A case for forum members easing up on 2K a bit

[Dermo]

Just companies making cars use third party parts, that's the case for software as well. I see absolutely no reason at all to require them to create their very own framework for online functionality, just as I won't require any producer of a car to develop their own wheels. The important part is that it works in the end. Reinventing something that's been fully developed by others is not very useful (unless of course it is impossible to understand how it works).

I don't think that the problem some people have with Steam is that its 3rd party, but that its third party AND does things that go beyond the scope of the game experience.
Sure the tires on my car aren't made by Honda. I'm fine with that, and I imagine others are too. But to extend the car analogy, it seems that the issue some people are having is that the don't want to have to call Goodyear and get permission to drive their car somewhere (even once), and they don't want their tires contacting Goodyear and telling the company where their driving to and how fast their going.

 

[Jugalub]

Like it or lump it isn't an answer to my question, which I will repeat. Do you know specifically how Steamworks embeds itself in games like CIV V such that it would be difficult for the developer to create a version without Steamworks? Thanks..

It's never been done so far (with a AAA title) I don't believe, that should tell you something, and why would it be? The developer has chosen to use the Steamworks APIs. They're not going to make the same game twice with two different sets of APIs just to appease a tiny, tiny minority. In regards to Civ V, Steamworks will be heavily utilised in the multiplayer aspects; community aspects; anti-piracy; distribution of patches, DLC and expansions; and bug reporting.

Anyway, I'm out of the Steam discussion as we're going round in cirles and I don't have any vested interest in all honesty. If anyone who has never used Steam before needs some help using it or wants to ask any questions aside from the dozen or so common ones then feel free to PM me and I'll try help you out.

 

[evrett37]

None of the steam stuff is on topic..take it somewhere else..sometimes I wonder if people purposely derail a thread with Steam rants

 

[Grouchey]

The developer has chosen to use the Steamworks APIs. They're not going to make the same game twice with two different sets of APIs just to appease a tiny, tiny minority.

Maybe someone else can answer my question? 2K Greg, perhaps?

 

[Jugalub]

Maybe someone else can answer my question? 2K Greg, perhaps?

I answered it. What do you want? An answer that uses some relative terms that wouldn't help anyone?

A AAA title that uses Steamworks hasn't released a non-Steamworks version. Why? The negligible demand for such a product is more than likely greatly outweighed by the effort in producing one, when they'd have to create alternate methods of distributing content, of handling anti-piracy measures and in handling the multiplayer aspects. Needless to mention the "alternate version" wouldn't be compatible with the Steam version for playing multiplayer.

 

[Senethro]

He answered your question listing a bunch of core components that Steam is involved in.

 

[eireksten]

Edit: Yes, windows is somehow the same, but i need Windows for several things, so i'm willed to do that. I do not need Steam for anything (blabla, besides it's an integral part of the game, i know).

Well, I don't need Windows beyond playing games. If it weren't for games like this, I would have gotten rid of Windows a long time ago. So that's exactly the same thing in my opinion.

I don't think that the problem some people have with Steam is that its 3rd party, but that its third party AND does things that go beyond the scope of the game experience.
Sure the tires on my car aren't made by Honda. I'm fine with that, and I imagine others are too. But to extend the car analogy, it seems that the issue some people are having is that the don't want to have to call Goodyear and get permission to drive their car somewhere (even once), and they don't want their tires contacting Goodyear and telling the company where their driving to and how fast their going.

The post I replied to clearly wrote that the problem was that it was third party. But lets move on with this assumption, shall we?

If I understand you correctly, it would be okay for you to call Honda (instead of Goodyear) and get permission to drive somewhere? Then there wouldn't be a third party involved in things outside the scope of the game.

Back from the analogy. Firaxis/2K could theoretically have developed an exact copy of Steamworks (never mind legal issues, that's irrelevant to the point of this example) and the Steam client themselves. They could also then use exactly Valve's subscriber agreement and privacy policy in relation with this client. Would that have been better? I can't see any reason to think it would be. Not to mention that this would have been worse for Firaxis, in that they would have to develop said framework.

I support Firaxis and the Civilization franchise. If they can use a solid third party framework to help develop the game the way they want, then I think they should.

Now you can complain all you want about how this framework actually works, and the consequences it has. But complaining that it's not made by Firaxis? I'm not buying it. That argument is just for emphasis by those who are running out of things to complain about.

