Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Steam games (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Yunshui 雲‍水 09:50, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of Steam games

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Also nominating:

{{List of Steam games}} (by necessity since it only refers to pages exclusively in this AFD)

Short summary: violates WP:NOT#CATALOG. MASEM (t) 16:28, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Further explanation: Steam is a popular software package that is used for purchasing and delivering games (and recent, productivity apps) to the user. It includes games made by its developer, Valve Corporation, but the bulk are third party titles. While Steam provides a layer of digital rights management to protect piracy of released products for any software on the system, it also offers an API layer, Steamworks, which developers can chose to take advantage of to offer more features like networking, achievements, cloud saves, etc.

Recently the category Category:Steam games was deleted per discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 November 27#Category:Steam games. This focused on the fact that at this point, Steam basically is a large vendor akin to Amazon.com and we would never have a category "Amazon.com products"; similarly this category was proved to be a problem. I will note that some arguments in that CFD pointed out that we had List of Steam games so the functionality of the category really wasn't lost.

That said, I've been mulling over these lists for a few days and realize that the lists themselves are a problem - again, they are akin to a catalog even though we don't give prices. It is not an issue of notability (Steam clearly is) nor instability (the rate that games are added and removed, though change about 3-4 times a week, are not huge), but simply we are basically giving a list of first- and third-party products a specific vendor supplies, making this commercial in nature. I'm also considering a recent set of AFDs that involved the channel lineups of specific cable/satellite providers (eg Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of AT&T U-verse channels) where we deleted these because we were basically providing a directory of what products a vendor provided.

I know these comparisons will come up, but I want to differentiate this list from other possible/existing lists. A hypothetical List of Microsoft Windows games (which would necessarily include every game on these lists) would be reasonable, since we are not identifying the list with any vendor, just by platform, which we have done for every other console/portable out there (eg List of Xbox 360 games); the console/platform is not a vendor here (though they can be ones that sell a sub-selection of those) so its not commercial in nature.

List of Xbox Live Arcade games would seem to be the same as the List of Steam games, but here, the only way to get these games on the 360 (with very limited exceptions of some retail releases) is through purchase through the service; further, the service offers special features/APIs that tie in with the 360 hardware/OS, which are included in the above list. Therefore, while it is a full "catalog" of games offered by a vendor, its serving the purposes of outlining games that have a specific feature-set for the 360 and just so happens these two sets are nearly identical. (Note: I am well aware of the price of MS points in the Arcade list, that does need to go, but that's not a point here, since we don't have price lists for Steam games). In the same vein, I would see no problem with a List of Steamworks-enabled games, since that would focus on the feature set and not the catalog aspect, and secondly Valve/Steam is not the only vendor for these (you can buy redeemable codes at Amazon.com or other places); Steamworks-enabled games require Steam to run, but that's not fully spelling the catalog, just focusing on a specific unique, notable feature. (I do note we apparently have List of games using Steam authentication, which is actually fine and could be expanded upon).

Going a bit more detailed, something like List of games developed by Valve would not be a problem because here, this is more akin to a bibliography or discography, even through Valve also is the primary vendor for all these games.

