Gabe Newell Shows Us How Customer Support Is Done

[Camul]

I love Gabe Newel, despite all of the stupid "Lord Gaben" shit (you're like the 80,000,000th person to say that. It's not funny now). He's brought a lot to the industry, and has given us many perfect examples of how storytelling telling in games should be done. It's a lot more enjoyable to play a game where levels just seem to be set pieces used to bridge the gap from one cut scene to the next. And despite how much I rag on Steam now, it did almost single-handedly save PC gaming, and who knows that the digital market for the games industry would look like today without it.

 

BUUUUUUT, their support is the WORST I've ever dealt with. I don't know why the number one game distributor on the PC (if not in the world), that's also had so much success with sales of their own games, cannot afford support that isn't abysmal. I'd even take support that's terrible over abysmal, but we don't even get that.

[IdortMasterRace]

[Guest Kloaked]

-snip-

/thread

[Guest]

There is always Uplay.

 

And if you don't like greymarket, g2a.

 

Desura is pretty bad on quality control too.  But it's not up to the platform to do quality control; if game is shitty or incomplete(they did tell you it's Early Access, no?), your player reviews(how would you know if it's shitty if no one has ever played it?  And how would you expect Valve to have people play every game on Steam then offer their unbiased opinion on it?  You can't.) should do that.

 

g2a and the like are just key-resellers. You can't really compare them to a digital distribution platform because they don't offer the service themselves, they just give you the key to activate the product somewhere else. Also, in regards to Uplay, look at my other posts. The software behind Uplay (and their servers) might be terrible, their customer support might be as bad as Steams, but at the very least they have better quality control. And no, I'm not talking about them dictating what is available on their service and what isn't (something that they've actually done for the longest time, just saying), and this is also not about playing every single game out there to completion. It's about starting up a game, seeing if it actually runs, seeing if it rips off other games or artists or even movies in some cases, and then deciding whether or not it should be on their platform. I'm asking for the bare minimum of quality control, that's it. One or two college kids would probably do that for minimum wage for a few hours a day, they have no excuse for not doing it. Steam doesn't release hundreds of games every day, it's usually just a handful or maybe a dozen at most.

 

If you went to a store, bought a can of an energy drink, realized that the company producing it ripped off the red bull logo and just filled the can with donkey piss, what would you do? Would you check the reviews for this specific energy drink, see people complaining that it's actually donkey piss and go "oh, I should have checked that before I bought it. Whoops, my bad!". NO, you wouldn't. You would be mad as all hell, give that store that sold you this thing hell and ask them why they stock this kind of bs.

 

-snip-

 

A million times this.

[ComradeHX]

That's full of shit and you know it.

Nothing is comparable there and some wasn't even what Valve did.

g2a and the like are just key-resellers. You can't really compare them to a digital distribution platform because they don't offer the service themselves, they just give you the key to activate the product somewhere else. Also, in regards to Uplay, look at my other posts. The software behind Uplay (and their servers) might be terrible, their customer support might be as bad as Steams, but at the very least they have better quality control. And no, I'm not talking about them dictating what is available on their service and what isn't (something that they've actually done for the longest time, just saying), and this is also not about playing every single game out there to completion. It's about starting up a game, seeing if it actually runs, seeing if it rips off other games or artists or even movies in some cases, and then deciding whether or not it should be on their platform. I'm asking for the bare minimum of quality control, that's it. One or two college kids would probably do that for minimum wage for a few hours a day, they have no excuse for not doing it. Steam doesn't release hundreds of games every day, it's usually just a handful or maybe a dozen at most.

If you went to a store, bought a can of an energy drink, realized that the company producing it ripped off the red bull logo and just filled the can with donkey piss, what would you do? Would you check the reviews for this specific energy drink, see people complaining that it's actually donkey piss and go "oh, I should have checked that before I bought it. Whoops, my bad!". NO, you wouldn't. You would be mad as all hell, give that store that sold you this thing hell and ask them why they stock this kind of bs.

Just because they sell steam keys that does not make them less of a distributor.

You are still trying to get Steam to decide what's good by your standards.

Those games all run unless your system isn't supported.

And it isn't up to Steam to detect/judge copyright infringement either.

Those games may be shit, but they are still result of someone's "talent"...if they want the world to know they are shit at making games...let them.

A store does not show customer reviews next to the product, steam does. Maybe people should read the easily available review before blindly adding game to cart.

If you see review that tells you it's piss and you bought/drink it, shame on you.

[IdortMasterRace]

That's full of shit and you know it.

 

[ComradeHX]

Why were you crying?

[Guest]

Just because they sell steam keys that does not make them less of a distributor.

You are still trying to get Steam to decide what's good by your standards.

Those games all run unless your system isn't supported.

And it isn't up to Steam to detect/judge copyright infringement either.

Those games may be shit, but they are still result of someone's "talent"...if they want the world to know they are shit at making games...let them.

A store does not show customer reviews next to the product, steam does. Maybe people should read the easily available review before blindly adding game to cart.

