It mentions it on the box I have - "Requires Internet Connection and Free Steam Account to Activate"Painted Battleship said:
Steam Gets Civilized
- Thread starter Shamus Young
- Start date
As a long time Civ fan (Playing since the original) I am not disturbed by this development in any way. I'm notoriously with losing game CDs and Steam lets me easily play without them, and in the off chance that my hard drive melts down and I need to do a full re-format, I can easily get a full, patched and updated game back on my computer (including all of its expansion packs) without praying that I have all the disks and CD keys.
As long as they aren't saying "You must buy Civ V through steam or you don't get to play it at all" then I'm all for it.
As long as they aren't saying "You must buy Civ V through steam or you don't get to play it at all" then I'm all for it.
The problem with letting 'good guys' build a monopoly is that there's no guarantee they'll stay 'good guys' or that the nature of the business world won't mean that some day they'll lose control of their monopoly to someone far less benevolent.
You know what, I like Steam. That said, I have a really fast internet connection that is constantly connected and I've been using the platform through its ups and downs since beta (sometime in 2003, I think). So I don't have a problem with it, and I'm actually glad that Civ V is coming to Steam, because it's actually significantly cheaper, as are nearly all games on Steam, than they are at any of my local game stores. So my choice is an economic one, otherwise I'm sure I'd be broke constantly for having to pay $90 at EB for a game that I can get on Steam for $50.
Just thought I'd add my two-cents worth there, and I really really wish that Shamus would go back to writing about game mechanics again, I really hate to say it but.. I just can't take his whinging about DRM and Online Distribution Platforms seriously anymore, because it seems like every single Experienced Points post for the last few months has just been about that.
Then again, I'm hardly forced to read it.
Just thought I'd add my two-cents worth there, and I really really wish that Shamus would go back to writing about game mechanics again, I really hate to say it but.. I just can't take his whinging about DRM and Online Distribution Platforms seriously anymore, because it seems like every single Experienced Points post for the last few months has just been about that.
Then again, I'm hardly forced to read it.
It took Modern Warfare 2 to finally make me use Steam. Now I've bought about 100 games on it. Personally I've always preferred to own nice boxed copies, but given that nowadays games are most released with just a DVD case, a disc and SFA else I don't feel like I'm missing out on much. Besides, one can't argue with the prices except for ridiculous ones like Borderlands being $79.99 USD on Australian Steam and $29.99 USD on American Steam.
Seriously, Steam is awesome. The crazy deals alone are worth having it. All these Civ people complaining; shouldn't. Soon they're going to feel the benefits. You're pretty silly not to take advantage of steam...
It's not like they tell publishers and devs to give them exclusives, they give them to steam in order to avoid as many boxed editions as possible by adding an extra incentive. By doing so they save so much money on packaging, resulting in a bigger profit from the smaller than console PC market, which will keep the PC market going strong.
@The underdogs comment.
They are underdogs, because they are rubbish. Seriously, D2D is god-damn awful, with no benefits, and often more expensive than a physical copy, with stupid America/Europe only sales.
Impulse is good, however, I've only used it to get the expansions for SinS.
Time to launch steam as of clicking the exe: 11.28 seconds.
Time to launch L4D: 9.68 Seconds.
Total time to get in game: 20.96 Seconds.
The problem isn't steam, it's you.
What reason is there to hate auto updates? Theres no logic behind it. If anything, it allows hot fixes to be distributed quickly and easily, and makes sure everybody has the same version
Seriously, can we have a intelligent argument against steam?
How so?Saverio said:
It's not like they tell publishers and devs to give them exclusives, they give them to steam in order to avoid as many boxed editions as possible by adding an extra incentive. By doing so they save so much money on packaging, resulting in a bigger profit from the smaller than console PC market, which will keep the PC market going strong.
@The underdogs comment.
They are underdogs, because they are rubbish. Seriously, D2D is god-damn awful, with no benefits, and often more expensive than a physical copy, with stupid America/Europe only sales.
Impulse is good, however, I've only used it to get the expansions for SinS.
...Cody211282 said:
Time to launch steam as of clicking the exe: 11.28 seconds.
Time to launch L4D: 9.68 Seconds.
Total time to get in game: 20.96 Seconds.
The problem isn't steam, it's you.
What reason is there to hate auto updates? Theres no logic behind it. If anything, it allows hot fixes to be distributed quickly and easily, and makes sure everybody has the same version
Seriously, can we have a intelligent argument against steam?
Any game that is released on steam gets a miss from me. Steam fails epically! I have had so many problems with it in the past. Give me a disc and xfire any day.
I cannot express how much I hate steam without a massive page long rant so I will stop here.
