Would it not be a valid argument that just because of games like War Z games should be controlled and not automatically be included?

Either way, that isn't why they rejected Paranautical Activity.

You can try to answer this :)

http://www.gog.com/forum/general/well_that_does_it_for_greenlight/post10

Also, if all what is needed to get on steam is a publisher, then it is a big dent for indie gaming, and it makes it very difficult to self-publish.

Well we really can't have people turning to publishers. I mean anyone can get a publisher right? It's so easy one has to wonder why there are any indies at all, and now that they all know everyone gets to skip to the front of the line. It's a very sad state of affairs if everyone has to start waiting in line at the front of the line.

In the survival of the fittest mayhem that is Greenlight, and the nigh impossible vertical climb that is getting published, how dare someone try to invest in both highly unlikely scenarios in order to have a slightly less slim chance of being relevant.

At least he was able to go somewhere else, and this isn't one of those things where the promoter takes ownership of the IP just for giving someone a shot. There are places where the world works that way.

They may still do so, nothing stops them. However, I still fail to see that getting a publisher should be an automatic pass on Steam.Getting a publisher may be good for them in all other regards, marketing and sales and so on. However, it should still be Valves prerogative if they want to let the game in, or what rules they have on letting them in.

Many indies do not want a publisher, they want to stay independent. I have no problem seeing that a game should be judged on its own merit, and not whether the developers have business sense / interest enough to bag a publisher. If I were an indie developer and had a game in Greenlight, I would be miffed by seeing games fast-tracking by "selling out" (yes, it is in quotation marks).

That was just a queer way of Steam to say they don't want the game on Steam in the present form. It's their shop, they can set the rules. If the publisher is not big as EA or so, probably that will be done what Valve says.

Now the question is if the game is really good and if it may come to GOG.

So how exactly does Steam define a game to be "indie"? Because clearly having a publisher is not relevant to the discussion.

Self-publishing should always be harder but it can ultimately come out more rewarding. Publishers have connections and a recognizable name. By self-publishing, you are going without that. Of course it should be harder.

And in reference to your other post, people on Greenlight getting publishers aren't "fast tracking". Frankly, if you're interested in looking for a publisher and aren't actively trying to get a publisher during your Greenlight campaign, I'd say you're wasting time. If you're not interested in looking for a publisher, that's your choice.

However, the issue here is that Valve rejected Paranautical Activity SOLELY on the fact that they had a Greenlight page. Had they never been on Greenlight, they may have been accepted - Adult Swim gets a decent amount of indies on Steam.

I guess I don't really see the problem here. Do you really want Indie games all over to start knocking on Publisher's doors to get a deal that allows them to circumvent having to get their game Greenlighted? If Steam allowed that they'd be indrectly pushing all Indie developers into publisher deals they may not really want to be a part of, and possibly don't have to at all if they manage to get greenlighted.

I don't blame them. That wasn't my question.

That Steam has become a necessity is not in question. That indie developers seem to be clamouring for Steam's approval is also not in question.

The question was simply: am I the only one who finds it somewhat disconcerting?

To expand the point a little: people have (often justly) complained about publishers using their power to dick over developers in some manner or another. The popularity of Steam was (I believe) seen as a good counter balance to this. Now, Steam's power puts it in a position to dick over developers, as highlighted in the linked video in the OP.

And I can't help but find that somewhat disconcerting.

Wanting to self-publish is fine, and anyone doing so I wish the best of luck. However with the current state of PC gaming, if your game doesn't manage to get the attention of someone at Valve, or appeal to the Steam core demographic enough to get through Greenlight, your sales are pathetic. Sales data that developers have revealed shows this over and over. GOG does good sales if your game gets on there, but still it is around 1/5th of steam. Places like Desura and Impulse get little sales. In that situation, between hoping for the best with Greenlight or taking a deal with a publisher that will give them a cut, but at least get you sales, most people will pick that.

It would be great if every game was measured on it's own quality, but sadly it isn't. As is I doubt many people would hold it against a game for going with a publisher if it meant them getting a chance to at least be on steam to make some money.

Didn't the Expedition: Conquistador guys have a Greenlight campaign going when they signed up with bitComposser?

we don't know that. they may have just started by getting an application, putting the name in google and greenlight comes up - "ah, it is the process already" and then the process stops there. saying it is SOLELY, we do not know, but it was where the process stopped, probably before it really started.

re. the rest - well, i feel that games should have equal chance and not depend on publisher or not, for me this is a sign that greenlight is working as intended.

They signed with a publisher and now they CAN'T get on Steam due to doing that? Is that a good thing?