Steam Greenlight Repels Trolls With New $100 Fee
- Thread starter Fanghawk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I have nothing interesting to say about this story. 100$ is a small fee in game production and since Steam is going to be free advertising even if you don't get greenlite, its one of the cheaper fees with a better value. However, I do like to note that if EA did this with Origin, this thread would have about 6 pages, and 3/4 of all comments would be about how evil and greedy EA is. DOUBLE STANDARDS ARE AWESOME!
Im glad to see that old submitting don't have to pay up, Justin will be pleased to hear that. Slender: Source will continue its rampage through greenlight.
Exactly. Also, for those that don't have the clout to make a steam-worthy game still could write off the $100 as advertizing. It's going to get exposure just by being there, even if it doesn't get on Steam's marketplace. Hell, if I had a shitty flash game I'd pay that just to get people looking at it for ad revenue.rodneyy said:
Well come on man. $100. Even for an indie that generally isn't TOO much to pony up.Irridium said:
Interesting article on Penny Arcade about this whole fee thing;
http://penny-arcade.com/report/editorial-article/the-100-fee-for-steam-greenlight-submissions-is-exclusionary-and-wrong1
Regardless, I honestly do think it is too much to ask for $100 for developers just to weed out trolls (I'd even say just $20 would suffice). This gesture is less about money for the developers, and more about giving everyone a fair chance to properly promote their game. You're going to get trolls no matter what, any amount of money would deter them, but setting the bar arbitrarily high just alienates those who just want to make a simple game in their spare time and hopefully share it to the world. For some, yes, $100 is too expensive for them, as not everyone has a million dollar budget, or even a $10,000 budget. I'd imagine plenty of college kids would love to utilize this service to promote their games but will be locked out due to this cost restraint. This service is less about just getting the top-tier, high quality games, and more about letting the community get the games they want, and the fewer the barriers the better.
Remember, VALVe doesn't need this money. Everything is going to charity, so this cannot be considered "advertising" or some other arbitrary thing that might need money because it is completely non-profit for both sides. In fact, I would rather that they take a small percentage for "Licensing costs" or "server space" as that would justify a larger cost in the first place, placing it back to a business dealing. VALVe doesn't need any of this money, so why make it this arbitrarily high? Because this is simply a deterrent for illegitimate contributors, and because it is simply for charity and not an actual business transaction, it essentially punishes the legitimate ones for something that could easily be solved by a review process beforehand or just a smaller fee. $100 doesn't seem like much in terms of large-scale game development, but for what this service is truly aimed at, it is a larger barrier than it needs to be.
http://penny-arcade.com/report/editorial-article/the-100-fee-for-steam-greenlight-submissions-is-exclusionary-and-wrong1
Regardless, I honestly do think it is too much to ask for $100 for developers just to weed out trolls (I'd even say just $20 would suffice). This gesture is less about money for the developers, and more about giving everyone a fair chance to properly promote their game. You're going to get trolls no matter what, any amount of money would deter them, but setting the bar arbitrarily high just alienates those who just want to make a simple game in their spare time and hopefully share it to the world. For some, yes, $100 is too expensive for them, as not everyone has a million dollar budget, or even a $10,000 budget. I'd imagine plenty of college kids would love to utilize this service to promote their games but will be locked out due to this cost restraint. This service is less about just getting the top-tier, high quality games, and more about letting the community get the games they want, and the fewer the barriers the better.
Remember, VALVe doesn't need this money. Everything is going to charity, so this cannot be considered "advertising" or some other arbitrary thing that might need money because it is completely non-profit for both sides. In fact, I would rather that they take a small percentage for "Licensing costs" or "server space" as that would justify a larger cost in the first place, placing it back to a business dealing. VALVe doesn't need any of this money, so why make it this arbitrarily high? Because this is simply a deterrent for illegitimate contributors, and because it is simply for charity and not an actual business transaction, it essentially punishes the legitimate ones for something that could easily be solved by a review process beforehand or just a smaller fee. $100 doesn't seem like much in terms of large-scale game development, but for what this service is truly aimed at, it is a larger barrier than it needs to be.
it's really sad it had to come to this. that does seem steep though, and they're punishing the wrong people. there must be another way to handle this. like a screening layer or something.
As a developer hoping to get on Steam after release, I want to state that any serious games (read, three dimensional, non-flash) will cost at least 4 figures to make. If you count the time spent (depending how much your time is worth), it's in the tens of thousands, if you make a decent wage, and your game has some time put into it. A hundred bucks is a piddly amount, and this will get rid of most, if not all, of the trolls, clearing the way for real games and ideas.
That's what Greenlight was supposed to be.Akytalusia said:
People didn't like Valve current way of screening games for inclusion onto Steam so they came up with this as a way to get the community involved, but I don't think it worked out the way they planned.
How many 2D flash games have drawn you in with a deep and compelling story, complemented by a detailed environment, both audibly and visually? Also, development times differ greatly. If you put more work into something, I'd consider it more serious. I'm not saying that flash games can't be fun (nor that every game needs to be serious and make you soul-search) they just aren't good for telling a serious story or conveying an idea. It'd be nigh on impossible to make a game about, say, the horror of war. Call it condescending if you want.Boudica said:
This is good. Being a rabid MOBA player I have a fierce hatred of trolls and seeing Valve deal so quickly and concisely with them in a way that not only weeds out the fakers but provides for a worthy charity is absolutely ideal. Besides, while we all want free stuff the reality is that if an indie developer wants to field a game and can't afford to pony up $100 US then they probably should rethink their budget strategy anyway. Not only will it keep trolls out it will make developers think more carefully about whether or not they feel that they're ready for the kind of exposure Steam Greenlight would provide and the expectations that would come with it.
To me it's a win-win scenario for everyone including developers. After all, if you aren't confident enough to invest the hundred bucks in exchange for massive publicity then you need to step back and reevaluate your position majorly.
To me it's a win-win scenario for everyone including developers. After all, if you aren't confident enough to invest the hundred bucks in exchange for massive publicity then you need to step back and reevaluate your position majorly.
Call it what you will, I don't really care, it's a matter of opinion and personal taste on the immersion/depth front. I personally cannot get immersed in a game unless it creates a suitable atmosphere and plays a certain way. You don't agree, that's cool.Boudica said:Yes, that is very short-sighted and dismissive. One of the best games of recent time:
http://store.steampowered.com/app/209830/
The only fact is that 3D games generally take a lot longer (and far more people) to make, and are therefore a bigger investment, hence, I'd say a more serious project.
Because before Greenlight, Developers and/or Publishers send in their games to Valve so a team could do a review process and see if that game is good and fair ect. for Steam - which caused many good games to not make the cut because they couldn't simply review it.Fiad said:
That's the reason they made Greenlight in the first place: To get rid of said review process! With your suggestion, they might as well cut the middleman and don't have Greenlight.
