Steam Gets Civilized

[Doug]

Okay, I don't see the problem. When the people who don't wanna use Steam complain enough to murder someone, 2K Games will just release the thing as a retail game, therefor gaining them more money. 2K Games aren't stupid enough to NOT do that.

There ARE retail copies, but they require Steam to work; thats why people are angry about it.

Not me personally, but I can understand why people feel angry about being forced to use it. That said, they where being forced to use SecuRom before, which is much worse than anything Steam has ever done, heh.

 

[Cody211282]

Damn it why do i need steam, I don't play multiplayer(except local) and I hate auto-updates not to mention I despise having steam on my computer. The only reason I have it right now is because I need to for DOW2 and I hate the fact that it takes about 5 min for steam to launch, then update, then look for updates for the game, then it prepares to launch for another 3, then finally lets me play my damn game.

I'm really surprised your comp can handle Dow2. Steam doesn't look for updates, it gets an update if there's any. Also, who the fuck hates auto-patching, are you in love with fileplanet or something?

No I just don't like patching, as I said before I don't play multiplayer as a general rule(unless a friend wants to and I only have one that has the game), so the only time I update is if something is so damn broken about the game that i literally can't beat it without the patch. And my comp can run DOW2 on max because its a friken beast.

A beast...that can't run Steam? This is where the other guy's confusion was, I think - if your comp runs DoW 2 fine, it should have zero problem with Steam...

As for auto-update, if you really, really, REALLY don't want it, you can turn it off for individual games.

As I have said before it's not running it, it's connecting that I have a problem with, mostly because my internet sucks, but it only bother me on steam. As for turning it off as I said before I did that once, when a new patch came out it wouldn't let me play until I updated, so it was exactly the same.

I would also like to point out that my biggest problem is that I'm forced to have steam after buying the disc, it makes no sense and if I don't want it I shouldn't have to use it.

 

[WitherVoice]

Personally, I'm a big fan of Steam. I don't deny that it's DRM, but it's the nicest and most agreeable of ALL DRMs ever created. I'm a fan of Valve, too.

However, I am also a big fan of personal choice. I'd very much like to see Steamworks used as an OPTIONAL plugin, possibly required for the multi-player. I'm sorry, but I've played Battlefield 2 Bad Company, and while the game was good, the matchmaking and server finding was close to a criminal offence; using a third-party matchmaking service would have done them a world of good, and Steamworks is excellent at it. So yea, possibly required for multi-player. But if it's the long game in peace, starting a Civ game in the morning and finishing in the evening you're after, I think you should have the choice not to bother with Steam.

Me, I'm going to buy this, and play it, and be monumentally thankful that it's on Steam. Steam does on occasion do things I find distasteful, such as the $/£/? pricing affair, but since there are few things I hate more than filling my shelves with game boxes, and Steam games have so far proven less perishable than CD ones anyway, I accept the bad with the good as the overall best choice for me. And I'll be an avid supporter of Steam until the day they tick me off; but your right NOT to use it and still get to play your favourite games should be preserved equally, I feel.

 

[Signa]

To put it blunt, I shouldn't have to turn on my air conditioner to drive my car.

I know the last thing you want is another Steam fanboy shoving his opinion down your throat, but I just wanted to say that I felt the same as you when I bought the Orange Box. However, now that I have it, I find it to be a program that I want to run on my PC. The chat and friend list stuff makes it functional in more ways than I could have expected. I wasn't planning on buying any games from their store because I like my physical copies, but when they started offering games for $3-$5, I couldn't say no. I'm at 186 games now, and I have no regrets and no problem with the way Steam treats me. Maybe you will have a similar experience, maybe you won't, but I feel in control of the games I own because Steam treats me like an adult. GfWL came with another game I got, and it feels so restrictive by comparison.

 

[cyber_andyy]

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.

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.

If it takes you five minutes, then I'd really suggest running a couple of defrags if you haven't already. And/Or running a disk check on the drive you keep your Steam games on. Or reinstalling Steam and your Steam games, if it's only Steam that does this.

You quoted the wrong person

 

[Don't Poke My Bobcat]

I know the last thing you want is another Steam fanboy shoving his opinion down your throat, but I just wanted to say that I felt the same as you when I bought the Orange Box. However, now that I have it, I find it to be a program that I want to run on my PC. The chat and friend list stuff makes it functional in more ways than I could have expected. I wasn't planning on buying any games from their store because I like my physical copies, but when they started offering games for $3-$5, I couldn't say no. I'm at 186 games now, and I have no regrets and no problem with the way Steam treats me. Maybe you will have a similar experience, maybe you won't, but I feel in control of the games I own because Steam treats me like an adult. GfWL came with another game I got, and it feels so restrictive by comparison.

