To people who disliked Steam.

[jbevermore]

I personally like Steam. It's especially nice because of how friendly it is to indie game developers, it's a lot easier to get "shelf space" with Steam then it would be with a brick and mortar game store. And they're much better for managing your stuff then other sites like direct2drive.

At the same time...I can kinda sympathize with the anti-Steam crowd, the civil libertarians of the internet. Steam has huge potential for evil. Unrealized evil, but still there looming over your head. Fact is, though, that's true for more or less every company out there. Google could probably take over the world in a heartbeat (or at least the wired part of it) with the amount of blackmail material they could conjure up in 24 hours.

As much as I'd like Steam to have the gog.com approach to drm, the odds of AAA title producers going that direction is slim.

Frankly, I'd love to see a poll about the political views of the Steam/anti-Steam debate. I bet there's a disproportionate number of Ron Paul voters in the anti-Steam block.

 

[Becephalus]

Steam is great and the future of the computer game industry. Without it the industry was collapsing due to piracy and we would have been left with consoles. It also is actually pretty good too.

There are no problems playing steam games offline.

 

[deanej]

As of right now, the only easy way to lose access to your Steam games is to blatantly cheat; say no to aimbot/wallhack/etc, even on non-Steam games. (Civ equivalent- Civ4 world builder*)

Or if PayPal decides it doesn't want to send a payment over to Valve. It happened to a CFC member a few months ago.

edit: btw deanej, you took psy's quote out of context there (the businesses acting like businesses thing); you'll find he's actually on your side if you go back and read through his posts.

I know, but I still had a point to make.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Steam is great and the future of the computer game industry. Without it the industry was collapsing due to piracy and we would have been left with consoles. It also is actually pretty good too.

There are no problems playing steam games offline.

Consoles have gotten better though, and have become a serious threat to PC gaming steam or no steam. They have machine capability comparable or better than your average computer (software optimized for them specifically helps and is something PC can't do) and have improved on controls/post release content.

In essence consoles are part of the reason steam doesn't want to screw us.

 

[Kerosene31]

Consoles have gotten better though, and have become a serious threat to PC gaming steam or no steam. They have machine capability comparable or better than your average computer (software optimized for them specifically helps and is something PC can't do) and have improved on controls/post release content.

In essence consoles are part of the reason steam doesn't want to screw us.

My bet is we'll see Steam or something similar on consoles in the future as well (maybe as soon as next-gen).

 

[Kerosene31]

I personally like Steam. It's especially nice because of how friendly it is to indie game developers, it's a lot easier to get "shelf space" with Steam then it would be with a brick and mortar game store. And they're much better for managing your stuff then other sites like direct2drive.

At the same time...I can kinda sympathize with the anti-Steam crowd, the civil libertarians of the internet. Steam has huge potential for evil. Unrealized evil, but still there looming over your head. Fact is, though, that's true for more or less every company out there. Google could probably take over the world in a heartbeat (or at least the wired part of it) with the amount of blackmail material they could conjure up in 24 hours.

As much as I'd like Steam to have the gog.com approach to drm, the odds of AAA title producers going that direction is slim.

Frankly, I'd love to see a poll about the political views of the Steam/anti-Steam debate. I bet there's a disproportionate number of Ron Paul voters in the anti-Steam block.

Well said. That should end the thread with an exclamation point.

 

[Beef Hammer]

PS3 users can already log into steam. And this weeks steam deals were pretty damn good if anyone checked them out.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Really now? How is it not well-optimized?

You don't like it and that's your right, but can you at least admit that many of us not only tolerate it, but like having it?

If you care about the reason civ V is less optimized for steam than other games I'm sure you can find the answer. However, if you like it anyway what does it matter? Not optimized =/= not working and in all honestly steam's contribution to civ v problems is minor. I'm just pointing out that this is ONE of the reasons people don't like it.

Also, I don't have to admit that some people like having it. That's an objective truth as long as people say they like it and there's no reasonable basis to suspect they're lying.

My bet is we'll see Steam or something similar on consoles in the future as well (maybe as soon as next-gen).

Xbox live arcade perhaps...

 

[Sock Bramson]

deanej-

How did this PayPal screw up go down? Did somebody buy a game with their PayPal account, successfully install it, and then have PayPal mess up the actual transfer of payments? More info would be nice for confirmation, but it sounds like that's more of a problem on PayPal's end as opposed to Steam's.

beef-

Can PS3 users access Steam despite the current PSN debacle? If so, Valve deserves some props for bringing internet connectivity to the multiplayer-less masses.

