Civ 5 digital deluxe coming exclusively to Steam! Steamworks confirmed!

[HamTard]

I can leave my Vista PC on for a week, playing Steam games without ever closing Steam, and it will only end up using 74MB when minimized to the system tray (which it almost always is, I only open the window sometimes, if you add a game to favorites you can launch from right clicking the system tray icon). Even when I have the window open, it doesn't go above 91MB. I have no idea where you guys are getting 250MB.

In an era where Dell's cheapest desktops come with 4GB of RAM, I don't see how 91MB is a problem. My Vista Windows Sidebar uses more RAM than Steam and it does a whole lot less.

 

[HamTard]

I'm not a Valve employee - I certainly wouldn't want anyone to take the kids spreading these rumours seriously (including most of the crap they make up about Steam!). I wish I was a Valve employee, that would be an awesome job.

It's funny how telling the truth about Steam results in an accusation of being a Valve employee (as if they had the money to throw around on marketing to 50 disgruntled forum posters) yet spreading obvious lies about how Steam works (as so many people on this forum have been doing) isn't tied with an accusation of working for Valve's competition.

 

[PieceOfMind]

It's funny how telling the truth about Steam results in ...

I think it's funny you put it that way. That's all Chalks is doin' here. Just here providing the truth and nothing more.

 

[Toni1]

I'm not a Valve employee - I certainly wouldn't want anyone to take the kids spreading these rumours seriously (including most of the crap they make up about Steam!). I wish I was a Valve employee, that would be an awesome job.

As far as your links go:

You get the advantage of the game being released several months earlier because you didn't have to wait for Firaxis to manually re-write all the online functionality from scratch for everyone who does want it. But other than that not much since you've gone out of your way to avoid the features it provides.

Firaxis also get the advantage of relatively solid DRM for free. Not an advantage for you directly, perhaps, but better sales of Civ 5 means more money and resources going into future expansions, additional content and other releases by the company. In the long run, that's good for you too.

The argument of "I don't want any of these things so they should release a completely different version of the game just for little old me" doesn't make very much sense. There's no reason for them to do this and even if there was, they can't, because it would remove the DRM which is a vital part of the deal for them.

Don't get me wrong, I understand why you'd say "I want the game to be DRM free", I really do. I understand why someone would say "I want the game to be released tomorrow". I'd understand it if you said "I want to go home from work 2 hours early every day". These are all perfectly normal things to want and there is nothing wrong with wanting them.

The thing is, often, there is more to consider than just the fact that you want something.

Aaaargh! *counts to ten and takes several deep breaths to calm down*

You didn't even bother to read the two questions did you? I don't see anything remotely relevant to what I was asking in your posta and last third went entirely off topic as I didn't even mention DRM in either question, I was asking about singleplayer features that Steam provides (so no online, no multiplayer and no benefits developer/publisher). It shouldn't be so hard when you can quote dozen multiplayer features out of bat.

Ah forget it, you are obviously intentionally ignoring anything that in your imagination could even remotely make your precious Steam look bad so please stop answering my questions about Steam. Some other steam user might be able to answer remotely objectively to them and not quote Steam Bible. Preferably someone that uses or has used other DD services extensively. Even 'no singleplayer benefiting features' would be an answer you know.

Such ammount of RAM wont affect performance of mainstream PCs.

I don't know other setups beside mine but for me it most certainly gives both framerate increase and less stuttering in heavy action situations. It also seems that AI in Civ 4 can make it's moves bit faster and I can play longer in game before before number of cities and units start to glog my system down. Why does this bother some people so much anyway? This is rather pointless argument as I can and do what ever I see fit with my system and no one in this world has any right to stop me from doing it. It's an aging rig (~3 years old, I did post specs before but here's the link again) and can't handle any new 3D game in full detail (any non indie anyway) anymore, haven't been for over a year now so any little bit helps and I know this from my over 15 years of PC gaming. Always, no matter good rig I buy, I'll eventually have to resort to these meansures to extend usable lifespan of my computers, four years being bare minimum without upgrade.