I cannot express how much I hate steam without a massive page long rant so I will stop here.
Hm... as a Steam/Valve fan, and a long time Civ fan, and a DRM hater, I really don't know what to think.
On one hand, Steam brings in lots of great things. I may actually give the online more of a chance now, since its integrated and isn't going to use Gamespy or something crap like that. I remember I barely ever touched the multiplayer in Civ4, mainly because none of my friends had it and it just wasn't that fun for me. But with Steam I'll be able to play with Steam friends right from the get-go, and I won't have to re-ad everyone. This could also help set up quick, fun games with friends. Plus with Steam we won't have to deal with the same DRM shit Bioshock 1 and 2 dealt with.
And on the other hand, I was perfectly happy playing alone. The game has infinite replayability since every new game has a brand new map, civs are randomized, and anything can happen. I didn't need to be connected online to have fun, the AI provided enough entertainment. Plus I doubt friends and lots of people would be willing to sit through a many hour game, going from ancient times to the future like I like to do. It just seems like a pointless addition to me since Civ4 offered a nice and easy way to play. No online required, infinite fun on your own, and that was it.
And I agree about the whole Steam monopoly thing. I know that right now Steam and Valve actually give a damn about their fans/costumers. But what will happen when Valve's gamer-friendly leadership is replaced with a not-so-gamer-friendly leadership. People say this won't happen, but once upon a time Microsoft was seen as the underdog, as the cool guy. Everyone loved Microsoft, and said that it would never turn into a big ass-hole corporation. And look what happened.
On one hand, Steam brings in lots of great things. I may actually give the online more of a chance now, since its integrated and isn't going to use Gamespy or something crap like that. I remember I barely ever touched the multiplayer in Civ4, mainly because none of my friends had it and it just wasn't that fun for me. But with Steam I'll be able to play with Steam friends right from the get-go, and I won't have to re-ad everyone. This could also help set up quick, fun games with friends. Plus with Steam we won't have to deal with the same DRM shit Bioshock 1 and 2 dealt with.
And on the other hand, I was perfectly happy playing alone. The game has infinite replayability since every new game has a brand new map, civs are randomized, and anything can happen. I didn't need to be connected online to have fun, the AI provided enough entertainment. Plus I doubt friends and lots of people would be willing to sit through a many hour game, going from ancient times to the future like I like to do. It just seems like a pointless addition to me since Civ4 offered a nice and easy way to play. No online required, infinite fun on your own, and that was it.
And I agree about the whole Steam monopoly thing. I know that right now Steam and Valve actually give a damn about their fans/costumers. But what will happen when Valve's gamer-friendly leadership is replaced with a not-so-gamer-friendly leadership. People say this won't happen, but once upon a time Microsoft was seen as the underdog, as the cool guy. Everyone loved Microsoft, and said that it would never turn into a big ass-hole corporation. And look what happened.
Even as a long time Civ player and rabid Sid Meier fanboy I'm not concerned over this. I was concerned over Firaxis flirting with Civ on consoles and facebook and how that could affect the direction of future Civ titles... but then word of Civ V being developed came out and my ringpiece unpuckered.
At the end of the day Civ V players will either adapt or abandon the title and that will prove whether the right decision was made.
At the end of the day Civ V players will either adapt or abandon the title and that will prove whether the right decision was made.
I'm on the fence. I've gotten a ton of games on Steam, but I prefer to have a choice. A game like Alpha Protocol is an ideal Steam purchase for me, I may play it for five hours or I may play it for fifty, but it's one of those games I like having in my digital locker. Civ is a different story; I already know I'm going to sink thousands of hours into it. Still, I immediately purchased the collector's edition when it was announced, it's Sid.
It takes me an average of 5 min to get into a game that I have to have steam for, and I can run DOW2 on max setting, so I don't think it's my computer. I also see no damn point in have to use steam if I go out and buy the disc, as I stated before I have no problem if they want to sell it with steam I just have no clue why I need it if I didn't buy it from steam.cyber_andyy said:
And for the auto updates, since I don't play multiplayer I friken hate it when I'm forced to update for no reason, not to mention if I have any mods it kills them.
EDIT: I should also point out that I don't buy games from steam, I hate not having the physical disk on me, it bugs me to no end and I hate waiting to download stuff.
Obviously I'm the only person in the world whose computer freezes during Dwarf Fortress.
I tried installing Steam some time ago, when there was a big sale for a game I wanted or other. It wouldn't load so I gave up. Haven't come back since. I'm primarialy a console gamer, so there's nothing I want on Steam, or more precisely that which I do want on Steam won't run on my computer.