If you see review that tells you it's piss and you bought/drink it, shame on you.

 

Sure, they distribute keys but they do not offer any service beyond that. You simply can't compare steam to sites like that. Steam offers a service and is the largest distribution platform when it comes to video games.

 

No I'm not, I just want them to get rid of the illegal and completely broken games before they sell them. That is the very base line of quality control, to make sure that you're not selling and taking your cut for stuff that was created with stolen assets and that people can be sure that a game they purchase even launches.

Wrong, there have been numerous occasions of old games on steam that will not work correctly out of the box. A game that didn't feature any music because you would have to burn an audio-CD and play that while playing, tons of greenlight games that simply won't launch because the developer fucked up or didn't care, old games that didn't support any kind of modern hardware, etc.

They're taking a cut on every sold copy, they have to get rid of these games eventually anyway, I'm just asking for them to do it before some poor soul buys it. They do have to enforce these things and they frequently don't allow certain games on their service, so they might as well do it for broken and illegal games.

Sure they can do that, but why does it have to be on steam? Why do they have to charge money for it and why do they have to drown out legitimate, good games that deserve the exposure? Being on the front page on steam is important, especially if you don't have a marketing budget, so why are broken and illegal games allowed to take up that space?

 

So, caveat emptor basically? I hope you realize that this doesn't apply in many regions where steam operates. It is not a thing in many countries, and that's stated in the law. The consumer legally doesn't need to check if that energy drink (or that game or whatever) contains donkey piss, he has the right for a full refund so the whole "shame on you" thing doesn't work. Whether you like that or not, that's the law (and the general mentality of consumer first) in many regions of the world.

[Misanthrope]

I think he meant to say "Everyone at Valve should be able to start a publicity stunt even if the actual support its crap and we don't honor basic consumer rights like refunds for poor or non-working products"

[ComradeHX]

Sure, they distribute keys but they do not offer any service beyond that. You simply can't compare steam to sites like that. Steam offers a service and is the largest distribution platform when it comes to video games.

No I'm not, I just want them to get rid of the illegal and completely broken games before they sell them. That is the very base line of quality control, to make sure that you're not selling and taking your cut for stuff that was created with stolen assets and that people can be sure that a game they purchase even launches.

Wrong, there have been numerous occasions of old games on steam that will not work correctly out of the box. A game that didn't feature any music because you would have to burn an audio-CD and play that while playing, tons of greenlight games that simply won't launch because the developer fucked up or didn't care, old games that didn't support any kind of modern hardware, etc.

They're taking a cut on every sold copy, they have to get rid of these games eventually anyway, I'm just asking for them to do it before some poor soul buys it. They do have to enforce these things and they frequently don't allow certain games on their service, so they might as well do it for broken and illegal games.

Sure they can do that, but why does it have to be on steam? Why do they have to charge money for it and why do they have to drown out legitimate, good games that deserve the exposure? Being on the front page on steam is important, especially if you don't have a marketing budget, so why are broken and illegal games allowed to take up that space?

So, caveat emptor basically? I hope you realize that this doesn't apply in many regions where steam operates. It is not a thing in many countries, and that's stated in the law. The consumer legally doesn't need to check if that energy drink (or that game or whatever) contains donkey piss, he has the right for a full refund so the whole "shame on you" thing doesn't work. Whether you like that or not, that's the law (and the general mentality of consumer first) in many regions of the world.

I'm talking about bad distributor, not "bad distributor you have to download from."

Because Steam is popular. Why do "good games" in you opinion have to be on Steam?

I don't know why they would be on front page other than the fact that they were new. There are other ways to advertise without spending money, look at Toxikk...

So far, I would agree that Steam has proven to be too "open" for its own good, but not everything is bad about that, every game is given a chance（such as Hatred, I do enjoy SJW's tears even when I don't care for the game）.

Telling Steam to further restrict games being put on for sale will only get people to complain（they always find something to complain） about that instead. Some idiots already complain about her niche game being unpopular, so I guess that's not too bad either.

You shot yourself in foot there.

Steam operates in many regions, including China. Illegal in one does not mean illegal/enforced in another, assuming it's even illegal in one.

The only thing Steam NEEDS to do is to kill off the shitty developers abusing review system, there are retards who review their own games positively and then there is Dimmdrive and its false advertisement.

[shawno]

How is going to the exec great customer service?

If i had to email the top dog after not getting a response from normal support after a week id be pissed.

It nice the he responds but if gaben was serious about customer support he would have to make the whole team accountable with the same level of performance.

[Guest]

I'm talking about bad distributor, not "bad distributor you have to download from."

Because Steam is popular. Why do "good games" in you opinion have to be on Steam?

I don't know why they would be on front page other than the fact that they were new. There are other ways to advertise without spending money, look at Toxikk...

So far, I would agree that Steam has proven to be too "open" for its own good, but not everything is bad about that, every game is given a chance（such as Hatred, I do enjoy SJW's tears even when I don't care for the game）.

