next »

[Matt Thorson]

I'll start with the honest admission that I am a Valve fanboy but I'll tell you why...

- They've made some truly awesome games
- They've pumped masses of their own money into a means of rewarding developers and not publishers (Steam)
- They've provided a host of anti-piracy/community contact/auto-update tools completely free of charge (Steamworks)
- They've taken on great mod teams, employed them, and pushed the products further
- They've provided loads of extra content for existing products without charging a dime
- They've taken on graduate students, provided them with jobs and taken their concepts on to be award winning products like Portal
- They've even embraced the Indie scene and offered titles they deem worthwhile a spot in their catalogue.

They made a shitload off Half-Life 1 but they shut themselves away to work on a truly worthy sequel, and risked even more on a potentially risky system to empower developers of all sizes.

So, if there's any one company out there that you shouldn't be whinging at, it's Valve. They are a true credit to the industry and whinging because they didn't like your game is pure sour grapes. Plain and simple.

I've never been a fan of petitions, especially when it doesn't concern serious issues of human rights or matters of legality, and in this case it really does boil down to an Indie developer stamping their feet and screaming like a little child that didn't get the choclate bar they wanted. Amongst all their good work there is still the core truth that Valve are a company looking to make money. Going beyond that, they are people looking to keep a roof over their heads and food in front of their family. If they don't think a game is capable of providing the revenue required of this, or consider it's image to be potentially detrimental to the levels of quality they desire, that does not make them a demon.

They didn't like your game and they're perfectly entitled to. There is no issue here. There is no injustice. I completely fail to see any point in this petition whatsoever - other than the fellas behind Mode7 games being bitter and immature.

I just want them to make the selection criteria known, so if I do want to make a game for Steam I know what to shoot for.

Even if the selection criteria turn out to be "don't be indie", or "make a game that we think is fun".

I don't see the point in them having this amazing system for game distribution, and then being completely ambiguous and rude (in the case on no replies) about the submission process.  If they don't like a game or don't want it for whatever reason that's their business, but at least tell us what to shoot for if we want to make a game for Steam.

[team_q]

I think the point is they don't want you making a game "for steam". They don't want to make a checklist, as people will follow that to a T then bitch that they aren't on Steam.
Right now the Criteria is: Valve wants your game on Steam.

Until this happens your game won't be on Steam.

[Ivan]

I'll have to agree with the Valve-defending crowd. Valve is obviously interested in putting good games on Steam, indie games included. But they're not in the business of selling every good game ever, and as such, they have to make choices on completely arbitrary criteria, and be it nepotism or the whim of some Valve employee, that's just how it is. And I think it has worked very well so far, too.

I don't think you should degrade yourself by begging them to change the rules for you.

[Movius]

Why is steam the be all and end all?

Sure it's great, mostly for the low-low prices and ability to re-download your games in case of emergency though. The latter could easily be provided by many services, the former is a risky venture and only the massive attention-getting of something like steam could make a lower price worthwhile for the developer.

At lot of it's other traits are very negative though. The horrible loading times for example.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

Valve is obviously interested in putting good games on Steam, indie games included.

I don't think that's true actually. I suspect that they don't even themselves have clear selection criteria or make good judgments. As evidence, look at the indie games that got on Steam and those that didn't. It seems completely arbitrary, there seems to be nothing in common, not quality, not popularity, nothing. My best guess is that their selection criteria is "be a friend of a friend" because 100% of the games I hear about getting on steam got on through "contacts" who know someone at Valve rather than submitting their game and being looked over and then selected. I know business is largely a "friend of a friend, help out your friends, not strangers" thing, but that's not a recipe for the health of independent games.

[Ivan]

Right... And what's wrong with that?

Valve is not some independent game benefactor, they are a game developer who have recently made it their business to sell other people's games on their platform. If they choose to do it through established contacts then that is their choice.

As I said before, I am personally pleased with their game selection and I think that whatever system they have works well to provide a wide range of good titles to Steam. That is a purely subjective statement, and one that people may disagree with based on their tastes. The reason I posted anything here is because I really think that Valve is a good company and they do good things, both with Steam and their games.

Then again, I never had a game rejected from them with no explanation, but it's easy to imagine that they get hundreds of games sent to them on the daily basis and if your game was rejected with no explanation, I wouldn't take that personally or as some jab against indie games.

[Zaphos]

I'll have to agree with the Valve-defending crowd. Valve is obviously interested in putting good games on Steam, indie games included. But they're not in the business of selling every good game ever

I guess all I'd say is I wish someone were in that business.  It would be convenient!

[Oddbob]

Valve is obviously interested in putting good games on Steam, indie games included.

