Talk:Steam (service)

Client functionality cleanup

I cleaned the "Client functionality" section up, and in the process, removed some information. Here is a list of the content removals and the reasons. The rest of the content from the "In addition" list has been moved to the body of the article.

However, as of 2009 very few games support this feature.

Every Valve release has a retail box, and in fact, they provide a very significant percentage of Valve's sales.

The client works similarly to a [[feed reader]]:

It's a very loose comparison, and ultimately is unnecessary for the paragraph.

*The Steam Cloud allows games to upload save-game files to the Steam servers.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://store.steampowered.com/news/1968/|title=Steam cloud}}</ref> This gives players access to their saved single-player games and key configurations from any computer.

This is already covered in its own section below.

Currently, mods for Valve's [[GoldSrc]] games, Valve's [[Source engine|Source]] games, [[Killing Floor (2009 video game)|Killing Floor]] and [[Red Orchestra: Ostfront 41-45|Red Orchestra]] can be integrated.

A list is not really necessary, and ultimately just creates unnecessary difficulty in the article's maintenance.

Anunnakki (talk) 04:48, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Good job, it was well overdue for a clean-up. -- Love, Smurfy 21:52, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Minor Neutrality Dispute

Exacerbating the situation is Steam's very poor customer support.

Billing and account questions are equally difficult to find.

These seem more like opinions than facts. Could I get this checked into a bit more? Blumin (talk) 07:59, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Tom removed them. For the record though I looked Valve up on the BBB's site, they have a A rating on a A+ to F scale. Reading through the complaints, it appears that most have been closed positive reasons, such as "Valve addressed, and customer accepted", "Valve addressed, customer never responded", or in a few cases administrative closures like "BBB determined Valve made a reasonable offer/response but customer rejected". They have 12 unresolved complaints noted. There's nothing listed about any sort of BBB investigation or review ferret (talk) 15:30, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Helping develop a list of all steam game deals - separated by weekend deals and midweek deals

List of Steam Sales

On most weeks, Steam offers midweek and weekend sales on their games.

Weekend Deals

Sale End Date	Game Name/ Package Name	Discount in terms of US dollars	Discount in terms of Percent
2010-01-29	Freedom Force Pack	$5.50	73.3%
2010-01-29	X-Com Complete Pack	$13	86.7%
2010-01-29	Tropico 3	$26.4	66%

Sources that contain data: http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-1066531.html\ http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=720271

I would say that this would just come across as advertising to include it in the article ferret (talk) 19:30, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, definitely. There is no reason this should be included. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 19:33, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, this does not need to be in the article at all. Anunnakki (talk) 21:35, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

In addition, sales are listed on the front page of Steam's website, under the "Specials" tab. --Tom Edwards (talk) 16:15, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I am not at all doing this for advertising purposes. Perhaps this should be a different article in the related section.

I would also like to see sales for direct2drive as well.

Wikipedia is an information source. More information, the better. What is the usefulness of this information you ask. Well, if one were to look at digital distribution on a timeline, one could figure out a number of pricing metrics between time periods and that's the true value of pricing information. These metrics can be compared across companies and different media formats. This is the type of information that should be available to the public.

The "In addition, sales are listed on the front page of Steam's website, under the "Specials" tab" comment is obviously only worthwhile for the short period of time it is available on the homepage.... which is only for advertising purposes!!!!! I want a retroactive listing that doesn't advertise steam products, but rather provides a chronology of pricing in digital distribution. Since steam is the biggest why not. Knowing about a sale after the fact isn't really advertising. Just make List of Steam Sales a separate article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.132.90 (talk) 17:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

The text you want to add definitely does not warrant its own article. And there's no reason to show a chronology of pricing. To take a bunch of different sources and draw a conclusion based on them would be a violation of WP:SYN, if nothing else. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 19:13, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, whoever-you-are, not a historical database of numbers. Perhaps you should talk to the guy behind steamgamesales.com. --Tom Edwards (talk) 20:21, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Not to be rude, but an encyclopedia is information and facts. Numbers are the hardest facts of all. Numbers tell as objective of a story as possible (assuming the person interpreting them knows what they mean and how to use them).Wikipedia's mission is to be the one-stop location for all the world's information. How does this not align. Pricing my not be of interest to you, but it incredibly important from a business perspective. Just because you aren't interested or don't understand the value of numbers doesn't make it irrelevant or give you the right to be a gatekeeper to withhold information(hard facts) from the public.

