blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
Yep. Mutant Mudds is clearly not a good fit. Suck it up, Jools!
Mutant Mudds Steam REJECTED
- Thread starter Box of Bunnies
- Start date
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
Although I'm not one of Mutant Mudds' biggest fans (in fact I downright hate it), but does anyone think it's possible someone at Valve/Steam has a 3DS, bought Mutant Mudds on eShop, and just didn't like it? If that's the case, the rejection is somewhat understandable although a dumb reason. Somebody somewhere likes the game and if they want to buy it/play it on the PC too, then why not let it come out?
I understand not letting any old publisher put reskinned games out and trying to have a form of 'quality control,' but it's not like Mutant Mudds is exactly a hidden game.
I understand not letting any old publisher put reskinned games out and trying to have a form of 'quality control,' but it's not like Mutant Mudds is exactly a hidden game.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
So it's vague and could be any number of things but none of those could be a "polite" 'we don't like your game', is that what you're saying? Nevermind the fact the response being this vague helps the developer in no way.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
jim-jam bongs
Member
valve really should give better explanations about why they reject stuff.
for example "derivative cash-in which embodies the current trend of creating middle-of-the-road 2d platformers with light action and puzzle elements and leveraging the desperation of the tragic 8-bit nostalgia crowd".
for example "derivative cash-in which embodies the current trend of creating middle-of-the-road 2d platformers with light action and puzzle elements and leveraging the desperation of the tragic 8-bit nostalgia crowd".
This is it, people should stop trying to think of sensible reasons. Rejecting games because the team of approving folks don't like it or 'think' their userbase won't like is nonsense.
They're not in a position where they can have enough pressure put on them by others, but that definitely doesn't mean they have a good policy going
If there's a market for this, a market where people enjoy these kind of games. Games that do nothing specifically wrong but are middle of the road, why shouldn't those games exist?
jim-jam bongs
Member
who says they shouldn't?
they have every right to exist.
and valve have every right to choose not to sell them.
Of course. But if they believe people will buy them, what sensical reason to they have not to approve? It's not that they have some kind of QA policy where they want games with high metacritic scores or something, because that's evident
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
I'm sure Steam submission reviewers are trying to do the best of a job there, but to assume there's never a dose of subjectivity in the process is a bit, dunno, perhaps naive? The fact they can (and do) give as vague a response to the submitter as they please does not help either.
No, I want my Steam to remain a staple of high-production value, high-originality games. Let those nintendo platforms host those sub-par, impossibly-hard, middle-of-the-road platformers. Serves them right, duh.
jim-jam bongs
Member
maybe they don't think people will buy them? there are plenty of games like this one on steam and elsewhere, maybe they don't feel that it does enough to stand out in the sea of shitty 2d platformers which threatens to drown the entire indie games scene?
Pretty much yes
In this case Mutant Mudds is apparently a very good game and quite well known so its rejection just seems a bit weird. But Steam constantly rejects or ignores games they don't like. They have no responsibility towards the developers and they only want the best/popular games in their store so if they don't think a game is good enough or have enough sales potential they just wont bother with it.
Nintendo/Sony/MS can't reject a game for being low quality as long as it fulfills the technical requirements, or no publisher would ever work with them again. I believe there is usually an early concept submission that may be a bit more vague and weigh in sales potential and how the game will reflect the platform etc, but that's done early in the development.
Valve won't look at an indie game until it's nearly done. The relationship with the developer is different as PC devs aren't specifically making the game for Valves platform, but they're still screwed if they can't get their game on Steam.
Define shitty 2d platformers for me, because it seems to be doing quite well critically. Are you simply talking about how it looks?
How many other 2D platformers on Steam are there like it? Show me a few of the plenty where you can go back and forth between the layers. I'd happily buy something like that now
Davey Cakes
Member
I've beaten VVVVVV twice now. Once around the time it came out, and again just last week. I also bought and beat Mutant Mudds only a couple of weeks ago.
I agree that VVVVVV is more original, but I'm not seeing why it's more polished or substantial than MM. To collect everything in the former takes a couple of hours, to collect everything in the latter takes a couple (or a few) hours. They're both simple, and they're both challenging (though it's obvious which is actually tougher). I don't see a reason to not treat the games as being on the same level, but offering different sorts of platforming experiences.
