Gamers Add Tags to Protest Ubisoft on Steam (Future of Steam Tags?)

[NuclearKangaroo]

If you go to FarCry 4 or AC: Unity's Steam pages, you'll see a bunch of custom user tags. You'll see ones like "Don't Preorder," "Remember watchdogs," and "Uplay required," along with some amusing ones (ACU has a tag that says "Walking Simulator").

That's really all there is to the story: people are unhappy with Ubisoft's practices and making it known.

I'm curious what people think about two elements of this:

1. Do you think it's a good thing people are doing this?

2. Do you think Steam Tags are going to end up being moderated or in some other way controlled after this?

1: Yes, especially the Uplay required tag for Ubisoft games.

2: The tags are moderated, but by the Devs and not by Valve.

i thought the moderation was crowdsourced, i mean i can report tags and shit like that

Its both crowdsourced and Dev moderated, otherwise actual helpful but otherwise negative tags like 'DRM' 'GFWL' and 'Uplay' would be active.

i see, that sucks

sometimes valve expects too much from developers

 

[Ryanrulez5]

An update on this story Far cry 4 and Assassins creed unity have both been removed from steam (at least for me anyway)

 

[erbkaiser]

Any relevant tags are always removed from Steam by Valve. All that's left are joke tags like 'walking simulator' which carry no meaning, and rehashes of genre tags that the publisher can already set.

You can't even tag broken games with 'Extra DRM' and all, or a game like Towns with 'abandonware'.

 

[Elfgore]

I think Steam or the devs have some sort of control over the tags. I remember Total War: Rome 2 had a whole bunch of funny ones that dissed the game. Like "Rome wasn't patched in a day" and a few others. They're gone now. I don't imagine Ubisoft will stand for their games to be called such. I expect some kind of moderation to be done.

I don't understand how Assassin's Creed could ever be considered a walking simulator though.

 

[nevarran]

Ah, it's just for fun. I doubt Ubi will bother trying to put the tags down. Valve will do it sooner or later tho'.

Frankly, I find them annoyingly untrustworthy. "Glorious" tells me nothing about Half-Life 2 outside of the fact that somebody apparently liked it. No, users, Assassin's Creed III is not a sandbox title, and "Where is Charles Lee" is neither clever nor informative. And as amusing as it is for those familiar with the title to hear Team Fortress 2 referred to as a "Hat Simulator" that is NOT helpful for people looking at the title for the first time, nor is it something that anyone in their right mind would do a search string for. Nor are "Shepherd." and "Wrex." helpful tags for Mass Effect. And for all that there is some mechanical similarity between Darksiders and Ocarina of Time, it is not a "Zelda" title, nor is it a puzzle game.

Point being that user immaturity had long since compromised the potential benefit of user-defined tags and Steam would probably do well to drop the system.

Those tags may not be helpful in describing the game. But they can be useful for searching similar games.
A tag "Shepherd" may lead you to other titles from the series, spin-offs and whatnot. Even a generic "Glorious" tag can lead you to other games people think worthy of such label.

 

[DoPo]

A tag "Shepherd" may lead you to other titles from the series, spin-offs and whatnot.

Yes, you do need a tag on Mass Effect to find out about the existence of Mass Effect 2 and Mass Effect 3. Otherwise, who knows what other games in the series would be called.

Even a generic "Glorious" tag can lead you to other games people think worthy of such label.

Only that's potentially every game ever. More or less. It doesn't actually mean anything as you don't know WHY people would consider something to be glorious. If you go look for a phone or something, do you try to find a label that says "It's good" (literally. Just these words) or are you after something a tad more specific than that?

Those tags may not be helpful in describing the game. But they can be useful for searching similar games.

If they don't describe a particular thing, then they aren't good for searching for something similar. If a game has a tag that doesn't describe it in some way, then by definition you would not find a "similar" game for the tag would not refer to anything.

