You don't know how game development works do you?

So you're saying Steam should exclude games during their most profitable and lucrative period?

Originally posted by Boblin the Goblin:

You don't know how game development works do you?

I don't think he knows how business works

That road doesn't lead where you think it does, OP.

Originally posted by Boblin the Goblin:

You don't know how game development works do you?

You put a bunch of computer nerds in a room, throw some Monster cans and snacks every now and them, shake it a little and a game comes out!

Isn't it?

Originally posted by AlexZ:

Force devs to release game N years (optimal 2) prior putting on Steam (EA, beta, alpha, demo - doesn't matter)

There's some errors in your post title that makes it a smidge confusing. But regardless of what you mean, Valve doesn't control other people's projects. Valve doesn't won them, Valve has no say, they're in no position to make demands or set deadlines. And frankly, Valve just doesn't operate that way. There's a reason they don't already do any of the half-baked "Valve should force developers to do X by abusing Steams market dominance". So, don't hold your breath.

Originally posted by AlexZ:

Delete or fee them, make your store clean, those never released "ads" on Upcoming/Wishlists simply trashing the search/store.
If they just delete and put them again - it doesn't matter, at least they are alive and moving, also number reset.

The developer paid for the store page. Your sense of tidiness is arbitrary. Valve has the system they want. Valve understands software development, you don't. Vlave has used their experience and expertise to make informed decisions about how Steam operates. They're not likely to change it because you have a weird axe to grind against long running or delayed projects, or even dead projects. Those store pages are not hurting you in anyway. Thy're not your concern.

OP: It's more complicated than that to implement in practice.

That being said, I hear you. When you post about this subject on these forums, a lot of the replies will be something bordering on bootlicking. Most of them will also be from people who gladly prove others wrong, but can't have a normal discussion or posit points without getting personal about it or going full tilt. Consideration, middle ground, reasoning, etc. aren't things you'll get much of in this area, at least on topics like these.

tldr; don't expect a reasoned discussion from most people here, do expect them to say you're 100% wrong if you're 65% wrong and completely ignore the remaining 35%.

The whole process could use improvements, no denying that. A lot of people like to pretend that the way it is now is the only way it can be done, and it's pretty easy to see that's not the case. Just compare it to any other business, investment, practice, etc. and see if these mediocre standards would hold out there. Wouldn't fly for five minutes. Developing games to sell for money is business, it can be planned and projected either by experienced individuals or by consulting what they've learned. Game studios do it all the time.

And then there are some pretty well established studios who've released full fledged, big titles before, who also undertook early access projects, cancelled halfway through because "it's too much work" and left their customers with a bricked game. Or games that lingered in early access for a decade. That's obviously the result of either poor work ethic or poor planning, and could've been avoided. It's also not much to ask that developers have a clear plan of what needs to be done and a rough estimate of how long it will take with a deadline. Their closely related cousin, software engineering, does this quite well on a regular basis. And again, studios do it too. If you're too uncertain about anything to give any sort of due date at all, perhaps you shouldn't be doing it yet?

Steam won't do jack, though. If, or when, this changes, it'll be external pressure or regulation forcing them to implement some demands and standards.

Meanwhile, just don't give them any more money. The game market is saturated with titles, there's no shortage of good ones, so while they figure out how to make this process work, just let them figure it out on their own time and pick something that comes with a guarantee.

Or use stores like GoG if you find steam's overall practice leaves them undeserving.

GabeN has stated he wants Steam to host just about every game. You cannot have a clean and tidy storefront and also meet that goal. Lots of folks have lots of disagreements about this, some folks hate the prerelease ads, some folks hate the smut games.

I can see where this would be tough to deal with; prerelease ads have some value, and putting a one size fits all hard limit on such seldom works for everyone but many Steam policies have to be altered to deal with the minority of abusers so it is not unheard of.

Originally posted by Cray:

That's obviously the result of either poor work ethic or poor planning, and could've been avoided. It's also not much to ask that developers have a clear plan of what needs to be done and a rough estimate of how long it will take with a deadline. Their closely related cousin, software engineering, does this quite well on a regular basis. And again, studios do it too. If you're too uncertain about anything to give any sort of due date at all, perhaps you shouldn't be doing it yet?

There are few things less popular here than suggesting corporations be required to perform any degree of due diligence.

Originally posted by AlexZ:

Delete or fee them, make your store clean, those never released "ads" on Upcoming/Wishlists simply trashing the search/store.
If they just delete and put them again - it doesn't matter, at least they are alive and moving, also number reset.

A game will be under Early Access if it is not a full release, alpha, beta, etc all apply to that.

You do realise half-baked games aren't a new phenomenon?

You should have seen the pile of garbage you could end up with after each dive into a shareware bin.