Added weird "meta gaming" shit like trading cards. Got games that literally existed just to allow people to get cards. Allowed some trading and other meta gaming of the system. Even got pressured by some SJW types to drop politically controversial games like Hatred and even had their recent porn games brouhaha.

    And now, they're doing this. I guess there's just too much pressure from all directions, and they really just decided that no, we're not bending to various pressure groups, and instead just making sure that asset flips and such are not on the store. If true, good on them.

    1. Re:Steam's progression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I always knew you were one of those porn game anime jackoff faggots. Always.

    2. Re:Steam's progression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Implying that you aren't. How cute.

    3. Re:Steam's progression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      What is this BS about SJW getting them to drop Hatred? Last I checked it was right here on Steam:
      https://store.steampowered.com/agecheck/app/341940/

    4. Re: Steam's progression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't Always a brand of tampon?

    5. Re:Steam's progression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hes a conservative, dont interrupt his victimhood with actual facts. It just pisses them off even more.

    6. Re:Steam's progression by Luckyo · · Score: 2

      "Last you checked" being the key part. Gabe Newell himself personally apologised for its removal and it was reinstated.

    7. Re:Steam's progression by Luckyo · · Score: 0

      Facts tend to be on "conservative" side, or more specifically on the side that isn't crazed puritans who just can't handle other people having fun in a way they don't approve of:

      https://www.gamespot.com/artic...

      Which nowadays is predominantly the far left progressive movement, who's activists carry the moniker SJWs.

    8. Re:Steam's progression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This was actually a thing that happened.

      https://www.themarysue.com/steam-greenlight-hatred/
      https://www.cinemablend.com/games/Why-Hatred-Was-Removed-From-Steam-Greenlight-68961.html
      http://nerdreactor.com/2014/12/15/hatred-steam-ban/

      Gabe Newell himself stepped in to unban the game.
      https://metro.co.uk/2014/12/15/mass-murder-sim-hatred-banned-from-steam-4988684/

      Capcha: murders

    9. Re:Steam's progression by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      I guess getting caught peddling a lie in such a brazen way with no way out caused you to instantly shift topics to "but it wasn't good!"

    10. Re:Steam's progression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are the one peddling the half truth lie. Hatred is currently on Steam. Go check it out.

    11. Re:Steam's progression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Even got pressured by some SJW types to drop politically controversial games like Hatred and even had their recent porn games brouhaha."

      You forgot to mention it is no longer dropped- my guess would be to push your political perspective.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-truth

      Reason I knew this is I recently picked up Hatred on sale. Mediocre game but can be fun in short bursts for how over the top it is and shock value. Similar to original Postal in this regard. Your misleading statement and only telling partial information to push a political agenda does seems very "conservative" these days indeed..

    12. Re:Steam's progression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It WAS dropped. You're trying to lie your way out of that.

      The fact that they eventually said this is BS and reinstated it isn't any credit to the SJW freaks who pulled it down and therefore is irrelevant.

      Quit trying to lie for them.

    13. Re:Steam's progression by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      The mention "I forgot" is literally there, couple of posts above. Which you conveniently missed in your spinning of yet another brazen lie. I think we're done talking.

    14. Re:Steam's progression by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      What makes you think he's lying "for" them? So far, his actions are completely in line with "being" one. Lies, deceit, baseless accusations. All modus operandi for this particular crowd.

    15. Re:Steam's progression by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      How's that redefining of words working for you so far?

  9. Early Access by tylersoze · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Eh, all I really want from Valve is a filter that blocks all "Early Access" games from ever appearing, as I'm browsing for games on their web site.

    1. Re:Early Access by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or at least rename "Early Access" to "Perpetual Beta". The thing that encourages this shit the most tho is Patreon. Once they start getting enough money from Patreon every month to live on, they have an incentive to never finish the game and end the gravy train.

    2. Re:Early Access by burningcpu · · Score: 3, Informative

      You can filter out early access titles by navigating to Store/Explore/Customize your queue and deselecting Early Access Products.

  10. Kudos to Valve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kudos for recognizing that hard and fast rules cannot be applied here. A strict set of rules are just vulnerable to gaming. People will constantly try to work around them, and raise hell when they force Valve's hand to either change the rules or apply them unfairly. This need to use the Pornography-definition of "I know it when I see it".

