Discussion in 'News Updates' started by V. Soma, May 6, 2010.
Also 'shotbungagger' is classy as hell, way to prove that I'm the one that needs to grow up.
Grumpy old man here (raises hand), where do i sign in?
A) Grow up already 'fraid I already did youngster, but good thought.
B) shockingly no one is out to get us, lots of games are Steam Only and lots of games do damn well for it. Not necessarily true sonny, think I got a X-wife who's still after my spleen. Congratz for the Steam fans on the plethora of games, you worked hard to get it.
C) Steam is easy, accessible, free (to download at least), and a great organization tool. People who refuse Steam are the grumpy old men in the way of basic progress, phasing out the inconveniences of the past to make PC gaming better. Great, appreciate the benediction of Steam. So, do they make a decent cup of coffee as well? Of course i'm a Grumpy Old Man ( btw, that's our clan tag on Freelancer, GOM.) junior, i've earned the right after all these years to be a grumpy old man. In the way of progress? LMAO, where do you think progress started from cubling... From grumpy old men. Phase out? invonvienance? lol, spoken like a true product of your generation. I truly feel sorry for your parents when it's time for them to retire. Point is, while you may be ready, willing, and able to roll over and fawn at the altar of your favorite pc religion, some of us "grumpy old men" will have made up their own minds on what they wish do do.
Do you mean something like ... history?
Hmm, corporations acting in my best interest.
Enron? Tyco? Madoff? Credit Card Companies? Investment Banks?
Who stripped the forests? Who pollutes the air? Who pollutes the water?
No, you are probably right
... we can trust corporations to look out for our best interest.
Steam may not be in the same category, but they are on a lot of computers.
Do you know their agenda? Do you know they can't abuse your data?
Is it impossible for them to collect data without your knowledge and consent?
They don't answer to us. Worse, they are a 3rd party.
If I buy Civ V, I expect a business transaction with Firaxis.
If I buy at a retail outlet, I expect a business transaction with the outlet.
Now, we have Firaxis, 2k, retail outlet, and Steam.
Too many fingers in the pie.
I will sit this dance out.
In case anybody's been keeping track, it's now been one whole week since the announcement that TakeTwo will be forcing all versions to use Steam. That should be plenty of time for TakeTwo to monitor the fan response and realise that they've upset a lot of fans, if they hadn't already anticipated that ahead of time. Elizabeth is obviously monitoring the boards, and she's had plenty of time to communicate the sentiment up to her bosses.
Put another way, it's time for TakeTwo to decide whether they want to win the game via Domination/Conquest, Diplomatic, or Space victory.
I haven't seen any sign from TakeTwo whatsoever that they'd be willing to reconsider this decision. On the contrary, we've seen repeated statements from TakeTwo that this is the way it is, and to accept it or go away.
Elizabeth, if you would like to comment that TakeTwo is willing to listen at all to the legions of Civ fans on this critical issue, and possibly change its stance on Steam, now is the time, before too many other fans read this thread. However, I fear that it is already past the point of no return.
Commenting for the last time,
Man all we need is some kinda birther stuff and we can have the full web of crazy in here.
"No man, you don't KNOW their agenda, they could just be waiting for enough users to get it or something, then bam, mass identity theft!"
Really it's your loss though I guess, no one is gonna uninstall the older Civ games, you can enjoy them still, I'll just be over here with most users who don't inherently quake in terror what the big evil corporation is gonna do to me for fun and sport, playing the new game and having fun.
Loudest =/= Biggest.
I can point to any number of the assorted "BOYCOTT THE GAME" groups that fall apart because their major 'numbers' are just volume, not members, heck pretend I posted those screenshots (from evil Steam!) of the Modern Warfare and L4D2 boycott groups, and most of their users are ingame in those games.
I'm not calling for a boycott... I'm just asking for some resolution either way so I don't need to keep checking this board and get on with my life ;-) If that means I won't purchase Civ V, so be it... I'll have saved fifty bucks, and I'll always have Civ 4
I'm not going to join any organized boycott, I'm just going to not buy the two copies that I had planned to.
I still haven't purchased Orange Box even though I have wanted play Portal and that's been, what, three years?
And yes I'll go read a book, ride a motorcycle, play Fallout or Civ 4 or some other game with all the time I won't be spending on this release. I'm not going to say that makes me happy, but forced Steam is a non-starter for me.
That is more towards game engine changes, these happen all the time. I was thinking along the lines of either radically altering your gameplay formula or embracing / rejecting modability. The former is technology driven, the latter design driven.
