Are you still following Steam's curation stuff?

I honestly don't see the point as most curators that are popular already have websites in which they are recommending these games. Maybe it will get you guys some people who have never been there, but I have no idea.

So, I was totally going to say no, but just the other day I went to the page to find the name of a game - Velvet Sundown. I think the curation stuff is bad as a whole and has made the Steam store even more of a shit show IMO.

I never followed it to begin with.

I find some use of the curated lists on Steam, if only to get some inspiration as what to play whether it's something well known or something more obscure. But I couldn't imagine that the few minutes per week I flip through those pages is worth a great deal of your resources.

Yeah. I still think it's a cool feature for someone, just not for me. If something is endorsed by a curator I follow, I've probably already heard of the game and know that it's well-regarded.

The utility of the feature is, presumably, for people who don't spend a lot of time paying attention to the gaming press. But then how do they know which curators to follow? Do they watch one TotalBiscuit video and say "This guy's all British, it's fun!" and then follow his curator thing?

One of the featured curators on Steam's front page the day the system first launched was called "it's shit", which pretty much sums up my feeling on it at the moment. In theory it's a nice idea, but in practice right now it just seems to be a platform for popular youtubers to promote their own content and not so much the games themselves, alongside the types that post Steam reviews that typically feature single line internet memes or references and generally aren't really helpful to anyone looking to actually buy the games.

I "follow" it in the sense of the function on steam. But I haven't been in a steam buying/game playing mood in a while, so I haven't been paying too much attention.

The way I went about it was to go to a steam page with a game that I considered a hidden gem and was lesser known and selected a couple of curators from there. There is one list in particular that I like and it's called DJ's underrated and underappreciated game recommendations. He will play recent lesser known indie games and goes very indepth with his reviews.

Yup, that's the way to go. Large lists are mostly useless. I'm not going to go through your list of 200 favorite games and chances are high it will be pretty similar to the other list with 200 greatest games anyway.

I don't think there's a huge benefit for Giant Bomb to maintain it but aslong as you keep the list small, I will check it out periodically.

In general, I use the curation system to check out obscure or ultra specific lists that link together games in interesting ways. There is a guy that has a online PC magazine and looking at his site, you can pretty much tell it's an one man job. I'm pretty much the only person following his list but hey, atleast it led me to a cool website.

I'm also following lists for one handed gaming, Latin American games, low spec games, games that are free of memes, games that combine CCG and strategy... I also love making that stuff up myself like creating a list of games where Belgium is somehow involved or games where you play as a ghost (making it the only list where Ghost Master and Shadow of Mordor can co-exist!).

The GB curators list reminds me that I need to get Lethal League and Marvel Heroes 2015, so it was useful there.

I find that all the recommendations the Curation thing throws at me are for games I already own but maybe that'll change going forward.

Also, never thought I'd say this but Steam's new front page is even more of a mess than the old one. I want to see what's new and what's on sale, not what you'd think I'd like because I accidentally bought Farming Simulator 2013 in a bundle.

It's there. That's about it.

Giantbomb is already curatorial in its content so there's no point having it as a list on Steam.

I use the curation feature sparingly at best. I still think it's pretty interesting and has potential but so far I wouldn't say that it actually managed to put surprising stuff on the store page for me. I'm starting to occasionally read some user reviews and view the community hub for games and that still is the only stuff I use Steam for other than activating the games that force me to (so pretty much most of them).

I agree that highly judicious and selective use of the feature would be the only way to make it worth my time - I'm not going to keep up with a flood of recommendations. So, as of right now, if curation doesn't have a tangible marketing benefit for GB don't invest serious ressources into it. GB is still one of the only pseudo-"social media" services I use and Steam certainly isn't even close to competing with that the way I look at it. Of course, being European and having to buy Steam keys literally anywhere but on the Steam store to not get ripped off doesn't help. All Steam gets out of me with its own store is some of that sweet trading card cash.

Quite honestly I'd been on a bit of a break from games, so I bought a ton of stuff in the Christmas steam sale and then the next time I even looked at the steam store was to buy a bunch more stuff in the summer sale, and since that ended I've not even launched the steam client until launch day for Wasteland 2, which I promptly downloaded but didn't play until last weekend.

So, I didn't even know the curator stuff existed until somebody mentioned the changes that were coming to it. The social side of Steam has never been something I've used or wanted other than a handful of instances where people talk to me over the messenger app instead of facebook. That's me anecdotal experience with it.

While I agree that you can get better coverage of the games that are being promoted by curators elsewhere, it is (in theory at least) a good way to spotlight a game that I may not even be aware of. Afterall, I can't research a game on GB / YouTube etc if I didn't even know it existed in the first place.

I guess the problem then comes down to folks choosing to spotlight games that are just kinda obvious. Maybe that problem is on me for being a bit too aware of what's out there.