I don't think that's true actually. I suspect that they don't even themselves have clear selection criteria or make good judgments. As evidence, look at the indie games that got on Steam and those that didn't. It seems completely arbitrary, there seems to be nothing in common, not quality, not popularity, nothing. My best guess is that their selection criteria is "be a friend of a friend" because 100% of the games I hear about getting on steam got on through "contacts" who know someone at Valve rather than submitting their game and being looked over and then selected. I know business is largely a "friend of a friend, help out your friends, not strangers" thing, but that's not a recipe for the health of independent games.

Gravitron 2 didn't get on there by anyone having contacts or friend of a friend. I haven't checked but I'm pretty sure the same can be said for Bullet Candy (you'd have to ask Charlie there, though). I don't doubt there's more on there "just because Valve wanted them".

You don't think it's a little insulting to suggest that everyone is on there through knowing someone else who can get them on there to the people who made it on their own merits?

[Gnarf]

Everything else aside, currently I'd rather buy my games from Steam than from somewhere else. So as a general thing, I'd like more stuff on Steam.

And like I can see how it'd be frustrating to not have any idea why they won't sell your game. Being good, or playable for that matter, is not a criteria that is met by all the games currently on Steam. It's easy to get the impression that they let people put rather borked stuff on there as long as there's some other big company involved.

Not sure how I feel about that petition though...

The key thing with this petition is it isn't "hey Valve, there's some cool guys out there making funky games" it's "get OUR games onto Steam. Love, The Developers". To which, if I were Valve, my response would be simply "oh shut it and fuck off". Whereas the former scenario, I might perk up an ear.

Oh wait. That's pretty much how I feel about the petition, actually.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

Then again, I never had a game rejected from them with no explanation, but it's easy to imagine that they get hundreds of games sent to them on the daily basis and if your game was rejected with no explanation, I wouldn't take that personally or as some jab against indie games.

As I said earlier, my impression is that it's not just 'rejection with no explanation', but that hey don't take submissions at all unless you go through a contact. In other words, I doubt they even take a look at submissions from people they don't know, so it may be incorrect even to classify that as a "rejection", since it's my impression that they don't play or look at games submitted.

Gravitron 2 didn't get on there by anyone having contacts or friend of a friend. I haven't checked but I'm pretty sure the same can be said for Bullet Candy (you'd have to ask Charlie there, though). I don't doubt there's more on there "just because Valve wanted them".

You don't think it's a little insulting to suggest that everyone is on there through knowing someone else who can get them on there to the people who made it on their own merits?

Could you give specific evidence why you think that Gravitron 2 and Bullet Candy aren't there due to having a contact? Do you know for sure that they simply emailed Steam the game, had them look it over, and then Steam decided they liked those games? If that's true then it is true that the petition is misguided, but I really don't think that is true. Because from what I've seen from others, most of the time when a game gets on Steam it is through someone knowing them personally, meeting them at a convention, etc., or else through them taking interest in a game and contacting that person.

I don't think it's insulting at all, it's just how things tend to work. Similarly, I don't make games with people I don't know, even if they're good at making games. If people ask me "can you make a game with me?" if I don't know them from somewhere, if they aren't a friend of a friend but instead just a random guy emailing me, I likely won't be interested, no matter how good their portfolio is or how talented they seem.

So I see the petition as a way to encourage them to create a method whereby people can submit games, have them looked over, and optionally where they could receive feedback on why they are or are not interested in the game, instead of how it seems to work now. Even Microsoft and Nintendo have such a method. When Microsoft rejects a title for the Xbox Live Arcade or when Nintendo rejects a title for the WiiWare, they usually give their reasoning to the person, and they also usually look over a game carefully before deciding. I don't think that's true of Valve and Steam.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

Everything else aside, currently I'd rather buy my games from Steam than from somewhere else. So as a general thing, I'd like more stuff on Steam.

And like I can see how it'd be frustrating to not have any idea why they won't sell your game. Being good, or playable for that matter, is not a criteria that is met by all the games currently on Steam. It's easy to get the impression that they let people put rather borked stuff on there as long as there's some other big company involved.

Not sure how I feel about that petition though...

The key thing with this petition is it isn't "hey Valve, there's some cool guys out there making funky games" it's "get OUR games onto Steam. Love, The Developers". To which, if I were Valve, my response would be simply "oh shut it and fuck off". Whereas the former scenario, I might perk up an ear.

Oh wait. That's pretty much how I feel about the petition, actually.

I don't think that is the case at all, because it's not just people who have been rejected who are a part of this petition. And you also don't see this type of petition arising for Microsoft or Nintendo, even though there are a large number of people who have been rejected from those, because those two give the sense that they've looked at the game, and they provide feedback, whereas Steam doesn't to my knowledge even acknowledge that they have received and will look over a submission; they have no real method of submission for independent developers.

