# Valve adds Steam submission checks as reviews take up to 12 working days > Developers must run games through Steam for at least 5 minutes and check dependencies, achievements and cloud saves. AI-assisted releases are part of the backdrop, but Valve has not blamed them for the backlog. > > OpenCheese AI · 2026.11.06 · Web page: https://opencheese.dev/blog/valve-adds-steam-submission-checks-as-reviews-take-up-to-12-working-days A game that runs when someone opens its executable has not necessarily passed the more relevant test: running through Steam. Valve's updated submission rules now require developers to check that their games work through the platform for at least 5 minutes before sending a build for review. The change comes as approval queues lengthen amid a surge in new games, including many made with AI, although Valve has not directly blamed AI-assisted projects for the delays. ## A longer queue, with more checks before entry Valve's target review time is 3-5 days. The company now acknowledges that developers can wait up to 12 working days, leaving a larger gap between submitting a build and getting it through review. The revised requirements are intended to reduce the number of builds returned for corrections. Valve wants developers to catch more problems before submission, so its reviewers spend less time examining the same builds again. That is a narrower response than changing which games Steam accepts. The announced measures concern whether a submission is ready for review, from its launch behavior to the way its screenshots are categorized. There is a practical distinction here. Testing a game directly on a developer's machine can miss problems that appear when it is installed or launched through the Steam client. A working executable is useful evidence, but it does not answer every question the platform needs answered. ## What developers must check The updated checklist covers both the game itself and the material submitted alongside it: - **Launch through Steam.** Developers must start the game through Steam and confirm that it runs on the platform for at least 5 minutes before submitting the build. - **Check common components.** Installation of shared components, including DirectX and Visual C++, must be checked in advance. - **Prepare achievements.** Developers need to make sure achievements are ready before review. - **Check cloud saves.** Steam Cloud save settings must be configured correctly. - **Categorize screenshots.** Screenshots must be sorted into categories covering gameplay, menus, concept art or video. The launch requirement addresses a specific gap in earlier submissions. Some developers had limited their testing to opening the executable directly, potentially missing installation and startup problems that occurred through Steam. The other checks extend that same principle to supporting components and platform features. Valve is asking developers to arrive with those details already checked, rather than discover during review that the build needs another pass. The modest duration of the launch test is part of what makes the change striking. Before a game joins a queue measured in working days, Valve wants evidence that it can run through the intended client for 5 minutes. ## The AI connection remains an explanation, not a finding The longer waits coincide with a sharp increase in new games, many of them created with AI assistance. That makes AI an obvious part of the discussion, but it does not establish how much of the backlog those projects caused. Developer 2 Left Thumbs suggested that an influx of low-quality projects during September and October may be one reason the queue has grown. Valve itself has not directly connected the increase in waiting times to AI-made games. Those positions should remain separate. One is a developer's proposed explanation for the congestion. The other is Valve's acknowledgment of longer waits and its attempt to reduce repeat reviews. There are figures showing how common AI disclosures have become among some Steam releases: - **October releases.** A Reddit user reported that 49.9% of games released on Steam that month disclosed the use of AI-generated content. - **June demos.** Almost 20% of demos participating in Steam Next Fest disclosed AI-generated content. The numbers describe different groups. October's figure concerns released games, while June's concerns festival demos. They cannot be treated as a clean month-to-month growth series. Nor does the 49.9% figure measure the review queue. It does not establish what share of pending submissions used AI, how long those submissions took to review, or how often they needed corrections. A disclosure that AI-generated content was used also says little, by itself, about the quality of the finished game. The distinction matters because the proposed explanation can easily become more definite in the retelling. AI-assisted games are arriving in substantial numbers. Valve's reviews are taking longer. The information available does not show how much the first fact explains the second. ## Cubic Earth shows what a delay can cost in attention For an independent developer, a review delay can interrupt a launch that has already begun attracting an audience. The creator of Cubic Earth said the game's trailer had received more than 60,000 views on YouTube and that wishlist additions had exceeded 6,000. Those figures show that players were paying attention before publication was held up. The developer said the delay was followed by complaints on the game's community pages and fading interest in the launch. In that account, the queue had become a public-facing problem, rather than a private administrative wait. The figures do not establish lost sales, and the developer did not need to make that claim to describe the difficulty. A trailer can build expectations while the release remains dependent on a review process taking longer than its stated target. That puts the extra checking in context. Finding a preventable launch problem before submission is inconvenient. Finding it after waiting for review can mean another correction cycle while prospective players are already asking where the game is. ## Plan around the wait, not just the target Developers have a concrete response available: complete the Steam-specific checks before submitting, including the installation route and launch behavior that a direct executable test can miss. Release planning also needs to account for the longer stated wait rather than assume the 3-5-day target will hold. The checklist is intended to reduce repeat reviews. It should not be mistaken for a promise that an individual submission will receive faster approval. The broader question about AI-assisted volume remains unresolved by the figures available. Valve's immediate response is more practical and considerably less futuristic: before sending a game into the queue, make sure it actually runs through Steam. ## Related posts - 2026.11.07 · [Inkling 2 Small ranks third for website generation on DesignArena](https://opencheese.dev/blog/inkling-2-small-ranks-third-for-website-generation-on-designarena.md): Thinking Machines Lab's 594 billion-parameter model scored 1340 in DesignArena's website-generation ranking. It is available through Tinker, with an Apache 2.0 weight release planned after external safety checks. - 2026.11.06 · [Claude adds read-only bank access with Personal Finance beta](https://opencheese.dev/blog/claude-adds-read-only-bank-access-with-personal-finance-beta.md): Anthropic's Personal Finance tool connects Claude to bank and credit card accounts through Plaid. The US beta can analyze spending and flag possible problems, but it cannot move or invest money. - 2026.11.02 · [Anthropic and OpenAI give California different plans for stopping dangerous AI](https://opencheese.dev/blog/anthropic-and-openai-give-california-different-plans-for-stopping-dangerous-ai.md): Both companies wrote to Governor Newsom after his September order. Anthropic wants the attorney general able to seek a court-ordered pause, OpenAI wants mandatory emergency shutdown mechanisms that developers must actually use.