Anti-Steam Petition

[Willem]

*edit* hey Willem, since you're on some sort of 12 hour delay in this thread I'm going to just kinda wait until you catch up before even attempting to reply.

Yes, one of the reasons why I'm leery of game companies relying on the internet for their DRM. I'm on a wireless service that only allows me a certain amount of time, then I'm off. Not to mention that it tends to drop out from time to time, which makes it impossible for me to play any game like Mass Effect of Assassins Creed 2. So I'm very sympathetic to what I see as a trend beginning to happen here with this move. Maybe I'm just being paranoid but I have a right to be concerned, and an obligation to speak out about it. If the game companies aren't made aware that there's a line they can't cross, then they'll do so in their pursuit of profits.

 

[isndl]

Yes, I am indeed getting tired of posting in said threads, however, if you were to let such people post their opinions unopposed, people who don't know anything about steam (I mean other people who don't know anything about steam, because that would apply to half the people in the first group too) will probably believe what they read.

I'm happy to tire first, but the fact that people who don't know about steam read these forums and feel the need to actually ask questions about how steam works in order to find out that there's absolutely no reason they should have any problems with the system instead of just believing the BS that these guys post is worth the effort.

The irony of this is astounding. When I registered here, I did so to ask Elizabeth some questions about the integration of Steam. Some of the answers will take time, so I planned on continuing my normal habit of lurking.

Do you know why I started posting? Because of people like you spouting off inaccuracies as if it were the truth. I didn't plan on getting involved, but I decided I shouldn't let others make decisions based on misinformation.

Just so I know, you're saying that people who actively don't want to play any multiplayer games, any mods, any chat, any contacts list or community features to such a degree that they actually want the entire game to be re-written to accommodate them are in the majority?

Just to double check, this is the thing you want me to disprove?

If developers cannot code a game to handle a lack of features, they ought to be fired. Any experienced developer will have fail-safes to handle broken features in case a later update breaks them by accident.

You're right dude, why should I listen to a 2k games employee when I could listen to some random dude who's guaranteed not to know what the real situation is like.

I never claimed that Elizabeth was completely wrong, merely that she more than likely does not have the complete picture. I accept that Steam is integrated to the game; I reserve judgment on how deep that integration is. You would do well yourself to take statements with a grain of salt.

 

[AvatarLDI]

Yes really. If anyone is keeping this debate alive Chalks it's you, with your evangelical zeal to defend a service most of us don't care about, and some despise outright. Did they promise you a place in Steam heaven to come here and stick up for them or something?

Exactly, he sounds more like a person defending his religion, then someone who just want to play a game. You can't reason with a zealot. I have had bad experiences with the Steam company in the past, and value my privacy, so will not buy this game, end of story. I don't need to be preached to that my opinions have no value. If you worship Steam, go buy the game and have fun, more power to you. Just don't dismiss everyone else who does not share your love of Steam more then the actual game.

 

[Chalks]

The irony of this is astounding. When I registered here, I did so to ask Elizabeth some questions about the integration of Steam. Some of the answers will take time, so I planned on continuing my normal habit of lurking.

Do you know why I started posting? Because of people like you spouting off inaccuracies as if it were the truth. I didn't plan on getting involved, but I decided I shouldn't let others make decisions based on misinformation.

Ok, I'm sorry that my pseudocode crap upset you. I need to remember that this community has a significantly higher IQ than the ones I am used to and I can't get away with vague inaccurate gestures.

If developers cannot code a game to handle a lack of features, they ought to be fired. Any experienced developer will have fail-safes to handle broken features in case a later update breaks them by accident.

That really wasn't a reply to what I said at all.

I never claimed that Elizabeth was completely wrong, merely that she more than likely does not have the complete picture. I accept that Steam is integrated to the game; I reserve judgment on how deep that integration is. You would do well yourself to take statements with a grain of salt.

I certainly don't object to that position. It's the position of people who assume the exact opposite of what the 2k reps have said and use that to justify their de-integration demands.

 

[isndl]

Ok, I'm sorry that my pseudocode crap upset you. I need to remember that this community has a significantly higher IQ than the ones I am used to and I can't get away with vague inaccurate gestures.

