Civilization 5 and Steam(works)

[anandus]

I have had the unfortunate experience of dealing with Steam once and said never again. I have been lucky to never have to deal with them again and just tonight, two days before the release I find out if I want to play a game I really want to play I have to deal with that trash again.

My first time with Steam was with unexpected and horrible when I bought Half life 2 (I believe it was). I didn't realize I had to have Steam running to play the game when I bought it (I bought the box from the store, no digital download). I installed and downloaded as needed only to find out Steam had to let me play the game and if it was down I couldn't play. If there was a wait to log on to play my single player game, I couldn't play. I tried for two days and NEVER got to play the game. I threw it away, chalked it up to stupid tax on not researching a product well enough and swore off buying anything through them again. I honestly would rather have been kicked in the groin then read that Civ 5 was going to run through such a horrible system.

Mind you that Steam has matured since the days of Halflife 2.

And besides, technically you'd only need to log in to Steam when installing. Afterwards you could just always play offline. No need to log in, etc. to play.

 

[Lord Parkin]

The main thing that concerns me is this (from the manual):

"Steam will check for updates and automatically patch your game if one is found – no more
hunting around on the Internet for the latest update information!"

Great. Sounds like that'll be just perfect for breaking all long-term multiplayer games in one hit every time a new patch comes out. As a Civ player who plays almost exclusively in multiplayer, this is very bad news. Every time a Civ4 patch came out it would break our games, but at least we could revert back to an earlier version to fix it. It doesn't sound like that'll be possible with Steam.

I'm also unhappy with the extreme markup on Steam's version of Civ5 in New Zealand (as many of the other threads have been complaining about).

Also, I frankly just don't like the idea of having an unnecessary third party program standing between me and my game. It simply doesn't feel right. Sure a lot of people like Steam, and I'm all for people who want to use the service using it. However, it should be a choice, not a compulsory additional program forced upon everyone who just wants to play the game and has no interest in third-party software.

To me it's as offensive as the downloads out there for common services (stuff like MSN) which now try to install about 15 additional programs and 5 toolbars unless you manually deselect everything one by one. And at least in those cases you can deselect the things you don't want. No "deselecting" Steam.

But I guess I'm just ranting to the wind... not much that can be done now. Ah well.

 

[Orbiter]

Will a steam-bought Civ5 have any disadvantages when it comes to mods in any shape or form?

 

[ori]

@Lord Parkin: the release version will apparently only allow MP games that will not last long anyways and the longer stuff is only promised for later.

@Orbiter: Welcome to CFC and there won't be a difference.

 

[Lord Parkin]

@Lord Parkin: the release version will apparently only allow MP games that will not last long anyways and the longer stuff is only promised for later

Darn, well that sucks. A big downgrade from Civ4 then.

Pitboss was (and still is) absolutely awesome. Playing in multiple 8-10 month games with 18 or so human players has been (and continues to be) a major highlight of Civ4 for me. Civ5's going to feel rather empty with that missing.

Sounds like there could be potential issues with mods too, since they're going to be charging for DLC. That seems like it's either going to be completely pointless or extremely intrusive. For instance, if someone makes a leader similar to one available in the DLC, do they just let it be (in which case very few people are going to pay for the same thing they can get for free), or do the Steam/2K people step in and start mass censoring of mod content (in which case they're going to anger and alienate a lot of the fanbase)? Looks like either way they're shooting themselves in the feet by trying to charge people for modded content. The best modded content I've ever seen (Fall From Heaven and Legends of Revolution for two examples) has been completely free for use. There's no way that any DLC is going to be able to compete with what the modding community can come up with, which begs the question of what's going to happen when this occurs to the folks at Steam/2K.

 

[ori]

well, mods are treated separately from DLC atleast with regards to the distribution system - but we have no real information about mods and MP - what we know is that they stated that MP modes other than simultaneous turns via Steam will be released at an unspecified later date...

 

[anandus]

Pitboss was (and still is) absolutely awesome.

I thought a pitboss will probably included later?