 

[Grouchey]

He answered your question listing a bunch of core components that Steam is involved in.

Yes I see he's edited his reply to include the following:

In regards to Civ V, Steamworks will be heavily utilised in the multiplayer aspects; community aspects; anti-piracy; distribution of patches, DLC and expansions; and bug reporting.

It's a push to see any of this as integral to playing the game aside perhaps for multiplayer for some -- these features have almost nothing to do with game play that couldn't easily be done through a 2K or Firaxis site. Bug reporting may be interesting though, anyone know more about how that works?

 

[Dermo]

The post I replied to clearly wrote that the problem was that it was third party. But lets move on with this assumption, shall we?

Fair enough I was only articulating the reasons beyond that that bother some people

If I understand you correctly, it would be okay for you to call Honda (instead of Goodyear) and get permission to drive somewhere? Then there wouldn't be a third party involved in things outside the scope of the game.

No you didn't understand (or perhaps I was not as clear as I could have been)
Because I don't have to call Honda to get permission to use my car, any more than I currently have to call Firaxis to get permission to play Civ 4.

 

[eireksten]

No you didn't understand (or perhaps I was not as clear as I could have been)
Because I don't have to call Honda to get permission to use my car, any more than I currently have to call Firaxis to get permission to play Civ 4.

Then we agree that it's no longer the third party thing that is the problem It is the DRM method of having your game tied to an account at all.

 

[eireksten]

It's a push to see any of this as integral to playing the game aside perhaps for multiplayer for some -- these features have almost nothing to do with game play that couldn't easily be done through a 2K or Firaxis site. Bug reporting may be interesting though, anyone know more about how that works?

Even though it's not integral for you when playing the game, it can be integral to the game itself.

Firaxis, which are the ones designing the game, have decided that they wanted rich online functionality for the game. Using Steamworks as a framework for this is sensible, as that means they don't have to develop these things themselves. Which is nothing but sensible. Who wants to reinvent the wheel? That's really a waste of time. Besides, it's a lot more fun to spend your energy on the actual game than these things.

Having decided to use Steamworks, the rest of the game is designed and implemented with the fact that Steamworks is available, and that the game will be run with Steam in the background. It is, thus, integral to this game. No one claims that it had to be from the start. Only that it has become an integral part of the implementation they've gone with.

 

[Magma]

This is one of the reasons I really don't get. The simple fact that it was developed by someone else than Firaxis is your problem? So you'd require all the software you buy to be developed by one and the same company?

Just companies making cars use third party parts, that's the case for software as well. I see absolutely no reason at all to require them to create their very own framework for online functionality, just as I won't require any producer of a car to develop their own wheels. The important part is that it works in the end. Reinventing something that's been fully developed by others is not very useful (unless of course it is impossible to understand how it works).

If it's the fact that the Steam processes has it's own program/GUI you've got a problem with, I don't get that either. You have a problem with the processes running on your machine being visible? Now, that's silly.

I agree that not everything with Steamworks integration is optimal, but the fact that it's made by a third party really is nothing to complain about. DirectX is made by a third party. Windows is made by a third party.

As I said, I would not care if Steam was optional for people who wish to play multiplayer - I play Civ singleplayer however and have no need for it. Thus to repeat myself:

The Civ5 is acceptable, Steam however is not. Yes, it very much is forced. When I buy a game I expect it have the programs I need to run it, not third party malware I am never going to use.

 

[Grouchey]

Even though it's not integral for you when playing the game, it can be integral to the game itself.

Firaxis, which are the ones designing the game, have decided that they wanted rich online functionality for the game. Using Steamworks as a framework for this is sensible, as that means they don't have to develop these things themselves. Which is nothing but sensible. Who wants to reinvent the wheel? That's really a waste of time. Besides, it's a lot more fun to spend your energy on the actual game than these things.

Having decided to use Steamworks, the rest of the game is designed and implemented with the fact that Steamworks is available, and that the game will be run with Steam in the background. It is, thus, integral to this game. No one claims that it had to be from the start. Only that it has become an integral part of the implementation they've gone with.

"Rich online functionality?" Do you mean multiplayer? I recall that CIV IV had a 3rd party multiplayer service before, so I don't know how much new game development time they've carved out by going with Steam. If you mean by rich online functionality is PMing your friends while in game or having Steam groups or Steam acheivements or whatever, honestly do .002% of fans care about or want these features?

