Civ5 - shipping with Steamworks * plus Digital Deluxe Edition

[DRJ]

Steam is an integral part of the game - we're building the game for and with Steam. That's the simplest way I can explain it. It's part of the game.

So was the ingame multiplayer menu and the autodownload of patches in CIV IV.
But I mostly downloaded the patches here as the ingame patching often sucked and reading about it, it seems Steam will do exactly that, too.

Btw.: if Steam is part of the game, no need to install 2 programs then? It is in the game, isn't it? This sounds pretty odd to me and not necessary for the average single-player offline-gamer. Ah, wait he shall get hooked up on DLC, so Steam is forced to be used. Admit it.

 

[kayapo]

Steam is an integral part of the game - we're building the game for and with Steam. That's the simplest way I can explain it. It's part of the game.

In this case the issue is very simple to me...

There are two fundamental problems I have with the chosen path for CIV5.

1 - Having one of the starter civilizations bundled together as a DLC milking product on game launch.

This is just not very elegant at all. I expect this kind of thing from 2K, but I expected more from Firaxis. This just after the fiasco that was CIV IV - Colonization is really disapointing and says a lot about the future of Firaxis.

Since they don't respect me as a costumer I just about lost my respect for them as a game developer. Firaxis = CA in my books now.

2- Not being able to buy the game as a digital download from anyone but Steam

I have no qualms with Steam. I use it for a number of games, all of which I had the choice to buy from different game sites. If I can buy the game from Impulse or Gamersgate I'll buy CIV 5, otherwise I'll wait a few years.

Now I doubt anyone would sell a game that comes with the competitions program as a requirement, but hey, what do I know.

I understand this is a done deal and there is no turning back now and it is fine. I hope there is enough sentiment around these boards (and maybe other boards) to at least make you relay these two messages to your superiors (if you happen to have superiors that is )

- Milking us with DLC is possible but there are limits to what is acceptable.
- Nobody likes be be forced to do anything. Monopolies are usually bad for business.

Thank you.

 

[mamba]

Btw.: if Steam is part of the game, no need to install 2 programs then? It is in the game, isn't it? This sounds pretty odd to me and not necessary for the average single-player offline-gamer. Ah, wait he shall get hooked up on DLC, so Steam is forced to be used. Admit it.

Steamworks is integrated in the game and it makes use of the Steam client. At least that is my take on it. So what Steam is offering is relied on by Civ 5, making Steam a separate program but an integral one for the functioning of Civ 5.

For a single player game all you need to do is activate it via Steam and then set Steam into offline mode. While you still need Steam, you do not need it to be connected to the internet.

Whether you get hooked on DLC is entirely up to you, via Steam you have the option to get DLCs but you certainly can choose not to download anything. Much like you had the option to buy expansions in the past.

 

[Periander]

So was the ingame multiplayer menu and the autodownload of patches in CIV IV.
But I mostly downloaded the patches here as the ingame patching often sucked and reading about it, it seems Steam will do exactly that, too.

Btw.: if Steam is part of the game, no need to install 2 programs then? It is in the game, isn't it? This sounds pretty odd to me and not necessary for the average single-player offline-gamer. Ah, wait he shall get hooked up on DLC, so Steam is forced to be used. Admit it.

It's not 'forced to be used', it *is* part of the game. You do not have a choice, that is what they've developed for the PC version!

When you buy most other DVD games these days, you are actually running all sorts of 'unnecessary' 3rd party software; look at SecuROM, and all of the dramas surrounding it. Now, I won't be making a case for anti-piracy measures, but they are a fact of life in PC gaming in this day and age. Steam just happens to handle this in a superior way than any other system I have seen.

Not that this matters to you, but Steam games also have the best generic multi-player system available today.

If you want mods and hate DLC, that's cool too; just download mods as you have previously and install, and don't buy or install any downloadable content. DLC does not stop or limit modding in any way shape or form, (if anything it encourages it). What it does allow is a platform for the developer to value add... and surprise surprise, there is a massive market for it.

