Ogaburan
Warlord
Say what you want, for me its just annoying. It just hangs out in the background like an uninvited guest eating my precious CPU usage.
That is weird as hell. First time I've heard of it happening too, so yeah I don't know what's up. You could try e-mailing Steam support and politely complaining about it as it is definitely something that should be fixed.It absolutely did uninstall GW. I reinstalled and still have access to my account though, so that should be enough of an indication that it was not a Steam download as they were pretty good about removing my access to everything that was linked.
Actually it says both what I said and what you posted. Steam removes everything in the folder its installed in, you can however copy/move the steamapps folder to somewhere else and it won't touch it.Actually, that link says something slightly different:
The uninstallation process deletes the folder Steam was installed to to ensure it is fully uninstalled. If you accidentally installed Steam to a folder containing other data, for example C:\Program Files\ instead of C:\Program Files\Steam\, STOP!
I enjoy the ease of the digital distribution, the amazingly cheap sales, the up-to-date patching, the community features, ingame steam community, tracking hours (sadly only for games you bought on Steam and not just those you launch through it (you can add shortcuts for non-steam games)). I still use X-Fire (mostly for screenshots and tracking hours played) but very few people I play with use it, whereas they all use Steam. It also allows me to keep my desktop free of icons, as I add all the shortcuts to Steam and don't need to go hunt them down in a folder on my desktop.Those who love Steam, should state what they love about it. Do you love the digital distribution, digital rights management, multiplayer or communications aspect of it?
Yep, and while not the most utopian it certainly could easily be worse and I really don't mind it.Valve is smart, because by forcing users of Steam games to sign up in order to install the game, they are able to advertise immediately with their digital distribution, and are able to enforce their DRM at that moment. This is the reason why they probably won't ever go to 'sign up for Steam only to get updates' method.
And communications don't work in Offline mode of course. I fully understand the annoyance for those who don't play offline and agree that Steam needs to improve its offline accessibility. Still, at least it offers an offline mode. Unlike Ubisoft.If you don't play online, MP is irrelevant... therefore, for those players, only communications is the plus here. DigDis is nice if you don't like actually having a tangible product.
1. Then exit it, you can also quit Steam from the File menu in the upper left (click Exit).HATE HATE HATE!
1. I don't want this other software on my system sitting there and running in the background until I turn it off from the system tray.
2. I don't want it to delay my startup and start downloading patches that take forever.
3. I don't want adverts for new games popping up.
https://support.steampowered.com/kb_article.php?ref=5344-QWBN-3580
Question
How do I stop Steam from running automatically when I start my computer?
Answer
With Steam open, click the Steam menu, and choose Settings.
Click on the Interface tab, and uncheck the box that says:
"Run Steam when my computer starts."
Those who love Steam, should state what they love about it. Do you love the digital distribution, digital rights management, multiplayer or communications aspect of it?
Actually it says both what I said and what you posted.
No, you said that the Steam uninstall won't ever remove other software, while the page actually says that if Steam is (incorrectly) installed into a folder with other software, it will remove that other software too. That seems the most plausible explanation of this user's problem.
I think what 2K don't "get" is that people consider their computers to be their own domain. I arrange things how I want and decide what programs I want running.
What evidence do you have for this? It seems to me from reading these boards and this thread in particular (which you obviously haven't done) that a lot of people hate it, not a "tiny share". Even so, you still don't seem to understand why this is so annoying for me, and I suspect, all the other people who seem to dislike it.I think what you don't "get" is that most people don't care. Obviously, the publishers know that some small number of people will hate Steam, or anything new. But people like you are a tiny share of their market.
If it did make the experience better then maybe you would have a valid point, but it doesn't - it's just a pain in the arse that serves no function other than DRM, which other publishers have enforced in a much less intrusive manner.They think making the experience somewhat better for lots of people outweighs pissing off a few, and also that the mechanics of Steam will increase their share of paying users. And I think they are probably right on both counts.
Earlier tonight there were 56,000 people playing Civ5 simultaneously. I think we can infer that Steam hasn't hurt total sales. The noise you're seeing here are largely the grognards who want the same Civilization as previously, with upgraded graphics but still playable on the same computer as Civ4. They've always been a minority even here as endless polls about Steam in the months prior to release showed.What evidence do you have for this? It seems to me from reading these boards and this thread in particular (which you obviously haven't done) that a lot of people hate it, not a "tiny share". Even so, you still don't seem to understand why this is so annoying for me, and I suspect, all the other people who seem to dislike it.
Community features, patch and DLC distribution, SteamCloud saves, backup creation utility, multiplayer bits and pieces amongst other things. You've made no effort at all to learn anything about it and would rather just rant ignorantly.If it did make the experience better then maybe you would have a valid point, but it doesn't - it's just a pain in the arse that serves no function other than DRM, which other publishers have enforced in a much less intrusive manner.
