• GeneralEmergency@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Steam happily took money from unity asset flips and one level early access titles for years.

    They have zero quality control and instead hashed out the curator system for users to do their job for them.

    • NightOwl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t want a curated store though and would rather have people be able to release games, and let users decide if it is something they want or not. I can access reviews myself and don’t need companies deciding what game is or isn’t worthy of being available. And users is who I trust more anyways, which is why for so long search term + reddit is what I’ve relied on.

    • pkpenguin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is a lot like saying YouTube is evil for allowing anyone to upload videos to their platform

    • Kimano@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean, isn’t community self-policing and an overly tolerant attitude towards picking what type of games are allowed on your platform exactly what we want from them?

    • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Quality control is another word for “high barrier to entry”, and especially with their market position, being rejected by Steam for some arbitrary reason would effectively kill your project.

      Not only should they not restrict the ability to sell your games there without a concrete reason; they shouldn’t be permitted to do so. A company with that much influence shouldn’t be allowed to be a gatekeeper of what constitutes a “good” game.

      Their review system and strong return policy are more than enough.