Aftermath: Valve, not developers, should police AI clones on Steam
Luke Plunkett writes that this week's wave of AI-generated clones, in which someone scrapes a real game's codebase and sells a copy on a storefront, has pushed developers into defensive tactics. Those include announcing games later, favouring in-person events over online showcases and delaying public playtests. He argues the burden belongs with Valve, which takes a 30% cut of most Steam sales and already has content rules it enforces unevenly.
Plunkett points to a Steam Next Fest with more than 8,000 games as a sign that moderation is overdue. He says a store full of near-identical copies will drive users away. He cites Nintendo acting against Unpacking copycats on the eShop and PlayStation removing publishers for clogging its store as precedent. His conclusion is that the problem is Valve's to fix.
CounterpointDefenders of Valve's hands-off approach would say that screening thousands of submissions for derivative code is hard to do at scale. They would add that aggressive proactive removals risk catching legitimate developers, and that Valve already has an AI-disclosure policy that it can enforce after the fact.