Don't get me wrong, I'm well aware of how good Steam is and the services it provides. Not least because the majority of this site may as well be on Valve's payroll. I have absolutely nothing wrong with the application itself.

However on a principle level, I should be able to choose to install it or not. You can argue I do still have the choice by not buying the game, which I indeed will not. I refuse to encourage such behaviours, because whilst at the moment it is harmless and may benefit me in setting up said installation; it is the beginning of a slope I wish the games industry wouldn't slide down.

I still don't know why developers can't just return to paper activation codes if they really want to do something about piracy. If they can place DRM in the game, someone can take it out - and if I can see this I don't see why they can't.

Instead, they've removed one sale from someone who's bought every game in the series. And I'm sure they'll be others.

 

[Delusibeta]

To be honest, I do concur with the "no choice" complaints. Steam is great for deals, but on a day-to-day basis I would far rather buy my Fallout 1s and Beyond Good & Evils off GOG, and more modern games from whoever sells 'em cheapest (often, retail)[footnote]unless said game has obnoxious DRM (e.g. Assassin's Creed, Mass Effect 1), in which case I'll try to avoid said DRM (e.g. buying Mass Effect 1 off Steam).[/footnote].

That all said, personally I don't have a problem with retail Steamworks games, mainly because I get Steam's service for retail prices. I do wish more games pull a UT3 (i.e. optional activation on Steam/Impulse) however.

 

[GrinningManiac]

What's the big deal with Steam?

I didn't know about it until I got The Orange Box, and it's been fine ever since. It makes for quick patching for my games, instant communication with my friends, an interesting place to meet new people AND it offers all my favourite games

Why is it bad? AT ALL!?

 

[joing_da_fun]

I am putting a note here.
HUGE SUCCESS.
People still stealing games.
Developers still creating money.
DRM still failing to stop hackers.
Gamers paying the price or not playing at all.
DRM still alive. DRM still alive.
In term of DRM steam deliver a good service, features I now find useful, cheap sales, and minimised the problem impacts on the computer for a DRM system, but still have the off-line error issue sometimes, and set auto-update by default. I understand the problems of other gamers have with steam in term of modding broke dur to force updates. Impulse's service is average compare to steam, for example of finding out how to change email (already done) and issues with third-party software(that?s is another story). Impulse is as better DRM system, yet allows me control what i update and install, and i can use SINS, fences pro and paintshop pro without impulse running in the background. Anyone who use steam or/and impulse had to live with of feeling you renting the games you buy and possibility worst things may happen in the future, new management, going bankrupt, irreversible corruption to your steam/impulse account, etc.
The best way to protect customer's interest and ownership of digital media is to have regularisation over the players of the video game digital sale distribution market like Valve, Stardock, GOG, D2D, Gamersgate, Blizzard and etc. Force them to allow customers to activation of their game means by telephone and fax (like Microsoft?s activation telephone system), fair and healthy business competition, stop taking large percentages of small indie company profits (example world of goo and 2Dboys), and some guarantees to receive all games purchases or complete refund due to account corruption, damage, or etc. Example of the Apple?s app store and Google talk issue is a very good reason to have some of regularisation to stop conflict of interest and again protect the customer wallet.
_______________
Note that paying DLC is bull to begin with GTA IV, DLC is the worst. wait for devs to package into a real complete game or **free updates included**
(Yes my grammar and spelling is crap don?t reply about it)

 

[Yamikotai]

You quoted the wrong person

Oops yes I did, sorry 'bout that

 

[Banter]

"From a business perspective, this is like releasing a game for the PS3 that requires you also own an Xbox 360 in order to to play it"

I'm a nit-picker, and I'm picking a nit on this statement.
This analogy is not very accurate at all when you consider that Steam is a free software download, and PS3 and Xbox 360 are consoles which cost a fair sum of money. It's really closer to asking you to download a new homepage for your PS3 to run the game.


Civilisation 3 & 4 have been on Steam for some time now, so I would've thought this would've been decided a long time ago.
The Total War series has been Steam too for years, so I'd think this is less of strategy gamers being 'yanked into the world of Digitial Distribution..' etc, but closer to a slow build up.

 

[Downfall89]

I seriously don't know what the big deal about Steam is. I love it in fact. More importantly though, Civ 5. Seriously, I will cry in joy when this game is in my arms (Steam) in September.

 

[Cartographer]

I'm of very mixed opinion on this issue. On the one hand I've been waiting for Civ V for a while now, on the other I hate Steam with a passion and refuse to have it on my system.

I now have a hard choice, register my complaint with my wallet and not buy a game I want to play (not too hard, I don't have anywhere near the free time to play games that I used to).
Or, buy the hard copy and get a cracked version, that will certainly be out within a couple of days of release (again, not too hard, but is very much an ethical "grey" area)

 

[Booze Zombie]

I don't get why people are so confused about Steam, it updates the game for you, even if you don't like online gameplay, that's not a bad thing.