 

[PPQ_Purple]

Well since the question has been asked let me answer it.
I have been waiting for years, ever since I got CIV4 for CIV5 to come out so I can finally make use of that second core and those hardware components that are not freaking 10 years old.

But I would rather hack off my own arm with a rusty spoon than allow steam onto my machine.

Also this:

Darn, well that sucks. A big downgrade from Civ4 then.

Pitboss was (and still is) absolutely awesome. Playing in multiple 8-10 month games with 18 or so human players has been (and continues to be) a major highlight of Civ4 for me. Civ5's going to feel rather empty with that missing.

Sounds like there could be potential issues with mods too, since they're going to be charging for DLC. That seems like it's either going to be completely pointless or extremely intrusive. For instance, if someone makes a leader similar to one available in the DLC, do they just let it be (in which case very few people are going to pay for the same thing they can get for free), or do the Steam/2K people step in and start mass censoring of mod content (in which case they're going to anger and alienate a lot of the fanbase)? Looks like either way they're shooting themselves in the feet by trying to charge people for modded content. The best modded content I've ever seen (Fall From Heaven and Legends of Revolution for two examples) has been completely free for use. There's no way that any DLC is going to be able to compete with what the modding community can come up with, which begs the question of what's going to happen when this occurs to the folks at Steam/2K.

Hearing about it being steam only makes me so angry. And together with the whole DLC vs MP vs Moding issue, right now, I feel like I have just suffered a stillbirth.
Thank you Fireaxis.

 

[The_J]

I honestly would rather have been kicked in the groin then read that Civ 5 was going to run through such a horrible system.

But I would rather hack off my own arm with a rusty spoon than allow steam onto my machine.

just want to say that you are clearly not alone.
There are sure more than 100 people on CFC who disapprove this step.
I hope you'll not become weak and that you both will stay loyal to your principles.

 

[Senethro]

just want to say that you are clearly not alone.
There are sure more than 100 people on CFC who disapprove this step.
I hope you'll not become weak and that you both will stay loyal to your principles.

I too am interested to see the outcome.

 

[misterdc]

I will probably NOT buy the game, Steam is making me less likely to buy it.

Yet again another incomplete game release

One thing that many Steam lovers neglect to understand is that many many people have had bad experiences with Steam in the past. Now if you use Steam and have not had any problems then I am happy for you. Just because you haven't had them yet doesn't mean you wont or to be honest will either.

I have read many posts all over the net about the Steam situation with Civ 5 and many people have stated that you will only have to log onto Steam to activate the game. That's not entirely true even in offline mode you are still logging into a 3rd party software to run the game, your just not having to go online. And also from what I have been able to read the only way that I will be able to play Multiplayer Online with my friends that I already play Civ 4 with is through Steam. My problem isn't with Valve and their business plan it with the makers of Civ requiring me to use a 3rd party platform that has nothing to do with the game they have made and I bought. Now if people that like Steam want to play through Steam then that is great, but there is many people that do not like to play the game that they bought that way.

And then we come to the modding community Civ has one of the most robust modding groups out there and many time with new game updates it make mods not work. Now with Steam what happens if a group of people find a mod that they just love and HAVE to use Steam to play multiplayer online, and every time I log into Steam it auto-updates the game and then that group of players loose days or even weeks of game play.

I just don't like 3rd party programs having the control of items that I have payed my hard earned money for with out my permission. Many people site that you had to play Civ via the same sort of online community and I have to point out that, that is not true because of the availability of direct ip style game sessions.

Basically it all comes down to the fact that big companies are going to do what big companies are going to do and the only recourse that the little guy has ever had is not buy the product. Some times it makes a difference sometimes it doesn't. Here is hoping it does in this case, and if it doesn't well then I guess Firaxis isn't on the good guy game company list anymore and it's just one more step to making PC gaming into consoles.

 

[Senethro]

I'm not going to do long answers since theres a whole thread of that.

I will probably NOT buy the game, Steam is making me less likely to buy it.

Yet again another incomplete game release

By what criteria is it incomplete?