I would really be surprised if that had not always been the case
I do not consider this a change at all, there always have been extensions, DLC is just an updated / more flexible method for providing those.
and at least according to what they say it still is
Why did people buy expansions ? There are 3 million or so copies of civ sold. Maybe 20% of the customers are using mods. That leaves a huge market for expansions and DLC, even if you think the two (mod and DLC) are mutually exclusive audiences (which to me they are not).
I think the two can co-exist and do so already, I agree that we will see who is right in the next few years.
It is a little late in the development process to change directions now, even if the rumblings on the boards would convince them (which I doubt they would, too few people to make an impression).
I certainly do not expect any change in direction, now it is up to the Steam-opponents to decide whether to get Civ V or skip this one, hoping that enough people do so to get Firaxis or whoever to reconsider for the 6th iteration.
Those weren't the changes I meant. I meant DLC. That part was prefacing my argument, and I could have been more clear
I'm guessing your 'extensions' = expansions, as there was no DLC provided before Civ5. Assuming I'm correct... DLC isn't an expansion (like BTS or Warlords).
I back my argument this way: the DLC offered with civ5 can fairly easily be modded in. Compare that with the effort required to create a mod that equates to an expansion -- FFH2. That took a relatively large and very skilled team quite a while.
If you equate DLC and expansions then we'll have to agree to disagree
It's not that the mod/DLC audiences are mutually exclusive, it's that mods make DLC less viable, thus compete with them. Will the 'suits' accept that there's room enough in Dodge for both to co-exist, or will they eventually force a High Noon showdown?
I'm thinking that after DLC gets modded in, even if the DLC has decent sales, there will be pressure to prevent mods from replicating DLC. Big companies have a history of such short-sightedness (consider the movie or record industry folks for example).
We should make a bet -- in 2 years loser buys
Thanks for the polite and well-thought out reply
PS when I refer to pressure and big companies I don't mean Firaxis. I consider them gamers who make games for gamers, and I have great respect for them personally and as a company.
Alright I'm gonna be nice about this, but I want to ask, of the people who dislike Steam over this, how many of you guys have tried it? I know at first it was buggy, it turned me off at first too, but now it's gotten much better. Portal is free for a while on Steam, yes, free, so I'd like to just ask everyone who thinks this is the death of Civ, try it. Download Steam, get Portal for free, and just see for yourself how a Steam Only game works.
This isn't me being smug or anything, I just think Portal would be a good bar for you guys since it too is Steam required, and worst case, you get a cute little puzzle game for free.
DLC can be an expansion like BtS the way I see it (please tell me why BtS could not have been a DLC if you disagree).
DLC can however also be a lot smaller, i.e. a new civ, a new leader even. Expansions of that small size are not feasible without digital distribution, which is why I consider DLC to be the natural evolution of expansion packs.
The only 'DLC' I am aware of for Civ 5 right now is actually the deluxe edition. I agree the Babylonian civ is no comparison to FfH2 and in theory can be modded in easily (creating the LH is the most complex part of that).
On the other hand I do not see why FfH2 could not be released as a DLC. To me, every mod / expansion pack can be turned into a DLC, at least theoretically. Not every DLC could be turned into an expansion that could be sold in stores however (due to potentially being of very small size and therefore low price).
Yes, mods compete with DLC, but there is room for both from my point of view. Think of DLC as more 'professional' mods with a price tag.
Take the Babylonian civ as an example. Of course a mod could come up with a Babylonian civ, but I would expect higher quality from the official DLC, i.e. a better leaderhead, unique diplomacy texts and speech for both the LH and units.
In a mod you frequently (not always) find inferior LHs (there certainly are LHs which are close to Firaxis quality, even though they have to do some recycling of animations etc., there also are many LHs which are clearly inferior) and you rarely find unique diplomacy texts and almost never civ-specific speech.
Both the DLC and the mod provide a Babylonian civ, the quality could be rather different however. Some people are certainly ok with the mod version (and bypass the DLC because of that), others might be willing to pay a few bucks for the DLC version of it. Yet others might bypass the civ altogether and use neither version.
I understand that fear, but on some scale that is similar to big mods and expansion packs too. A big mod might introduce enough changes to compete with an expansion pack (civs, leaders, unit types, techs, wonders, ... - actual gameplay changes are rarer, but mods which introduce those clearly exist as well).
I doubt anyone did not buy BtS because there was a FfH or a Revolutions mod. While that risk (of bypassing the 'official content') is higher for smaller DLCs, there imo is enough room for the two to co-exist, esp. if the developer knows that the mod community is an asset to the franchise.
Yes, companies do have a tendency to go for short term gain over long term viability, so we will see what happens. As of now I believe there is room for both mods and DLC.