The pricing mechanisms used in digital distribution such that of Steam, Direct2Drive, Impluse, GamersGate, and others are very unique and extremely valuable to those in business, especially those in finance across all industries. Since these companies are private, it is hard to determine exactly where and how much the influence of pricing effects sales and the value offering each of these businesses can offer to its end users.

To say that "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia... not a historical database of numbers" is right. It should be the analysis of those numbers using a variety of different of objective metrics that tell an accurate picture of the company and at the same time offer value to customers to a timeline of sales which will make them informed about each business's offerings. The raw data should be accessible so that the analysis is verifiable.

I feel that those naysayers are being subjective because of there own limitation of understanding or a barrier in perspective. Either case, knock it out. You do not have the right to be a gatekeeper and withhold factual information of value from the public just because of you personally have conflicting beliefs. Facts are facts and should not censored in any form. I appreciate your concern for the advertising bit of our conversation, because that is a cause of concern, but I could care less to promote any digital distribution company or any company for that matter.

My personal mission on Wikipedia is to bring hard data to the table so that viewers of articles can use that information to make their own hypothesis versus an article just stating someone else's perspective and people being mindless drones and accepting things that have no backing. Let's provide the information to the end user and let them make there own decision instead of being a gatekeeper telling people what they can and cannot has access to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.110.226.193 (talk) 02:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I understand your concern of multiple sources being incorporated. The ones I listed were only there as a means to start this discussion and facilitate the begins of an article to be created. I don't think that will be a problem. I am positive we will be able to locate a single credible source for this data. Very basic information is needed to create these pricing metrics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.110.226.193 (talk) 02:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

You should really brush up on Wikipedia policies. We don't just add information for the sake of adding info and let the end users make a decision. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Articles don't just get filled with crap text; there are judgment calls as to what can and cannot be added. If nothing else, text that's added has to be verifiable by reliable sources, and the two sources you gave above - both forum posts - do not count as reliable. So even if any of us did think the text should be included, it's not currently verified... and is therefore unusable.

Four users have now stated that this information should not be included in the article, so it's probably time to let it go. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 03:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Really, guy, this information has no reason to be compiled—other than perhaps some abstract specialty economist studying the trends of online video game sales, or to the business hosting the sales itself, or its competitor(s). If your reasoning that this information is useful for end users so they can come to their own conclusions based on the "hard numbers," or if you're talking about coming to some conclusion yourself and including it in the article, then you're missing the point. An encyclopedia, by nature, is supposed to be a secondary source of information—that is, it compiles existing accumulated knowledge. This is why Wikipedia enforces the No Original Research rule, and the Verifiability rule. A compilation of historical Steam sales is generally unpractical and has little use, and as Annyong has already said, Wikipedia is not the one-stop-shop for any and all miscellaneous information. Nobody is censoring you; we're just making a judgment call about the significance of your proposed section/article, and the judgment is a resounding no. Anunnakki (talk) 06:27, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Stayed out of this conversation so far but yeah, this has no place in the article. -- Love, Smurfy 17:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I see this is going nowhere. I hope you realize that your judgement call is short-sided. To you seriously think that encyclopedias don't have hard data. Do you seriously think that in the not-to-distant future numbers will be included in everything, because they are the most objective facts of all. It is inevitable that this type of data will be included. I find it funny that you think a judgement call isn't subjective. I hope you realize that your perspectives are all of the same mindset, obeying the Wikipedia code mindlessly as without practicality. Ask yourself why for a change. It is obvious from these conversations that you are all completely business/financially incompetent. "abstract specialty economist" are you joking. It's called basic four function math. Do none of you have any business sense what so ever. Wikipedia is a source of objective information that can be used for a practical purpose and research.

Issue from secondary sources: told you it was just to get started. Hence it's in the discussion. NOT the source that would be used on the article. Pay attention.

In regards to the ass clown who questions that I in some way would makeup my own data or fabricate some information. Pay attention. NEVER SAID THAT.

What the hell are you guys talking about with practicality. There is a list of Steam Games that has release dates and other data that most people don't care about. What is the value of that then. Geez. Can't you see they are in the same format. Both are in tables. The only real difference is that there is more text than numbers. Don't you get it. You are in fact gatekeepers. You have no business sense whatsoever. So, if you don't understand something, stay out of it. Now of you clearly have the where with all to speak about this in an intelligent manner. I understand the concern with sources and the ass clown making stuff up saying i'm going to fabricate some analysis of the numbers. Do you not understand that all of the pricing metrics are standardized. Financial ratios are clearly defined and can be linked to articles explaining what those financial ratios are.