Telling Steam to further restrict games being put on for sale will only get people to complain（they always find something to complain） about that instead. Some idiots already complain about her niche game being unpopular, so I guess that's not too bad either.

You shot yourself in foot there.

Steam operates in many regions, including China. Illegal in one does not mean illegal/enforced in another, assuming it's even illegal in one.

The only thing Steam NEEDS to do is to kill off the shitty developers abusing review system, there are retards who review their own games positively and then there is Dimmdrive and its false advertisement.

 

Fine, you can talk about those all you want, but in the end they just sell you the access to the platform that you're actually using. Steam and g2a are 2 completely different businesses, you can't compare them just because both sell games.

 

Steam is the most popular platform out there, and that's why they have a responsibility to a certain extent and the power to help out smaller games. Why are you derailing the argument though? This was about their quality control and their customer service.

 

Just because there are other ways doesn't mean that they can rely on that. We're talking about tiny studios here, sometimes just one person or a handful of people working on this kind of stuff for years, spending their savings and hoping that it'll all work out in the end. These kinds of people deserve that spotlight WAY more than a broken game, something that's stealing assets from other hard-working people or a game from the 90s. Also, Steam has basically accepted this and is agreeing on the matter (they're just doing a pisspoor job at it as usual) with the "popular new releases" as the default tab and the steam curator system.

 

Hatred has nothing to do with this conversation, it's a game that was not allowed on the service due to its content, not because of quality issues or stolen assets. Basic quality control does not equal censorship or taking away someone's chance at making their game, it's a basic entry criteria of "don't try to sell stolen assets as your own game and make sure that it actually runs". If you think that's "unreasonable" or that people who steal assets from others or can't even produce a working product "deserve" to be on steam then you're just being silly. This doesn't help anyone except for some dickheads who wanted to sell their shit to make a quick buck. Whether or not people will complain is also irrelevant, why should that matter?

 

No I didn't, Steam already complies with the law in the regions they're operating in. A game that is banned in china will not be available if you log into steam from china. A game that is banned in Germany will not be available to german users. A game that features swastika will be censored in germany, and some titles are only available as a "low-violence" version for german users as well, due to the fact that this is the law in germany. What else did you think? Just because Valve is an american company they don't have to comply with EU or german or chinese law if they operate there? Are you serious? They already do. They just conveniently ignore consumer protection laws in europe because nobody bats an eye, because the definition of a "broken" piece of software is mushy and because it would require a class-action lawsuit or government attention towards the issue.

 

I would agree here, it's just another broken system.

 

 

Steam is terribly anti-consumer and it has been for the longest part. Nobody is asking for censorship or for some kind of assessment from steam towards any game, it's just a matter of shitty quality control, terrible customer service and the result of that: pissed off people who want a refund (which they are entitled to, at least in europe) but can't get it. 

[Albatross]

Steam users must have some seriously low standards then. 

I can get a live chat on Origin going in a few minutes and usually have problems solved the same day. Steam? Good luck. I'll use a better example for real world scenarios: BH Photo. Not as big as Steam (in the $$$) yet they have staff on call, live chat and email that respond within hours. 

There are so many companies that employ better CS that its embarrassing for Steam not to have a dedicated department. "Every employee is involved in support" is a load of shit. Why not pay 6 dozen people to actually run your support backend properly? Try that one Gaben. Oh wait, I've insulted the holy institution of Gaben, I'm going to hell for insinuating that Steam does anything wrong. 

Its sad that we give every other distribution platform shit but when it comes to Steams everyone turns a blind eye and screams YEA BUT CHEAP GAMES BRUH 

 

I prefer Origin's client and their support to Steam.

 

I can actually get help from Origin within forty minutes. For Steam? I'm lucky to see a response within three days. So I ain't blind. B)

[DildorTheDecent]

Gabe Newell definitely is a great guy, but man that company suffers from mismanagement and shitty customer support. Steam is actually the WORST digital distribution platform out there, both in terms of quality control and in terms of customer service. This is just another example of that.

I bet i'd be able to submit a assignment made game that was created with Visual Basic. 

[Itereus]

The whole issue is really weird to be honest. Why are we supposed to be happy that a CEO of a company answers a costumer support issue? It literally makes no sense to be happy that he responded, and even to go as far as say that he shows us how customer support is done? If by terribly, yes. But the reality is, if a CEO has to respond to an issue a costumer has, the whole system is broken.

 

I've heard a lot of bad things about Steam's costumer service, haven't interacted with them yet myself though, so I'm going by second hand information when it comes to this topic. But please people, instead of praising Gabe, grill him. Ask why he responded to the issue. Why it takes so long to get a response from CS. If he really is supposed to show how it's done, organize a proper CS, one would think that with their dominance in the market, they would have the best CS, at least they should be able to afford it.

 

And the whole "everyone here at Valve is in support" is just silly. Sure, if a costumer rep can't figure out an issue, talk to the developers. But I imagine that most issues can be easily fixed by a bog standard CS with an FAQ.