2K/Fraxis dont like poor people

[Shurdus]

Probably enough for it to be an ethical concern.

Now, whether a publisher would actually decide to reach out to these people (probably 2-4 million) or not would depend on if they wish to stay on the relatively "safe" side of Modern Online DRM or if they feel confident that their game will still be successful with a "CD-Key only" version.

It is an ethical concern how? We must not forget that out of all the people in the US, not everybody is a gamer. It is very safe to say that the people who want to have internet for gaming will try to get it if they can. Of the people who want it but cannot get it only a few would want this game. It is not unreasonable to assume this is a minority group. So if Firaxis targets a certain market, it can safely target the people who are gamers with internet access because that is the fast majority. There is nothing unethical there. This is how buisness works, correct?

EDIT: also are there even numbers out that show how many amongst the people without internet are gamers? We can assume there are a few around in that group, but this may very well not be the case. We know nothing of this.

 

[Tasunke]

I'm pretty sure we don't live in a world where anything relating to "access to video games" is an ethical concern.

I am fairly certain that there is nothing in this world that couldn't be considered an ethical concern. Maybe you thought I said "dillema."

Most schools of ethics form a centralized viewpoint with which you view everything within the world. It is true, however, that most people feel disgruntled about discussing ethical viewpoints towards anything other than decisions of Right and Wrong. Some feel that other forms of ethical discourse subtract from the value of Right and Wrong discussions.

This is not a Right and Wrong discussion, merely a view on compassion for consumers rights. Namely, say you have 40 million consumers (or more) that want your product. You choose a system that automatically alienates 2-4 million* of those consumers. This could be seen as a lack of compassion towards the player base. Economically speaking, there is a certain point where you are inclined to move ahead with the majority ... however the question still remains if its what a "decent person" should do.

*2-4 million is just a guess on my part, extrapolating from the 24 million US citizens without internet access. The actual number of gamers could be far greater or far less, however you chose to refute any ethical considerations over video games for any reason, so I might as well have used 5-10 million in my example ... as long as it is the face-value economically sound decision to leave those people behind "without game"

Edit: I have crossed out the word "Ethics" (due to the broad nature of the word) in order to avoid the misguided temptation to "cry Hyperbole" ... it was never my intention for it to be a "good and evil" argument.

 

[Chalks]

I am fairly certain that there is nothing in this world that couldn't be considered an ethical concern. Maybe you thought I said "dillema."

Most schools of ethics form a centralized viewpoint with which you view everything within the world. It is true, however, that most people feel disgruntled about discussing ethical viewpoints towards anything other than decisions of Right and Wrong. Some feel that other forms of ethical discourse subtract from the value of Right and Wrong discussions.

This is not a Right and Wrong discussion, merely a view on compassion for consumers rights. Namely, say you have 40 million consumers (or more) that want your product. You choose a system that automatically alienates 2-4 million* of those consumers. This could be seen as a lack of compassion towards the player base. Economically speaking, there is a certain point where you are inclined to move ahead with the majority ... however the question still remains if its what a "decent person" should do.

*2-4 million is just a guess on my part, extrapolating from the 24 million US citizens without internet access. The actual number of gamers could be far greater or far less, however you chose to refute any ethical considerations over video games for any reason, so I might as well have used 5-10 million in my example ... as long as it is the face-value economically sound decision to leave those people behind "without game"

I think that saying preventing someone from accessing a video game is "unethical" is over dramatic.

Also, since the game can be activated over a phone line using a dial up connection, the point is irrelevant since they are not being prevented from playing the game if they have access to a phone line.

 

[lietkynes]

It would be nice for 2k to donate some computers and games to the poor.

Aye the poor will be super-happy to have some video games to play while they are starving .

 

[Tasunke]

This is an amazingly fun thread.

 

[Shurdus]

Fun indeed, al the discussion and outrage we feel, because there may or may not be people out there who are mad because they cannot play the game... Even though we do not even know if these people are in fact out there, or that they even know already that they will be mad in the near future, because they probably have not heard yet that they cannot play civ5 because they have no internet access.

 

[Tasunke]

Well, I recently read a figure that approximately 80% of Firaxis's customers don't even bother with Digital Distribution sites like Steam et al.

Therefore, a lot of people newly buying Civ V will likely spend a frustrating half hour or so figuring out everything they need for the whole ordeal of interacting with steam. Not that it is a hard process at all, but initiation is usually a b*tch

 

[Shurdus]

Well, I recently read a figure that approximately 80% of Firaxis's customers don't even bother with Digital Distribution sites like Steam et al.

Therefore, a lot of people newly buying Civ V will likely spend a frustrating half hour or so figuring out everything they need for the whole ordeal of interacting with steam. Not that it is a hard process at all, but initiation is usually a b*tch

It was a female dog when Half-life 2 came out. Steam was new back than and it could barely handle the traffic that was required for the activation.

In the present however I feel that steam is a breeze. It works like a charm and while I do feel the annoyance in general that you should need to install a third party program in order to play a game, I think it is not that bad because steam is small, it is easy, it performs very well overall and a player does not even know it is there.

The only concern I can possibly see is that users will know that steam is running and they get annoyed by the fact that the steam icon is running in the tray when they shut civ5 down. People less neurotic who judge the program by it's merits and who are not annoyed by the very fact that it exists would come to the conclusion that it is not that bad. Granted, it would have been better if it was not required, but given the fact that it is, and given the fact that it barely uses any resources and it is for all intends and purposes invisible, it is fine with me.