As for the other games, I never played Binding of Isaac, but I did play Super Meat Boy to full completion and it's definitely the most Steam-worthy of any games because of the amount of content. I'd add that I think it's the only one worth a GOTY nomination, as well. VVVVVV is great but GOTY? No way.
Then again, we all have our opinions. I considered Mega Man 9 to be the downloadable GOTY of 2008.
PixyJunket
Member
This is why alternate shops/clients like Desura and GOG will always have a place.
Steam will never, ever be a "one stop" shop for all of your PC gaming needs, unless those needs are extremely narrow and very mainstream.
Steam will never, ever be a "one stop" shop for all of your PC gaming needs, unless those needs are extremely narrow and very mainstream.
Glass Rebel
Member
what is this hyperbolic junk?
FieryBalrog
Member
truly
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
VVVVVV was my GOTY 2010. It's okay that you didn't agree, of course, but I'm not crazy for thinking it.
Something is not substantial only by raw length, but also by what it does with the time it has. VVVVVV introduces mechanics at an excellent pace, iterates on them, and quickly moves on. In fact, the triumph of the game is its economy; it takes the basic flipping concept, shows you 100 or more ways it could be used, and then takes a curtain call. Making matters better, every mechanic in the game lands perfectly with the exception of the "Do as I say / not as I do" escort mechanic. Portal is probably the quintessential example of this kind of game design this generation, down to their parallels in terms of their very short lengths but surprising heft.
Mutant Mudds introduces new ideas less frequently and more unevenly. I think the lack of bosses contributes to an overall low tension experience. Nothing feels like a crescendo or a payoff. You simply play until you no longer have to play. Of course the final level is the most challenging by far, and the only one where the timer is an actual threat, but there's never that satisfaction the way there is with VVVVVV's higher tension or more tightly crafted moments.
Moreover, VVVVVV's masterful checkpoint placement allows the game to be authentically challenging, rather than just difficult, and sets up the game for a great pace. Mutant Mudds suffers from its lack of checkpoints, because the result is a game where the standard segment length is too long for the content it contains.
Wrong. It was literally my GOTY 2010.
I genuinely don't understand why Valve reject games for Steam, at all.
The only justifiable reason I could see is that they don't want a lot of low-quality games on Steam, but there are two problems with that; firstly the decision on what and what isn't good enough is very subjective and likely down to one person's opinion. Secondly, this obviously isn't the reason, as there's still complete shite like Revelations 2012 released on there.
The only justifiable reason I could see is that they don't want a lot of low-quality games on Steam, but there are two problems with that; firstly the decision on what and what isn't good enough is very subjective and likely down to one person's opinion. Secondly, this obviously isn't the reason, as there's still complete shite like Revelations 2012 released on there.
Warm Machine
Member
There are some really negative things that come along with the PC game ecosystem as it stands now.
In my opinion, not being on Steam really hampers your visibility to PC gamers. As well, not being on Steam somewhat auto reviews your product to the outside world, giving the impression that if you are not good enough to be on Steam, you are not good enough to buy even where it is available.
I fully understand a possibility why Valve does not give you any reason whatsoever when they decline you. I would guess that they don't want to be in the position to give you a list of issues in the fear that you may actually resolve them and therefor become somewhat legally obligated to put your game up for sale.
On the flip side of this though, giving no reason brings any possibility to the fore. It might be the case where the very genre of the game is stopping you from getting on Steam. If so, the project you just spent your time and money working on was an absolute waste, and even worse becomes product dictorial to what sorts of games should become available to PC gamers. I certainly hope that isn't the case, but another DD outlet that will remain nameless gave us that very reason as to why they didn't want to stock us. Once again, fair enough given that these stores and services are the property of the corporations who fund and manage them.
The unfortunate thing though, is that there are actually opportunities where a publisher will front your game and do the political wranglings to get your game up anywhere you want it for a cut of the profits or IP ownership or what have you. That flies in the face of the independent development spirit that has been rising in the industry..
I feel the biggest irony in our own case was that if Orbitron: Revolution was declined simply based on the game being no fun that Steamworks integration would have actually made it more fun due to leaderboard and player profile support, which are two intrinsic elements in a score attack style game. Sure, we could have built that infrastructure ourselves but that would have been another $2500-$5000 worth of development that would have been made irrelevant if it did appear on Steam.
For an indie, every dollar counts and even the waiting period that you are put into to hear back from any PC DD service is costing you money that you could be putting towards making your game better or cutting your losses and moving on to something new.
