Anti-Steam Petition

[AvatarLDI]

I will not buy it if it means having Steam on my computer. Had one game with Steam on my last computer, (Half-Life2), it forced me to be logged into Steam even when I was running other programs, wasting memory. Annoying pop up everytime I started my computer, forcing me to log on. I quit playing the game and uninstalled it just to try to get rid of Steam, but like a virus it was in the registry and I had a hell of a time getting all that Steam crap off that computer and am convinced it contribued to destroying my hard drive on that computer, since my problems only started when I tried to remove Steam. Never again! I will stick to my Civ4 game. Never play online anyway, don't need Steam's crap on my computer, for me it was like trying to get rid of a virus.

 

[Raneman]

I will not buy it if it means having Steam on my computer. Had one game with Steam on my last computer, (Bio-Shock2), it forced me to be logged into Steam even when I was running other programs, wasting memory. Annoying pop up everytime I started my computer, forcing me to log on. I quit playing the game and uninstalled it just to try to get rid of Steam, but like a virus it was in the registry and I had a hell of a time getting all that Steam crap off that computer and am convinced it contribued to destroying my hard drive on that computer, since my problems only started when I tried to remove Steam. Never again! I will stick to my Civ4 game. Never play online anyway, don't need Steam's crap on my computer, for me it was like trying to get rid of a virus.

You haven't even seen what steam can do. I feel like I'm watching a little kid pick up Fallout and calling it "Bad, like... Diablo 2 bad."

 

[AvatarLDI]

You haven't even seen what steam can do. I feel like I'm watching a little kid pick up Fallout and calling it "Bad, like... Diablo 2 bad."

I saw what it could to to my computer, that was enough. For me it has no redeeming qualities, has nothing to offer me that I want. By the way, I loved Fallout and Diablo 2, and I didn't need Steam screwing up my computer to play them.

 

[The Turk]

Agreed! I REALLY hope civ V doesn't become one of those games where they force you to pay much more to get a newer "update", I really do not like DLC, and I hope it doesn't spread to Civ V, because that would just ruin everything

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Obviously a lot of people are going overboard with the anti-Steam talk. But even worse to me is the counter-argument of "if you don't like Steam you must be STOOOOOOPID." It hardly helps your cause. There are a lot of people that have issues with it, and I doubt every single one of them conjured their gripes out of thin air, for no reason except that they wanted to be ticked about something. Until you accept some of the complaints as legitimate and coming from Intelligent, reasonable people, you sound as bad as them to my ears.

Personally, I tried Steam, didn't really have any use for it, and had a heck of a time running things when it was on my old system. People say it's better now. That's probably true, but I really wasn't high on my list of things to try again just to get a SINGLE PLAYER GAME to run.

 

[MaxCiv]

That's what they said about music CDs, yet artists are still producing and marketing them. There will always be a certain demand for brick and mortar realeases, enough to justify bypassing the digital downloads. Many people don't even have broadband access yet, which is pretty much a requirement for downloading a full game. They have no choice but to go to their local retailer. If you think that digital content is the only way that people will be able to acquire things like computer games, then you're sadly mistaken.

It won't happen overnight, but you can see the "writing on the wall" already. Go in in any "brick and mortar" EB games store or similar. How big is the shelf space for boxed PC games? Even the freaking PSP games are given more shelf space than PC games. That's the harsh reality.

Regarding your CD analogy, you are totally off. The music industry has always been opposed to digital distribution, the only exception being iTunes.

The people who buy music are largely the same people who buy computer games. There's very little difference in the demographic.

Wrong! They are 2 groups that have a big overlap, that's all. I don't buy music (CD or digital) and I know lots of people who has literally thousands of cd's and records and never owned a computer.

Both of those things can easily be reversed at any time that 2K chooses to.



Irrelevant. If they felt that they would lose enough sales over this then they would change their minds.

You really have no idea about software development, do you? Do you think that work on Civ 5 and Steamworks integration started last week? For a retail release of september, the game HAST TO BE pretty much done now. It is probably going through internal beta for bug fixing and balancing.

If you think that even if the wanted to remove Steamwork from the game today, they could "easily" do it and release it in september you are very naive.

