Last week, Valve boss Gabe Newell visited the University of Texas' LBJ School of Public Affairs and spoke about (opens in new tab) the "bottleneck" of Steam's current approval process and possible solutions for getting rid of the red tape. Part of the problem, Newell explained, is the mediocre headway from the Steam Greenlight (opens in new tab) voting system, "a bad election process" that may even be axed in the future.
"It's probably bad for the Steam community, in the long run, not to move to a different way of thinking about that," Newell said. "In other words, we should stop being a dictator and move towards much more participatory, peer-based methods of sanctioning player behavior. Greenlight is a bad example of an election process. We came to the conclusion pretty quickly that we could just do away with Greenlight completely, because it was a bottleneck rather than a way for people to communicate choice."
Greenlight certainly suffered a rocky launch back in August, with scores of fake submissions peppering the genuine efforts from indie developers. Valve implemented a $100 submission fee (opens in new tab) as a quick fix, but a larger question looms: are voters part of Steam's "dictatorship"? Are good games going unnoticed simply because someone gave a thumbs-down for arbitrary reasons such as "too anime" or "looks dumb," and would replacing it with something else entirely transform Steam into the publishing paradise Newell envisions? Let us know what you think of Greenlight in the comments.
Thanks, Gamasutra (opens in new tab) .