This is where services such as Xbox Live Indie Games and iOS, for all the flack they get, really do developers a favor because you have a 99% chance of being published provided you are a responsible developer.
In my opinion, not being on Steam really hampers your visibility to PC gamers. As well, not being on Steam somewhat auto reviews your product to the outside world, giving the impression that if you are not good enough to be on Steam, you are not good enough to buy even where it is available.
I fully understand a possibility why Valve does not give you any reason whatsoever when they decline you. I would guess that they don't want to be in the position to give you a list of issues in the fear that you may actually resolve them and therefor become somewhat legally obligated to put your game up for sale.
On the flip side of this though, giving no reason brings any possibility to the fore. It might be the case where the very genre of the game is stopping you from getting on Steam. If so, the project you just spent your time and money working on was an absolute waste, and even worse becomes product dictorial to what sorts of games should become available to PC gamers. I certainly hope that isn't the case, but another DD outlet that will remain nameless gave us that very reason as to why they didn't want to stock us. Once again, fair enough given that these stores and services are the property of the corporations who fund and manage them.
The unfortunate thing though, is that there are actually opportunities where a publisher will front your game and do the political wranglings to get your game up anywhere you want it for a cut of the profits or IP ownership or what have you. That flies in the face of the independent development spirit that has been rising in the industry..
I feel the biggest irony in our own case was that if Orbitron: Revolution was declined simply based on the game being no fun that Steamworks integration would have actually made it more fun due to leaderboard and player profile support, which are two intrinsic elements in a score attack style game. Sure, we could have built that infrastructure ourselves but that would have been another $2500-$5000 worth of development that would have been made irrelevant if it did appear on Steam.
For an indie, every dollar counts and even the waiting period that you are put into to hear back from any PC DD service is costing you money that you could be putting towards making your game better or cutting your losses and moving on to something new.
This is where services such as Xbox Live Indie Games and iOS, for all the flack they get, really do developers a favor because you have a 99% chance of being published provided you are a responsible developer.
Davey Cakes
Member
I will say this: I'm happy that you guys are open-minded enough to consider a game like that to be GOTY. Means that you care about concise, challenging, and thoughtful design.
As for Mutant Mudds, I guess I can understand how it doesn't "do what it does" as well as VVVVVV, but at the same time I consider the game to be just as Steam-worthy because it's competent and fun overall, and in my opinion fits in just fine with other indie platformers. It's perfect for when you want a classic-feeling Mega Man-esque platformer.
crimsonheadGCN
Banned
No, not a way of saying a shitty game. There are developers who will submit a repackaged version of Call of Duty or some other popular game that has some things changed like the name, opening sequence, main menu, etc. and claim that they developed the game.
Expressing preference is, "I wish this were on Steam, but it interests me so I'll buy it anyway."
Being destructive to the PC games DD marketplace is, "No Steam, no buy."
old manatee
Banned
I thought people were worried about valve having a monopoly on pc distribution. Maybe it's a good thing that not every good pc game requires steam.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
I forget the link, but it was quite the story back in the day.
grimshawish
Banned
I personally like all my games in one place but if its good enough it won't bother me.
Diablo III to me is a must have but they've screwed anything worthwhile in that thing with a number of stupid decisions.
In terms of Mutant Mudds, its quality isn't really important. Its certainly competent that much is clear.
I think this is more about Steam using a rather poor system for evaluating these things, certainly Mutant Mudds may make it eventually but the current set up just doesn't work.
Diablo III to me is a must have but they've screwed anything worthwhile in that thing with a number of stupid decisions.
In terms of Mutant Mudds, its quality isn't really important. Its certainly competent that much is clear.
I think this is more about Steam using a rather poor system for evaluating these things, certainly Mutant Mudds may make it eventually but the current set up just doesn't work.
All of my games are faked being in one place.
My non-Steam games are still in my Steam library. Good enough for me.HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
All of my games are faked being in one place.
lolface
I pretty much feel the same way. Just completed MM and it was great, but its certainly a tier down from VVVVVV. It might sound silly, but I loved the 'story' elements in the latter. They're infrequent and never leave you standing for more than a minute, but they added a real sense of progression and purpose as you go about saving your fellow crew-members. If it had just been a level select screen, the different areas locked behind doors like MM, that sense of the game building towards an end-goal would have been lost.
