https://kotaku.com/valves-rocky-road-to-better-communication-about-steam-1833504663
Valve's Rocky Road To Better Communication About Steam
Credit to Valve: Over the past 15 years, it's turned Steam into a megalith
and kept it relevant with a steady, if slow, stream of new features. But in
continually reacting to problems instead of anticipating them, and by keeping
communication to a minimum, Valve has left a swath of damage in its wake,
from review bombs and toxicity to fiascos like the recent near-release of
post-apocalyptic rape fantasy Rape Day. After a press briefing at GDC in San
Francisco this week, I spoke to Valve about its recent travails in the realm
of transparency.
Valve在过去15年间将Steam建设为宏伟的奇观，并以缓慢而稳定的速度添加新功能。
但由于在面对一连串问题时的迟钝反应，以及与外界仅仅保持着最低程度的交流，
Valve在诸多评论轰炸与后启示录幻想作强奸日等仇恨言论中彻底搞砸了，留下一地狼藉。
本周在旧金山召开的GDC新闻发布会后，我与Valve谈论了近来他们在透明度方面的困境。
Valve still plays things pretty close to the chest when it comes to
communication, but the folks running Steam seem to be realizing that isn't
quite working. Recently, there's been an uptick in statements from the
company's beating heart in Bellevue, Washington.
Valve仍然相当重视沟通的重要性，但是负责营运Steam的人似乎才刚意识到，
现行的做法并不有效。最近，这家公司位于华盛顿柏卫的运作核心，
对此已经有了较明确的说明。
“The company still thinks like it's this tiny little group of folks,”
director of marketing Doug Lombardi told Kotaku. “We've never outgrown the
mentality that we're only, like, 50 people. And the principle has always been
‘Just ship stuff, people will find it.’ Then we'll listen to developers and
customers and make updates and stuff like that... Now we're hearing from
folks that there's so much going on, that they're being fed from the firehose
and all that. ‘Maybe if you guys took some time to curate your messages a
little better, we'd understand where you're going, where your head was at,
how to leverage it, etc.’”
市场主管Doug Lombardi告诉Kotaku：
"公司以自己还是个小团体的方式在思考，我们仍然幼稚地以为自己还是个50人的小公司，
遵循着'把东西放上去，人们自己会去找'的原则，然后再听取开发者与消费者的意见，
进行后续的更新。现在，员工都说事情实在太多了，他们就像被消防水管强迫喂食一样，
'你们要花点时间组织一下语言，我们才能了解你们要干什么、在想什么、如何去实现。'"
Steam business specialist Tom Giardino was frank in his assessment of how
unintuitive Valve's previous, infrequent missives about new features,
changes, and decision-making could be. “Developers are so busy,” he said. “
They might ship a game once every two or three years. A huge amount of
Steamworks changes and improvements come in that time. We'd work really hard
on an update, ship it, and post a blog about it that maybe 500 people would
read.”
Steam的商务专员坦诚地评价Valve过去关于新功能、
改变与决策过程的公文有多么稀少而又不直觉：
"开发者们都很忙，他们可能每两三年就要出一款游戏，
与此同时也会有大量的Steam功能改善，我们努力更新，
最后却发布一篇可能只有500个人会想去读的说明。"
But Valve is still a primarily reactive company, putting out fires where they
arise instead of building features and policies that are immediately
fireproof. This approach has frustrated many developers and users over the
years. Most recently, that tendency drew widespread ire when, earlier this
month, a self-described “game where you can rape and murder during a zombie
apocalypse” called Rape Day appeared on Steam, with a Steam page that said
it was coming soon. After days of controversy, Valve announced that Rape Day
wouldn't come out on their platform after all due to “unknown costs and risks
” the game posed.
但Valve仍然是一家以回应为主的公司，哪里有火才去扑灭，而非主动建立能防火的对策。
这条路线在过去多年来令许多开发者与用户都感到相当挫折。
就在最近，这股挫折感又招来了广泛的怒火，因为本月稍早，一款宣称
"可以在僵尸末日中强奸与谋杀"，名为强奸日的游戏页面在Steam上出现，并即将发售。
在数日的论战后，Valve公告不会让强奸日上架的决定，理由是"无法预知成本与风险"。
But that's pretty much all the company said, and nobody could parse out
exactly what the statement meant. As ever, Valve refused to put things in
cultural, moral, or ethical terms, preferring instead to speak from behind a
veil of incomprehensible business-ese. This led to further confusion and
anger over the whole incident.
表态仅此而已，没人能从中分析出这句声明的真正意思。一如以往，
Valve拒绝为文化、道德或伦理表态，而是隐藏在幕后打令人费解的官腔，