 

[Veneke]

It's been a while since I've been about here, but I must admit that the big names that I remember posting were much better at arguing than what I'm seeing here.

Anyway, I'm using Steam currently, and I am unimpressed. It has managed to completely fumble every single installation I've ran through it. I'll admit that support was available when requested, though I was waiting 1-2 weeks in one case. I have no doubt that it will fumble CiV's installation. Other than that, it has given me a lot of options I have no interest in, and makes very little sense for Civ considering it is predominately a single-player game. I'm sure there's some fine fancy uses for it, but it simply isn't critical to it's core function.

However, the days of the single-player strategy game seem well and truly numbered. This new Civ for Facebook and the use of Steam all signal a move that the more... common... Civ gamer won't blink twice about.

Basically what I'm getting at is that Steam is merely something that's happened to the PC gaming world and now must be dealt with. It's like the new security measures at the airport. Free? They better be. Pointless? Most of the time, yes. Reassuring to corporate types? Undeniably.

I do urge anyone reading this who has decided not to buy CiV because of Steam to reconsider. I suggest so not because I think Steam is a good system (personally, I think it's terrible one, better than some, but still terrible), but rather because this is Civ we're talking about.

I've played every single Civ game there is, including FreeCiv, and I have no intention of missing one. Withholding sales only works on a mass basis (ie 1-2 million), anything less is unlikely to have any effect considering the nature of the Civ franchise. The fact is, we're not going to be able to scrounge up 1-2 million sales to alter this (though I'm up for trying), so the best solution is to go along with this, write a letter to some of the Civ people, 2k people and the Steam people, expressing your personal frustration regarding this extra hassle and anything else you happen to have go wrong on you with regards to Steam (it won't do anything, but you'll feel better), and just try not to notice the small little black box at the corner of your screen.

 

[arstal]

Veneke, don't worry about the single-player strat genre. It's going strong from other companies.

Civ isn't the only big player anymore. It's the biggest player- but Stardock has some up with some very worthy offerings the last few years. Others have as well.

 

[EmpireOfCats]

This new Civ for Facebook and the use of Steam all signal a move that the more... common... Civ gamer won't blink twice about.

I think this is the most important point. There are a few loud people around who will hate it and complain. The rest of us -- what's the problem? It's like asking people to drop Windows because it is closed source or to drop iTunes because it doesn't give you complete freedom over your music.

Forget it. It's Civ, and unless the game is a complete screw-up, people will do almost anything to play it. In fact, I'm guessing that if Firaxis decides to use Steamworks to build an OS X version, the number of customers they will add will be higher than the number of Steam boycotters. When push comes to shove, people will buy Civ.

 

[PieceOfMind]

Aaaargh! *counts to ten and takes several deep breaths to calm down*

Off topic:

I think this is relevant here. I think it'd be great if Chalks and people who disagree with him could do the following.

source: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/nick.heap/Effectiverelatwork.htm

Between two people
Method 1: Active listening. Here one party summarises in her or his own words what s/he hears the other person say and the feelings underlying it. S/he then feeds back to this person. The process continues until the talker is sure the listener understands. Then the roles are reversed.

EXAMPLE
I was working with a group of senior people on a management course. The group was stuck in an argument between two of the members, who I’ll call Fred and Mary. I asked each person to summarise the argument of the other in his or her own words. Mary began by saying: ‘I believe you think XYZ; have I got that right?’ Fred responded by explaining a bit more until he was sure Mary had fully understood his argument. When Mary summarised again accurately they both knew she had understood his argument completely. Then we did the same thing in reverse. When both Fred and Mary had fully understood and acknowledged each other’s position, the argument fell away. They could now bridge the differences.

It usually requires verbal communication. Not sure it would work quite as well in writing (on a forum) but would it hurt to try?

I am being serious here. I really do think a lot of the arguments going on here are a result of one or both sides not fully acknowledging each other's points of view. What I have put in the quote box there is proven to be an effective strategy at managing conflict/arguments.

I don't expect many will take me seriously on this, but at least I'm putting the information out there for you to think about.

