The Dream of Open Submissions

Fourteen years ago, Steam introduced Greenlight, a system intended to democratize the game selection process. The idea was simple: allow anyone to submit their game to Steam, and let the community decide what gets published. Before Greenlight, getting a game onto Steam was largely dependent on established relationships and publisher clout. For independent developers, this created a significant barrier to entry. Greenlight aimed to tear down that wall, giving everyone a shot at reaching a massive audience.

How Greenlight Worked (and Why It Was Flawed)

The concept was straightforward. Developers would submit their game to Greenlight, providing details, screenshots, and videos. Then, the Steam community would vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on whether the game should be greenlit for release. Games that received enough positive votes would eventually be approved by Valve and added to the Steam store. Initially, it cost nothing to submit a game, but this quickly led to problems. The system became flooded with low-quality games, joke submissions, and outright asset flips. The sheer volume of submissions made it difficult for genuinely good games to stand out.

The Downside: A Flood of Content and Exploitation

The free-for-all approach of early Greenlight had unintended consequences. The platform was overwhelmed by a deluge of content, much of which was of questionable quality. This made it difficult for users to sift through the noise and discover promising indie titles. Moreover, the system was susceptible to manipulation. Some developers resorted to buying votes or using bot accounts to artificially inflate their game’s popularity. This undermined the integrity of the voting process and made it harder for legitimate games to gain traction. And so Valve tried to fix this issue by charging a fee.

The $100 Entry Fee and Its Impact

Valve attempted to address the flood of submissions by introducing a $100 fee for each game submitted to Greenlight. The goal was to discourage frivolous submissions and reduce the overall volume of content. While the fee did have some effect in curbing the number of low-effort games, it also created a new barrier for smaller, less-funded developers. For indie developers operating on a shoestring budget, $100 could represent a significant portion of their development funds. It was a step in the right direction, but it also generated more controversy as it impacted some developers more than others. Even with the fee, Greenlight still faced challenges in terms of discoverability and quality control.

The Rise of Asset Flips and Broken Promises

Despite Valve’s efforts to improve Greenlight, the platform continued to be plagued by issues. One persistent problem was the prevalence of asset flips – games that were created using pre-made assets and offered little to no original content. These games often flooded the Greenlight system, pushing aside more deserving titles. Another issue was the lack of quality control. Many games that were greenlit were never actually released, or were released in a broken or unfinished state. This eroded user trust in the Greenlight process and made people more hesitant to support games through the platform.

The Demise of Greenlight and the Introduction of Steam Direct

Ultimately, Greenlight’s problems proved too difficult to overcome. In 2017, Valve announced that it would be shutting down Greenlight and replacing it with a new system called Steam Direct. Steam Direct aimed to streamline the submission process and provide developers with more direct control over their game’s release. Under Steam Direct, developers would pay a fee to release their game on Steam, bypassing the community voting process altogether. The initial fee was $100 per game, but this was later adjusted based on sales revenue. Steam Direct was intended to address many of the issues that plagued Greenlight, such as the flood of low-quality content and the lack of quality control. However, it also faced criticism for potentially lowering the barrier to entry too much, leading to an even greater influx of games on the Steam store. The result: many more games, but it’s harder to get noticed.

Greenlight’s Legacy: A Learning Experience

Steam Greenlight, despite its flaws, was an important experiment in open game submissions. It demonstrated the power of community-driven curation, but also highlighted the challenges of managing a large and diverse ecosystem. The lessons learned from Greenlight helped inform the development of Steam Direct and other initiatives aimed at supporting independent game developers. While Greenlight may be gone, its legacy lives on in the way Steam approaches game submissions and community engagement. Looking back, Greenlight was a brave attempt. It wasn’t perfect, but it paved the way for new opportunities for indie developers to get their creations in front of gamers worldwide. And while Steam Direct may be its successor, the lessons learned during the Greenlight era continue to shape the Steam ecosystem.