 

[KazeAizen]

I haven't really used Steam that much. Just this summer I finally built a PC worth a damn so I intend to use it a lot more now. However this tag protest I can get behind even if it is small. One thing the video game community has really failed at is protesting. I don't mean the random forum or blog post but legit and organized protesting. Sure it will probably barely put a dent in that gigantic armor of Ubisoft but eventually something has to give. Hell taking a look back at my own game history and with the recent Jim Quisition I've pretty much decided to not preorder anything anymore when it comes to games and because of Gamestops latest antics I've burned all bridges with them.

I guess the point that I'm trying to make is that if we can get more things like this going, call the publishers out on their bad behavior, and actually hurt them I think we'll start seeing some good change. More power to these people and their tags.

 

[AetherWolf]

steam tags are already moderated

you shoulve seen it when they first unveiled the system, i laughed the entire afternoon, it was glorious

i particulared liked the "diva dev" tag on FEZ

these kind of incidents while hilarious i shouldnt be, criticism isnt the purpose of steam tags, if you dont like a game, write a steam review about it

http://steamcommunity.com/id/nuclearkangaroo/recommended/220780/

I remember the brief time that Putt-Putt Joins the Parade was accompanied with such tags as "Hardcore" "Nudity" "Gore" "Intense" and "Story Rich". Some games that receive less attention sometimes retain the goofy tags anyway. Makes me wonder if the tags are moderated by third parties or by Valve themselves.

 

[Atmos Duality]

I've started seeing little bits of other warning tags like Always Online (most recently for Dungeon Defends: Eternity, and boy am I glad or that). Though admittedly, I don't care about most big releases once they're out so I didn't pick up on this trend.

I don't think we'll see it abused quite as much as something like Metacritic score bombing since it seems to take a considerable number of the exact same tags (no misspellings or hyphenation) before it sticks.

 

[DarkhoIlow]

I love Ubisoft's games, and I think the tags should stay because they're potentially funny and the point of adding user tags is for user feedback.

And MGRising totally needs "Nanomachines, son" because that's both funny and accurate, and would probably make me more likely to buy it (if I hadn't already bought it on PS3)

MGRising should of included "RULES OF NATURE" tag as well, but they deleted that also unfortunately.

 

[Something Amyss]

Tags that don't describe the game, no matter how witty, don't belong with the tags.

In fairness, I picked the ones most relevant to the "issue" here, and there are several which are relevant. Oh, and "walking simulator," because it was funny to me.

Perhaps a comment/user-review section would be a good place for posting what kind of simulator you believe the game to be.

But then how would we aggregate simulators and discover similar games?

Its both crowdsourced and Dev moderated, otherwise actual helpful but otherwise negative tags like 'DRM' 'GFWL' and 'Uplay' would be active.

I was under the impression that they were.

In any sense, I meant directly moderated as the forums can be. I apologise for not making that more clear.

I haven't really used Steam that much. Just this summer I finally built a PC worth a damn so I intend to use it a lot more now. However this tag protest I can get behind even if it is small. One thing the video game community has really failed at is protesting. I don't mean the random forum or blog post but legit and organized protesting. Sure it will probably barely put a dent in that gigantic armor of Ubisoft but eventually something has to give. Hell taking a look back at my own game history and with the recent Jim Quisition I've pretty much decided to not preorder anything anymore when it comes to games and because of Gamestops latest antics I've burned all bridges with them.

I guess the point that I'm trying to make is that if we can get more things like this going, call the publishers out on their bad behavior, and actually hurt them I think we'll start seeing some good change. More power to these people and their tags.

The thing is, Ubisoft's a company that has reported multiple years of losses. I don't think they're so much in need of a dent in their armour as they need to stop being the Black Knight from Monty Python. Dammit, I used my monthly quota of MP jokes or references.

I mean, I can go deeper with that. Rather than acknowledging where the losses come from, Ubisoft (and other companies) blame piracy and so on, and seek editorial control so they can limit negative publicity rather than making games we actually want. Steam's been pretty accommodating and I suspect it will continue to be, and I suspect this is power Ubi and others want. They know they're hurting. They probably even understand it's an issue with their games. What they don't seem to get is that an iron fist hasn't been saving them. But instead of addressing grievances, publishers have been trying to restrict our capacity to complain.