 

[300lb. Samoan]

That old EA ad is remarkable, they've come so far from where they started. Also, there's a Jon Freeman [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQq12lDl0Kk] in that picture.

 

[StriderShinryu]

"Six years ago Half-Life 2 came out as a Steam exclusive. Fans of the series got a chance to figure out what the platform was all about, and then they had to decide if they were willing to accept it, or miss out on the flagship of all FPS games."

Not a bad column by any means but.. what? Half-Life 2 the flagship of FPS? Yes, I'm an admitted HL2 unbeliever but even if I stretch my imagination (and tolerance) as far as it (they) can go, I still can't see any truth in this statement.

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).

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.

The statement wasn't that Half Life 2 is a flagship FPS title which, even though I don't personally agree I know it's got enough fans and enough pull to be considered such, I agree with. The statement was that HL2 is/was THE flagship title. Even back then I don't see that being the case. Certainly at it's time it was one of the leaders in the story based FPS games movement, and it had a prequel to build it's hype, but that was a very strong and varied time in PC FPS gaming with the Quake series, the Unreal series, Deus Ex, etc. It seems rather silly to single out HL2 no matter how much you like it as being the flagship given it's competition (and particularly given that this statement is written from the perspective of the game not even being out yet which is where it really started to gain widespread approval).

 

[Cartographer]

I don't get why people are so confused about Steam, it updates the game for you, even if you don't like online gameplay, that's not a bad thing.

It does it whether you want it to or not, and not every patch has actually improved/fixed a game, I've lost count of the number of times a patch has caused problems and instability all on its own. It gathers data about your playing habits and system, including installed software and transmits them for third parties to use (boot Steam up on a system with an ATI card installed and then one with an nVidia card installed, the prices in the store change depending on your system), and those are the features we "know " about, what else is/could be running?.

It's all well and good to ask us to "trust them" that their software does what they say it does, and nothing else. How about they "trust us" that we're not going to pirate the games, and give us the option not to use their system?

And that is the biggest point, most fundamentally, it limits your choice as a consumer.

 

[JEBWrench]

*snip*
Perhaps I should have stopped at "The controversy is about having to install a programme that will do absolutely nothing for me".

To put it blunt, I shouldn't have to turn on my air conditioner to drive my car.

What you do get is the opportunity to have the game on any system, as well as a backup should anything happen to your disc.

But yes, I do understand your point. I think, though, at this point, damn-near every game has a much more horrendous DRM solution, often involving terrible terrible programs running. Steam is, at worst, to my way of thinking, a decent consolation prize.

 

[Booze Zombie]

It's all well and good to ask us to "trust them" that their software does what they say it does, and nothing else. How about they "trust us" that we're not going to pirate the games, and give us the option not to use their system?

And that is the biggest point, most fundamentally, it limits your choice as a consumer.

Perhaps...

But they are not here to take a moral high-ground, they are running a business.
Using the statistics, it seems like there's a lot of pirates and that a lot of people are quite happy to take something for nothing, so I don't see why they should trust, us, not us individually, but us, the people who want to play games, to pay for things.

Besides, if you are so unhappy with Steam doing all of those things, can't you simply update all of your stuff and then just play everything in offline mode from then on?
There's not really any issues then.

 

[MooseHowl]

I think I'll end up skipping Civ 5, at least until it's ridiculously cheap and bundled with all the inevitable expansions. I can live with Steam if it's giving me things almost for free.

Steam is really bloated for what most Civ players will want it to do: Install Civ 5. Impulse can do that easy, with no delays afterward beyond the actual game's loading times. But Steam needs to run every time the game starts, which adds 2-3 minutes of extra loading time. It's no huge deal-breaker, but it is irritating. It's like tacking a 2 minute long unskippable cinematic to the game, which plays every single time the game starts. I normally disable all the cinematics too... but Steam is no mere Bink video, sadly.

I think the biggest problem is that Steam is trying to be the Microsoft Windows of online game sellers. They want the Steam Client to do everything anyone could want it to do, and so it does. Which means it takes quite a while to boot up, since it loads everything on startup, not just the "I would like to play Civ 5" feature. And so the people (i.e. me) looking for that more specific function get annoyed, because we don't want chat, or blogs, or achievements, or news, or the store, or autopatching. Just Civ 5.

The worst part is that it's a great leap backwards for Civ fans. Retail Civ 3 has a CD check; no drm off Impulse. Retail Civ 4 had a CD check, later patched out by Firaxis; no drm off Impulse. Civ 5 has Steamworks... forever.