Civilization 5 and Steam(works)

[Zhahz]

I think this is a bad poll, because Steam and Steamworks are two seperate entities.

If Steamworks is an API the game taps to do multi-player type stuff, there's not much you can do about it and it's a valid type of thing for a dev to do (use 3rd party libraries).

Steam itself is more of a distribution/networking tool. My problem with Steam is that it's intrusive and runs too much. I love digital distribution. Impulse, D2D, etc and others are hassle free and don't run when you run games you buy. Anything that wants to run at the same time isn't a user/buyer-friendly option.

If you could download via Steam, authenticate once or reasonably via Steam, update when desired (you can I believe), etc, Steam would be fine. But it's my understanding that Steam runs every time you run the game and runs in the background while you run the game (could be wrong, but that's the way I've read it in several threads). There's no need for this at all and it's annoying.

So, anyways, can't vote because I don't think the poll is worded/structured well.

 

[Senethro]

Well then show me how its not. From reading through the Steam forums this is what I gather. If I'm wrong, and you want to help, then please do something more than just say I'm wrong. That does nothing but give the discussion a point to flame from.

Been there, done that. Lets not fill another thread with it. Or lets at least keep it to an old one.

Zhahz, with some option tweaking Steam can be made to do what you want except for always running when Civ runs. But thats fine because it needs to run anyway to use Steamworks and takes less than 20MB ram minimised i.e. not an amount anyone with a computer capable of running Civ5 should care about.

 

[Honorable_Pawn]

Well then show me how its not. From reading through the Steam forums this is what I gather. If I'm wrong, and you want to help, then please do something more than just say I'm wrong. That does nothing but give the discussion a point to flame from.

Agreed.

 

[MaxCiv]

Well then show me how its not. From reading through the Steam forums this is what I gather. If I'm wrong, and you want to help, then please do something more than just say I'm wrong. That does nothing but give the discussion a point to flame from.

As it has been explained and proved numerous time on other threads (where you even posted), here it is again! Now please stop spreading false information.

 

[White Elk]

As it has been explained and proved numerous time on other threads (where you even posted), here it is again! Now please stop spreading false information.

This discussion has been going so well. I'm not going to take the bait. Here is a post in which I provide a number of examples directly from Steams Forums. And here are four more related to offline mode. I've qouted actual Steam users with actual problems. Included with every qoute is a link to the source. These are just a few examples of the many I found. These are not uncommon problems.

I earnestly seek links with info from Valve/Steam that would ease my concerns over these issues.

 

[Insanity_X]

I've never used Steam before, and I'm getting it solely for CiV, and am likely to never use it for anything else for the forseeable future. However, as the screenshot shows, you can set Steam not to autopatch your game and thus you can wait for mod compatibility to be confirmed before upgrading. Meaning your concerns regarding the issues are not particularly valid.

Will I have problems with Steam? Probably, but I'm technologically incompetant and I have problems with most complicated problems. If I did have a problem, I'd google it, and probably come to the conclusion that was caused by something between the chair and the keyboard.

Also, Piece of Mind busted the 'no internet, but can't go offline' thing. Steam looks at whether or not there should be an internet connection and tries to connect to the internet. The problem can be solved by unplugging the internet cable or disabling the wireless internet.

 

[Mercade]

My decision is purely based on the question...
Do I expect to get $50 (or $60) of value out of the game?
I don't see how the answer can possibly be less than a resounding yes.
When I compare the value for money of video games like Civ with other entertainment options like a trip to the cinema the descision becomes even clearer.
So, the answer for me is Yes with no reservations, and I simply don't see how, short of totally abysmal reviews ahead of release that decision can change.

My sentiment exactly.

 

[mjs0]

As it has been explained and proved numerous time on other threads (where you even posted), here it is again! Now please stop spreading false information.

Sigh.
I plan on buying the game and I am not out to bash Steam but...as I have explained on several threads that option does not do what most people might imagine it does from the name.

By default Steam will download patches for any game pretty much as soon as it finds there is one available.
The option pictured means - Do not automatically download patches for this game. I will tell you manually when to download and install patches for this game - and guess what trying to play the game whilst online is one way you manually tell the game to download the patch, so...

If you are offline and can stay offline (i.e. you don't want to access the community hub, don't want to purchase DLC, don't want to play multi-player, never accidentally start the game whilst online, etc) than Steam will not know there is a patch BUT as soon as you go online and play the game Steam insists that you install the patch, and it remembers. So, if you try to abort the patch installation and go offline and try to play then it will complain that you cannot play the game until the patch is installed even when offline.

Oh and if there is a patch available and you want to reinstall or install on a new PC there is no way to avoid the patch...it is forced on you because there is no way to go offline before Steam notices the patch.

The net of this is that the ONLY way to avoid patching your game is to install/activate before the patch is available then then never ever either play the game online or reinstall. So, for example if you own any other Steam games and play those online you can never ever (not even once) forget to go offline before playing Civ or the patch is forced on you.

Once the patch is noticed and it is queued for download there is no way to back out, no way to stop it and no way to reinstall without it.

So, as with most things there are two sides to every story, the patch is not forced on you in the sense that there is one narrow path that allows you to avoid it if you are lucky, but stray from that path just once and you can never get back.

Given this information, I believe that to try to pretend there is no problem is disingenuous.

(This information is based on extensive research, investigation and experimentation. I would dearly love to be proved wrong, so anyone who can point me at information from Valve that invalidates my argument and concerns will have my gratitude.)

 

[Greybriar]

I've never used Steam before, and I'm getting it solely for CiV....