If they felt that the money they would lose in lost sales was greater than the cost of backing out of their agreement, they wouldn't hestitate. Or at the very least they might consider removing that requirement later on, after the contract had sufficiently run it's course. The software would be no problem to eliminate, they would just issue a patch that removes it. The bottom line is that if no one voices their displeasure over a business decision, then the corporations will feel that they can do whatever they want to. We don't just have a right to complain, but an obligation to let corporations know that there's a line that they simply can't cross in their dealings with the public. And while some people might think that the approach being taken with Civ 5 is insignifigant, it's edging us closer to the day where we no longer buy games, we only rent them.

PS: Having a third party involved in my use of a game also introduces too many variables that I'm just not comfortable with. Companies come and go all the time, or are bought out by bigger companies. If things go sour with Steam, or their relationship with 2K, or they are bought out by a larger entity that's hostile to 2K, then the Civ community is going to be caught in the middle. I don't want to find sometime down the road that I can no longer install and play the software I've paid out for because it's no longer being supported for any number of reasons. Or that they've changed their policy and I'm now required to pay up again in order to reinstall my game.

Do you really think that the people saying they won't buy the game (assuming they will actually won't) on these or other forums will make any relevant financial difference? Civ games sold millions around the world and most of those who will buy the game don't even know or care what Steam is. Even if 90% of the users here won't buy it, it will have less than 0.01% impact on the overall sales.

Good luck with your petitions and boycotting!

 

[ori]

Moderator Action: Merged a few dozen posts - please don't post multiple successive posts. If you want to add something and no one has replied yet, please use the edit post function.

There are multiple posts in this thread that either trigger or evade the autocensor. Please do not use foul language, if you trigger the autocensor or feel the need to self censor, please rephrase.

Also keep the discussion civil - discuss the topic not each other.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Greybriar]

From the 2K Forums:

Yes, you're going to have to activate through Steam....

This gamer won't be activating through Steam. You just lost a Civ5 sale plus a lost sale for each of its future expansions (unless they are standalone and don't require Steam).

 

[xenobiotic]

I will not buy it if it means having Steam on my computer. Had one game with Steam on my last computer, (Bio-Shock2), it forced me to be logged into Steam even when I was running other programs, wasting memory.

It only has to be running when you are playing the steam game, not other programs and it uses minimal memory. Your antivirus likely uses more. When you don't have friends running, steam does very little in the background.

Annoying pop up everytime I started my computer, forcing me to log on.

See, points like this make me think anti steam people have never used the program. Or have you just never opened an options menu?

I quit playing the game and uninstalled it just to try to get rid of Steam, but like a virus it was in the registry and I had a hell of a time getting all that Steam crap off that computer....

Every computer program leaves stuff in the registry after uninstall.

and am convinced it contribued to destroying my hard drive on that computer, since my problems only started when I tried to remove Steam. Never again! I will stick to my Civ4 game. Never play online anyway, don't need Steam's crap on my computer, for me it was like trying to get rid of a virus.

Strong evidence behind this claim. You're 'convinced' are you? LOL. Trying to get rid of a virus? The two are not remotely analogous. Once you uninstall steam the simple way it will never have any deleterious effects on your computer. PERIOD.

 

[need my speed]

The point is, why should we have Steam in the first place? It still takes too much memory. AvatarLDI is right with the popups, I experienced them too although I'm sure it can be turned off. We choose to buy computer games (or acquire them another way), we didn't choose to use Steam. I can't comment on the last post.

 

[Buccaneer]

Why not go with just an eLicense? You buy the game online and download it. Get the activation key (like with many downloadable software) and then play. Once it has the key, there is never any reason to have an active internet connection.

 

[Akka]

I'm sure people are smart enough here, but do realize that people could (and will) vote that they will not buy Civilizations V just to remove Steam, but in the end will buy it.

The very point making these protection useless, is that they are MORE of a hassle for honest consumers than... less honest means.

"path of least resistance", does this ring a bell ?
That's the problem with useless and annoying protection, they really ARE counter-productive, because they fight something by rising the incentive to use it. Go figure.

 

[Sciguy001]

There's not reason to argue about something that's being argued in like 100 other places in this forum.