That said, from an outside perspecitive, they do look like the best bet. If a company gains a near-monopoly through competence rather than dirty dealings, I see no problem in supporting it. If the smaller companies want to compete they may just as well step up their game.
If it ends up being like the console wars it's a desirable outcome. Even better because the odds you'll get stuck with a Dreamcast are low. Unless all these programs have some sort of feature to prevent themselves from being disabled I think anyone who's primarialy a PC gamer will know how to shut them off selectively if need be.
I tried installing Steam some time ago, when there was a big sale for a game I wanted or other. It wouldn't load so I gave up. Haven't come back since. I'm primarialy a console gamer, so there's nothing I want on Steam, or more precisely that which I do want on Steam won't run on my computer.
That said, from an outside perspecitive, they do look like the best bet. If a company gains a near-monopoly through competence rather than dirty dealings, I see no problem in supporting it. If the smaller companies want to compete they may just as well step up their game.
If it ends up being like the console wars it's a desirable outcome. Even better because the odds you'll get stuck with a Dreamcast are low. Unless all these programs have some sort of feature to prevent themselves from being disabled I think anyone who's primarialy a PC gamer will know how to shut them off selectively if need be.
So. I love Steam. I own lots of games on Steam. And I live in Australia. So keep that in mind when reading he following:
BAH. My issue isn't with Valve or Steam, but with 2K. Those greedy bastards are pursuing heavily regionalised prices on Steam. On the INTERNET. Which is a fundamentally BORDERLESS environment. It makes me so incredibly angry when a company does this. $50USD. £30GBP. $80AUD. So I'm being charged 40-60% more, just because I live in a nation where people are dumb and buy stuff from brick-and-mortar stores which have to slug them because -they- get ripped off by publishers and/or distributers. So fuck you, 2K. Good choice going with Steam - you obviously support non-retarded DRM. But I refuse to buy this game for 60% more than someone else has to pay, just because they live somewhere else. It's discrimination, and it's cost them a sale.
Now, I'm responding to a bunch of people, so it's been covered in spoiler tags so my post isn't ridiculously long.
More seriously, the monopoly issue is a real issue, but Valve aren't publicly traded, so it's not like they'll be bought out unless the owner -wishes- to sell it. I personally consider bankrupcy to be unlikely, given how much money Steam would be making. That, and they make wildly popular videogames, too. So unless there's monopoly abuse, or Valve collapse and/or are sold... I don't see an issue.
BAH. My issue isn't with Valve or Steam, but with 2K. Those greedy bastards are pursuing heavily regionalised prices on Steam. On the INTERNET. Which is a fundamentally BORDERLESS environment. It makes me so incredibly angry when a company does this. $50USD. £30GBP. $80AUD. So I'm being charged 40-60% more, just because I live in a nation where people are dumb and buy stuff from brick-and-mortar stores which have to slug them because -they- get ripped off by publishers and/or distributers. So fuck you, 2K. Good choice going with Steam - you obviously support non-retarded DRM. But I refuse to buy this game for 60% more than someone else has to pay, just because they live somewhere else. It's discrimination, and it's cost them a sale.
Now, I'm responding to a bunch of people, so it's been covered in spoiler tags so my post isn't ridiculously long.
While I admire your resolve, there's no point in missing out. Your actions will not, cannot EVER change the actions of a company like 2K. No given consumer's actions will. We're all utterly powerless, and whether you like it or not, we're going to see everything have at least one third party "are you a criminal or not?" program come with every game in the future. The best you can do is encourage the use of good ones, like Steam, not bad ones, like Games For Windows Live.Don said:
No, what you've traded for is a closed system, where you have no choice in the matter. All the games will cost roughly the same. There are (in Australia, at least) maybe a half dozen to a dozen different stores which carry all the games. I'm made to suffer arbitrarily regionalised prices, a draconian ratings system, and the whims of any cheap publisher who chooses to not release a game in my country. Furthermore, if we're talking about idiotic DRM, how about a console - a machine which is like a PC, but crippled entirely so you can't do anything other than play the games they provide? That is DRM, so much so that the entire device and concept is built around it. Mind you, I don't believe such a thing will be ever going away, so it's not like I don't own a 360 too.Straying Bullet said:
*coughs quietly* You know, if you look at Dawn of War 2's attached programs, Games For Windows Live is about a dozen times as frustrating. Especially if you like multiplayer. Just make sure Steam doesn't run at startup, if it's an issue for youCody211282 said:
If you're upset at something for it being patched a lot, I have to question whether or not you realise how beneficial it is to you when things are patched. Go and read the patch notes. See how they fix crashes, bugs, and in the case of games, imbalances. Really, if you like, go and take a look at the pile of rubbish Steam was when HL2 launched with it back in 2004 or so. See the justified rage at having to use Steam, because back then it was buggy, and was a mess. I'm so glad they've patched it!Cody211282 said:
So... everyone is happy, except people who compete with Steam? ...huh. Reading it -that- way... I suddenly have an urge to ignore you and buy something on Steam.Saverio said:
More seriously, the monopoly issue is a real issue, but Valve aren't publicly traded, so it's not like they'll be bought out unless the owner -wishes- to sell it. I personally consider bankrupcy to be unlikely, given how much money Steam would be making. That, and they make wildly popular videogames, too. So unless there's monopoly abuse, or Valve collapse and/or are sold... I don't see an issue.