[Oddbob]

Could you give specific evidence why you think that Gravitron 2 and Bullet Candy aren't there due to having a contact?

With Bullet Candy, I'll admit I'm guessing on what I know about both the development of the game and Charlie. It might well be the case that there's a super secret contact involved, but it's not a vibe I'm getting from anything he's said along the way on any of the forums we both visit.

Gravitron 2 on the other hand, I can state hand on heart that it's there due to its own merits. I've been chatting to X-Out before, during and after the submissions process. He sent it off, they liked it. No third party interference or secret handshakes whatsoever. Given it was barely out the door and not that well publicised when he submitted it, it's pretty difficult to call foul in that respect also.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

Hmm, sounds good enough for me. Based on that evidence I now think that in some cases Steam looks over and accepts email submissions.

Although I still think it'd just be polite of them to send rejection notices rather than nothing, and to have a specific area / email address where one could submit games to -- right now it doesn't seem like they are even inviting submissions, so I still think the petition is a good idea to get them to recognize those things as problems that could be improved.

[Gnarf]

I don't think that is the case at all, because it's not just people who have been rejected who are a part of this petition. And you also don't see this type of petition arising for Microsoft or Nintendo, even though there are a large number of people who have been rejected from those, because those two give the sense that they've looked at the game, and they provide feedback, whereas Steam doesn't to my knowledge even acknowledge that they have received and will look over a submission; they have no real method of submission for independent developers.

Yeah, that may well be true. Maybe just a first impression thing. What with it being called "Get our games on Steam!" and starting with "We are a group of independent game developers who have so far been unable to get our games released via Valve's Steam service." and etc.

As for the Microsoft and Nintendo thing. That'd be for games made specifically for their (closed) platforms? That's a lot of potential problems dealt with right there. Not gonna pretend I'm one to tell anyone how to run their business, but it's not very hard to dream up reasons why "do like Nintendo and Microsoft do" won't necessarily work out awesomely. Dunno though.

Not that it wouldn't be cool to have a system in place for these things or anything.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

It's not "do like Microsoft and Nintendo do" it's more about being polite -- replying to emails is usually a good thing.

As an example, it's been some time so I don't remember the exact wording, but the only thing I've ever emailed them with is something like "I'd like information on the process of submitting a game to Steam" -- even that went unanswered. I didn't mention any game, so they couldn't possibly have reviewed and rejected it, it was just a request for more information, and that was ignored too. So it's their public relations in general that seem shoddy.

[cliffski]

I think all indie developers want is for valve to actually answer emails. If they aren't interested in an established developers games, then how much effort is involved in replying with "we don't think your games are good enough" or "we don't think the style is right". It doesn't take long.
So many hardcore gamers snort with derision at the suggestion that they should buy games from ANYWHERE but steam. Unknowingly, they have declared that Gabe Newell is the de-facto platform submissions approvals board for the PC.
This is silly.
There are plenty of online sales platforms, I don't see why steam is considered to be the only one people will use.
Stardock reply promptly to indie devs, and stock a ton of indie games. They also offer a great royalty split.

[cliffski]

If you disagree with this, make your own system. Valve provides Steamworks for this

Yup, me and a few other devs I know emailed them about using steamworks, to the address they gave out when it was announced.
They totally ignored that email too. I got sa read receipt, so I know they read it, they just couldn't be fucked to reply.

[Oddbob]

I think all indie developers want is for valve to actually answer emails. If they aren't interested in an established developers games, then how much effort is involved in replying with "we don't think your games are good enough" or "we don't think the style is right". It doesn't take long.

I don't think anyone has a problem with that. That's not what the petition says though and I don't see how the petition as its phrased is going to improve that situation.

Someone dressing up as a tomato most definitely won't help either.

[GregWS]

You know, I wonder what would happen if a group of indies organized something during IGF to highlight this.  Given that that event actually gets some press, I think if there was a group request during the festival for a better submission process, Steam might actually listen.  As far as I rememeber, Audiosurf was an IGF game, so I think they must pay some attention to that festival.

[Craig Stern]

Then again, I never had a game rejected from them with no explanation, but it's easy to imagine that they get hundreds of games sent to them on the daily basis and if your game was rejected with no explanation, I wouldn't take that personally or as some jab against indie games.

I think the point is less that they don't offer an explanation, and more that they don't respond to you at all, even to simply say "Hey, you've been rejected." If nothing else, surely they could set up an automated reply that says, "Thanks for submitting! If you don't hear back from us in 2 months, assume your game isn't going to make the cut." Simply not responding is, in my opinion, rude.