Valve have updated the developer guidelines for releasing a game on Steam, making it clear that the scourge of mobile gaming advertising-based business models are not going to work on Steam.
Everyone is acting like this is purely for good intentions, but I’ll point out they make most of their money from taking a cut of the sale price from games. Ad money probably would not go to them at all. This is almost certainly purely a business decision, not because they fundamentally don’t like the concept or want to protect you from it.
I honestly don’t really care about Valve’s motivations. It’s a good decision. This kind of trash can take over and ruin an entire marketplace if you let it.
Of course everything a company does is in the best interest of the company. Even as simple as “let’s make excellent products with lifetime warrantees” benefits them by making people want to shop there.
But that doesn’t mean it isn’t a good thing when companies realise the customers best interest are also their best interest. We should encourage that, not scoff at it.
Of course everything a company does is in the best interest of the company.
That is not true, but that is part of the problem and also why Steam is at least a little better for us customers. Most companies only do what is good for the stakeholders short term, Valve does what is good for the company/single owner long term. And happy customers are good long-term, but not so important short-term.
It is still capitalism, and thus still terrible. But a tiny bit less terrible.
Yeah, but every time Valve does anything, people are always thinking they did it for them. Honestly, I have no issue with non-intrusive ads. If it’s a racing game or something with ads on the boards, like real life, I don’t mind. It can provide the developers with extra money, which either reduces cost to the consumer or allows them to do more. It also does no harm to the consumer.
Removing options isn’t really good. It isn’t in the customer’s best interest. It’s only in Valve’s best interest. Only a knee-jerk reaction makes it seem like it’s in the customer’s best interest.
Removing choices to the consumer isn’t good. It may sound like they’re doing a good thing, but if a racing game can include non-intrusive ads and either make the game cheaper or make more content without harming the experience, that’s good for the consumer. If a company makes a shitty ad ladden game, you can always just not buy it. They aren’t defending you. They’re defending their method of making money and ensuring you can’t make money without paying them, while removing options for the consumer.
the state of current gaming should be enough prove for you that no, people cannot just choose not to buy them… same as you can probably not avoid AI in anything new you buy, they put it everywhere and you either eat it or give up X thing you loved
OP didn’t seem “happy”… in fact, they seemed mad people were happy and not outraged this one good step was here because it may have been made out of a business decision and not just Valve falling on its own sword (that’s why I made the comment)
Everyone is acting like this is purely for good intentions, but I’ll point out they make most of their money from taking a cut of the sale price from games. Ad money probably would not go to them at all. This is almost certainly purely a business decision, not because they fundamentally don’t like the concept or want to protect you from it.
I honestly don’t really care about Valve’s motivations. It’s a good decision. This kind of trash can take over and ruin an entire marketplace if you let it.
Of course everything a company does is in the best interest of the company. Even as simple as “let’s make excellent products with lifetime warrantees” benefits them by making people want to shop there.
But that doesn’t mean it isn’t a good thing when companies realise the customers best interest are also their best interest. We should encourage that, not scoff at it.
That is not true, but that is part of the problem and also why Steam is at least a little better for us customers. Most companies only do what is good for the stakeholders short term, Valve does what is good for the company/single owner long term. And happy customers are good long-term, but not so important short-term.
It is still capitalism, and thus still terrible. But a tiny bit less terrible.
Yeah, but every time Valve does anything, people are always thinking they did it for them. Honestly, I have no issue with non-intrusive ads. If it’s a racing game or something with ads on the boards, like real life, I don’t mind. It can provide the developers with extra money, which either reduces cost to the consumer or allows them to do more. It also does no harm to the consumer.
Removing options isn’t really good. It isn’t in the customer’s best interest. It’s only in Valve’s best interest. Only a knee-jerk reaction makes it seem like it’s in the customer’s best interest.
Yes, when something half good finally happens, let’s complain it probably didn’t happen for better reasons
Why are we never happy again?
Removing choices to the consumer isn’t good. It may sound like they’re doing a good thing, but if a racing game can include non-intrusive ads and either make the game cheaper or make more content without harming the experience, that’s good for the consumer. If a company makes a shitty ad ladden game, you can always just not buy it. They aren’t defending you. They’re defending their method of making money and ensuring you can’t make money without paying them, while removing options for the consumer.
the state of current gaming should be enough prove for you that no, people cannot just choose not to buy them… same as you can probably not avoid AI in anything new you buy, they put it everywhere and you either eat it or give up X thing you loved
You can be happy about a decision while still understanding the business rational behind it.
OP didn’t seem “happy”… in fact, they seemed mad people were happy and not outraged this one good step was here because it may have been made out of a business decision and not just Valve falling on its own sword (that’s why I made the comment)
Maybe the look at the shitshow that is mobile gaming and they want to stay away from it. Good intention in my book.
a good thing done for a shitty reason is still a good thing.
Also known as free market capitalism 100% working as it should.