Why no Steam, Notch?

#1

Post by sorbus » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 5:45 PM UTC

Re: Why no Steam, Notch?

#2

Post by wccrawford » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 5:59 PM UTC

Sounds like good reasons, to me. They're a company with on-the-edge games and they can't afford to be held back.

I'm actually quite surprised that Valve has -any- say in what they do on their own website, or what they implement in the game. I could understand having to implement certain features (like not crashing with the Steam overlay) but to prevent features, marketing, non-game sales, or anything else that doesn't directly affect Valve?

Inconceivable.

Re: Why no Steam, Notch?

#3

Post by shoota » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 6:05 PM UTC

Then why are they bringing Minecraft to the XBOX 360 which is a much more locked down platform than steam?

Re: Why no Steam, Notch?

#4

Post by mcantor » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 6:05 PM UTC

I really admire how much Notch seems to understand opposing viewpoints that most people would simply make inflammatory posts about. His diplomacy here, as well as with Bethesda, has been stellar: Not "Steam is a DRM-ridden mess that I wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole, bwa ha ha!", but instead, "I understand why they'd want to control their platform." Not "Bethesda are an Orwellian corporate giant trying to crush the little guy, bwa ha ha!", but instead, "This is probably just lawyers being lawyers." Never a bridge burned. What respect and maturity! Hats off to you, Notch. I'm proud to be a part of the same community of developers as you.

Re: Why no Steam, Notch?

#5

Post by daniel_reetz » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 6:06 PM UTC

This is how the battle for openness is won. Not by endless online argument, but by building stuff. Stuff that, by virtue of its openness and flexibility, is too awesome to be needlessly and arbitrarily constrained.

Beats the shit out of dogma.

Good on ya, Notch.

Re: Why no Steam, Notch?

#6

Post by AngryParsley » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 6:06 PM UTC

wccrawford wrote: post #2

Sounds like good reasons, to me. They're a company with on-the-edge games and they can't afford to be held back. I'm actually quite surprised that Valve has -any- say in what they do on their own website, or what they implement in the game. I could understand having to implement certain features (like not crashing with the Steam overlay) but to prevent features, marketing, non-game sales, or anything else that doesn'…

You keep saying that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Apple and XBLA have similar restrictions about interaction outside of their walled gardens. There are good reasons for this: Preventing fraud (they trust their credit card processing much more than some random app developer), filtering objectionable content for those under 18, ensuring a certain minimum standard of quality, etc.

Also sorry, I accidentally downvoted you when I meant to upvote you. (Can someone please move those arrows farther apart?)

Re: Why no Steam, Notch?

#7

Post by doctoboggan » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 6:12 PM UTC

shoota wrote: post #3

Then why are they bringing Minecraft to the XBOX 360 which is a much more locked down platform than steam?

Steam is merely a new distribution system for a platform Notch has already shipped on while the XBOX 360 is a totally new platform with its own required distribution system.

Re: Why no Steam, Notch?

#8

Post by pavel_lishin » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 6:15 PM UTC

shoota wrote: post #3

Then why are they bringing Minecraft to the XBOX 360 which is a much more locked down platform than steam?

They have an alternative to using Steam on PCs - they can release their own binaries, or source. They don't really have such an alternative on the XBox.

Re: Why no Steam, Notch?

#9

Post by streptomycin » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 6:18 PM UTC

mcantor wrote: post #4

I really admire how much Notch seems to understand opposing viewpoints that most people would simply make inflammatory posts about. His diplomacy here, as well as with Bethesda, has been stellar: Not "Steam is a DRM-ridden mess that I wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole, bwa ha ha!", but instead, "I understand why they'd want to control their platform." Not "Bethesda are an Orwellian corporate giant trying to crush t…

http://www.minecraft.net/about.jsp

> I'm not very happy with the draconian nature of (L)GPL

Re: Why no Steam, Notch?

#10

Post by streptomycin » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 6:19 PM UTC

daniel_reetz wrote: post #5

This is how the battle for openness is won. Not by endless online argument, but by building stuff. Stuff that, by virtue of its openness and flexibility, is too awesome to be needlessly and arbitrarily constrained. Beats the shit out of dogma. Good on ya, Notch.

The battle for openness is won by building proprietary software?