It wasn't just the pseudocode, it was nearly every post you (amongst others) had made. The pseudocode was simply the point where I decided enough was enough.

That really wasn't a reply to what I said at all.

Only if you think rewriting the majority of the game is the only alternative to chat et al. If the game can run with chat being broken, why can't it run with no chat at all?

Unless, of course, it can't. And then the programmers are fools for assuming that the features Steam provides will never break.

I certainly don't object to that position. It's the position of people who assume the exact opposite of what the 2k reps have said and use that to justify their de-integration demands.

Then why did you automatically retort that I had no idea what I was saying? You've been consistently jumping to conclusions in every reply you've made. It's that kind of behavior that made me stop lurking and post to begin with.

 

[MaxCiv]

Because a great many people have absolutely no use for any of those features. All they want to do is play a single player game in the privacy of their hoome on the single computer that they own. The people like you who will benefit from them will be by far the minority, so why must the rest of us be forced to have it as well?

You can still play Civ 5 single player without any internet connection after the initial activation. The fact that there will be other multiplayer and social and community tools built in the game, that you can choose to use or not, will not prevent you from playing the game the same way you play Civ 4 now.

According to what meter or parameters did you assessed that the majority of gamers share your opinion (fear?) of Steam? Do you really think that Firaxis and 2K just woke up one morning and said "that's it we are going to use Steam!" without evaluating the pros and cons, the costs, the objections of "some" of the community, etc. of such decision.

As I told you in another post, whether you like to admit it or not, the future and the surviving of PC gaming will depend on a digital distribution platform. Steam right now is the most likely candidate for such platform with over 25 million active users and growing.

Look at what Blizzard is doing with Battle NET 2.0 which will be launched with SC2 (currently in beta) and then integrated with WoW and all future titles. Does the concept look like familiar to any other system you heard of that starts with a S and end with a M?

It's 2010, time to move on. The change will happen with or without you (or me for that matter). If you don't want to be part of it you better hold on those CD/DVDs of yours, they might be considered rare relics one day and they may pay for your grand children's education .

 

[Chalks]

Only if you think rewriting the majority of the game is the only alternative to chat et al. If the game can run with chat being broken, why can't it run with no chat at all?

Unless, of course, it can't. And then the programmers are fools for assuming that the features Steam provides will never break.

It would not be practical to provide an utterly crippled version of the game without steam, especially when you would need to sort out an entirely new DRM system to handle this niche version.

Branching the project to cater for a tiny number of people isn't something that's going to happen.

I'm amazed that you think it would be reasonable for them to do this.

Then why did you automatically retort that I had no idea what I was saying? You've been consistently jumping to conclusions in every reply you've made. It's that kind of behavior that made me stop lurking and post to begin with.

You don't have any idea about it. I agreed with you when you said you'd reserve judgement on the level of the integration until you knew more.

I personally believe the PR rep that it's integrated heavily. Might not be true, but if someone was to say that the integration was certainly not heavy at this point they wouldn't have a leg to stand on, which was what I was trying to say.0

 

[scratchthepitch]

I don't remember if I signed this petition before the wording change or after it, and I'm too lazy to go back and check. So I'll just "sign" this petition again and reiterate that there is no chance I will buy Civ5 if it requires steam.

Having read this and several other threads about Steam on this forum over the last couple of days, I've grown quite disgusted with the salesgirls here, several of whom are also spamming the same hard sell, browbeat the customer rubbish on other sites, I have noticed. Insulting, harassing and annoying one's customers is really the worst way one can do business. Back when Civ4 first came out I noticed the same thing here and on other forums when somebody complained their computer wouldn't play the game. They were immediately swarmed with salesgirls insulting them and accusing them of all sorts of irrational rubbish. Just like what is going on here. That's not what I call customer service. Reading that mass of abuse back then was one of the main reasons I never bought Civ4 and also why I elected to not become active on this forum at that time. I, as a potential customer, had no desire to be disrespected by a business or by it's minions and adolescent fanboys.