People are crazy to suggest that Steam is going to make them not buy a game; but guess what, 2K came out and told you all well in advance and have a rep here wasting hours responding to your criticisms. So if you're still so paranoid about it, just do what you threaten to do, don't buy it.

However if you're prepared to *gasp* go online for all of 2 minutes after installing from a DVD, sign up, login in and Steam will validate your copy of Civ V. After that if you want Civ V for off-line single player, put Steam in off-line mode and/or don't auto-update. If you do that, then all you're doing is what you've always done to play a game, put a Civ V icon on your desktop, and double-click to play. That's it.

 

[Shotgunbadger]

- Milking us with DLC is possible but there are limits to what is acceptable.
- Nobody likes be be forced to do anything. Monopolies are usually bad for business.

Thank you.

Come on now, stop saying 'forced' as if this is anything. Yes, you have to download steam, but making 'forced' your word as if this is some horrible torture is insane. You are downloading a key part of the game, no one is going to kick your door in with a gun in hand. As for monopolies are bad, really? The entire reason we have antimonopoly laws is because they are great for business, when you have only one choice, it's clear where the money is going to go.

 

[cccv]

Also it annoys me that people don't get that DLCs are nothing more then cheaper, mini, expansions that allow you to pick and chose what you want to buy.

I don't care if you think DLC and Xpacs are similar or not, if it's ready for release when the game comes out it should be in the game. You shouldn't have to pay extra on day 1 to get the complete game after you already paid full price for said game.

And cheaper? See, we don't know enough yet. How much will it cost per civ? 10 dollars is outrageous and I can't imagine how anyone could disagree. Will Babylon be available for DL independent of buying the deluxe version? They won't tell us, because they want us to think so, or at least be uncertain enough that we'll pay the extra 10 now rather than risk forfeiting any chance of ever having the professional quality Babylon in the game.

And yes, the vast majority of people who buy deluxe would indeed be paying 10 dollars just for Babylon, there should be no dispute about that. How many people would be willing to pay for the soundtrack? I'm guessing less than half. And the behind the scenes stuff, how many people are interested in that? Verrry few. How many would actually pay for it? I'm guessing maybe one-- Sid Meier's mother. maybe. This would be like if your favorite band came out with a CD, and the only way to buy it was in a bundle containing the CD and a pile of cinder blocks for 50 dollars. And as you expressed outrage over them expecting you to pay $50 for a CD, a man in a suit actually had the unmitigated audacity to say "but you're not paying 50 for a CD, you're paying 50 for a CD and these great cinder blocks!!! How cool is THAT!?"

So yes, I resent the fact that they're going to sell me an incomplete game for full price and then ask me to open my wallet again to get the rest of it. And if it turns out that Babylon isn't available except for in the deluxe version and I forfeit a ready-to-go-at-day-one civilization if I refuse to pay 10 dollars for it, I will lose all respect for the company and all self respect as I buy it.

 

[Anomaly]

$49.99/€49.99/£29.99

Why is it that we EU gamers are always milked for our Euros?

49.99$ = 40.43€ = 34.39£

So Europeans have to pay 61.82$ for this game, and British only 43.59$? That's 12 bucks more than US and 18 bucks more than british have to pay for the game.

That doesn't make me happy!

 

[mamba]

Why is it that we EU gamers are always milked for our Euros?

49.99$ = 40.43€ = 34.39£

So Europeans have to pay 61.82$ for this game, and British only 43.59$? That's 12 bucks more than US and 18 bucks more than british have to pay for the game.

That doesn't make me happy!

Order it from the UK then (as a box, not a download)

 

[Periander]

Pfft, we get far more ripped off in Oz with all games. The logic is that they don't want to undercut retail sales; Valve doesn't set prices, it's the publisher that does.

That said though, there are ways around the problem...

 

[Nick Danger]

Considering you made 2 posts demanding...

More hyperbole. I politely asked once, you passed on answering, I politely asked again and mentioned that you may have missed my question, and that it would be the last time I brought it up.

I hoped you'd address what actually bothered (is that a better word?) me... ...you could respond to my real answer instead of adjectives.