I think looking at V^6 would definitely improve the sequel to MM, by having:
1. Sense of progession. Maybe a Mario 3-esque map screen?
2. Continually introduced (and expanded upon) new mechanics that help keep the game fresh and interesting.
3. Unobtrusive story elements that get you a little more invested in the game. Maybe the Mutant Mudds kidnap your family at the start and you have to go through the worlds saving them. Then they'd pop up in your house, VVVVVV style.
Still really liked MM though, there's great potential for the sequel.
AcceptableGhost
Member
I don't think Mutant Mudds was rejected for being "too radical".
Criminal Upper
Banned
3DS superior to Steam confirmed.
Agreed.
I really don't understand how this got rejected. It'll probably be like Gemini Rue where they simply messed up, word gets out, they see it on 3DS, and go "Oh, well, ok."
Allan Holdsworth
Member
Probably because no one would have bought it for $9 on Steam.
On a similar note, I can't help but feel that if they're regulating this based on price it can't possibly be healthy in the long term for new game development. Sometimes it just isn't practical to release these games for very low, especially if even $10 seems too much. Friendly to the consumer by far to err on lower, but it's not worth much if they can't bring in enough to justify continued development, or able to grow at least a BIT in scope.
Warm Machine
Member
Steam asks for a price from you but they make clear that they will work with you on price if they want the game. Price can't be the issue if everything else checks out.
You can't tell me that a Steam exec is unwilling to send them an email saying "We want your game but your price, according to our data, is too high for what you want to sell. Lets work on this and make a go of it!" They have to be somewhat reasonable and pragmatic which is why I doubt this is the issue.
grimshawish
Banned
I do love when people say stuff like this:
- Super Meat Boy = £11.99
- Braid = £6.99
- Limbo = £6.99
- World of Goo = £6.99
Mutant Mudds - Eshop = £8.10
This 'Nintendo eshop is a rip off' bollocks is pretty much baseless and born out of the iOS comparisons. What has happened to them btw? Their 100% comparable in their pricing to steam (outside sales).
Not saying its the perfect price; but certainly not horrible.
grimshawish
Banned
Not to mention the way Steam and the internet works means if a game launches too expensive it can cut its price and almost be a 'relaunch'.
Not really Steams place or the point of such an evaluation policy.
Just dump the code for your game in Source, you will get on Steam easy! It certainly worked for Revelations 2012.
While I tend to primarily support Steam for PC games, I'm not one to lock myself out of other markets. I however will not just use a Steam knockoff. If another game service wants my dollars, it does need to be different from Steam. GoG's focus on classic games and being DRM-Free made it a worthy service to use in tandem to Steam, unlike other services I have encountered. For years, I had only used Steam and GoG... until I had heard about Desura just recently. After checking out what it had on the website, I found its indie and modding service focus to make it a worthy service to use in tandem to Steam also.
A PC gamer who prefers Steam should at least be aware of and for the success of other services, especially ones that differentiate from what games Steam has like GoG and Desura do. Steam's awesome, but I'm not going to wall myself in just because I think Steam's awesome, especially if there are other services for games that are awesome in a different way.
A PC gamer who prefers Steam should at least be aware of and for the success of other services, especially ones that differentiate from what games Steam has like GoG and Desura do. Steam's awesome, but I'm not going to wall myself in just because I think Steam's awesome, especially if there are other services for games that are awesome in a different way.
It's basic bargaining, really. Set the price higher than you need to, so when you drop it down to the price you're comfortable at people are more receptive. If Arkham City launched at $25 I might've waited on that inevitable $10 or lower deal rather than buying it straight at $25. Then again we are talking Arkham City.
Because they can
Alex
Member
Perhaps they mean for the quality of games. Mutant Mudds is more in line with something like League of Evil (decent, not stand out) in quality than Braid or Super Meat Boy.
The only thing on the eShop I'd pay the asking price for in retrospect is Pushmo, there's just so little to pick from and whats there tends to be overpriced jank that people wouldn't buy at a dollar on iOS (and I buy a lot of iOS games!).
I very much hope Nintendo can pull in a little more support for the Wii-U eShop than they have the 3DS one. At this point though, I wish they'd just give up on their failures in attracting third parties altogether and just drop the bucks on a few more game studios to fill the holes in their lineup.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
This GIF is missing the lasers.