Civilization 5 Steamworks questions/concerns for inclusion in the FAQ

[PieceOfMind]

One of the comments made on the site was someone suggesting that a very small proportion of the pirates may have "accidentally" pirated it, meaning a friend gave it to them and because of how easy it was to get they didn't even think it mightn't have been a free game. The suggestion was that the game have a message run upon first use or something like that, with "Thank you for purchasing the game. If you did not purchase the game, please go to X to support us. Thank you."

While piracy everyone immediately judges as bad, the creative and pragmatic people can learn to treat it as a reality and actually use it to their advantage or at least take simple and non-invasive measures to discourage it.

Someone else talked about the rise of advertisements in games. I've already noticed this becoming more common. With in game advertising (it doesn't need to be ridiculous - product placement is often pretty harmless and effective), people who pirate the game are actually doing a service in a way, though still not legal.

I mean, it could even be argued that making a game easy to pirate, like World of Goo, and making it obvious from in the game that it was meant to be purchased could actually do more for the game than simply trying your hardest to prevent a single person from pirating it.

 

[wolfigor]

Nevertheless, at the bottom line piracy is:
a) bad
b) bad
c) bad
d) unjustified
e) period.

Sure, nobody argue that piracy should be legal, but that does not justify invasive DRM systems that limit consumer rights (e.g. limiting the "first-sale", "Fair use", right to personal backup, etc. ), install what can be considered at all effect legalised spyware, and force them to subscribe to services to access the "goods" they legally acquired.

It's somehow sad to see how the needs of corporations are so often getting more priority than the rights of consumers

 

[kozzer]

right to personal backup

You realize that Steam allows you to burn games you buy to CD/DVD, right?

 

[StStutter]

Sure, nobody argue that piracy should be legal, but that does not justify invasive DRM systems that limit consumer rights (e.g. limiting the right to personal backup, etc. ), install what can be considered at all effect legalised spyware, and force them to subscribe to services to access the "goods" they legally acquired.

It's somehow sad to see how the needs of corporations are so often getting more priority than the rights of consumers

Listen, the price for civ5 is no longer just 60$, its $60 plus Steam. This is the reality.

For most people, Steam's cost is extremely low if it doesn't actually add value ot the purchase.

If Steam's cost is too high for you to justify buying the product, don't. We aren't losing rights. We're gaining the right to play a quality game by purchasing it.

 

[wolfigor]

You realize that Steam allows you to burn games you buy to CD/DVD, right?

I was talking about DRM in general not about Steam in particular, but thanks you for allowing a clarification

Listen, the price for civ5 is no longer just 60$, its $60 plus Steam. This is the reality.

I was talking about DRM in general not about Steam in particular, please don't take my words out of their own contest and use them wrongly.

 

[kozzer]

I know that, but I was talking about DRM in general not about Steam in particular.

(Anyway you cannot use your own copies without Steam authentication after restoring a backup on clean PC, and somebody may see it as a limitation to a functional backup.
Anyway that's beside the point)

Ahh, ok. It's all good then. Just wanted to make sure you knew that, because I think being able to back up your stuff is a significant point.

 

[diligence]

its $60 as you say, Plus Steams restrictions on usuage. And you can buy the game from Amazon so you are not purchasing the right to play the game from steam, you are Forced to use steam.

 

[StStutter]

its $60 as you say, Plus Steams restrictions on usuage. And you can buy the game from Amazon so you are not purchasing the right to play the game from steam, you are Forced to use steam.

Same as your forced to spend $60. The use of Steam is an additional cost of the game.

When you buy insurance, this insurance only applies to one person. This isn't a reduction of consumer rights. By purchasing civilization 5 you are agreeing to play it using Steam. Is this worth it? It's up to you.

 

[diligence]

Being force to pay $60 is not same as being force to use steam. $60 is to purchase the game which seems now your not, your paying for the right to lease a game off them till steam thinks its too old and scraps it, Microsoft stops supporting or updating their software after a few yrs XP is soon to be canned in that way.
I want to own my version of the game to play where and when I want, I not want someone else to tell me when and where I can play it, Libraries are free well they are in my town, and I can take a book when they open and have to bring it back at a set time where i can take it out again. Steam is the same, I can either comein when I want read the book in the library or I can take it out but have to bring it back after 1 week.