 

[Toni1]

Basically what I'm getting at is that Steam is merely something that's happened to the PC gaming world and now must be dealt with.

I do urge anyone reading this who has decided not to buy CiV because of Steam to reconsider. I suggest so not because I think Steam is a good system (personally, I think it's terrible one, better than some, but still terrible), but rather because this is Civ we're talking about.

I've played every single Civ game there is, including FreeCiv, and I have no intention of missing one. Withholding sales only works on a mass basis (ie 1-2 million), anything less is unlikely to have any effect considering the nature of the Civ franchise. The fact is, we're not going to be able to scrounge up 1-2 million sales to alter this (though I'm up for trying), so the best solution is to go along with this, write a letter to some of the Civ people, 2k people and the Steam people, expressing your personal frustration regarding this extra hassle and anything else you happen to have go wrong on you with regards to Steam (it won't do anything, but you'll feel better), and just try not to notice the small little black box at the corner of your screen.

Why should we bend over backwards for service we do not like or meansures we do not support? Our only powers as customers in an undesireable situation is to complain and vote with our money and move to services that carter our needs. At least that way our money is spend on something we apreciate and support. If Firaxis/2k does not carter our needs we should simply seek out developer/publisher that does and maybe our money will either keep them afloat or help them develop products we like. That's free market economy for you.

The thing I don't understand is why are you and others so persistant in your effort to make us join steam and continue to buy firaxis/2k products? What excactly is it to you? I mean when I encounter people that are disgrundled with either GOG.com or GamersGate I, after initial inquiry and attempt to help rectify the situation, usually suggest that they try other DD services out there to see if one of them carters his or her needs better. I think it's better that way than trying to persistently keep person that is disapointed or does not like the service around. Forcing someone to use a service will only make them frustrated and eventually come to hate the service in question.

Now that that's out of the way, as you seem more sensible than most other steam users so far, could you answer answer the two questions I linked in this post. Just try to be objective about it and please please avoid the preaching speeches Chalks seem to enjoy so much. I'm starting to fear that joining steam involves brainwashing as he mechanically quotes same texts in different order no matter what is asked or talked about. Steam version of Lord's Prayer is ringing in my ears and causes serious headache as we speak.

Our Steam who art in Valve,
hallowed be thy DRM...
Please make it stop!

 

[Veneke]

Veneke, don't worry about the single-player strat genre. It's going strong from other companies.

Civ isn't the only big player anymore. It's the biggest player- but Stardock has some up with some very worthy offerings the last few years. Others have as well.

Quite true Arstal. I've actually quite a few Stardock titles myself and they're quite good. While I will admit Civ isn't the only big player anymore, it is a key game in the genre.

Also, I just noticed another post of yours:

BTW, Valve put the banhammer on mods that were competing with their hat drop system in TF2 last night- so if you want a sign on what the mod community might face in Civ V, there's a good sign of what the climate will be.

That, quite frankly, is more worrying than any other aspect of Steam. Has anyone from either 2K or Steam confirmed or denied whether players will be prevented from modding things into the game and sharing said modifications?

 

[lemmy101]

The thing I don't understand is why are you and others so persistant in your effort to make us join steam and continue to buy firaxis/2k products? What excactly is it to you? I mean when I encounter people that are disgrundled with either GOG.com or GamersGate I, after initial inquiry and attempt to help rectify the situation, usually suggest that they try other DD services out there to see if one of them carters his or her needs better.

Because a) It seems a bit like a travesty that Civ fans would miss out on Civ because of something we regard as so inconsequential. b) It's being implied that a company and product we have a lot of love for (that has, in my case at least, revolutionised my PC gaming experience. No exaggeration) is not just 'something you dislike' but likened to some evil plague forced upon the games industry, and we wish to defend it, especially as others who don't know much about Steam and have yet to form an opinion may take your perspective, and be scared off getting Civ 5 for questionable reasons. and c) it's a forum argument, no side ever budges and each wants their argument to be the last word. Since the crux of our argument is 'Steam is totally awesome, you just don't realise it yet' of course we're going to recommend you give it a fair chance before publicly rubbishing it.