Saying one gets annoyed with steam sounds to me like saying you do not like being in a room with other people because you can hear them breathing and that annoyes you.

 

[EdCase]

Well, I recently read a figure that approximately 80% of Firaxis's customers don't even bother with Digital Distribution sites like Steam et al.

Therefore, a lot of people newly buying Civ V will likely spend a frustrating half hour or so figuring out everything they need for the whole ordeal of interacting with steam. Not that it is a hard process at all, but initiation is usually a b*tch

Seriously, if someone can't handle installing and using Steam.....why do they have a computer at all ?

It is click and play, if it was any simpler the computer would just play the game for you.

(PC gamers are usually very computer literate)

 

[Shurdus]

Seriously, if someone can't handle installing and using Steam.....why do they have a computer at all ?

It is click and play, if it was any simpler the computer would just play the game for you.

(PC gamers are usually very computer literate)

Tasunke is not suggesting he cannot do it, just that steam is very annoying to use. Like I pointed out it can be very busy when major titles are released, so the slow speeds that steam provides are than really pushing the limits of the patience of the poor, poor users that need to wait for their downloads to finish. Note that this is something entirely different than not being able to handle steam.

 

[Ahriman]

Tasunke is not suggesting he cannot do it, just that steam is very annoying to use. Like I pointed out it can be very busy when major titles are released, so the slow speeds that steam provides are than really pushing the limits of the patience of the poor, poor users that need to wait for their downloads to finish. Note that this is something entirely different than not being able to handle steam.

There is a difference between "the Steam server can sometimes struggler with the 10s of thousands of people trying to simultaneously download their new 3GB game" and "the Steam server will struggle to handle the tiny data transfer needed to sign in once and register your vesrion of Civ5".

You don't need a 3MBps connection to be able to register your game and start playing.

 

[Tasunke]

I dunno, but I get the feeling that at least half the users of the Civilization series (as with probably many games) ... with not having to use digital providers generally there is not much focus on such companies, so there is probably very little awareness about steam.

Therefore, I foresee a lot of customers getting "surprised" to put it mildly

 

[Shurdus]

I dunno, but I get the feeling that at least half the users of the Civilization series (as with probably many games) ... with not having to use digital providers generally there is not much focus on such companies, so there is probably very little awareness about steam.

Therefore, I foresee a lot of customers getting "surprised" to put it mildly

But to most this surprise means that they shrug, install steam too because it is a part of the installation just like gamespy comrade is part of the installation of civ4 - a part that you may decline if you so wish - and then get on with it.

 

[Shurdus]

There is a difference between "the Steam server can sometimes struggler with the 10s of thousands of people trying to simultaneously download their new 3GB game" and "the Steam server will struggle to handle the tiny data transfer needed to sign in once and register your vesrion of Civ5".

You don't need a 3MBps connection to be able to register your game and start playing.

The limiting factors to the speed are not only the amount of data the steam servers can send per second, but also by the maximum amount of connections. If enough users are online at any given time like is often the case with major releases, and the game requires not just one but several checks, then every user will face the waiting that is the result of thousands of users fighting over a limited amount of connections that the steam server can make. It may be just a check-up, but it is one at a very busy cliënt. It matters not how fast my connection is if there are other factors limiting the efficiency of the transaction.

There will probably be a waiting line indeed. People seem to get so outraged by this fact of little importance. Put steam on, do whatever is needed to get the registration going, then go call a friend, get some fresh air, vacuum your room and when all that is done the registration is probably over. If not, get some sleep - or read the manual and try again the next morning. By then the peaks are over and the procedure will proceed without any further hickups.

I can hear Homer Simpson in my head: "Thirty seconds? I want to eat now!" That is basically what this is too. There may be some minor issues, the registration may take a few minutes longer than is strictly needed, if worst comes to worst you may have to wait until the next morning, but if that is done then it works like a charm.

 

[Tasunke]

hehe, burning through two days after i bought the game ... just to play the game ... that's like half of most people's honeymoon hype period which occurs once they have paid for a potentially awesome game.

 

[Shurdus]

hehe, burning through two days after i bought the game ... just to play the game ... that's like half of most people's honeymoon hype period which occurs once they have paid for a potentially awesome game.

You can put it that way and then it sounds horrible. You can also see this as the time when you can still do the things you want to do, because after that civ5 will dominate your free time.

 

[Tylerryan79]

Is it true that if you buy steam games at a retail store, the disc that comes with it is only some sort of steam install, and not the actual game?

On another note, I have decided that being the voice for the poor and huddled masses is too much work, so if anyone feels like taking on the cause, this is your moment to shine.

 

[Shurdus]

Is it true that if you buy steam games at a retail store, the disc that comes with it is only some sort of steam install, and not the actual game?

On another note, I have decided that being the voice for the poor and huddled masses is too much work, so if anyone feels like taking on the cause, this is your moment to shine.

It is not true. It is still the comlpete game, although you still need to activate on steam. With a store version you can skip the downloading thoughm so the installation is faster.

Also for every minute you do not defend the poor and huddled god kills a kitten.

 

[FeelGood]

I just hate every game that need "internet connection" for playing or registering reason. I just wish to play it ... but... well since I still need it for civ v, then, move on.... and hopefully steam will not trash my new pc.

 

[timtofly]

Maybe Firaxis/2K should wait 2 more years to release the game. That way technology and (mandated internet access is available to all) will catch up, and Big Brother will foot the bill for everything.