Civilization 5 Steamworks questions/concerns for inclusion in the FAQ

This is an assumption based on personal experience but not an official position of 2K.

This is just one example in which 2K has not been transparent about implications of using steam, and users have all the right to feel concerned about 2K intentions.

Its not an assumption on personal experience... I've never been to Russia or Thailand, its a combination of fact and logical assumption, 2k doesn't need to comment on every worry about Steam, Steam will be able to answer some of these concerns better than 2k. Or you can just figure it out yourself without having to be told via logic.
 
12agnar:
Its not within the rules, its specifically against EULA rules and is therefore illegal, the reason the limit's in place on Steam do not prevent such activites is not because they are allowed but because to further extend the limits of the DRM they will impeed on genuine customers who use the offline mode because they lack an internet connection.

2k Certainly does not promote using the Steam software incorrectly, the only way to legally play with friends and family on multiple PC's is to buy multiple copies, Steam/2k Is well within thier rights to stop the abuse of the easy-going offline mode by impeeding on genuine customers legal use of the offline mode I hope they don't however just because of a few criminals who think its thier right to break the law.

Legal? Criminal? Break the law? An agreement between two parties that may or may not be valid is subject to criminal law? What law? Steam makes, interprets, and enforces laws now? How much jail time would a person be looking at for installing on a second computer so his son could play while he plays on his?
 
12agnar0k, and what about when the US version is actually the cheaper option? Aussies are being asked for 80USD if they buy the game from Steam, but about 46USD if they buy the boxed retail copy from sellers like CDwow. Considering the convenience of Steam, it would be reasonable of many Aussies to want to buy the game on Steam but using the US price of 50USD.

If they can buy it cheaper in the US, based on the way you are describing things here, it would be perfectly logical to region-lock the game so that US version could not be played in countries where the game is sold for a higher (premium) price.

For example I was thinking about buying the D2D Deluxe edition offer because it's only 60USD. However it's not available to Aussies and the only way I can take up that offer is by taking two risks:
1) Placing trust in someone living in the US (or other) to buy the game and "gift" it to me without any credit card fraud complications etc.
2) That the game won't be somehow broken by using it in the wrong region.

I'd probably be prepared to pay that roughly 15 extra USD but the second of the above risks 2K are failing to rule out. As a result, they're likely to get a "lesser" sale from me. People who are asking the region-lock question are just wanting to make an informed decision. Giving those customers the information they need can easily result in better sales revenue so it's arguably in 2K's interest to be answering the question anyway, assuming it can be answered.
 
While it's all true and fair that nobody has given an official statement that region locking will not be applied, there is also no indication at all that region locking will be applied. The only existing examples of region locking involve e.g. Thailand where games are sold at bargain prices. I am not aware of a single example of a game sold in a Western country that is not playable in Australia for price reasons (not considering censor).

The American market is the standard and I'd like to see backlash and outcry if people who buy a DVD pack in New York and mail it to their cousin in Sydney ... only to find out it doesn't work. It's just not going to happen.

While the Steam argument of USD 80 vs USD 50 is valid, the game is avialble on the regular market in Australia for much less. Also, there's a significant difference between USD 50 and EUR 50 and even more so between GBP 25 and EUR 50, I've not seen anyone worry about a region lock between US and EU, or between UK and EU for that matter. Bottom line: there won't be a region lock on Australia.

And yes, feel free to reply: But I still want an official statement, yadda yadda.
 
Well Pieceofmind is ofcourse right, they could region lock the US if they wanted to because of people buying on mass from Australia, but thiers a couple reasons why they probably wouldn't, for a start the price loss isn't that significant, also if they region lock the US, their home territory, thats not good business, this is your main market, and you don't want to restrict their abilities to go overseas and play Civ5, the loss of custom would be too much, the Thailand/Russia situation just stopped people in the West buying very cheap while on holiday, which people were doing. Its not quite the same as US->Australia, but I do see your concern, you need to find out who decides to region lock, is it 2k or Valve, and then just PM the appropriate contact and ask if their is any region restrictions, explaining that you want to know where you have to buy your copy if you are moving countries.

If you buy it in the US, install it in the US, go into offline mode and stay in offline mode, even if its region locked to the US you will still be able to play offline, just stay off the internet (online mode) and it can't tell where you are in the world :D.
 
Is it true that, should Steam become unavailable, there is no legally binding clause in either (Steam / Take2) license that prevents them from simply abandoning their customers, and leave the customers with a DRM that doesn't let them activate their purchased games anymore?
Please note that there is no legally binding clause that Civ 5 work after you installed it. About every game license (since you're not purchasing a game, you're purchasing a license. Even for classic on-CD/DVD games) makes sure that there's no guarantee of anything except replacement of physical defects on the material products (i.e. replacement of a scratched/bent DVD, damaged manuals etc). If the game doesn't work on your computer for whatever reason, you're typically (censored). Even more now, since more and more games come with one-time activation codes, and stores are learning not to take back games that "I couldn't install".

That's because no company will commit itself to a legally binding clause for circumstances that are not under their control. That include committing itself to actions in case of bankruptcy - placing an undue legal burden on any buyer is a sure way of making sure no investor will touch your company with a 10-foot pole, even before bankruptcy (some similar tactics are used to really be sure no one ever buys your company. It's called poison pills, and it's mildly dangerous, because if you really need saving, you have to spent a lot of time dismantling those before anybody will help you).

So, no. There is no legal binding "we will support you in perpetuity", there never was, and there never will be.
 
Please note that there is no legally binding clause that Civ 5 work after you installed it.
(...)
If the game doesn't work on your computer for whatever reason, you're typically (censored). Even more now, since more and more games come with one-time activation codes, and stores are learning not to take back games that "I couldn't install".