The more gamers that give in and create a Steam account to run Civ5 or some other game, the more games that will appear that are available only for Steam. At the rate it's going, Steam will eventually have a monopoly, and that is totally unacceptable to me.

 

[Janig]

mjs0 i think if you pause the download then work offline you will be able to play without patching, but maybe youve addressed this already.

Steam will make patching and multiplayer much better. I would probably buy civ anyway but I recognise that steam is a good service - I cant predict any steam problems - so I chose poll option #1

Steam will eventually have a monopoly, and that is totally unacceptable to me

do you plan to create a games distribution company?

 

[CanuckSoldier]

Well being an MP player, which puts me in the minority in this forum, I welcome Steamworks, I think people here are forgetting how crappy Gamespy is, and all the problems we have had since Civ3PTW came out using it.

Steamworks is definitely a step forward in MP matchmaking.

CS

 

[Methos]

I'll buy the game no matter what, simply because its Civ! I do have Steam and use it on my computer, but if I had the option, I'd prefer to buy Civ 5 that does not require Steam.

The greatest reason that Civ has been such a value to me, are the mods. I am very concerned with Steams forced game patching.

And you wonder why the Pro-Steam crowd react when you spread such misinformation as compulsory patching!

This is a concern for me too. As a HOF Co-Admin we've had several problems with players who have had Steam patch in-between game sessions of a possible HOF submission. Since our HOF Mod works via version (i.e. 3.19), then the forced patch makes that submission invalid, as well as any ability to make future submissions to the HOF until we've updated our HOF Mod. Heck, many of our players (us HOF Staff too), often have dual/multi installs of the game on our computers with the different versions. It appears Steam does not allow this.

Because of having seen this, I can agree that White Elk's worries do have substance. Even though many of you argue that its not a problem, I've personally seen it, so would have to disagree with you. The problem does exist.

 

[Methos]

At the rate it's going, Steam will eventually have a monopoly, and that is totally unacceptable to me.

do you plan to create a games distribution company?

It's a rather simple concept, but let me explain. If a company has a monopoly, then they have no reason to further expand and/or better their product. Whereas if they have competitors, they must expand and better their product if they want to succeed and/or stay in business.

In other words, if you want the best products, then you want there to be competition.

 

[Tylerryan79]

How do you like them apples! I'm no mod, but i also agree there is definetly substance. After reading all those complaints in the forums I am very worried about offline mode, seeing as I will have to rely on that to play(no 24/7 connection). Thank you for stepping in and throwing in a judgement, where everyone, pro and anti steam alike, can see it.

 

[Sterf]

There is competition at the moment, don't know where you get it that there isn't or isn't going to be. If everyone's going with these wild hypotheses again like they'd become a monopoly somehow, it would be because the competition seriously lacks and they'd become the 'winner' (in this again hypothetical situation). You know, in this situation that's not going to happen because digital distribution is something that's starting to get a foothold and is obviously favoured by the majority of people. There is just no reason to think there would be no competition. It's an concept taken out of thin air.

It's the 'yeah, but what if this doomscenario were to happen?' syndrome all over again.

Never had to use the word 'hypothetical' so much in my life since I registered here. Or read this disproportionate amount of 'but if' , 'what if' and all kinds of the 'if' derivatives.

 

[arstal]

If there wasn't a clear dominant force in the market- it would be suicidal for 2K to make a platform-exclusive game. The only real way to counter that is to support Valve's competitors whenever practical- which I try to do. Whining about the problem, or accepting it as an inevitability or "it is what it is", won't do squat. Supporting a market that is supporting us is the positive option, and the only one that will work in the end.

I do not boycott Steam. I just think Steam DRM detracts from the value of a game, to the point where I will pay more to get the games somewhere else. I bought the Mount and Blade games off Steam for that reason + discounting. First thing I did was take the serial, download the game from Talewords, enter the serial there in order to get it off Steam.

So far, I have boycottted third-party games that mandate Steamworks though, as I find that odious.

 

[ori]

Moderator Action: I asked politely to keep it civil - accusing others of lying is not being civil
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[bigdog5994]

i dont understand why we need Steam

 

[nerd]

I voted "Never,because of steam" but that is not precisely true. As I have said elsewhere, steam and on-line reg are ok with me, what I can not accept is forced downloads/patches only on the gaming system. This is basically a vote of "never, due to incompatability with dial-up internet".
Fix this and I will buy it even with steam.

 

[PieceOfMind]

Wow, the discussion was heating up for a moment there. Hope it remains civil!

@bigdog5994. The simplest explanation to why we need Steam is that there exists a contract between Valve and Take Two where presumably it is one of the conditions. For example, because the game uses Steamworks, we need to have Steam.

Now, another question you could ask is why we need Steamworks. TakeTwo/2K will tell the customer it's in their best interest (they have already done this). Whether that is based on evidence is unknown. The way I see it at the moment, if you value things like Friends lists, Achievements and other sorts of online features like that, then Steamworks may indeed be a great thing for you. I've not been convinced by the marketing about Steamworks so far. From the limited research I've done of Steamworks, its own marketing/advertising appears to be aimed at developers and publishers rather than end-users. Based on this, I assume the advantages of Steamworks are mainly for the developer/publisher. For that reason, I won't hold it against a publisher or developer for wanting to use Steamworks, but I do raise my eyebrows when we're told we want it and that's why we're getting it.

For the record, I said I'm undecided for this poll, and that Steam is making me less likely to buy it. For a start, the price on Steam is 80USD, 90USD for the deluxe edition. I've never bought a game that expensive at release so I'm going to have to learn how awesome a game it is before I even consider ordering it.

Cheers,
PoM