My apologies for tossing around the p-word, by the by; I was busy imbibing and failed to stay diplomatic. I will, however, stand by my assertion that many of the arguments I've read currently have no bad examples to give them credence. If you guys are practicing advanced divination, on the other hand, then the joke's on me.
the individual publishers try to force people to pay for their games again (they won't; the public outcry would be too great), there will be easy/google-able ways to fix the problem. If you have all of the game files on your computer (and you do, since you pay for them and all), then you have the capability to make your games work. These methods are currently and rightfully illegal. If push comes to shove, however, I certainly would have no compunction against working around any douche-baggery.

So far, the only anti-Steam argument I've heard that actually has some meat to it is the complaint that you can't sell Steam games. Fortunately for me, this isn't even an issue to begin with. If you know you want to resell a given game, then you shouldn't buy it on Steam. If you like to hold onto your games, then there's no real reason not to get it on Steam. (unless you want it on console, or you can't afford it, or you're a Luddite and disapprove of technology in general)

 

[Maniacal]

How did this PayPal screw up go down? Did somebody buy a game with their PayPal account, successfully install it, and then have PayPal mess up the actual transfer of payments? More info would be nice for confirmation, but it sounds like that's more of a problem on PayPal's end as opposed to Steam's.

When you buy a game on Steam it immediately gets added to your account before the payment actually goes through. There are a couple of incidents I recall.

One being a guy who bought some of the DLC for Civ5 using PayPal which then placed a hold on ((no idea why, probably just to be a dick, PayPal likes to do that with no explanation), as such Steam did not receive the money for the product they already gave the customer and automatically locked his account due to fraud. He was able to solve the issue with Steam support and got his account back since it turned out ot be entirely PayPal's fault.

I don't really remember the other one I think he is referring too, but that was also an error on the guy's part and paypal's.

 

[Kerosene31]

If you care about the reason civ V is less optimized for steam than other games I'm sure you can find the answer. However, if you like it anyway what does it matter? Not optimized =/= not working and in all honestly steam's contribution to civ v problems is minor. I'm just pointing out that this is ONE of the reasons people don't like it.

I didn't make the statement, so I'm asking the person who made it to explain it.

Now Steam contributes to Civ V's "problems"? What problems does Steam contribute to?

I've said it dozens of times in this thread, if you don't like it, that's your opinion and that's perfectly cool, but when statements like this get made, I think you need to expand on your thinking.

If you say "I don't like X" that's perfectly fine. However if you say "X is broken because I don't like it", well that's a problem. I hope you see the difference.

 

[Maniacal]

If you care about the reason civ V is less optimized for steam than other games I'm sure you can find the answer.

Or you could tell us because I don't see how its "less optimized" for Steam than any other game available on Steam.

 

[ohioastronomy]

It's pretty amazing to me that there are such hardcore corporate defenders here. With Steam I give a company information about my gaming habits - which they then profit from. I need an internet connection (which I otherwise don't). Resale options - or passing software down to, say, my son - lost. Option not to use patches, etc. that I don't like - lost. And what do I gain? Nothing obvious - the convenience factor on installation is quite minor.

I can understand why the suits like this arrangement, much like I understand why the suits like to soak players for high cost/low value DLC. Why consumers would be enthusiastic about losing leverage and paying more, however, truly mystifies me.

 

[PieceOfMind]

(Prepare yourself for my wall-of-text entry to this thread.)

I use Steam on a regular basis.

The possibility of it going down at some point or me being banned for an unfair reason I view as an acceptably small risk, and I weigh this up against the benefit of being able to very easily buy games, download them and install them as well as the fact I can get games cheaper than what many retailers in my country typically ask, if they are even allowed to be sold in this country at all. I also factor in the fact I won't be able to resell games when I decide the prices I'm willing to pay.

Those who choose not to buy games because of Steam, I'm sorry but there is no simpler way to say it than:
You will be left behind.

I've had headaches using GFWL and Starforce. These things significantly deter me from buying any game that uses them. (I haven't bought a game with Ubisoft's online DRM but I assume that'd be even worse.) Steam for me has finally managed to reach that point where I consider it to add a small net positive value to a game purchase. I'm fully aware that "buying" a game from Steam does not amount to anything more than 'attaching' that game to an account I hold with Valve. This does not bother me deeply. I pay money for games so that I can play and enjoy them, not so I can feel good about the knowledge I could play them in 20 years time even if Valve and Steam no longer exist.