 

[need my speed]

Steam perhaps is totally awesome...For those who play multiplayer games. I have yet to see a usefull function for singleplayer gamers. Perhaps someone can provide me with one?

 

[Chalks]

Aaaargh! *counts to ten and takes several deep breaths to calm down*

You didn't even bother to read the two questions did you? I don't see anything remotely relevant to what I was asking in your posta and last third went entirely off topic as I didn't even mention DRM in either question, I was asking about singleplayer features that Steam provides (so no online, no multiplayer and no benefits developer/publisher). It shouldn't be so hard when you can quote dozen multiplayer features out of bat.

You're going to get the game several months earlier than you would without steam.

Tell me, how are you justifying claiming that this is not an advantage to you?

 

[lemmy101]

Steam perhaps is totally awesome...For those who play multiplayer games. I have yet to see a usefull function for singleplayer gamers. Perhaps someone can provide me with one?

1) Extra money for a company you love to continue making great products, without requiring online always like some other DRMs.
2) Cheaper development costs and quicker development times for the game, resulting in higher quality and quicker release. Also more money for developer.
3) Achievements
4) Much higher chance of Civ6
5) Technically: Playing the game at all.
6) Digital distribution. Amazingly awesome game deals. Occasional weekend pass trials to full games instead of demos:
7) Automatic patching
8) Play it earlier (pre-loading)
9) Can be reached in-game by friends (if you wish to be) - no more missed important msn messages while fullscreen.
10) No CD in drive required.
11) The in-game mod community wassit system they talked about, which may not exist if it wasn't for Steam, or at least will almost definitely be built around Steam tech.
12) The warm fuzzy feeling and pride of your Steam game library. Immune to the ravages of time, scratches,theft, fire or being lost and always just a click away wherever you are:



If I'd bought these from shops, I would have spent about 20x more money for them. I think I got every GTA game for £3.99 IIRC.

<3 Steam

 

[Veneke]

Toni1 -

I am only pointing out that a single lost sale will not change the situation in any manner. A million lost sales would. Where I'm coming from though is that I would go through just about any DRM for Civ, simply because I enjoy the genre, Sid's work in particular and just the game as Civilisation (regardless of number). If you don't want to do that, well... fair enough. But we should realize that they aren't going to do anything about it unless we can get a bit of a mass movement going. A few people here and there saying "I'm out." will go no where and only mean that you won't be playing the latest in Civilization.

Don't get me wrong. I'd as soon recommend Steam as I would cutting off your own leg. The fact is though that without Steam you won't get Civ. Civ is what I'm supporting, and if 2k or whoever wants to annoy their more dedicated fans in favour of sales, that's their call. Again, it comes down to mass movements. If you want Civ V without Steam, then we need a bucketload of people, anything else is wishful thinking.

Question 1: What tangible benefits does steam provide for single player only, always offline player (when game is run = no internet connection)?

None that I can see.

Question 2: Why would single player gamer that shuts down internet while playing choose Steam over any other DD service out there if all of them had same game with same price?

I'm not 100% sure I'm following this question. I think you're asking why choose Steam over another DD service. Barring one or two exceptions, it is my experience based on what I've got myself and what I've read in other forums that most DD services are about the same in terms of installation, support and so on. Steam seems to have the advantage in being more popular (and why that is, I do not know - I think it's the "community" aspect). In this case though the DD service is being dictated to us, so we don't really have a choice.

Chalks is one of the poorer posters in this (and related) threads.

 

[Chalks]

Chalks is one of the poorer posters in this (and related) threads.

Cheers, at least I could think of a reason why single player fans shouldn't be complaining about Steam - or did you have as much trouble as Toni deciphering that point because I *gasp* said more than one thing?

 

[Veneke]

Cheers, at least I could think of a reason why single player fans shouldn't be complaining about Steam - or did you have as much trouble as Toni deciphering that point because I *gasp* said more than one thing?

Alright, fine... my replies are in bold.

You get the advantage of the game being released several months earlier because you didn't have to wait for Firaxis to manually re-write all the online functionality from scratch for everyone who does want it. But other than that not much since you've gone out of your way to avoid the features it provides.

