next »

[J-Snake]

Here is my suggestion, which can work in a mostly automated way (the way Valve likes it):

Limit the release frequency to one game per 3-6 months.

I know I cannot be the only one with this suggestion, but I don't see it getting attention and elaboration.

So here is my reasoning behind it:

As of now, every "little dev" is treated as a bad actor by default. A strategy of this kind is favored when there are more bad actors than good actors. And this is likely the case. But ideally you should strive to harm bad actors as much as possible without harming the good actors. And one of the points which separates a good actor from a bad one is the release frequency.
Everyone who understands the development process knows that turning an idea into a polished game usually takes at least few months, even when the game is simple and the rough prototype is up and running within a day. Lower release frequency will also force devs to go for more quality rather than more quantity. No one is complaining about the lack of quantity, right? But many people complain about the lack of quality. On the other hand: I don't exactly know how far reaching the restrictions on key requests are as of now, but if an "asset flip" manages to participate in one single bundle, then it can already contribute to financial success.

Now I am aware that there are creators who have the manpower and/or skill to release polished smaller games some more frequently. But this is rather a rarity. So they can easily be tracked case by case basis and put on an accredited list (if Valve feels confident about them) which gives them more freedom (like it certainly already exists for established devs). So this is the only part which requires manual action.

I am not saying this suggestion alone is sufficient, but it can be a part of the solution.

Before I put this suggestion on Steamdev forums, first I would like to hear your opinions on that if you have some to share.

[Tusky]

Well I for one think that is a great idea.

In the absence of actual staff curation which Valve are allergic to (as you mention) I can see this as a workable alternative.

[Janionano]

Am I thinking wrong, or one of those publishers of fake games could just create another profile and keep going on?
I am not very familiar with those fake games, but if a publisher launches a horrible game, it will not come to be viewed with suspicion by the players? Are they using the same profile to launch multiple games?

[J-Snake]

I was thinking about that the suggestion provokes more fake identities. On the one hand it takes more work and risk for the bad actors, on the other hand Valve might also need to put some work in chasing them. Don't have insights on the balance here. It can be a point of discussion.

[Tusky]

There is a heck of a lot of admin and paperwork to get set up as a partner - at the very least it would be a deterrent. Valve could also maybe set something automated up to detect  the same registry info being used multiple times

[J-Snake]

What I know is that your legal name has to be associated with your account. That can help.

For those who are interested, I put the suggestion on Steamdev forums now:
https://steamcommunity.com/groups/steamworks/discussions/0/1727575977537329361/