Well if they (steam) are so great why do they not have an opt out allowing them to sell our details to whoever they want? I always click when signing up to competitions and websites to opt out of passing my details onto 3rd party etc. If they want to sell my details then I should get a cut of the price. only fair.

 

[Commander Bello]

Sure, nobody argue that piracy should be legal, but that does not justify invasive DRM systems that limit consumer rights (e.g. limiting the "first-sale", "Fair use", right to personal backup, etc. ), install what can be considered at all effect legalised spyware, and force them to subscribe to services to access the "goods" they legally acquired.

It's somehow sad to see how the needs of corporations are so often getting more priority than the rights of consumers

I completely agree that signing on at Steam would be a very short-sighted move for a reasonable customer.
Therefor, I can only ask everybody to think about it and to ask, whether your are willing to give up your rights as a customer.
I guess, most people would deny any attempt to make them stop reselling old books for instance (well, "most people" obviously excludes the one who don't own books and regard them as being outdated...)
And for software such the same attempt now shall be a sign of "modern times"?

Listen, the price for civ5 is no longer just 60$, its $60 plus Steam. This is the reality.

For most people, Steam's cost is extremely low if it doesn't actually add value ot the purchase.

If Steam's cost is too high for you to justify buying the product, don't. We aren't losing rights. We're gaining the right to play a quality game by purchasing it.

Oh yes, we are.

We are losing the right to maybe disagree with Steam's plans in the future and after that still have access to our games.
We are losing the right to sell our copy of the game to somebody else, in case we would not like it anymore.

It may be that for you such things are not rights, yet for me they are.

 

[bite]

Oh yes, we are.

We are losing the right to maybe disagree with Steam's plans in the future and after that still have access to our games.
We are losing the right to sell our copy of the game to somebody else, in case we would not like it anymore.

It may be that for you such things are not rights, yet for me they are.

You know what we lost that "right" a long time ago

2. Sublicense, rent, lease or transfer your personal serial number without express written consent from Stardock.

C. You agree that you shall not, under any circumstances:

(i) sell, grant a security interest in or transfer reproductions of the Game to other parties in any way not expressly authorized herein, nor shall you rent, lease or license the Game;

(b) Distribute, lease, license, sell, rent or otherwise transfer or assign this Software, or any copies of this Software, without the express prior written consent of LICENSOR;

 

[Commander Bello]

You know what we lost that "right" a long time ago

Oh, and since we've driven the one-way road in the wrong direction since 30 seconds already this should make us speed up a bit?

 

[Rebel44]

Oh, and since we've driven the one-way road in the wrong direction since 30 seconds already this should make us speed up a bit?

Only thing that is changing is publishers ability to enforce those licence agreements.

I dont sell my games so I dont care...

 

[Greybriar]

You know what we lost that "right" a long time ago

For those of us who live in the United States, there is this: US court says software is owned, not licensed.

 

[bite]

By the way here is Firaxis Producer Dennis Shirk talking about why they chose Steam

What are your plans DRM-wise?

Shirk: Right now, we’re using Steam and Steam’s DRM. We felt that, if you have to have DRM, we wanted it to be as unobtrusive as possible. I mean, you’ve got different choices out there – Ubisoft with their “always-on” Internet connection and stuff like that. We opted to just have a one-time activation through Steam, and then you’re done. You can play offline. You can play online. Everything else that came along with Steam, though, we actually really loved. All the features that came along with Steamworks – the achievements and everything else. So if you have to do something like that, we probably made the best decision.

http://www.vg247.com/2010/07/09/interview-civilization-vs-dennis-shirk/

 

[Greybriar]

By the way here is Firaxis Producer Dennis Shirk talking about why they chose Steam

http://www.vg247.com/2010/07/09/interview-civilization-vs-dennis-shirk/

Thanks for the link, bite.

 

[PieceOfMind]

If they love everything about steamworks, that means they love DLC. Let's see what they have in store.

Worryingly, it also means they love automatic patching. I hope I'm taking things way too literally, of course.

 

[12agnar0k]

Sure, nobody argue that piracy should be legal,

install what can be considered at all effect legalised spyware, and force them to subscribe to services to access the "goods" they legally acquired.

Actually you are worng.