What evidence do you have for this? It seems to me from reading these boards and this thread in particular (which you obviously haven't done) that a lot of people hate it, not a "tiny share". Even so, you still don't seem to understand why this is so annoying for me, and I suspect, all the other people who seem to dislike it.
Complete non sequitur. You don't know how many people would have bought it were there not Steam involved. And I bet most people who bought it were not aware of the Steam requirement until they took out the DVD and tried to install it.Earlier tonight there were 56,000 people playing Civ5 simultaneously. I think we can infer that Steam hasn't hurt total sales.
Try this forum?Community features
Check for updates button worked perfectly wellpatch and DLC distribution,
Not useful to most people and if you're desperate to play on multiple computers a pen drive is easy to useSteamCloud saves
I admit, I have no idea what this is, backup creation utility
I don't play multiplayer so can't comment on whether Steam is useful for this (tried multi once with Civ 4 and it was not fun), multiplayer bits and pieces amongst other things.
You still don't get it. I don't want to learn anything about it. I don't want it at all. I just want to get on with playing the game. It doesn't take a genius to see that this is just DRM with a lot of overheads.You've made no effort at all to learn anything about it and would rather just rant ignorantly.
I'm not going to go through and count, but the balance seems split pretty evenly between the love/hate camps.Of course, now we get the universal response of anyone whose opinion isn't agreed with, "You obviously haven't read the thread." Give me a break. Half a dozen people, maybe, have posted here about their strong dislike for Steam.
Let's not. Because these people have already bought the game. And liking or disliking Steam has very little to do with whether you buy the game or not. In any case, why should I care how many sales 2k makes.Let's say that represents 6 lost sales.
You, Sir, deserve the Nobel Prize for misuse of statistics. How about we say, only 5 people in this thread said they liked Steam, so that's only 0.0002% of the number 2K need, therefore there is no chance of Civ VI ever coming out. I realise in reality you're probably not that stupid, but why make such fallacious arguments?2k needs to sell millions of copies of Civ V to recoup development costs and make a good profit. So that's something like 0.0003% of their market.
Senethro said:Community features, patch and DLC distribution, SteamCloud saves, backup creation utility, multiplayer bits and pieces amongst other things. You've made no effort at all to learn anything about it and would rather just rant ignorantly.
Senethro said:Earlier tonight there were 56,000 people playing Civ5 simultaneously. I think we can infer that Steam hasn't hurt total sales.
I've already stopped it from starting up when I boot my computer. But after I play Civ 5 it hangs around running in the background unless I remember to turn it off every time in the system tray afterwards.
If they must use Steam, they should make it completely invisible to the user.
I don't think they care, nor do a lot of people. Or they get used to it. Though I understand your concern.I think what 2K don't "get" is that people consider their computers to be their own domain. I arrange things how I want and decide what programs I want running.
It barely uses any system resources, and time really is a mere few seconds (otherwise you might need to do some cleaning on your computer). It also doesn't hog your internet connection or anything like that. Unless you are downloading lots of stuff through steam, in which case (even the patches) you have control over that. If you have a rather annoying ISP who sets tight limits then complain to them and ask them to raise the limits for their products (I know SimonL lives in Quebec and the ISps there set stupidly low limits, so he has to be careful how much he downloads, but gaming and running Steam is just fine).Any piece of software that does things without permission (even if it's trying to be helpful), will be annoying and attract hate, especially if it uses up resources, be it internet access (some of us have slow connections used by multiple people, and a limited monthly download allowance, where we have to pay money for every megabyte above this that we use), time (shutting the damn thing down, closing ads etc), or computer memory/CPU usage.
I'm sane and I really like Steam. It seems to me you're biggest problem is that you are unfamiliar with it and don't like it being 'forced' upon you. Not so much the program itself.I realise that the resources and time it uses up are in reality tiny, but still, the fact that it's using any will make people dislike it. It's like a unwelcome goblin that sits around in the corner of your bedroom watching you, not doing very much, but occasionally springing into life and trying to be helpful. Sane people just want it to go away and leave things as they were!
Because people who enjoy the game are far, far less likely to post when things are going the way they want to. Its like this on nearly any forum, especially after a release. Anyone with a complaint goes to the forum and complains, hence why it always looks like the majority is hating it when this may or may not be true (as the situation depends).What evidence do you have for this? It seems to me from reading these boards and this thread in particular (which you obviously haven't done) that a lot of people hate it, not a "tiny share". Even so, you still don't seem to understand why this is so annoying for me, and I suspect, all the other people who seem to dislike it.
Sigh, this has already been covered to death, try reading some of mine and other's posts in this thread.If it did make the experience better then maybe you would have a valid point, but it doesn't - it's just a pain in the arse that serves no function other than DRM, which other publishers have enforced in a much less intrusive manner.