At this point, it's no wonder people have taken to tags as a form of protest. But it's not because they need to be made aware.

 

[KazeAizen]

The thing is, Ubisoft's a company that has reported multiple years of losses. I don't think they're so much in need of a dent in their armour as they need to stop being the Black Knight from Monty Python. Dammit, I used my monthly quota of MP jokes or references.

I mean, I can go deeper with that. Rather than acknowledging where the losses come from, Ubisoft (and other companies) blame piracy and so on, and seek editorial control so they can limit negative publicity rather than making games we actually want. Steam's been pretty accommodating and I suspect it will continue to be, and I suspect this is power Ubi and others want. They know they're hurting. They probably even understand it's an issue with their games. What they don't seem to get is that an iron fist hasn't been saving them. But instead of addressing grievances, publishers have been trying to restrict our capacity to complain.

At this point, it's no wonder people have taken to tags as a form of protest. But it's not because they need to be made aware.

As terrible as it sounds maybe they will eventually bleed out and collapse. That would mean thousands of jobs maybe millions of jobs lost. However Companies with bad business practices like them that continue to make them worse need to go or at least take a gigantic blow so they know they aren't invincible.

I'm praying for the day Gamestop shoots themselves enough times that they bleed out.

 

[Something Amyss]

As terrible as it sounds maybe they will eventually bleed out and collapse. That would mean thousands of jobs maybe millions of jobs lost. However Companies with bad business practices like them that continue to make them worse need to go or at least take a gigantic blow so they know they aren't invincible.

I'm praying for the day Gamestop shoots themselves enough times that they bleed out.

I don't really see the terrible nature of toxic corporations bleeding out. I do feel bad for anyone who might happen to be employed, but I'm not sure that's enough to want to prop them up. Besides, the employees will be the first ones to get the ax in the first place. So basically, protecting the company is no guarantee you're protecting the employees.

On the other hand, I would rather they actually attempt to reform than outright crash. I'm just not sure how likely that is, all things considering.

This is such a slow burn, I doubt we'll see either reform or death any time soon.

Unless Steam tags really do work.

 

[KazeAizen]

As terrible as it sounds maybe they will eventually bleed out and collapse. That would mean thousands of jobs maybe millions of jobs lost. However Companies with bad business practices like them that continue to make them worse need to go or at least take a gigantic blow so they know they aren't invincible.

I'm praying for the day Gamestop shoots themselves enough times that they bleed out.

I don't really see the terrible nature of toxic corporations bleeding out. I do feel bad for anyone who might happen to be employed, but I'm not sure that's enough to want to prop them up. Besides, the employees will be the first ones to get the ax in the first place. So basically, protecting the company is no guarantee you're protecting the employees.

On the other hand, I would rather they actually attempt to reform than outright crash. I'm just not sure how likely that is, all things considering.

This is such a slow burn, I doubt we'll see either reform or death any time soon.

Unless Steam tags really do work.

Agreed. Besides who knows. Ubisoft is an empire and they do have talented people working there. Hell if it collapses we might see a bunch of new studios pop up. True I would rather they reform myself but whatever like they say only time will tell.

Gamestop though. They really can just burn. Lack of an actual legit games exclusive competitor with them is part of the reason the actual market is so jacked up to begin with.

 

[Something Amyss]

Gamestop though. They really can just burn. Lack of an actual legit games exclusive competitor with them is part of the reason the actual market is so jacked up to begin with.

I'm not sure that'll help. Instead, it'll put the ball in the courts of Amazon and Wally World (in the US, at least). Amazon's already wheeled and dealed for exclusive content (and maybe Wal-Mart has too, but I don't remember offhand). I'm not sure this becomes a better scenario, though I would rather order through Amazon than Gamestop.