You have your right to your opinion, I respect that, and am glad you have the opportunity to use steam with Civ5. It's not my place to challenge your opinion, and I have not. What I did is ask why your britches are in a knot because some want steam as an option, and you answered. What's there to respond to - you want me to argue with you? Agree with you? Or what?

 

[Nick Danger]

Nick -

I know what Steam can collect for you (as you do, it's publicly available what they can collect!)...

Ok, then it should be no problem to provide the comprehensive list of what exactly is collected in the groups:
-"Aggregate information"
-"Individual information"
-"personally identifiable information"

We know that "...a valid email address and a password, and to verify they are older than 13 years of age." is collected. And "...the time spent playing a game, per account...". And we know some things that aren't collected like "...information about what other processes are running concurrently on the computer." But that leaves our a whole lot of potential information.

Like IP address - is that collected and is it 'Individual information'?

Valve no doubt has a complete list of what is collected in each of the 3 categories, and since as you say "...it's publicly available what they can collect!", please to provide a link as their privacy policy page seems to lack this information -- all I see there are very vague and generalized statements.

Thanks!

 

[Nick Danger]

Originally Posted by milan
I think the main question most of us are wondering about is: Why will steam be obligatory and not a choice? Why don't you make two Civ5 distros - with and without steam so everyone can be happy?
I as many others will not buy a game that ships with steam/any other similar service.

Steam is an integral part of the game - we're building the game for and with Steam. That's the simplest way I can explain it. It's part of the game.

This is an interesting dance.

Milan is asking why steam is an integral part of the game and not optional. Your answer is the circular 'it's integral because it's integral'.

I think it's obvious why it's integral. And I think it's obvious that your job prevents you from saying the obvious answer. You're in a tough position and I empathize.

We long-time players who want steam to be a choice are in a tough position too. Abandoning a game we've loyally supported for almost 20 years is not something we relish. Hopefully you empathize with us too.

 

[PieceOfMind]

It doesn't really, it annoys me that people think that Steam is some horrible monster lurking in their computer, it annoys me that people think that Valve is out to get them, and it annoys me that people think downloading a harmless 3rd party is somehow so horrible and life ruining that it will keep them from playing a game they want.

Also it annoys me that people don't get that DLCs are nothing more then cheaper, mini, expansions that allow you to pick and chose what you want to buy.

Is that enough reasons to be annoyed at a shrill minority that claims to speak to everyone?

Do you know what a strawman is? Don't want to get in an argument with you - just want you to consider the meaning of that device.

Bolding words like rapist and fascist wont make your post true, sorry. You can go ahead and scare people away, but Valve is a company that clearly cares about their customers (hell, they're giving away a very popular game for FREE right now, that doesn't spell greedy corporation to me).

Why can't a greedy corporation also be a smart corporation? McDonald's gives me free wi-fi access in their restaurants. Doesn't change the fact I think they're a greedy corporation.

Valve just happen to be very smart. If you want to prove to me whether they're greedy or not, why don't you show me their annual profits?

Personally, I don't really care whether they're greedy or not. It's beside the point (IMO).

 

[KC Michaels]

I love Civ and can't wait to play Civ V. I am disappointed that I will be forced to install software that spies on me to play it. I am sad that Civ is going down a path of DLC to try and milk extra money out of people but at least I have an option there and can skip it.

It sucks that corporate types worry only about the bottom line and not customers happiness until it affects sales but that is life. Trying to pass this decision off as what customers want instead of just a way to make more money provided me with a chuckle. It might make it easier for people to swallow the decision if they just admitted they think this model will make them more money instead of trying to pass the decision off as a way to improve the Civ experience. The few ways Steam really could be helpful are almost lost entirely in a single player offline game which is what Civ mostly is.

 

[kayapo]

Come on now, stop saying 'forced' as if this is anything. Yes, you have to download steam, but making 'forced' your word as if this is some horrible torture is insane. You are downloading a key part of the game, no one is going to kick your door in with a gun in hand. As for monopolies are bad, really? The entire reason we have antimonopoly laws is because they are great for business, when you have only one choice, it's clear where the money is going to go.

Why do you care what I think? I wasn't talking to you.

Why bother quoting my post when you can't even read through it?