  11. digital branding agenc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This article is more informative best article i have seen
    Its help you for further details click the link below

    In new york digital branding agency IOITSOL is one of the best new york digital branding agency.In new york digital
    branding agency IOITSOL Provide best work in new york.New york digital branding agency or company encompasses many
    different skills and disciplines in the production and maintenance of the new york digital branding agency.The different
    areas of application include UI design; interface design user experience design.Today in new york digital branding agency
    IOITSOl is the best agency.IOITSOL is also the Most creative new york digital branding agency in the past recent years.

    https://www.ioitsol.com/

  12. Re:OMG FREE SPEECH THO by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Furthermore, unlike console and mobile platforms, Steam has very little switching cost. An end user can always just up and switch to Itch or Origin or GOG or Humble or wherever else.

    An end user who does that will find that a percentage of their Steam games cease functioning.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  13. Re:OMG FREE SPEECH THO by tepples · · Score: 1

    Through what mechanism does purchasing a license to play a video game from a service other than Steam cause Steam games to cease to function? And is there any related documented policy?

  14. Re:OMG FREE SPEECH THO by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Furthermore, unlike console and mobile platforms, Steam has very little switching cost. An end user can always just up and switch to Itch or Origin or GOG or Humble or wherever else.

    An end user who does that will find that a percentage of their Steam games cease functioning.

    Through what mechanism does purchasing a license to play a video game from a service other than Steam cause Steam games to cease to function?

    That's not what you said. You said switching. That means you stop using one thing, and start using another. If you stop using Steam, then your Steam DRM games will stop working. If you meant that a user can easily use multiple services, you should have said so, but you didn't.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  15. This is why nobody listens to them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > You forgot to mention it is no longer dropped- my guess would be to push your political perspective.

    That's no thanks to the SJW types who pushed to take it down and therefore not even remotely exculpatory. The whole point of his post is that Steam is sick of this and is stopping the deplatforming and no longer listening to the SJW types.

    What would those SJWs even argue? Something like: "Oh, yeah, we managed to pressure Steam into taking down this game until Gabe decided we were a bunch of whiny losers and put it back, that proves that everything is right and good with the world. Leaving out that Steam decided we were pathetic, whiny losers that they should never have listened to us in the first place is just an attempt to smear us by making us look more competent at deplatforming than we actually are!"

    All they're doing here is proving that SJWs a bunch of whiny killjoys who no one wants to be around who should go back to mom's basement and cry themselves to sleep.

  16. Play old Steam games on Steam; buy new elsewhere by tepples · · Score: 1

    Perhaps I wasn't entirely clear that I meant switching for new purchases from Steam to the other markets, and continuing to use Steam only for those games already purchased through Steam. I thought it would have been implied in a comment on an article about which games are and aren't available for new purchases on Steam.

  17. Goat Simulator _was_ an Asset Flip by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    Goat Simulator started out as a broken mess and got that polish when it hit it big. It was just somebody playing around in the Unreal Editor and they posted the "game" as a joke. It took off with Streamers and the rest as they say is history.

    The difference between Goat Simulator and most Asset Flips is that it had a clever angle on the assets it flipped. But Valve doesn't want to be the one to judge what's a clever angle and what's run of the mill garbage. Hell, there's a one man operation that made a competent Doom 3 clone out of asset flips.And I just spent a ton of time on an RPG Maker game that was 90% stock tiles and a well written story with good combat.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Goat Simulator _was_ an Asset Flip by AC-x · · Score: 1

      Goat Simulator started out as a broken mess and got that polish when it hit it big. It was just somebody playing around in the Unreal Editor and they posted the "game" as a joke. It took off with Streamers and the rest as they say is history.

      You just got literally everything wrong about Goat Simulator. It was an internal game jam entry from one of Coffee Stain Studio's staff members that they posted on YouTube and became a viral video hit before they (as a company) polished it and released it on Steam.

      It was never released in a non-finished state on Steam.

      Another good example is Surgeon Simulator, a game released as a prototype outside of Steam and was only released on Steam after it was finished.

      Steam is not the Apple App Store of PC, if you have an early prototype you can release it anywhere. All that having a flood of prototypes and genuinely bad faith asset flips on Steam does is make it hard to find good indie games.