/sign

 

[need my speed]

The very point making these protection useless, is that they are MORE of a hassle for honest consumers than... less honest means.

"path of least resistance", does this ring a bell ?
That's the problem with useless and annoying protection, they really ARE counter-productive, because they fight something by rising the incentive to use it. Go figure.

I don't really know why you're quoting me, but, that's what I've been saying.

 

[xenobiotic]

The very point making these protection useless, is that they are MORE of a hassle for honest consumers than... less honest means.

"path of least resistance", does this ring a bell ?
That's the problem with useless and annoying protection, they really ARE counter-productive, because they fight something by rising the incentive to use it. Go figure.

Right, the guy with a gandalf avatar and 6.5K posts on a gaming site knows how to maximize revenue better than the execs at 2K and other publishing companies.

Moderator Action: Trolling/Flaming - warned
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Akka]

I don't really know why you're quoting me, but, that's what I've been saying.

Well, you say they'll end up buying it. I say they'll find a way that requires less hassle.

Right, the guy with a gandalf avatar and 6.5K posts on a gaming site knows how to maximize revenue better than the execs at 2K and other publishing companies.

Wow, some random nobody trash talk me on the Internet because he's run out of anything intelligent to say (since his first post, obviously).
I'm hurt. Especially by the depth and relevance of your argument. No, really.

Moderator Action: Flaming - warned
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[xenobiotic]

Wow, some random nobody trash talk me on the Internet because he's run out of anything intelligent to say (since his first post, obviously).
I'm hurt. Especially by the depth and relevance of your argument. No, really.

I was only pointing out how ludicrous it is for gamers to claim they know better than 2K how to make money.

Also that post made no sense.

 

[need my speed]

Yeah, you do have a point and you SHOULD be right (and by that, I mean that companies are supposed to know better than the random citizen, sadly, that isn't always true). But Akka does make sense, he simply turns the argument around, although in a (slightly) offensive matter. Then again, the part about Gandalf and 6500 posts could be found offensive too.

 

[Tlalynet]

Even if the losses due to requiring steam are small, what do the pro-steamers think the actual gains will be? Do they believe requiring steam will greatly reduce piracy? It seems that the only pirates it would actually stop would be the people who love the game so much they want it asap but disrespect the game so much they would pirate it day one given the chance. Its kind of a strange combination of motives, but anyone else who would pirate will still just pirate.

Its losing a small amount of customers to gain a tiny amount of customers. For anti-piracy measures to really work they would have to actually prevent piracy, not just day one piracy either but actually prevent unlicensed players from playing the game. If 2K for any reason doesn't see that its their mistake. Arguing that its their job so obviously they are perfect at is is nonsense xenobiotic.

 

[Iceciro]

Even if the losses due to requiring steam are small, what do the pro-steamers think the actual gains will be?

I'm just going to copy this from the other thread because it 1) awnsers your question and 2) I'm too lazy to retype this.

2k/Firaxis realise that games have been moving into an ever-evolving social network type of deal since we used to invite friends over to play Atari with the second controller. Just because you do not move in this direction doesn't mean the majority of gaming isn't. And it doesn't mean that a feature-rich system that supports this that doesn't cost a publisher/developer time and money working on it is not a good deal for said publisher/developer.

Do you know what Steamworks gets those of you who don't play MP/want a community/to play with friends? It gets you development time on things you do care about - AI, an entirely new graphics engine, a program that can use multiple cores to increase turn times, brand now subsystems. That's right boys and girls, development time costs MONEY and is LIMITED. They can't just hold back a game until it's ready to release, at some point it has to produce revenue. So by adding Steamworks they can focus that time on things that yes, even you, will enjoy. So don't say Steamworks brings you nothing.

The game needs to have these things wether you use them or not - because people like me and my Civ playing friends use them, and as stated, gaming is fast becoming a SOCIAL activity. The limited people here who do not use friends lists or a community are not the majority anymore, and companies will do what is in their best interests to sell/entice the majority of customers. Firaxis and 2k do what is in their best business interests. Even Sid Meier knows he can't make games unless they're profitable, nice guy as Sid is.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Yeah, that's right, all of you people who don't use social networking when you game? Still getting something out of Steamworks indirectly. Please stop being so short-sighted.