I occasionally see people say things like “Why did Valve do X” or “Why doesn’t Steam work like Y?” And while I think more and more of us are aware of the answers to those questions by this point, as Valve’s strategy with Steam becomes more clear over the years, it could still be worth saying out loud.
I figured I’d throw my two cents into why Steam is the way it is and why it will always work better for certain types of games than other types of games.
but there's a few things rattling around for me in the ole dome
- valve has had some formative experiences around curation where peoole were very upset with them for picking winners and losers by choosing who goes in the store at all. so, floodgates open and minimal curation.
- i think their third party curation is also because they didnt want to get burned by picking winners
- in contrast in tabletop land someone
complaining that one of the biggest storefronts, target, doesn't do enough for the little guy would sound silly. buddy, target doesn't stock the little guy - i really think that more than managing user trust or believing in markets or anything else, valve doesn't want to do curation because they hate the idea of paying people to just do a job day in and day out - primarily because they dont want to pay for it and it and goes against their whole cross-functional ethos from that old employee manual. valve makes a remarkable amount of money for their headcount
- i dont think nintendo would put a game with no visual content in a direct either. unfortunately not every game that is successful as art has a straightforward path to commercial success
- all of this curation really feels like the role of game journalism which sadly isnt in great shape at the moment
- i'm not saying it wouldnt be nice for valve to do more, but i do suspect anything human curated would lead to a whole lot more yelling at valve