One thing that many Steam lovers neglect to understand is that many many people have had bad experiences with Steam in the past. Now if you use Steam and have not had any problems then I am happy for you. Just because you haven't had them yet doesn't mean you wont or to be honest will either.

I've had bad experiences with Steam in the past, I've had none in the past 3 years. The service has improved such that its never irritated me memorably in that time. Other online services and/or DRM such as GFWL and all the rest can't say as much.

I have read many posts all over the net about the Steam situation with Civ 5 and many people have stated that you will only have to log onto Steam to activate the game. That's not entirely true even in offline mode you are still logging into a 3rd party software to run the game, your just not having to go online. And also from what I have been able to read the only way that I will be able to play Multiplayer Online with my friends that I already play Civ 4 with is through Steam. My problem isn't with Valve and their business plan it with the makers of Civ requiring me to use a 3rd party platform that has nothing to do with the game they have made and I bought. Now if people that like Steam want to play through Steam then that is great, but there is many people that do not like to play the game that they bought that way.

You already used lots of 3rd party platforms from DirectX apis, securom DRM to Gamespy Arcade. Steam is good because it consolidates and reduces 3rd party involvement.

And then we come to the modding community Civ has one of the most robust modding groups out there and many time with new game updates it make mods not work. Now with Steam what happens if a group of people find a mod that they just love and HAVE to use Steam to play multiplayer online, and every time I log into Steam it auto-updates the game and then that group of players loose days or even weeks of game play.

This is a legitimate concern that we still don't have all the facts about yet.

I just don't like 3rd party programs having the control of items that I have payed my hard earned money for with out my permission. Many people site that you had to play Civ via the same sort of online community and I have to point out that, that is not true because of the availability of direct ip style game sessions.

Yeah, they've gone out of fashion. Blizzard doesn't allow them either. It is a case of desiring greater control and cutting features from pirates but as long as these systems are well implemented, I've no complaints. Battle.net is pretty good and I've never had problems with Valve's matchfinding/server lists.

Basically it all comes down to the fact that big companies are going to do what big companies are going to do and the only recourse that the little guy has ever had is not buy the product. Some times it makes a difference sometimes it doesn't. Here is hoping it does in this case, and if it doesn't well then I guess Firaxis isn't on the good guy game company list anymore and it's just one more step to making PC gaming into consoles.

Yeah, p much. The choice is now between Ubisoft/EA style always-on DRM and Steam. This may have been a battle that could never have been won as all these companies are doing is enforcing the rights they've claimed to have since the early 1990s, enabled by widespread internet adoption. Buying games in the 90s, 00s could be seen as endorsing those licensing agreements and leading to the current situation.

 

[PPQ_Purple]

I've had bad experiences with Steam in the past, I've had none in the past 3 years. The service has improved such that its never irritated me memorably in that time. Other online services and/or DRM such as GFWL and all the rest can't say as much.

The point is not as much if it is good or bad as much as it is about it being necessary.
Let us say for example the state made it necessary by law for you to have a police officer driving with you in your car where ever you go.

He might even be a good one, giving you all sorts of good advice. But in the end he is a stranger, siting on the seat next to you watching you.

You already used lots of 3rd party platforms from DirectX apis, securom DRM to Gamespy Arcade. Steam is good because it consolidates and reduces 3rd party involvement.

It's not the same.
DirectX and securom operate on my machine, without accessing the INTERNET.
I can play a game that requires both of them on my laptop, while in a rubber dingy floating off the coast of Antarctica if I wanted to.

And since I am buying a copy of a product, I want to have the right to use it any where, any time and under any conditions that I see fit for as long as I don't break any laws doing it.

Steam infringes on that.

Yeah, p much. The choice is now between Ubisoft/EA style always-on DRM and Steam. This may have been a battle that could never have been won as all these companies are doing is enforcing the rights they've claimed to have since the early 1990s, enabled by widespread internet adoption. Buying games in the 90s, 00s could be seen as endorsing those licensing agreements and leading to the current situation.

I actually prefer Ubistof/EA style DRM.
They send out a clear and honest message. " you user. We make the rules. Take it or leave it."