@tehpickle: The problem I see with your point is, Steam isn't really the home of a lot of interesting games that your average PC gamer hasnt previously experienced.

I never really got into it for some reason, it just never connected with me, I think it stems from the fact that I visit the site on a daily basis watching and listening to almost all the content so I already know all the games the team recommend.

I looked at it when it was created but haven't gone back since. If you stopped I'd be fine with it.

It doesn't hurt, I guess. But I only follow a few Curators on Steam: GB, Danny O Dwyer, RPS, and the G and T boards on the PA Forums. I wouldn't put too much stock into it if you don't want to do it, but it's still kinda cool to see the opinions that maybe aren't easily accessible on the website. Like Rorie talking about DoorKickers.

This. Plus, as someone else said, I read a fair amount about games already and have a decent knowledge of what's out there and what is good. I do not have endless hours anymore to play games big or small, so I have a good idea of what I want when I pick up a game. The feature has no purpose for me.

I think you have to be more selfish and ask what it does for Giant Bomb. If you think you could use it in a way that might get the site more exposure and bring new people in then you should probably do that I guess.

I don't think the feature is essential for users who already come here, but it's nice. Not nice enough to waste a lot of time doing it though. The best thing about it is that the few curators I follow tend to have games I like promoted and the more that promote a game will put it on the steam front page for me. It makes sure there is some quality there instead of solely whatever spam games have come out in the last 24 hours.

Yeah I don't really pay much attention to the curator stuff. I have a good idea of what is coming out though, so I feel like such a system isn't meant for people like me.

I've been largely ignoring it from the start.

I basically only pay attention to Giant Bomb's list. I like the idea. I especially like that it is just an easier way for me to see the games that the GB staff really like and then buy for myself. To be honest, I would get the same thing out of it if there was an evolving list on this site of recommended games.

In saying that, I read enough about video games that I don't need a steam list to tell me to buy Skyrim or Saints Row. But it might help you guys pick up the odd user. It would be interesting to know what percentage of curator users actually click through and visit the site that is recommending games. I would imagine it's fairly low.

Maybe there should be a "Steam Curator" thread where we all kind of collectively decide on games to add to the curation page? That could totally backfire as we add virtually every game in existence to the page, but if the staff doesn't want to update this thing then that's the natural next step imo.

EDIT: Also without the curation page I wouldn't have found out about Door Kickers which is a cool game.

I follow it but I already own the vast majority of the games recommended because I get all my games information from Giant Bomb to begin with.

@jeff: I follow TotalBiscuit, Jim Sterling and PC Gamer and Steam just shows the same games on the curator section of the front page. They do cycle, but its always the same 10-15. its been like that since the curator stuff launched, so i wonder if its broken for me.

Steam feels like a bit of a mess right now.

No, it's kind of fun to see what games people would recommend, but there's no value in it for me.

I load up the store page once a day, and the curator thing appears there. So yes, I'm still seeing the content that is in there.

I think the curator pages would be more meaningful if they were split up by staff member. I don't see much value in following a Giant Bomb list, but I could definitely see some value in Patrick running a curator page for good horror games, or Jeff running a list with rad shit like Lethal League and Crimsonland.

Well, I have never heard of DoorKickers...so it has already paid off by just looking at it once.

@jeff: @rorie: I actually like to check on it from time to time (which is somewhat rare now since I don't get as much free time to play games) since its a good place to see games that showed up on the site in one form or another (e.g. QL, UPF) that I've never got the chance to check out. Convenient is the word I would use to describe it. At least its within Steam so its easy to filter out games via genre so if ever I get to urge to look for a certain type of game, I can just check the GB curator page first and filter it out, and so on.

You guys usually talk about what games you think are cool on the podcast or shoot a Quick Look for it. There's plenty of ways to learn a game you guys like on Steam than sorting through that list.

I subscribed to a few curator lists and have completely failed to check back on them at all. All I do now is get real sweary at Steam for how much I have to scroll down to get to the goddamn game sales now.

I certainly think that's true to some degree, but there are quite a few little indie gems that can get lost in the din of other games, and that can be kind of unfortunate. Perhaps I'm giving 'average PC gamers' too little credit here, but there are an awful lot of games on Steam now, and I can't imagine that the average gamer is aware of all the good stuff.

@tehpickle: Depends on what you deem as good. After I played one "Survival - XXX - XXX - XXX - XXX Horror Game" I think I played all 500 of them. Or "[Noun] Craft]

I'd like a more done up feature that is kind of like Besties for video games.

I just don't see the point of it. I hear or watch the stuff on GB so I don't really need the curator thing on top of that.

Nope I havent used it because I pretty much /know which games I want and if something picks up my interest I will look into vids and stuff , but never a recomendation by a curator.

No.

I'd rather hear about a game through a podcast, website, video, or whatever, than one of the curated lists. So far it's mostly just mildly annoying filter.