I've noticed that this spamming phenomenon is much more directed at those opposed to the Steam requirement, than the dlc policy. Criticism of the dlc policy seems to be acceptable, and has not been subject to incessant sales spam, where any criticism of Steam, or being forced to use it, is considered blasphemy, a crime against God and country and is spammed to death by the salesgirls. It's quite clear that Steam is working towards monopoly control of download gaming sales and all this attempting to drown out Steam critics with sales pitches over the web has that organized stink to it of an orchestrated campaign. Their business practices remind me more of a protection racket than a legit company. 2K, in helping these people gain a monopoly, is hurting their customers, and in the long run, themselves as well.

Due to this there is zero chance I will use Steam for anything in the future. Any of it's services I might need, I will get from its competitors. I'm also unlikely to buy anything from 2K because of their support for Steam and facilitation of this kind of customer abuse that one sees here on this forum. Good job, girls, by trying to force me into acceptance of your shoddy business practices, you ended up losing a customer.

Sign

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

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

It is exactly because of this sort of customer intimidation practices by 2K/Firaxis and their people that I wont be purchasing anything from 2K/Firaxis in the future.

Moderator Action: And now warned for public discussion of moderator action. If you disagree with moderator action take it up with the moderator in question via pm or with the administrators.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[snowlyon]

Just so I know, you're saying that people who actively don't want to play any multiplayer games, any mods, any chat, any contacts list or community features to such a degree that they actually want the entire game to be re-written to accommodate them are in the majority?

Just to double check, this is the thing you want me to disprove?

...are you kidding me?

YOU keep saying YOUR in the majority regarding wanting Steam....I want to see you cite the source showing this to be true, heck, show me a thread in civIV or even three where you or ANYONE was clamoring for Steam to be used, either solely or in general! its just that simple, but like a good many other posts you tend to make you dance around and make vain attempts to sidestep without actually addressing questions with hard facts....

so again...I ask...provide the source or STOP saying your with the majority who wants to have Steam solely included....or even included in general...~

 

[isndl]

It would not be practical to provide an utterly crippled version of the game without steam, especially when you would need to sort out an entirely new DRM system to handle this niche version.

Branching the project to cater for a tiny number of people isn't something that's going to happen.

I'm amazed that you think it would be reasonable for them to do this.

It'd be simpler than you think. Every box out there in stores will have a CD-key, just so you can register it with Steam. Toss in a bit of code to ask for the key or check for the DVD if Steam authentication fails (because you disabled it), everything else being handled by fail-safes, and you're in business.

It doesn't have to be official support either. Even unofficial support would go a long ways towards accommodating those unable or unwilling to use Steam.

You don't have any idea about it. I agreed with you when you said you'd reserve judgement on the level of the integration until you knew more.

I personally believe the PR rep that it's integrated heavily. Might not be true, but if someone was to say that the integration was certainly not heavy at this point they wouldn't have a leg to stand on, which was what I was trying to say.0

I have as much information as you have when it comes to how deeply integrated Steam is, and so my interpretation of PR statements are no more or less valid than yours. Yet you seem more than willing to discount them simply because you disagree; not only that, but your choice of wording implied arrogant condescension, regardless of whether or not it was deliberate.

 

[Moff Jerjerrod]

While I'm not violently against having to use STEAM to play a computer game I do have an issue or two with this latest trend with pc gaming companies.

1. What is the long term support policy on STEAM driven games meaning years from now if STEAM does not exist or is bought out what happens to my game? Are there options to play single player and PBEM offline?

2. How does one add mods or rather can user created content be added and shared as we can do today with and ?

 

[Chalks]

It'd be simpler than you think. Every box out there in stores will have a CD-key, just so you can register it with Steam. Toss in a bit of code to ask for the key or check for the DVD if Steam authentication fails (because you disabled it), everything else being handled by fail-safes, and you're in business.

It doesn't have to be official support either. Even unofficial support would go a long ways towards accommodating those unable or unwilling to use Steam.

One of the major reasons for Steam's integration is undoubtedly the DRM. I don't think there has been a recent cd-in-drive DRM implementation on a mainstream modern game.

I also continue to disagree with you that spending time designing a whole system to bypass Steam to appease a minority of players is worth the development time - even ignoring the fact that it undermines a prime feature entirely.