 

[nevarran]

Yes, you do need a tag on Mass Effect to find out about the existence of Mass Effect 2 and Mass Effect 3. Otherwise, who knows what other games in the series would be called.

I was just using his example. For you: "Ezio" tag can show in which AC games, Ezio is present. Because, you know, they're not named AC Ezio 1, AC Ezio 2...

Only that's potentially every game ever. More or less. It doesn't actually mean anything as you don't know WHY people would consider something to be glorious. If you go look for a phone or something, do you try to find a label that says "It's good" (literally. Just these words) or are you after something a tad more specific than that?

If that tag is given by users and I can see how many people have given it, then yes, it's useful. The phones with the most "It's good" tags, would most probably be the best phones. It's just like a thumb up vote on YouTube, a like on Fb, etc...

If they don't describe a particular thing, then they aren't good for searching for something similar. If a game has a tag that doesn't describe it in some way, then by definition you would not find a "similar" game for the tag would not refer to anything.

But they describe it in a way, maybe not the best description if you don't know what the game is. But good enough for searching other titles with that certain property. That's my entire point.

 

[KazeAizen]

Gamestop though. They really can just burn. Lack of an actual legit games exclusive competitor with them is part of the reason the actual market is so jacked up to begin with.

I'm not sure that'll help. Instead, it'll put the ball in the courts of Amazon and Wally World (in the US, at least). Amazon's already wheeled and dealed for exclusive content (and maybe Wal-Mart has too, but I don't remember offhand). I'm not sure this becomes a better scenario, though I would rather order through Amazon than Gamestop.

Im doing that almost exclusively now. What I'm thinking though is that even though physical game retailers are slowly being out dated if say Gamestop were to fail that would actually open up the door for actual legit competition which is what drives free markets. They could have actual real sales on games instead of the bullshit buy 2 get one new or whatever horseshit that they do now. I mean Steam has GoG to compete with and one other I think that I can't remember but they have competition. Gamestop basically has a Monopoly.

 

[DoPo]

Yes, you do need a tag on Mass Effect to find out about the existence of Mass Effect 2 and Mass Effect 3. Otherwise, who knows what other games in the series would be called.

I was just using his example. For you: "Ezio" tag can show in which AC games, Ezio is present. Because, you know, they're not named AC Ezio 1, AC Ezio 2...

His example happened to be "Shephard" on Mass Effect titles. Do you agree or is not useful? If yes, then I don't know why you decided to use that example knowing it's wrong. If no, see previous comment, come back again explaining how exactly.

Only that's potentially every game ever. More or less. It doesn't actually mean anything as you don't know WHY people would consider something to be glorious. If you go look for a phone or something, do you try to find a label that says "It's good" (literally. Just these words) or are you after something a tad more specific than that?

If that tag is given by users and I can see how many people have given it, then yes, it's useful. The phones with the most "It's good" tags, would most probably be the best phones. It's just like a thumb up vote on YouTube, a like on Fb, etc...

Multiple issues here. First, the tags do not show how many people have voted for it. Therefore, it's quite meaningless data if you cannot measure it. Since it can literally be applied to every game ever, then it is of even less value. Second, related to the first, your phones example does not map onto mine. I did not say how many people have labeled a phone to be "good" but all phones labeled as "good". The difference is not only in the way you express it as the two express different ideas. Third, your description of the use of the tag overlaps with a different feature - the user reviews. A feature dedicated to do what you want it to do, yet you want to poorly imitate using a different one. Your suggestion is akin to the proverbial hammer made of precious metal. On one hand we have a feature which could express liking a game, on the other we have a feature that does express liking a game, and is quantifiable, and fits in with your model of how you think the former can be useful (but it isn't).

If they don't describe a particular thing, then they aren't good for searching for something similar. If a game has a tag that doesn't describe it in some way, then by definition you would not find a "similar" game for the tag would not refer to anything.

But they describe it in a way, maybe not the best description if you don't know what the game is. But good enough for searching other titles with that certain property. That's my entire point.