I only heard that the 1 gig "patch/game content" was for those who pre-loaded the game, this is NOT specific to Steam. I've had the same thing happen with pre-loads from GamersGate. Those who pre-loaded also would have downloaded it on Steam afaik (maybe the disc allowed pre-loading, but I doubt it and haven't read anything about that). Hence if they downloaded it they should already be aware of their limits set by their ISP. So far the first few quickfix patches Firaxis has released are very small.There are areas, as rbj2001 said, that have download allowances, in which people must pay if they exceed.
With Civ 5 requiring a 1 GB download patch, that is an annoyance right there. It's not even a patch, it's a large portion of the game they decided not to put on the DVD.
Covered above, more people will show up to complain then people who show up to congratulate. If something is working more or less well enough (or perfectly fine) you have no real driving force to go to the forums and post about it.@DaviddesJ: You make assumptions on the overall number of people who don't like Steam; there is no evidence to support this. In fact, if it was so small, Steam wouldn't be so controversial. The large controversy surrounding Steam shows in itself there is a large number that don't like it's underlying ways of doing business.
First of all, I agree it is not a whole lot of people. However, the majority of the world's population is unlikely ot have ever HEARD of Civ5. Even today, selling 1 million copies of a game is decent, selling 5 million is really good. Civ5 is currently in the top 5 most played games on Steam, its competing with similar numbers for the top 3 spaces with Counter Strike, Counter Strike Source, and Modern Warfare 2. Team Fortress 2 is just below them with around like 20,000 players.I can't believe how you actually are trying to tie the number of people playing the game to say that Steam hasn't hurt sales. There is 0% way that you can infer that with any accuracy whatsoever.
56,000 people playing Civ 5 worldwide is not a whole lot at all (world pop=6,697,254,041+). There are probably more people playing Civ 3 worldwide; and definitely more playing Civ 4 if I had to take a guess.
You also have no idea hoe many have NOT bought it because of Steam. These exact same arguments were voiced when Empire: Total War went the Steamworks route, same with Modern Warfare 2. And this certainly did not noticeably impact the sales of either game (Empire: Total War was really broken (for most people) when it was released, its fixed now. Civ5 is definitely not a broken game).Complete non sequitur. You don't know how many people would have bought it were there not Steam involved. And I bet most people who bought it were not aware of the Steam requirement until they took out the DVD and tried to install it.
Ignorance causes fear of the unkown, and that is not a good thing. I highly recommend you check out Steam as much as possible and learn about it before completely condemning it.You still don't get it. I don't want to learn anything about it. I don't want it at all. I just want to get on with playing the game. It doesn't take a genius to see that this is just DRM with a lot of overheads.
Poor sales = death of civilization as we know it.Let's not. Because these people have already bought the game. And liking or disliking Steam has very little to do with whether you buy the game or not. In any case, why should I care how many sales 2k makes.
@DaviddesJ: You make assumptions on the overall number of people who don't like Steam; there is no evidence to support this.
You're wrong and out of touch. Patches that size are not uncommon.There are areas, as rbj2001 said, that have download allowances, in which people must pay if they exceed.
With Civ 5 requiring a 1 GB download patch, that is an annoyance right there. It's not even a patch, it's a large portion of the game they decided not to put on the DVD.
We weren't talking about the utility of it to everyone, which you've just decided you can judge on behalf of "anyone", he said no other functions existed and I was correcting his ignorance.Most of everything you mentioned is nothing that anyone needs, except for MP (which only is good for online players).
Oh please. You're utterly deluded if you think Civ3 and Civ4 still have a larger peak usage than many modern games. Why even bring the irrelevant world population in? You're grasping at straws or your thinking is very disordered.I can't believe how you actually are trying to tie the number of people playing the game to say that Steam hasn't hurt sales. There is 0% way that you can infer that with any accuracy whatsoever.
56,000 people playing Civ 5 worldwide is not a whole lot at all (world pop=6,697,254,041+). There are probably more people playing Civ 3 worldwide; and definitely more playing Civ 4 if I had to take a guess.
And BTW: Inference is a good guess heuristics (based on logic, statistics etc.) to observations or by interpolating the next logical step in an intuited pattern. The conclusion drawn is also called an inference. The laws of valid inference are studied in the field of logic.
Your inference was actually just your assumption/guess.
That said, you are right that I am only expressing my own opinion. Someone else can have a different opinion. But when people say, "If you disagree that Steam is harmful to Civ V, then you must not have read this thread," then that's just nonsense.
You manage to highlight your lack of reading skills again, since what I actually said was that reading this thread shows that a lot of people don't like Steam, which is a fairly uncontroversial fact, not that it's "harmful to Civ V".
I happen not to want it and I don't appreciate being forced to use it. Give people the choice.