As already mentioned in the paragraphs before my question, that was not my point. If a company correctly noted the technical requirements for the game on the box (which they are required to do), then it's entirely under my control whether I can play the game 15 years from now or not. I can boot into multiple versions of Windows, I have a second computer and a storage of old spare parts, and I'm quite confident that I'm technically literate enough to give every old game the environment it needs. For example, I have no problem running the original Daggerfall on my secondary computer - it took a while and I needed to change some parts, but it worked. I currently have several hundred PC games in my collection and I assure you that each of them still works, because for each of them this matter is entirely under my control.

Steam now takes this control away from me. With Steam, I can not be certain that it is under my control whether the game I purchased keeps being playable, because Steam explicitly keeps this control for itself. Steam actually explicitly states in their license that they can terminate my license whenever it pleases them and, should I disagree with their reasoning, my only option is to leave earlier (and I could try to sue for a refund, which still wouldn't give me the purchased products back).

That's because no company will commit itself to a legally binding clause for circumstances that are not under their control. That include committing itself to actions in case of bankruptcy - placing an undue legal burden on any buyer is a sure way of making sure no investor will touch your company with a 10-foot pole, even before bankruptcy
Well, that's a common argument, but considering the rest of Steam's argumentation it doesn't really make sense. When people are asking "Will we be able to play our games even after Steam is gone?", then Steam says that there is a system in place that can remove the DRM under these circumstances, the system is already developed, tested, confirmed working, and they'd "presumably" use it in such a situation. So it all sounds very easy. However, as soon as someone asks "Then why don't you guarantee it?", the whole construct which was so easy and devoid of any problems before suddenly becomes a "poison pill" which would deter investors.

You see the problem of Steam's (and your) argumentation? Either there actually is a DRM-removal system in place and the really do intend to use it (and their contracts with their business partners allow them to), in that case there's no risk of putting it into the warranty. Or there's a good chance that said system cannot be used (due to considerations of fromer or future business partners, investors, etc., or due to the system not working in the first place), then they of course shouldn't put such a clause into their license, but they also should actually inform their customers of these risks instead of trying to give them the impression that there's absolutely nothing to worry about.

So, no. There is no legal binding "we will support you in perpetuity", there never was, and there never will be.

The day when a "required repeated authorization to actually let you play the game you paid good money for" is labeled as "support", will probably be the day when I limit my further collection to indie and Open Source games.

I'm not asking for "perpetual support". I'm asking for reliable security that they don't suddenly take the products I purchased away from me for whatever business reason might sound convincing to them in the future. I have this security with all of the several hundred games I own. So far, I don't have it with Steam, they explicitly exclude it in their license. They justify their DRM system with the necessary battle against piracy, but in fact they are taking rights and control away from their legal customers.
 
@Psyringe: Is there anything new in this post, or is it just rehashing the same post we've seen numerous times by now? You already know the answer to all your questions. You're never going to receive a "realible security" written in triplicate and signed in blood.

Having said that, there's not a single instance of a popular game from 2K or Valve (and probably many other reputable companies) that became unplayable because of other reasons than being an old game that became incompatibility with modern hardware.

But yes, you don't have the "reliable security" and another 100 posts isn't going to change that.
 
Its one of those things you're never going to get an answer on because some lawyer somewhere has said it would be inconvenient. I'd like to think Valve's intentions are good, theres been words to that effect in the past, but currently and for the foreseeable future they are going to remain inscrutable. As always, caveat emptor.
 
@Psyringe: Is there anything new in this post, or is it just rehashing the same post we've seen numerous times by now?

Parts of it were new (the response to the "it would hurt their business to provide a warranty" argument, for example). Others were rehashing points I made previously, which might be expected in a response to someone who directly addressed me and either misunderstood or misconstrued said points. Why?
 
12agnarOk:
@3 EMS, 10 to life.

Someone who enters into an agreement, in good faith, them breaks it may be considered dishonorable. That should be shameful enough in a society of mostly good people. You're point is good, if i'm inderstanding it correctly, but comparing not honoring an agreement to criminal behavoir is a little harsh in this case. Especially when the "good faith" part is questionable.
 
Psyringe:

Article 13 of Terms (that you transcribed) clearly shows you are right: the seller can revoke the licence, without any reason, when he pleases; not even under condition of refund you.

But the matter is not an important business. Just the purchase of a game.

I'll buy it.
 
12agnarOk:
You go to jail if you want, I prefer my freedom

I think you're missing the point. The point is that it is not illegal behavoir. So while you are enjoying you're freedom, I'll be enjoying mine just a little bit more.
 
Yeppers,
... after being talked into joining the 20th Century,
... ... (the 21st is too advanced for me)
... I pre-ordered Civ V.

... [cue audio: "The Other Shoe Dropping"]
... (wait for it ...)

... I am being transferred. :cry:
... ... beyond the Internet. :cry:
... ... beyond the telephone. :cry:
... ... beyond snail mail. :cry::cry:
... I'll have electricity. :goodjob:
... I'll have my personal office. :goodjob:
... I think I saw a water closet. :mischief:

Sooooooo ...
... The information regarding 'offline' mode is encouraging.
... ... (Thank you :))
... I hope Civ V/Steamworks installs/runs
... ... without incedent the first try. :rolleyes:
... Just in case,
... ... I'm taking Civ4:BtS and BUFFY, also. :goodjob:

:cry::cry::cry:
 
Okay, i've been digging through the threads a bit, to see if something like a "user FAQ" besides the official FAQ is necessary.
Are any major questions open, besides preloading, regional discrimination/regional locking, free Mac version if you alread have the Win version and "what happens if zombies eat the brain of Valves network manager"?
Can't find anything really important besides that.
If there's still anything, please post it again :).
 
Back
Top Bottom