Answer the question asked, not the question you want to be asked. To deal with your point more generally, I would have waited the few months. This also isn't an advantage for the offline single-player. We've been waiting this long, we can go another bit if it means less Steam.

Firaxis also get the advantage of relatively solid DRM for free. Not an advantage for you directly, perhaps, but better sales of Civ 5 means more money and resources going into future expansions, additional content and other releases by the company. In the long run, that's good for you too.

Answer the question asked, not what you want to be asked, again. He asked for the direct benefits for the single player. This is not one of them. With regards to this point more generally, better sales of Civ V do not directly translate into being good for the existing fanbase, especially if said sales result in future Civ's growing away from what the original fanbase was expecting. See Steam for an excellent example.

The argument of "I don't want any of these things so they should release a completely different version of the game just for little old me" doesn't make very much sense. There's no reason for them to do this and even if there was, they can't, because it would remove the DRM which is a vital part of the deal for them.

Answer the question asked, not what you want to be asked, again. You need to listen to other people mate. There's no need to argue with this point more generally because it is an absurd argument that is basically a condescending attack on the people who are less than comfortable using a third-party software.

Don't get me wrong, I understand why you'd say "I want the game to be DRM free", I really do. I understand why someone would say "I want the game to be released tomorrow". I'd understand it if you said "I want to go home from work 2 hours early every day". These are all perfectly normal things to want and there is nothing wrong with wanting them.

The thing is, often, there is more to consider than just the fact that you want something.

No relevance whatsoever to question.

Hang on a minute, you didn't answer the question at all did you? You sneaky bugger, you had me going there...

 

[SGRaaize]

Geez, can someone explain to me what's the big problem with it being on Steam?
I guess I get that you guys are angry over having to use steam to play it, but really... so many pages of this pointless discussion

 

[Chalks]

Answer the question asked, not the question you want to be asked. To deal with your point more generally, I would have waited the few months. This also isn't an advantage for the offline single-player. We've been waiting this long, we can go another bit if it means less Steam.

That answers the question.

The fact that you personally don't care about this particular benifit doesn't make it not a benefit.

The question should be phrased as "What benefits does steam have, if you ignore all the multiplayer stuff, all the auto patching, all the mod distribution and community features and any benefits that I decide I could do without?" if you want to just arbitrarily say "well, I could live without that"

Answer the question asked, not what you want to be asked, again. He asked for the direct benefits for the single player. This is not one of them. With regards to this point more generally, better sales of Civ V do not directly translate into being good for the existing fanbase, especially if said sales result in future Civ's growing away from what the original fanbase was expecting. See Steam for an excellent example.

Again, perhaps maybe this isn't a guaranteed benefit, but it is a potential one. You're saying it doesn't count because it's not 100% set in stone as a benefit to you, but that wasn't in the question. Add "And is 100% set in stone and not just a potential benefit" if you want to exclude this from answering the question too.

Answer the question asked, not what you want to be asked, again. You need to listen to other people mate. There's no need to argue with this point more generally because it is an absurd argument that is basically a condescending attack on the people who are less than comfortable using a third-party software.

If you say "I don't like Steam because I'm not comfortable using third party software" then you don't know what the words you are using mean.

Simple as that.

The Civ series and every single other game in recent history has used a whole load of third party libraries, software and APIs.

If the root of your argument is "it has something third party in it! Eww!!" then you're using this argument because once upon a time, someone misunderstood what someone who knew what they were talking about was saying.

No relevance whatsoever to question.

Hang on a minute, you didn't answer the question at all did you? You sneaky bugger, you had me going there...

No, this is me attempting to give Toni some credit as to why she objects to Steam.

Evidently, you think she objects to it because she doesn't know what "third party software" means, has heard at some point that it's a bad thing an is regurgitating said issues in a context that makes no sense.

If this is correct then this does indeed have no relevance to the question. True.

 

[Senethro]

Veneke: As you've just seen the view of benefits is very subjective. I thought his list was very correct and significant. Clearly you think otherwise but you're not the final authority.