1. "Nobody can argue that piracy should be legal", this is not true,
UK Pirate Party

Thier are some good arguements for the removal of some Copyright laws, and basically for "Piracy" to be become a legal activity. The main one being "They believe that information or culture should shared freely to all people" Something like that anyway. Basically the idea is that while something like a hamburger when consumed can not be consumed by anyone else, "Private Good" is the economical term, something made of information, like a TV show, or Civilisation5 can once consumed/used by one person can be used/consumed by another, "Public Good" is the economical term. The Pirate Parties arguement is that Public Goods such as Information which can be given to everyone via the digital distrubtion methods at virtually no costs, should be allowed to. I.e one person downloading a Nickleback CD doesn't affect another persons ability to download it, so long as server costs / bandwidth are paid for which can easily be done by Adverts on Public Goods Download Sites or by Goverment Subsidies, or even by small download costs.

My point, to say "nobody can argue that piracy should be legal" is silly. You can argue it, you might loose however, thier are valid points both for and against legalised Piracy, I don't really want to start a big discussion here as its off topic, anyone who wants to get into an indepth discussion with me on any topic is welcome to PM me or create a relative thread. PS I don't condone with piracy necessarily, its against the law and thus should not be done, but to argue for legalising Piracy is fine and a perfectly acceptable Idea. However we are here to talk about Steam....

2. "Steam is like Spyware", this is not true, Spyware by definition is malicious, and doesn't allow you to remove it without a specialised tool, *Cough* like SecuRom, Steam can be removed at will, it is not an infestation on your PC. If anyone wishes to argue against this fact I can go into more depth.

3. "Steam is being forced on me" These comments are absoulte nonsense, you are a consumer and as a consumer you have the right to choose whether or not you want a product. Steam is not being forced on you, nothing is, Buying Civ5 with Steamworks is not a legal requirement, you are not forced by law or any other means to buy it and install Steam. No one is going to put you infront of a firing squad if you don't want Steamworks. You as a consumer have all your rights intact, if you do not wish Steam on your PC then don't buy a game with the Steamworks DRM.

If you will buy Civ5 no matter what stuff gets installed along with it then thats fine its your choice, you may not like Steamworks being on your PC, I don't particularily like having firewalls and anti-virus software but it is a necessity for me to use my computer efficiently without being riddled with viruses and problems, just like you will accept Steam on your PC if you want to be able to play Civ5. If you don't want Steamworks or you dont want an Anti-Virus system then you will choose not to have them. No one is forcing you to do anything against your will, I plead that people accept this reality as fact. Instead you should argue that you don't like having Steam on your PC to be able to play Civ5, this is an acceptable arguement, its in my opinion a poor arguement but one a few of you have seemed to want or need to argue. But thats only my opinion and the one shared by the majority of customers and the publisher and developer and the third party DRM provider, it doesn't necesarily make us all right.

 

[12agnar0k]

If they love everything about steamworks, that means they love DLC. Let's see what they have in store.

Worryingly, it also means they love automatic patching. I hope I'm taking things way too literally, of course.

Nothing wrong with DLC, its as bad as giving expansion packs. It's merely a way to give more content to a consumer on a game that they released and a way to make more money.
So long as its done right it won't affect peoples ability to play another person who didnt buy it. This can be achieved and only isn't if we have lazy developers, which I beleive we can all agree is not the case with Frixasis.

Automatic patching again is great, it removes your need to go out of your way to find a patch for a game which can be annoying. Again its only a problem if it isnt taken into consideration with development, i.e having a patch introduced, will it affect any mods? If so can something be developed to remove this problem?

These are not issues with Steam, merely general development issues. If development is thorough, then its not a problem.

 

[The_Coyote]

Only thing that is changing is publishers ability to enforce those licence agreements.

I dont sell my games so I dont care...

No it´s not completely true (at least at every place on the world) - the legal ability to resell games you bought as boxed version is still existent (the parts of the EULA were overruled by courts [had no legal binding - sometimes a fact claimed for the entire EULA] - and eg civ4 EULA allows transfering the game again).

Digitial distribution has a different legal situation (again perhaps not everywhere). If goods are tranfered only digital (music, games,...) the need to have an account is legal, also not allowing to resell this goods is legal.

Atm courts make differences between digital goods and their boxed version. And how a mixed game like Civ5 will be seen (boxed version, but trying to limit the rights to the level of digital distibuted games), we will have to wait.

But like you said with such construction they can enforce such rules - a fact which doens´t make this rules right. But it forces the customer to go to a courts if he/she thinks a part of the EULA doesn´t confrom with the local law.

And i don´t sell my games, but i still care ...