I already did, and you quoted it below here. No need to repeat myself repeat myself
Arguing semantics is not a good use of time. You define DLC to include expansions like BtS (and why not to Civ5 itself then?). I do not. Such semantics are not relevant to the points I've raised.
That (hopefully) settled...
Not in theory but in practice as much more than one civ has been modded in, and very professionally too.
We agree that they compete.
Regarding if there's room for both, our point of view is irrelevant. The point of view of the 'suits' that gave us forced steam is what matters.
Not only do I agree but I'll go beyond this -- I think FFH2/etc. caused more folks to buy BTS, but that's just my guess. I think mods are a good thing for civ. What the 'suits' will think when they start to see mods replicate DLC is what I'm considering -- will they be like the big music/movie studios and see it as lost revenue instead of good PR and good community building opportunities?
I wouldn't simplify my opinions into a "dislike" of Steam. I think it has both pros and cons. I've used it before and have been using it again over the past few days. I've also downloaded Portal already, and some free game demos. It all looks nice and runs well most of the time, but I have seen problems with it.
I'm critical of the decision to make civ steam-exclusive because it's annoying to the potential customers who consider the cons of Steam to be relatively large compared to its pros. As an example of something we should expect now that the game is steam-exclusive, Civ5 will be relatively highly priced and stay at a high price for a longer time. As a budget-conscious consumer, I only buy games when their price is closely matched with the value I believe the game has. Civ is one of the few games I'm happy to pay full price for. Most other games I buy once they have dropped in price because I don't care much for being milked of my money just to play games when they are fresh out.
In summary, I neither hate nor love Steam (ignore my signature lol). I dislike that I have to use it, but I don't dislike Steam itself. Does that make sense?
I have steam installed. I even fire it up once in awhile. In fact I just started steam for the first time in a few months to see what games I have on it (company of heroes, maybe Orange Box, maybe an older ww2 shooter IIRC). Steam's been sitting there at 99% updating for 5 minutes now... lol
I don't see steam as evil/etc. Your claims otherwise have been hyperbole.
I have no problem with the pro-steamers being able to use it with civ5 or any other game.
For me, steam offers absolutely no benefit with Civ5, and in fact offers a detriment.
I support your right to choose steam. You apparently don't support my right to choose to not have an unnecessary third-party program running in the background to play a store-bought and dvd-installed single-player offline civ5 game.
Why is that? Why does it burn your britches so much that some want the option to not run steam while playing a SP offline civ5 game?
BTW - 10 minutes now and steam is still hung at 99% updating...
15 minutes and counting... lol
I won't buy steam.
Let's make a voting. Ah, I guess there was one some time a go, majority was against steam - but what does that count in these fast moving times, right?
*takes a reminiscent look at the cover of the sweet Civ III package on top of his board*
It's not a question of whether or not they will ship it as a Steam exclusive; I'm betting that it relies on Steam/Valve for PC multiplayer and DRM. So IMO they won't simply release a non-Steam version in the future.
You know what though... I'm glad, because compared to the last effort with multiplayer and the fact that all disk DRM has a percentage of duds, you're much better off with Steam/Valve which handle both facets beautifully in other Steam games.
Don't want Steam, just want to play single player off-line? Install it once, then run it in off-line mode and don't have it start on startup. It won't update games, and barely takes up any resources at all, and you can still have an icon on your desktop for Civ 5 and just click on that.
I too am a long time fan. Long enough to remember that bug in Civ 1 where you'd get super squares in the arctic... City size 1 with pollution; ah, fun times.
You don't understand me - even if Steam worked fine (which I doubt heavily), I want a feeling of a real product: A glazing box, a tech tree poster, a handbook, a shiny disc and the smell of a fresh computer game. Steam is the opposite of that. Well, I guess I am just olschool, but I am not alone. I don't do bank business online and barely buy anything there... a real product got style and class for me. Civ never was a fast consuming product - it lasted over some years, it was something worthy you could pick up and lovingly look at - and that shall be so for the coming generations of the game, I think.
I really would be missing a box in my collection. Please, fireaxis, release at least single player as a disc!
You can still buy the physical version as far as I'm aware, (i.e., DVD with tech-tree and manual), but it will install Steam and Civ V, and then Steam will verify and update Civ V etc.
The Steam version is something that will last forever. You don't have to put in a DVD to play. You don't need to be online to play, (just once to verify when installing). You can lose a disk or serial key, but with Steam, (as long as you remember your username/password), you can login anywhere in the world and download your game, (you can even have it on *gasp* multiple computers in off-line mode).
Heck, I bought Civ IV + Warlords + BTS when it came on special on Steam even though I already had Civ IV and BTS; just because it's much more convenient.
Separate names with a comma.