I will note that I think deletion is the right approach here, but there is a possibility that these lists can be used to form the basis of a List of Steamworks-enabled games by removing those that do not have Steamworks, and adding columns for the appropriate Steamworks features, so a rename/revamp of these articles may also be possible. But my gut tells me it would be easier to start fresh than to work backwards - I might be wrong there. --MASEM (t) 16:50, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I don't want to just say "per nom", but Masem lays out a hugely comprehensive case. I'll just say we should not group items by vendor, and we have other ways of grouping them by company and online access and functionality. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 17:14, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete My initial reaction to seeing this was "what, are you kidding? How do we justify deleting this?" Masem makes a very compelling case, however, particularly with the distinction he draws between this and List of Steamworks-enabled games (something I agree could exist; indeed, I would support that list's creation and possibly using List of Steam games as a redirect) and the amusing suggestion that this is akin to having a List of Amazon goods. The distinctions back up the notion that this violates WP:NOT#CATALOG, in that it essentially represents a Steam sales catalog. I anticipate a barrage keep arguments akin to the obvious fact that this list is useful, but I hope people take the time to read Masem's well-considered rationale. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 19:37, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:NOT#CATALOG and per Masem (and some previous discussions). It simply comes down to us not listing a store's catalog. Steam is not a computing platform per se, and whatever games are on Steam will also be on their specific platform. If being on Steam was somehow unique, such list would be warranted (i.e. List of Steamworks-enabled games or something), however these games are just games in a very long list of items Steam sells and distributes and most games only incorporate Steam API for achievements and stats, which is hardly a defining factor, in my opinion. Granted that Steam is basically a monopoly right now, but that shouldn't be a factor or we are biasing for the "big guys". Besides raising these points I feel stronger about, I pretty much agree with Masem's arguments. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 20:25, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did you forget to include List of games using Steam authentication in this? And we do have Category:Steam Workshop games.--Vaypertrail (talk) 21:26, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I said we should not include it when it was brought up at WT:VG, and I'm guessing Masem agreed. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 21:28, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But you can apply the exact same deletion reasoning to it, can you not?--Vaypertrail (talk) 21:33, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, please see my reasoning above. Those lists you point are games sorted by a specific software feature (the use of Steamworks API, the use of Steam Workshop). Yes, they are tied to a vendor, this being Valve/Steam, but the focus is on the feature set of the software, as opposed to just being listed for sale on a site. --MASEM (t) 21:50, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of games using Steam authentication - I thought all Steam games required authentication? Making it a duplicate of List of Steam games. Correct?--Vaypertrail (talk) 22:14, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some games require Steam authentication when purchased via other channels. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 22:21, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are absolutely right that Steam's DRM is based on encrypting each executable file in a manner that requires you to have first authenicated yourself with Steam's servers to get a "magic cookie" (or other authentication token) that lets you then run the games; however, past this point, most games do not use that information at all even if it is available. This executable authenication is a function of the steam software and the developers of a game for the service need not do anything to have that work for them because that all executes before the game is launched. In other words - if it is on the store, it has this feature. What the List of games with Steam authentication does are those that then further use the Steamworks API to take advantage of the unique user information to track players in leaderboards or for matchmaking. This has to be added by the developer. My suggestion of a List of Steamworks-enabled games would encompasss this list since this Steam authenication in-game is part of the API. I think what the confusion is here is that the current authenication list needs to be accurate that it is talking about the in-game use of the feature and not just the default protection Steam offers. --MASEM (t) 22:22, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any sources available for List of games using Steam authentication, or is it all original research? I find it very unclear...--Vaypertrail (talk) 22:34, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the individual games will likely have their own sources to affirm that (eg a title off the top of my head I know does is Borderlands 2, as this was a huge thing to use Steamworks auth over the previous title's Gamespy). If not sourced to third-parties, then this information would be on the game's card sheet at Steam. --MASEM (t) 22:39, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Steam is not a maker of games, but simply a distributor. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:09, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete absolutely correct, Steam is not a platform. --SubSeven (talk) 05:25, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- As a comment on this point, this is a good way to identify the difference: Steam is a storeform, Steamworks is the basis of a platform. --MASEM (t) 16:13, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:NOTCATALOG --Odie5533 (talk) 15:24, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete ALL per nom. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 01:05, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This list is quite useful, and I don't believe the information it has should be deleted. I don't believe it violates WP:NOTCATALOG any more than List of Playstation 3 Games, List of Wii Wi-Fi Connection games, or List of PlayStation Store games, since Steam is considered its own platform (a gaming distribution platform. The page could use enhancements though. Look at it from another perspective: An article "List of Games available through Digital Distribution" would be acceptable, would it not? However, adding features to each game that are offered by the different digital distributors would take up a lot of space, and the list itself would be quite large. At that point, would you not consider making a "List of Steam Games", "List of Desura Games", "List of Windows Live Games", etc.? In addition, the main point of this article is the features and platforms each game supports. It is a difficult choice, but I think instead of just getting rid of all this useful information out of hand (I personally spent much time creating the Linux column and enhancing the Mac column) you should propose a way to keep this information and its usefulness while staying in wikipedia guidelines. I also think this request for deletion should be left open for quite some time. 98.127.132.120 (talk) 04:29, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Steam is not the platform - it is the store; the platform for these games is either Microsoft Windows (which encompasses them all + more) or Steamworks-enabled games. That list grouping is on the order with PS3 games (a platform), Wii Wi-Fi Connections games (a specific subset based on features). List of PlayStation Store games (note: List of PlayStation Store games is a list of lists, and while the individual lists are fine, I'm not sure about the list of list need). We would similarly not have a List of Desura games or List of GOG games. We would likely have a List of Games for Windows or Games for Windows - Live (these are feature sets) as well. Also, overarching, "It's useful" is not a strong argument. --MASEM (t) 06:37, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- To be honest, I don't see how those examples and List of PlayStation Store games and it's sublists don't violate CATALOG and are much better. PS list is basically their respective store's catalog, but split by platform or some other criteria. Their real distinction is that the games are only available via PlayStation Store and that may be valid criteria to pass WP:INDISCRIMINATE. If we had Available on Steam-only list, that would be different that Available on Steam list. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 09:39, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:48, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per NOTCATALOG. About as encyclopedic as a list of condiments sold at Tesco. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 02:32, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.