又为此事招致进一步的困惑与愤怒。
When I tried to ask Lombardi and Giardino about the statement's specific
wording, they sidestepped the question on two separate occasions. However,
Lombardi, along with Steam man-of-many-hats Alden Kroll, delved into how
Valve hopes to prevent another Rape Day-type incident from happening in the
future.
当我分别试着询问Lombardi与Giardino关于这句话的明确意思时，
他们不约而同的避开了这个问题。然后，在Steam中有着多项职务，
与Lombardi同行的Alden Kroll努力阐述表示，
Valve希望能避免未来再有强奸日这样的事件发生。
“There's this issue that happens that we're working to correct now where a
developer or publisher will sign up for something, they'll make a [store]
page and that'll go live, and then the code comes through and there's an
evaluation for the code—for the game itself,” said Lombardi. “So there's
this step where the sign goes up—’coming soon,’ so to speak—and then
there's this process of actually looking at the game. We're working to
correct that now so that everything gets reviewed before anything goes up.”
"我们正在修正的一个问题点在于，开发商或发行商为了注册一些东西，
他们会先创建商店页面并上线，接着还要上传程式码，然后是对游戏本身的运作测试，
在此间便是'即将上市'标语出现的时机，之后才会真正进入游戏审核的过程。
我们正在修正这些问题，确保以后所有的东西在上线前都要先经过检查。"
Rape Day, he clarified, was never actually approved; it only appeared that
way because the developers put the page up. In the future, that shouldn't
happen anymore.
他表示强奸日从未获准正式上架，当时仅仅只是开发者想让页面先出现而已，
未来也已经不会再有这种事。
Kroll said that, despite the belief that Valve automates too many of Steam's
processes, “like 90 percent of the games” being submitted to Steam are
reviewed multiple times by a human team at Valve. First the review team looks
at a game's store page, and then they play a build of the game itself and
check to make sure that it's functional and contains features listed on the
store page. “We go through a checklist of ‘Does it do these things? Does
the build match what's on the store page? Is it what they're promising?’”
said Kroll.
Kroll表示，虽然有人认为Valve过度自动化了Steam的许多程序，
实际上大概有九成的游戏被提交给Steam之后都会由Valve的人类团队进行多次检查。
先是看商店页面，然后进入游戏来确保是可以运作的，并且包含了商店页面声明的内容。
"我们用检查清单来确保'它能做这些事吗？内容是否与商店页面吻合？
这是它们承诺会有的内容吗？'"
There's also another review team for “edge cases,” according to Kroll. This
team meets once a week to look at games that don't fit pre-established molds
and evolve Steam's policies over time.
另外还有一个检查团队是为了特殊案例准备的，这个团队一周开一次会，
来看那些不符合规范的游戏，并且持续改进Steam的政策。
“These are things that we can't deal with right away, and we need a group to
figure out ‘How does this fit into our decision making, and how can we adapt
our decision making to that?’” said Kroll. “We knew from the beginning, we
couldn't define ahead of time a bunch of gray lines, because you can't
anticipate what people are gonna make. So then it's all these weekly
conversations around ‘This is in this gray area here. How do we see that?
How do we determine what that is?’ So it's an ongoing, iterative process.
We're constantly refining how that works.”
"有些事我们没办法立刻处理，而且需要一群人来思考'要怎么让这能符合我们的决策、
我们要如何调整决策？'，我们从一开始就知道，我们没办法提前在灰色地带划清界线，
因为你无法预期人们到底会做些什么事，这就是每周会议存在的目的。
'这里有个灰色地带，我们该怎么看？我们要怎么决定这里该怎么做？'
这会是一个不断重复进行的过程，我们会持续改进它的运作效率。"
Doubtless, this team has plenty to learn from Rape Day.
毫无疑问，这个团队需要从强奸日身上学很多东西。
Valve's particular style of reactivity has also left loopholes open for
abusive behavior from users. Over the years, Steam developers have dealt with
barely moderated communities, review bombs, harassment groups, and other
forms of toxicity. Valve initially let these things proceed sans much in the
way of human intervention, putting moderation duties on the backs of
developers and pushing back against review bombs only by implementing a graph
system in 2017 that mostly just served to make review bombs more visible.
Valve特有的反应模式也留下了能被用户滥用的漏洞。多年来，
Steam上的开发者们一直在处理难以管理的社群、评论轰炸、组织骚扰，
以及各种形式的负面行为。Valve最初对这些事放任自流、不进行人为干预，
将管理的责任全丢给开发者，只有在2017年反制评论轰炸时导入了图表，
来让评论轰炸一目了然。
Recently, the company's become more open to the idea of creating specialized