Steam does exactly the same, but all wrapped up in a nice package with sugar lumps on top and with a bit of wrapping paper.


I prefer honest evil. At least it is honest.

 

[Senethro]

The point is not as much if it is good or bad as much as it is about it being necessary.
Let us say for example the state made it necessary by law for you to have a police officer driving with you in your car where ever you go.
He might even be a good one, giving you all sorts of good advice. But in the end he is a stranger, siting on the seat next to you watching you.

The publishers believe it necessary and they're the ones with all the numbers. In fact, that they simply believe it necessary is the important bit and they're going to act on that belief.

It's not the same.
DirectX and securom operate on my machine, without accessing the INTERNET.
I can play a game that requires both of them on my laptop, while in a rubber dingy floating off the coast of Antarctica if I wanted to.

Whats wrong with the INTERNET? Why is that significant?

And since I am buying a copy of a product, I want to have the right to use it any where, any time and under any conditions that I see fit for as long as I don't break any laws doing it.

Steam infringes on that.

And do you really think a small number of individuals boycotting Civ5 due to Steam will accomplish useful goals?

I actually prefer Ubistof/EA style DRM.
They send out a clear and honest message. " you user. We make the rules. Take it or leave it."

Steam does exactly the same, but all wrapped up in a nice package with sugar lumps on top and with a bit of wrapping paper.

I prefer honest evil. At least it is honest.

This is irrational.

 

[PPQ_Purple]

The publishers believe it necessary and they're the ones with all the numbers. In fact, that they simply believe it necessary is the important bit and they're going to act on that belief.

That is the whole point.
The man believes they can walk all over us. And they can, becouse people like you bend over for them.

Whats wrong with the INTERNET? Why is that significant?

Because many people, me included do not have access to a 100% reliable high quality internet connection.

Because I may want to play the game from my laptop.

Because I hate to have something else running in the background unchecked downloading and uploading what ever it wants onto and from my pc.

Because I don't want Moderator Action: *snip* automatic updates.

And a million other reasons.

And do you really think a small number of individuals boycotting Civ5 due to Steam will accomplish useful goals?

As long as there are people like you bending over sadly no.


And in the end what does it matter to you what I do.
I won't be buying the game because of steam. End of story. You can go jump down a well for all I care.

 

[Senethro]

That is the whole point.
The man believes they can walk all over us. And they can, becouse people like you bend over for them.

Whereas you desire devs/pubs to beggar themselves through being as vulnerable as possible to piracy.

See? Its easy to assign uncharitable motives and qualities to people.

Because many people, me included do not have access to a 100% reliable high quality internet connection.

Because I may want to play the game from my laptop.

So use offline mode? Whats the problem?

Because I hate to have something else running in the background unchecked downloading and uploading what ever it wants onto and from my pc.

Whats the problem? Do you believe it a security risk? A privacy risk? Why?

Because I don't want Moderator Action: *snip* automatic updates.

Neither do I. Fortunately Steam's are quick and clean and I can even take steps to prevent them.

And a million other reasons.

As long as there are people like you bending over sadly no.

I'll assume you've posted the important ones.

And in the end what does it matter to you what I do.
I won't be buying the game because of steam. End of story. You can go jump down a well for all I care.

It clearly matters enough to you that you keep posting about it and replying to me.

I'm going to be enjoying Civ5 in a few days. How does this make you feel?

 

[Samcro]

I'm going to be enjoying Civ5 in a few days. How does this make you feel?

Honestly it makes me feel like you haven't ever used Steam on a new release game (while I am sure you have). New released games have enough problems, toss in a company that works when it wants to and has issues when more then a handful of players try to "validate" at the same time and I wonder when you will actually be able to ENJOY the game.

If I knew I could get the game tomorrow and actually play it whenever I wanted to I wouldn't care about a third party system running in the background. I wouldn't LIKE it, I don't think it's needed given all the other games that have come out that manage to run just fine without issues that DON'T have to use a third party system like Steam, but I could deal with it .. if it worked when I wanted I simply have zero faith in Steam that it's going to work when I want it to.