So you own literally zero games which have any kind of online DRM? No games with Securom, no games with UPlay, no games with Games For Windows Live, no games with Starforce, no games with ANY online check of any kind? If that's the case, congratulations to you, sir, but I'd then contend that you're not the sort of person who plays popular or big-name videogames. Which is fine, but doesn't really work for most people on this website.Blackbird71 said:
Pretty much agree with this guy, really there's very little wrong with having Steam installed, and you get a free Portal if you buy Civ 5 before the 24th May. (Ok, You get a free Portal just for installing Steam before then!) but yes, once installed, you can set it not to run on startup, to be in offline mode, and to generally leave you the hell alone when you're playing.Crunchy English said:
On the downside, a monopoly is rarely a good thing, and Steam's lovely friendly side may well slip away if they find a way of destroying all competition with the Steamworks option forcing people to come to them. After all, why bother investing in customer service, good prices and ease of use if people don't have a choice any more?
I actually don't see Steam 'turning to the dark side' but it is a concern that Steamworks could get out of hand and stop the little guys getting a cut, despite it being a useful piece of software. At present I have Steam installed, along with games from GOG, D2D, and EA Store.
Shamus, I enjoyed your article and found it informative on the debate about digital distribution but your last paragraph kind of ruins it. Merely stating your opinion that one company controlling a market is bad for consumers is 1. lazy and 2. analytically wrong. If you want to explain the economics behind your opinion that competition=good for consumer then at least your view could be respected, but as it stands it looks like you are either trying to brainwash or brainwashed yourself.
Let me give you an example of competition=good not failing. In the UK Royal Mail used to have a monopoly over the postal services in the country. Sending a letter from anywhere cost the same amount as it did from anywhere else and all of the rates were reasonable. Then a right wing 'Labour' government decided to open up the lucrative business market to other companies and ripped out a very profitable sector from under Royal Mail's nose. This in turn has created a multi-tier mail system based on where you live as well as making all mail significantly more expensive. Post takes longer, postmen have to do MUCH longer shifts with little additional renumeration, they have to carry much larger sacks, investment in equipment is much slower to happen, and workers have to strike to improve their wage in line with inflation meaning we all get our post delayed or lost. Another example would be the break-up of British Rail, the company that used to have a monopoly over the railway here. Broken up by the Conservatives and finished off by Labour, we went from having reasonable prices with trains that generally run on time and an integrated information network whereby if a train is cancelled the consumer gets to know about it (rather than sitting in the fucking rain for two and a half hours as happened to me) as well as loyalty cards etc. that work wherever you go to having a fragmented system with more waiting, more delays, more accidents, and more cost.
Let me give you an example of competition=good not failing. In the UK Royal Mail used to have a monopoly over the postal services in the country. Sending a letter from anywhere cost the same amount as it did from anywhere else and all of the rates were reasonable. Then a right wing 'Labour' government decided to open up the lucrative business market to other companies and ripped out a very profitable sector from under Royal Mail's nose. This in turn has created a multi-tier mail system based on where you live as well as making all mail significantly more expensive. Post takes longer, postmen have to do MUCH longer shifts with little additional renumeration, they have to carry much larger sacks, investment in equipment is much slower to happen, and workers have to strike to improve their wage in line with inflation meaning we all get our post delayed or lost. Another example would be the break-up of British Rail, the company that used to have a monopoly over the railway here. Broken up by the Conservatives and finished off by Labour, we went from having reasonable prices with trains that generally run on time and an integrated information network whereby if a train is cancelled the consumer gets to know about it (rather than sitting in the fucking rain for two and a half hours as happened to me) as well as loyalty cards etc. that work wherever you go to having a fragmented system with more waiting, more delays, more accidents, and more cost.
Any FPS fan worth his grain has played Half Life 2, regrets having not been able to, or is jaded that his personal favorite FPS title isn't in that throne (if I had to guess, you fall into the third category).StriderShinryu said:
You really can't say that about many other FPS games, so yeah... I'd say that Half Life 2 is a flagship FPS title.