 

[Genocidicbunny]

While I'm not violently against having to use STEAM to play a computer game I do have an issue or two with this latest trend with pc gaming companies.

1. What is the long term support policy on STEAM driven games meaning years from now if STEAM does not exist or is bought out what happens to my game? Are there options to play single player and PBEM offline?

You will have a cd-key available that you can use to get your game copy, however you do that.

2. How does one add mods or rather can user created content be added and shared as we can do today with and ?

Same way as you would with a non-steam version. Some games may have slight difficulties with mods, but most work just fine.


Also, I doubt Take 2 is going to go with a purely Steam version for Civ 5. That's just limiting their market too much. Even Valve hasn't released their major games as Steam exclusives. Its just non-sensible for a major publisher. It makes sense for an indie dev that cannot afford physical marketing and retail.

On the subject of the Deluxe edition: It will likely not contain anything that is game changing. Usually steam-deluxe versions have some kind of DLC added in, or maybe the soundtrack, or perhaps an extra map/units, but it's nothing gamebreaking for those that do not have it.

 

[Willem]

As I told you in another post, whether you like to admit it or not, the future and the surviving of PC gaming will depend on a digital distribution platform.

Well that's certainly not true. There will always be a large enough market to justify releasing a hard copy version of a top selling game, at least eventually. It will probably work the same way as Stardock's GalCiv XP, Twilight of the Arnor, or Fallout's DLC content. They'll sell it online for awhile and if the numbers are good enough, they'll release a hard copy version for retail. It's only the niche games that don't make a big impact on the market that youy'll never see in a retail outlet. And since they're not going to be good enough to really have a big impact, it will be no great loss anyway.

 

[AvatarLDI]

One of the major reasons for Steam's integration is undoubtedly the DRM. I don't think there has been a recent cd-in-drive DRM implementation on a mainstream modern game.

I also continue to disagree with you that spending time designing a whole system to bypass Steam to appease a minority of players is worth the development time - even ignoring the fact that it undermines a prime feature entirely.

What is your proof we are a minority of players? I don't believe you.

 

[Ahriman]

What is your proof we are a minority of players?

How about the fact that modern games are selling really well despite DRM, and that some games still sell fantastically well despite really nasty restrictive DRM (AC2)?

The proof is in the pudding; games companies have found that their big blockbuster games do just fine in terms of sales despite DRM.

So yeah, the number of gamers who will never buy any game with DRM is a minority. If if they really stay that way, then they won't remain gamers for very long.

 

[snowlyon]

One of the major reasons for Steam's integration is undoubtedly the DRM. I don't think there has been a recent cd-in-drive DRM implementation on a mainstream modern game.

I also continue to disagree with you that spending time designing a whole system to bypass Steam to appease a minority of players is worth the development time - even ignoring the fact that it undermines a prime feature entirely.

again...I ask you to cite your source for this claim~

 

[Chalks]

What is your proof we are a minority of players? I don't believe you.

Civ 5 preorders have been one of the top selling items on steam since it was announced. The platform has 25 million active users.

Pretty much every modern game has online activation DRM and recent Steamworks powered games have set global sales records.

No significant boycott. No significant descent.

Your turn, do you have any proof of your significance?

 

[Willem]

You will have a cd-key available that you can use to get your game copy, however you do that.

You completely missed his point. You can't play the game unless you activate it through Steam, even if you buy it from a retail store. If the game is no longer supported by Steam, for one reason or another, you won't be able to activate it. Hence you won't be able to play it anymore. Say EA decides that they want to expand into online distribution, and they figure that Steam would make a very good acquisition for them. We all know that EA was being rather hostile to 2K awhile back, so they decide not to support any 2Ks game on their newly acquired system. The civ community if going to be SOL.

And that's not a paranoid scenario by any means, it's entirely plausible. EA loves buying other companies and expanding their market presence. And they would love to undermine 2K so thay can buy them out as well. Which is is one reason why I'm not happy with this third party involvenment. Frankly, I'm surprised that 2K has even allowed themselves to be placed in such a vulnerable position. Dumb move on their part as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Willem]

The platform has 25 million active users.

25 million users in a world of about 7 billion. Yes, clearly the majority of the gaming population.