teams of flesh-and-blood people—rather than automated solutions—to weed out
Steam's most deep-rooted problems. Valve now has its own community moderation
team to assist developers. Most recently, it created a team that will look at
games that seem to be getting review bombed and, if need be, lock them down
so that incoming reviews temporarily don't count toward their scores. These
are positive steps forward after years of ineffective action or inaction, but
by previously opting to largely stay silent and let these things play out,
Valve ended up being partially responsible for heaps of harassment and a
broader player-vs-developer culture that has some devs eyeing the Epic Games
Store's greener pastures. Despite all that, Valve sounds like it plans to
stick to its guns.
近来，Valve为了解决Steam根深蒂固的问题，
开始从有血有肉的人组成的专家团队汲取灵感，而非依赖自动化的解决方案。
Valve现在有了专门的团队用来协助开发者管理社群。
最近还创建了用来观察评论轰炸的团队，并在有必要时暂时锁定评分以避免分数被影响。
Valve在长年来的无效行动或无所作为后，终于开始向前迈步，
但是由于过去长期的沉默与放任自流，Valve被认为需要对骚扰行为负一部分责任，
也形成了玩家与开发者对抗的氛围，而这又让一些开发者转向了Epic商店的新鲜土地。
无论如何，Valve似乎是准备好它的武器了。
“We can go all the way back to the day we launched Steam and say there's all
these things we wished we'd known beforehand that we could have done in
advance,” Lombardi said. “Part of it is, you get it to a point, you think
you have it, you ship it, and you find out a bunch of stuff once it's in the
wild and millions of people have it. You find not only the lists of things
you thought you should have included, but then there's this whole other list
of things that users and developers point out for you that you need to go do.
We measure ourselves more on how quickly we can respond to that stuff and
update things and keep reacting to stuff as times and technologies change.”
Lombardi说：
"我们可以回到Steam出现那天，然后说我们早就知道这些事然后可以提前预防。
一部分是，你知道这事该怎么做，你觉得自己已经掌握它了，然后实行，
接着你才会发现这件事实际上会导致大量的新问题，影响到无数人。
你会发现你该做的不只是你所想到的事情，还有用户与开发者所指出的事。
我们更加重视审视自我对于这些事的反应速度，
也会随着时间与科技演进不断更新并且应对新事物。"
Lombardi went on to point out that even way back when the company released
Half-Life, it wasn't expecting players to stack crates and find weird ways to
break the game. “That's sort of the funny example, but the same thing
applies,” he said.
Lombardi指出即使回到发行战栗时空的那天，也无法预测玩家会去堆箱子、
以奇怪的方法通过游戏。"虽然是搞笑的例子，但道理是一样的。"
But that's a single-player video game. Steam is a worldwide platform where
every minute decision affects hundreds of millions of users and developers.
One piles up far more collateral damage than the other.
但那是对单机的电子游戏而言。Steam是个世界级的平台，
任何微小的决策都会影响上亿个用户与开发者，所造成的伤害远比其他平台都多。
In response to that point, Kroll said he has regrets but ultimately stands by
the way the Steam team has handled things like review bombs.
Kroll对此的回应是，他虽然感到遗憾，但仍然支持Steam处理评论轰炸的方式。
“Of course we would rather save people grief,” he said. “But it's hard to
anticipate exactly what boundaries you need to put in place because you don't
know what people are gonna try, and you don't want to constrain too much the
ways people can voice themselves or—in the case of new features or
moderation or new types of games—you don't want to constrain the amount of
creativity people can put into the system, because we're surprised all the
time by what people bring.”
"我们当然不希望让人感到痛苦，但是真的很难预测你到底该做到什么程度，
因为你不知道人们会怎么做，你也不想过度限制人们的发声权，
—比如新功能、管理条例或游戏的新类型—
你不会想去限制那些有创意的人所带来的新点子，因为我们总是会为之惊叹。"
“But if you're looking at the review system for example, it was hard to
anticipate how people were gonna use it. Review bombing is a symptom of
having a popular platform that matters. That people care about. If nobody
cared about Steam, review bombing wouldn't be a problem on Steam.”
"但你在看评论系统时，难以预期到人们会怎么去使用它。
评论轰炸只在有影响力的热门的平台上才会出现，人们才会去在意。
如果没人在意Steam，Steam就不会有评论轰炸问题。"

终于知道自己还在用小公司思维开大车了

所以才出不了3吗

划重点 以后改成先审查才有页面 而不是先有页面再审查上架

营收营业额多少的小公司？

其实他这样改玩家制作方都没好处= =大概只有爽那群闹事的

steam希望大伙能自主自重，但现实层面来看几乎不可能

反正私人公司

溯游从之