Forced to buy from Steam only. The fact that you are forced to install Steam is secondary, though for some people it is also a big problem.

As for your second argument, I'm sorry to be condescending but this isn't the time or the place, please go read and study a bit before saying stuff like that.

It would be nice if people were allowed to just post their feelings on the subject of this thread without others jumping over each post on a nerd rage.

 

[tegual]

I am new to the forums, and i use steam quite a lot. not because i want to, but because i have to. I personally believe that single-player games do not need or warrant any form of online activation. It is sad that Civ5 is going to need steam, but when it was announced that is was going to have steam as a part of the package it didn't surprise me. A lot of new games are going towards either steam or heavy handed DRM which needs online activation, or constant online connections.

Now personally i dislike steam. People quote good prices but i like holding the disk in my hands. I have a decent gaming system, and while steam doesn't take up a lot of resources the actual program is extremely unstable, and games released on steam have problems running some time.

In regards to offline mod, i have never been able to get it to work. It is there and it never has worked. So this means that i will always have to patch the game when ever i want to play it. Living in Australia and having extremely bad and expensive internet plans mean that i can only play my games when i am not internet capped. I have this problem with all my current steam games and steam cannot help me. Making a game use steam is fine but quoting features the only work sometimes or not at all is pointless. Not only that but a few games that steam has released recently have had major problems especially in non American countries. For example there was no point buying the supreme commander 2 disk as it was useless because you couldn't pre-load from the disk and there was a big update the day it was released. Second a lot of people who had the disk were forced to download the game files again because of a steam error. Supreme commander was unlocked 24hrs after the release sate here in Australia.

I have had a lot of other issue with steam as well which have adversely affected my PC and gaming experience. I often see the client lock up. Some games don't always start up and i'll have to restart my computer to get them to work.

I know there are benefits to having steam, steams online community is not one of them but being able to have a backup of the game always and being able to access it on any computer is fine. But in a single-player environment that is pretty useless for me, especially since i have only one computer i play on.

I am disappointed that i am being forced to use steam but it won't affect the fact i want to play and buy the game, i have and always will work around problems that crop up from stupid development issue and prohibitively strong and useless DRM.

 

[TCMIV]

Why can't a greedy corporation also be a smart corporation? McDonald's gives me free wi-fi access in their restaurants. Doesn't change the fact I think they're a greedy corporation.

Valve just happen to be very smart. If you want to prove to me whether they're greedy or not, why don't you show me their annual profits?

Personally, I don't really care whether they're greedy or not. It's beside the point (IMO).

Greed is different than desire to run a good business imo. Profit is necessary to keep steam running, but greed is not.

I'll go ahead and be super lame with a dictionary definition of greed: excessive or rapacious desire, esp. for wealth or possessions.

Steam, to me, does not show excessive or rapacious desire. Game companies that sell DLC for ridiculous amounts on the other hand . . .

 

[arstal]

Microsoft used to give away Windows for free, all in the name of building market share.

Valve may not have evil intentions, and I don't think they do, but the impact of one company gaining a monopoly on the DD market could be very very chilling.

Also- Steam-type DRM where a 3rd party program has to activate to run your game should NEVER be used on a single player game.

If this is the direction Civ V is forced to go (I put no blame on Firaxis), so be it. There are games in the genre (such as those made by Stardock/Paradox) that WILL give us what we want.

 

[TCMIV]

And when steam takes over the world and steals all of our money you can say "told ya so." Until then, you're not a psychic so your comparison holds 0 value.

 

[PieceOfMind]

Greed is different than desire to run a good business imo. Profit is necessary to keep steam running, but greed is not.

I'll go ahead and be super lame with a dictionary definition of greed: excessive or rapacious desire, esp. for wealth or possessions.

Steam, to me, does not show excessive or rapacious desire. Game companies that sell DLC for ridiculous amounts on the other hand . . .

Even using your definition one could easily argue Valve is being "greedy". I wouldn't go so far as to say they're trying to monopolise anything but they certainly are trying to dominate the digital distribution market for computer games. The exclusive distribution of civ5 is a big win for Valve. I bet there were many smiles from their execs after that deal.