I agree that the game CIV V has been designed to run with Steam. The question is or was how hard it would be to modify or create a Steam-free version, and I believe that some posters answered very hard or impossible. I'm not seeing specifics or proof of that at all. I'm seeing love it or leave it, company knows best, etc. etc.

 

[Dermo]

Then we agree that it's no longer the third party thing that is the problem It is the DRM method of having your game tied to an account at all.

I'd say we do agree
And as far as I'm concerned (is AFAIC legit?) it's not even that much of a problem for me (after all the bank still owns more of the car than I do)

 

[Senethro]

You can't publish a crippled version of Civ5 without multiplayer and a different patching scheme, if it had one at all. There'd be a thread every day for the first 2 months with someone asking what was wrong with their game and why 2K/Firaxis made the idiotic decision to make a feature stripped and why didn't it say on the box and etc etc. That would be even more difficult to put up with than the anti-Steam crowd.

 

[Magma]

You can't publish a crippled version of Civ5 without multiplayer and a different patching scheme, if it had one at all. There'd be a thread every day for the first 2 months with someone asking what was wrong with their game and why 2K/Firaxis made the idiotic decision to make a feature stripped and why didn't it say on the box and etc etc. That would be even more difficult to put up with than the anti-Steam crowd.

Easy to have it on the disc but make it a non-required install while writing big-fat-letters at the Steam "You need this for multiplayer!", and whenever you try to do multiplayer in game without steam it says "You need to install Steam to access this feature, please use your disc or download at <website>".

Then of course have the patches uploaded on their own website and Civfanatics as is now.

 

[Grouchey]

You can't publish a crippled version of Civ5 without multiplayer and a different patching scheme, if it had one at all. There'd be a thread every day for the first 2 months with someone asking what was wrong with their game and why 2K/Firaxis made the idiotic decision to make a feature stripped and why didn't it say on the box and etc etc. That would be even more difficult to put up with than the anti-Steam crowd.

Nah, just saying "single player version only" on the box would work fine -- much better than the disclaimers on Steam's store when they sell games that won't run at all unless previous versions were purchased on Steam.

Nothing "crippled" about a single player only CIV btw-- that's the game I love!

 

[Senethro]

Easy to have it on the disc but make it a non-required install while writing big-fat-letters at the Steam "You need this for multiplayer!", and whenever you try to do multiplayer in game without steam it says "You need to install Steam to access this feature, please use your disc or download at <website>".

This sounds good until you realise they'd put a second DRM which would install when Steam isn't.

Then of course have the patches uploaded on their own website and Civfanatics as is now.

This would create a second version of Civ5 which would need separate QA for every patch.

Nah, just saying "single player version only" on the box would work fine -- much better than the disclaimers on Steam's store when they sell games that won't run at all unless previous versions were purchased on Steam.

Nothing "crippled" about a single player only CIV btw-- that's the game I love!

As said already, multiple versions increases QA, patching and support costs. It also confuses consumers who we already know refuse to read the text on the box. There was a thread recently about a guy trying to buy games from a restricted region to use on Steam, and then complaining when they wouldn't install. He then claimed there was no warning on the box when I could look at my own box and see this is false.

 

[Magma]

This sounds good until you realise they'd put a second DRM which would install when Steam isn't.

Not necessary. Just a one-time online registration for the rest of your life on the website. Installing DRM on the machine is a waste of everyone's time.

 

[Svip]

Gamers are generally whiners. If you really cared about DRM-free games and non-third party software for your games, you would might invest more of your time in free/open source software. If it means that much to you. As it apparently does to some.

I've come to terms that in most of cases, companies wants to rip me off and get in line. Since I mostly spend time doing open source software, I sort of accept this principle, because that's how it is in the gaming industry. You are going to get pissed.

These are the companies that you help create and build. You vote with your wallet, and now the ones you've elected have made an unpopular decision. The only true thing to do is not to buy the game. That's a real protest in my eyes.

You think that companies are less evil than governments? Hah, you've ain't seen nothing yet. Governments at the very least needs to win the hearts and minds of the people.

You get what you paid for, and you knew more DRM and more restrictions would be coming. Don't act so surprised.

This is also why I don't care. I knew more restrictions comes with each release. Sure, I don't like where it's heading. But right now, well, I'll admit, it's more of 'do I have a choice?'.

Also, for those asking 'where are the good free games?' You just ain't looking hard enough.