There's a lot of places where developers can have their game logo across Steam, and some developers have been going pretty overboard with noisy images filled with extras. Valve is putting a stop to it.
Announced in a Steamworks blog post Valve mentioned how they've "noticed more text, award logos, and even review scores being included by game developers in their graphical asset images" and that "some game logos themselves have become so small that it's hard for players to tell what the name of the game is" resulting in various graphical assets that are so noisy they're "distracting and hard to read". They also noted in most cases it's all in English too "isolating much of the Steam audience that doesn't speak English".
Hard to really argue with that, as a Steam customer it has become something of a nuisance. The example they included shows a small part of the issue:
There's plenty that did it far worse than their funny example images, but obviously Valve doesn't want to call out developers directly.
New rules come into effect on September 1st, with these clarifications:
There are a few little exceptions of course, like adjusting the images to tastefully note the latest update which is never really a problem. Valve added a special bit for developers to override an image for one month.
Some developers aren't happy about it though, as it has been another small way to perhaps pull in a bit more attention, with images that have awards some Steam customers might be more likely to click and take a look. I get that developers want to do a little showing off but quite a number really took it too far and Steam has dedicated parts of store pages to list awards and other things.
In other Steam news, Valve has increased production of the Steam Deck!
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
QuoteNo text or imagery promoting a different product. This includes no marketing of sequels or other titles in the same franchiseNot sure how I feel about that one, tbh.
At least for sequels/DLC I don't see why that would be so bad.
All things in moderation, of course.
MisterPaytwick Aug 1, 2022
Quoting: StalePopcornI think you hit the nail on the head in explaining why I ignore that approach to marketing and wait for (non-IGN) reviews.
I may sound jaded as hell, but until specific reviewers (ie Sseth / Mandalore) give me a good idea of what a game is about, I tend to actively take those awards and all that as reasons to _not_ pick the game.
The note on movie posters is very on the nose with the "By the producer of X", well fuck me sideway if it means quality, producers could throw money at a steaming pile of shit if it was printing greenbacks with enough marketing, and a good enough RoI. In a way, it's pretty much the same thing here. And before we have people going around BAFTA (for example), we got to keep in mind how many AAA games get those rewards, and such.
They aren't bad because of it, but it used to actually point out to something, but when there is so many awards and shit, it doesn't mean anything anymore...
And for movies, I'll even point out an example I love to use for this:
Spoiler, click me
Quoting: elmapul"No text or imagery promoting a different product. This includes no marketing of sequels or other titles in the same franchise"
chapter 2 count as marketing of sequels?
That probably falls under the "tasteful exceptions" described in the article:
QuoteThere are a few little exceptions of course, like adjusting the images to tastefully note the latest update which is never really a problem.
Just make sure "chapter 2" is only on marketing material specifically for "chapter 2", and not, for example, on "chapter 1"
Compare to the store header image:
Quoting: TheSHEEEPAt least for sequels/DLC I don't see why that would be so bad.Binding of Isaac: Repentance anyone? (know that's a Linux-only case, but it was still a dick move)
Last edited by namiko on 1 August 2022 at 10:09 pm UTC
StoneColdSpider Aug 1, 2022
Comandante Ñoñardo Aug 1, 2022
I still wish that they'd actually make them.
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me