Jeff sort of addressed this before. The concept for The Jeff Gerstmann Hall of Fame was going to basically be just that. But eventually it became the Bombastica feature, which features some of their favorite games. It's hard to justify a done-up video feature like that anymore. The Besties were dope! But if you saw the videos showing how Joey put them together, it was a ton of work for a 5 minute video.

Of course, the frequency of Encyclopedia Bombastic is sporadic and kind of disappointing. When Dan came on and did Twisted Metal 2, I figured we'd be entering a bold new era since Dan did hundreds of episodes of Replay at Game Informer. Which, coincidentally, became the most popular GI video feature by far (I mean, they'd even talk about meeting "Replay fans" instead of "Game Informer fans.")

But now we have Demo Derby, which always leads to good discussion of several games and of the era itself. I love it.

What I'm trying to say is that the content on this site is constantly changing and evolving. And I guess if we're looking for retro games, the occasional retro system stream is there to fill that hole.

I like the feature and have checked back a couple of times to see what new stuff you guys have added. But you shouldn't spend too much time making an exhaustive list, just add a few every couple of weeks, highlighting new stuff or older favorites.

Nope

I think I would check a lot more often had you guys updated it more frequently, you are one site among maybe 2-3 on the internet whose opinions I truly value, so it would be a nice thing certainly.

It would be useful for Steam sales, and I value the GB staff for being known persons behind recommendations. They've previously made their strengths and preferences for games known, and I'd be less inclined to trust someone random from the internet who could benefit in some way unless I agreed with them on other things. That said, I think Jeff was bemused once by the fact that a developer had quoted a positive statement by GB from a review on their promotional material without asking first.

The idea behind the curation system seemed OK at first, but it's quickly been corrupted into yet another avenue for people to promote themselves. I was hoping curation would make it easier for me to find obscure/overlooked titles that are good, but unfortunately that's not the case. The problem is that people (for example, the biggest curator on Steam: TotalBiscuit) appear to have the idea that curation means summarizing their thoughts on the game and linking to their coverage (on their own site), regardless of whether they liked the game or not. Unfortunately, it seems that Valve is encouraging this behaviour since products listed on the store will show curators' recommendations even if you're not subscribed to them... defeating the whole purpose of subscribing in the first place.

There are very few curators that actually try to cultivate a worthwhile library of titles... Giant Bomb, Rock Paper Shotgun, and kinda-sorta Jim Sterling manage to do this the best of the big curators I've looked at (which is the reason I've subscribed to them). I had more at first, but the moment I saw a curation saying "this game is bad, check my coverage to see why" or "this is an average title - check my review." I unsubscribed, because at that point they've simply become ads. It's not linking to coverage that bothers me so much as their mindless desire to have as many curations as possible.

The exception to this are curators that make me laugh... which is probably the best use of the curation system in its current form - much like the game tagging system Valve introduced a while back. (e.g. Best tag: Nanomachines, son.)

So, while I thank you for the time you've spent making a Giant Bomb curation account, I would understand if you wanted to not bother with the whole thing. I mean, as an average Steam user I haven't looked at any curator's list (for games or curators themselves) since the first week it released.

I follow a couple and most of them list games I'm already interested in or know about. I started up one that just keeps track of games on steam that have oculus rift support and I think some ppl find that useful. I dunno... It's nice that it's there but besides occasionally noticing that games I'm looking at in the shop are in various curated lists I follow, I don't really pay much attention to it.

I feel like asking in the forums might not get you the most accurate info i fear. The way i see it is that the steam curating would not really do much for people already deeply involved in Giant Bomb. They already go here for their info before they go to steam. The potential gain is attracting new sheep people.

The steam curation could be useful for getting new people interested. Every time a new person clicks on your recommendation and watches a quicklook there is a small chance you gain a new subscriber for years to come.

It might be more trouble than its worth. But i would see it as "free" advertisement for the site. Giant bomb might be giant in stature, but there are enough suckers potential costumers out there that never heard of it and can be seduced into buying a premium subscription.

newsflash! I just had a brilliant or insane idea!

What if the steam curation was in some way tied to the wiki?! Before you ask, no i dont know a lot about websites and how they work.

If the wiki could somehow be tied to the steam curation Giant bomb could become the go to place for more detailed info about games on steam. Want info about a game that's not the sales pitch on steam? just click the giantbomb link. not only will you find out if the game is crap or not but also additional info that would never make it to the store page.

Probably madness.. but hey we are brainstorming here right?

I think it's a neat idea, but I don't actually use or need it at all. When I go to a store and someone asks if I'd like some help I pretty much always decline, because I've already done my own research and know exactly what I'm looking for. Steam's curation hasn't really been relevant to me for the same reason.

To be honest, I've been pretty uninterested in most of the features added to Steam in recent years. I'd prefer if they'd actually do a badly needed revamp of the UI and the software in general than give us curation and trading cards and all that crap.

And no, Valve, making everything slightly bluer does not count as a revamp.