Valve, with Steam, have managed to significantly streamline the process of acquiring game licenses and installing games, and to some extent managing collections of games. It didn't used to be the case, but I now consider games that require CDs or DVDs to install to be a nuisance. I can be downloading 5 games at the same time (without personally attending to the computer), and when they are finished it takes on average less than a minute or two for the first-time setup of the game before it's ready to play. Compare this with juggling several game discs and being required to babysit the install process. If I'm paying something like $5 or $10 for a game it's not unreasonable for me to expect to spend as little time as possible just installing that game. This is one of the biggest reasons I have come to appreciate Steam as a service (still far from fanyboydom though ).

It's true that these days I have a mostly reliable broadband connection and expect to at most times in the future (I don't really play games when I travel) so the fact it (Steam) can be a more negative experience for people with expensive download quotas or limited access to internet does not factor into it much for me.

Aftershafter did link to a thread where I posted about a problem I had getting Steam to run in offline mode when my internet provider was unreliable, but it's a distant memory now and I did happen to find a simple work-around at the time anyway.



I have to say I find it a tad amusing the divide that discussions about Steam can create betwen gamers. Most people who use Steam regularly find its service to be satisfactory, if not very positive. This includes me. I say this as someone who found the level of service provided by Blizzard for one of its games to be unacceptably poor. Blizzard is a company that many gamers cannot or choose not to fault.
The reason I'm pointing this out is that it's quite likely that those who come to threads like this to post about why they like Steam are doing so because they only want to help. I see some of the posters in this thread having objections against the service which I believe would not be so significant to them if they actually used the service.

I'm not interested in fighting some battle over DRM or consumer rights, and by doing so boycotting some service or refusing to accept it. As someone not from the US I'm already used to having to settle for less when it comes to levels of service. I figure one may as well go with the lesser of the evils that can be chosen from.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Blizzard games (aside from WoW where I can't vouch for it due to never playing it) are impeccable. The surrounding support/policy/etc...well...there are chinks in that armor.

 

[PieceOfMind]

Blizzard games (aside from WoW where I can't vouch for it due to never playing it) are impeccable. The surrounding support/policy/etc...well...there are chinks in that armor.

It was WoW. Thankfully I got off that boat a long time ago. The fact I was at times expected to wait 2 or more hours in a queue just to log in would have been enough. (I would have to be a long way past an unhealthy level of addiction to even tolerate that) There were other reasons but I won't go into them because WoW players will come here and argue them with me. Besides, it'd be off-topic.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Or you could tell us because I don't see how its "less optimized" for Steam than any other game available on Steam.

Might not be any longer, been a while since I last checked up on/heard about it.

 

[PieceOfMind]

Steam still hasn't gone 64bit. I'm guessing that's what you're talking about? Civ5 would definitely benefit from having the freedom to go 64bit.

 

[kekekeke]

It is really annoying I can't control game updates. There is a checkbox for that but it does nothing. Checkbox simply keeps resetting if you uncheck it. Maybe I could use steam offline to play civ5 but its not really an option since there are other games that depend on steam being online.

Steam is just a DRM (Digital Restrictions Management) system for me. I admit updating games works nice, but there just isn't enough control for the user. Also there is way too many issues with steam sometimes not working properly. Not to mention you can't really resell games even you should have the right to do so. Also prices in steam are ridiculous.. often you can buy retail package of same game with 30% of the price in steam. Digital distribution should cost LESS not more since there is a lot of less crap included.

Like 10x hate and 1x like

 

[Sporhund]

The problem with GFWL in comparison to steam can really be described by how patches are applied:

Steam:
1) You start steam
2) It automatically checks for updates and downloads for all your games
3) You start the game and play

GFWL:
1) You start the game
2) After 5 cutscenes you cannot skip, you are requested to log onto GFWL
3) GFWL has detected an update, and you will have to sit tight in the main menu until its downloaded.
4) GFWL forces you to exit the game and go through a patch install which needs to be babysitted like ye olde times.
5) If more than 1 update has been released since your last game session, you can repeat this process for each one.
5a) If you refuse the update, you will be logged out of GFWL. Sometimes, it will allow you to continue your game, but it will not allow you to load a GFWL savegame.

I have the following games with GFWL: Fallout 3, Batman Arkham Asylum, GTA IV and Bulletstorm