The most disappointing part of this discussion is your complete lack of understanding. Let me state this again... just because you don't understand something, doesn't mean its worthless. THIS IS REALLLLLLY PRACTICAL if you are actually have business competence. All of the perceived problems with Wikipedia policy can be overcome. The real problem here is that the question of the practicality of the subject. Quit hiding and address the real issue. Test me. Because not a single argument is viable. Isn't there a single person in this discussion that know about finance/business. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.110.226.193 (talk) 04:19, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Jesus fucking Christ, calm your nerd rage, Mr. Business. Do you understand the purpose of a question mark? (See right there, I'm indicating a question, and thus used the punctuation mark the English language and many others use to identify a question, which is cleverly titled "Question Mark".) When I said "abstract specialty economist", it was fucking tongue-in-cheek. I take it you don't hear jokes very often in the confines of your mom's basement.

Since you seem to have such a hard time understanding such a simple fucking thing, I'll be as frank as possible: The one, singular reason this table of data does not belong in the article is because nobody will fucking use it for anything, ever. People will not look up Steam's Wikipedia article to check out the god damn sales it had 4 months and 1 week ago. Nobody will crunch these numbers to come up with any statistics of any kind, much less useful statistics. Sales that have already ended is useless information to 99.9999% of everybody who will ever lay eyes on the article because the sale has fucking ended and you can't buy it cheaper any more; and sales that are still ongoing would just be advertising, whether or not advertising is your intent, it is still fucking advertising.

To sum it up: nobody fucking cares but you. And yeah, I definitely agree that the list of Steam games doesn't belong on Wikipedia (it's an encyclopedia, by the way; you might do well to look that word up in a dictionary, or *gasp* even here on Wikipedia!), but at least it has some use to the readers of Wikipedia. Your idea is useless and nobody cares about your feelings or your petty arguments about Internet Injustice. Go fucking cry in your mom's bosom, you sperglord piece of shit. –Anunnakki (talk) 07:49, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Both of you, stop. You've both thrown WP:CIVIL out the window, and it has to end - and now. This issue and over and closed, and further inflammatory comments will be removed. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:11, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Text about friends removal

I'm going to undo this edit once again for a number of reasons. First, the forums are not a reliable source. Second, the text is absurd: "Steam Groups and Internet Forums are in an uproar over the incident." totally violates WP:POV. Third, we don't report every little glitch that's ever happened on Steam; in the grand scale of things, it's annoying but relatively small. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 17:45, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Seconded, should continue to be removed. It appears to have been related to a Team Fortress 2 update and potentially with a new STEAM Client beta being released as well. I personally saw the issue as it occured, but it deserves no more note than any other maintenance outage or minor service blip. On top of that, although the text says there was a forum post, there's no CITED source, whether or not it is reliable. ferret (talk) 17:54, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Yup. This was most likely caused by the UI Update anyway. -- Love, Smurfy 18:06, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Mac Client

By now, it's pretty clear there is a Mac client coming, what with all the icons people have found, and the Mac style ads Valve has released recently. But I'm not so sure it should be listed as having a Mac client until there is some kind of official release, whether that be a beta or final version—something "tangible", so to speak. What are your guys' thoughts? –Anunnakki (talk) 04:42, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. WP:CRYSTAL is iffy on this point. I don't think that it belongs in the infobox (and I just removed it) because it's not out yet. I'm sure we're going to have some text about this, probably in the History section, so I'd say it belongs there for now. Once an actual product is out - and I mean actually out, not just beta - then we can include it in the box. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 05:35, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I would say add it to the UI Update beta section. It is not in the stable release yet, all of the new icons and such are being found in the beta. ferret (talk) 12:59, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I've renamed the "Major overhaul" section to "UI Update 2010" (The official name). I've added a paragraph about the Mac speculation with two sources for now. Please feel free to expand it or tag a better source if you had one, this one appeared to summarize most of what's been found without heavy detail. I didn't want to use Kotaku as I believe they are still considered unreliable? ferret (talk) 16:36, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Steam has already been fully confirmed for Mac OS X, along with all of Valve's source engine first party catalog (L4D 2, Team Fortress 2, Counterstrike, Portal, HL series) http://www.joystiq.com/2010/03/08/valve-confirms-mac-support-for-steam-and-source-engine/ This is straight from Valve's Jason Holtman, so this is in no way a rumor anymore, it is official, so remove the windows-only tag from the article and make the necessary additions already.