Steam Needs Quality Control

You must have trouble understanding english.

I'm saying it has the best quantity AND quality. Both at once. PS4 only has quality in 1 game. No quantity. PC has both. 100 more aaa-aa's is nuts.

Its substantially superior.

People are blown away by very different things. I find many games that get 9+ painful to play, like a lot of the Cod franchise. I however spent about thirty hours building a memorial to Rancher Gno in Gnomoria. It wasn't nearly as magnificent as her savage spirit, but it was kind of neat.

That said, do you really base your view of a game's quality on metacritic? Fun fact about metacritic: The all time best games are either multiplats, Nintendo, or PC games. You have to go all the way down to 21 for a Sony exclusive, and there are like six versions of Zelda that are better then Last of Us. Valve also seems to have a better record then Naughty dog.

Simple maths don't tell much of a story.

I got 12-15 hours of gameplay out of excluding the cut-scenes. With them its closer to 20 hours game time.

As for Roler42's questions:

I've beaten MGS4 more than 100 times, on my old PS3 (before it broke, an original 2006 60gb PS3) I had 120-something stars or so (you get a star each time you complete the game so it will say *05 if you played through it five times)

and then on my new PS3 slim 320gb I've got about a dozen stars. So what does that make.. 1000 hours?

As for TLOU I have beaten the game twice, and recently gave up playing on the hardest difficulty, will probably play again in the future.

UC3 I beat once, UC2 I beat 3-4 times.

Believe it or not I struggle completing my games. I simply can't get into games anymore. If I complete a game, its highly honourable meaning it truly is a great game (or just really easy / short). I have 150 PC games on Xfire, but I've only completed 20-30 of them. I have 60 PS3 games and 40+ are not complete. The only games I completed in since UC3 and in 2011 are:

Bioshock Infinite

The Last of Us

Arkham City (bought it right after UC3, christmas 2011)

rest of my games from 2011-2014 are not yet completed.

But your opinion is wrong, MGS4 was masterfully edited and easily had the best cinematics in any game.

Shhh logic does not belong in system wars.

clearly a 10 hour game rated 10 by critics MUST be so much better than what you play.... :roll:

the people putting thousands of hours into WoW, TF2, DoTA 2 ect on valves games along.

but be ready for the butthurt flawed "BUH BUH THEY ARE MULTIPLAYER OFC THEY WILL BE PLAYED LONGER QQ" responses that follow.

10 hours of a linear no challenge TPS like uncharted or last of us.

or my 300+ hours in TF2 ... 1000 + hours in Mobas ... yea I think I know which I and most people would take.

more fun in a 30 minute TF2 session than I had in multiple hours of Last of Us...

Steam is way to big and popular to have Quality Control. If it was just one of many huge DD stores and had like 5% of the market QC could work just well. As it is now introducing strict quality control into Steam would be complete diseaster to indie pcgaming. It would annihilate most of it.

Well you can disagree all you want, but it's not illogical in the least. When a company provides a service and either fails or ceases to provide good customer service people will move on either to a similar service Like Gog or just do what I did and forgo PC gaming altogether (PS4 for the win) People are just going to get fed up of being jerked around especially when the Devs are purposely lying and deceiving it's customers. People who for the most part use Steam to find out about Steam games, because why wouldn't they? If you can't trust the service to be honest with you and not lie than odds are you're going to get mad and not use that service it only makes sense to rational human beings. I'm not going to keep buying products from someone who constantly lies to me and sells me broken knockoffs.

To quote Jim Sterling again

"It can't last this kind of business model, one that favors total market saturation over customer satisfaction, Quality guarantee and ones own credibility is so short sighted I'm surprised any company still goes for it."

Or they could learn from their mistakes and not throw money at every single thing steam releases? You're saying that it only makes sense for a rational human being because that's precisely what you did, so I consider that point pretty moot. I'd personally say a rational human being would be smart enough to not throw money at every project on steam, but apparently not. Also, if you're continuously buying broken products off of steam, you should really look into what you're buying because I have over 100 titles on steam and not one of them is broken or anywhere close to being unplayable. Seems more like you're blowing the problem way out of the water but of course you are, otherwise you'd have no argument in the first place.

You really have no proof that people will forsake and the numbers also disagree with you as steam is getting more and more popular. You can keep posting that quote but one man's opinion isn't proof, it's just that, an opinion.

Also, I see you're still ignoring all arguments as to how having quality control would be unfeasible for steam but that doesn't really surprise me since you're debate skills are quite lacking.