Whether or not they allow creation of a backup, when I buy a game, I want a box and a disc. If this puts em in the luddite camp as well, so be it but that's what I want.
But that's neither here nor there. Some folks don't mind downloading games via Steam, and that's great for them. What you have here, however, is a developer who also controls the distribution channel. Do they have a right to restrict their retail offerings in such a way as to encourage the growth of their digital distro channel? Absolutely. God bless 'em. But it's still a bit underhanded. Especially since they'd already announced the black box. So they're not only being underhanded, they're also being unfaithful. It's insulting to the customer, above all else.
Steam may be the greatest service in the world, and Half-Life 2 the greatest game, but this is a lousy way to be. Half-Life 2 is a great game, but it's not a console seller, much less a distribution channel seller. I wish Valve well in all of their future endeavors, but I do not like this move and I will not support it.
Nor is Valve alone in earning my ire in this regard. I think a lot of devs are getting sloppy and lazy with the advent of digital distribution, offerring content that *could* have made it into a game later on, for additional cost. Perfect Dark Zero, we're looking at you. Additional content that adds value to a game that was already a great value is one thing. Levels sold online for however much that weren't finished in time to make the original, released game worth $60 are a rip-off. As is forcing retail consumers to buy a game they may already own, and may have already played just to get the new content they want (Riddick, we're also looking at you here).
There are a lot of pioneers who are testing the waters of digital distribution and getting burned or having fabulous successes. Ultimately we, as the market, must decide what the market will bear, and we will. One way or another.
But that's neither here nor there. Some folks don't mind downloading games via Steam, and that's great for them. What you have here, however, is a developer who also controls the distribution channel. Do they have a right to restrict their retail offerings in such a way as to encourage the growth of their digital distro channel? Absolutely. God bless 'em. But it's still a bit underhanded. Especially since they'd already announced the black box. So they're not only being underhanded, they're also being unfaithful. It's insulting to the customer, above all else.
Steam may be the greatest service in the world, and Half-Life 2 the greatest game, but this is a lousy way to be. Half-Life 2 is a great game, but it's not a console seller, much less a distribution channel seller. I wish Valve well in all of their future endeavors, but I do not like this move and I will not support it.
Nor is Valve alone in earning my ire in this regard. I think a lot of devs are getting sloppy and lazy with the advent of digital distribution, offerring content that *could* have made it into a game later on, for additional cost. Perfect Dark Zero, we're looking at you. Additional content that adds value to a game that was already a great value is one thing. Levels sold online for however much that weren't finished in time to make the original, released game worth $60 are a rip-off. As is forcing retail consumers to buy a game they may already own, and may have already played just to get the new content they want (Riddick, we're also looking at you here).
There are a lot of pioneers who are testing the waters of digital distribution and getting burned or having fabulous successes. Ultimately we, as the market, must decide what the market will bear, and we will. One way or another.