And this is how tags should work, the point that I, and Asita, and this thread are making is that it's not exactly how tags currently work. You don't get to justify an implementation based on the general idea behind it when the two don't match.

 

[nevarran]

His example happened to be "Shephard" on Mass Effect titles. Do you agree or is not useful? If yes, then I don't know why you decided to use that example knowing it's wrong. If no, see previous comment, come back again explaining how exactly.

It may not be very useful now, since Shephard is present in all three games, but if he gets a spin-off or a smaller game, or something, then the situation will change. Even just with the natural progression of the series, one day we'll have several ME games and if a new guy comes to it and wants to check only those with Shephard, he'll be able to easily find them.

Multiple issues here. First, the tags do not show how many people have voted for it. Therefore, it's quite meaningless data if you cannot measure it. Since it can literally be applied to every game ever, then it is of even less value. Second, related to the first, your phones example does not map onto mine. I did not say how many people have labeled a phone to be "good" but all phones labeled as "good". The difference is not only in the way you express it as the two express different ideas. Third, your description of the use of the tag overlaps with a different feature - the user reviews. A feature dedicated to do what you want it to do, yet you want to poorly imitate using a different one. Your suggestion is akin to the proverbial hammer made of precious metal. On one hand we have a feature which could express liking a game, on the other we have a feature that does express liking a game, and is quantifiable, and fits in with your model of how you think the former can be useful (but it isn't).

I stand corrected here. At first I thought the length of the tag, in the list of all tags, is an indication of it's popularity. But it's not, it depends of the name of the tag. It's something Valve can always add to the mix tho', the thing is still in beta.
Many people don't feel like writing a review. Clicking on a tag, or thumb up, is much simpler and popular.

And this is how tags should work, the point that I, and Asita, and this thread are making is that it's not exactly how tags currently work. You don't get to justify an implementation based on the general idea behind it when the two don't match.

Like I said, they match imho. Not perfect, but that's why it's called beta.

 

[Something Amyss]

Im doing that almost exclusively now. What I'm thinking though is that even though physical game retailers are slowly being out dated if say Gamestop were to fail that would actually open up the door for actual legit competition which is what drives free markets. They could have actual real sales on games instead of the bullshit buy 2 get one new or whatever horseshit that they do now. I mean Steam has GoG to compete with and one other I think that I can't remember but they have competition. Gamestop basically has a Monopoly.

What worries me there is that it might actually end up with a similar result to (though not identical or on the same scale as) the 83 crash's [precursor of Pac-Man and ET. Companies may not look at the market and say "there's an opening," but rather "holy crap, if Gamestop can't make it, maybe there's no money in it" and leave it to box stores and etailers.

And let's face it. There isn't a lot of money in gaming stores. Games are a loss leader product. When I worked retail, the stores on average got about two bucks, maybe three for a game. The whole reason Gamestop's model exists is because games are a terrible product to move on. Amazon and Wal-Mart love them because they use them to get people into their stores or onto their site. Hell, Amazon even offers funny money as an incentive to keep you on the site. When I was working at Wal-Mart, the manager even acknowledged this and encouraged us to push other items on the folks who just came in for a video game.

This is not to say Gamestop are the good guys, but rather that their model exists for a reason: the games industry treats retail like crap. I'm sure they would get rid of retail for more than just used games if they could.

More to the point, anyone to take up the slack of Gamestop will likely be just as bad, because of the reality of a strictly games retail business.

I'm going to sort of bring this back around to tags, because I think there's a connection here. Many of the problems with digital services come from the same source: pressure from the publishers/devs. Be it Valve or Origin or PSN, there's some industry input by necessity, because otherwise, publisher X or Y might take their ball and go home. Or worse, come up with a competing service (Origin, EA Access). They're either run by or at the mercy of the industry. Many game companies would pull out if DRM wasn't in games, for example. I suspect that moderation of Steam Forums was also not something Valve came up with on its own. And I suspect there will be pub/dev control of tags for the same reason.

Digital stores have different challenges from retail, but there is definitely a constant: they're bumping against publishers.