Civilization 5 Steamworks questions/concerns for inclusion in the FAQ

Its not uncessary, if you wish to buy the DLC you then only need click buy, and you wouldnt need to wait to download it as its already in the last patch.
It is unnecessary, as there is still the chance that I might not want it.
What I want and what I don't want, and even more, when I want it, dear Sir, I would like to ask you to leave up to me.

Also what goes into patches is decided by the developers, thus its not up to you to decide what is or isnt uncessary.
A patch per definition is software which corrects faulty behaviour of the original software. Therefore it is also called bugfix.
Again, desire is entirely opinionated, if the developers desire it to be so, the the downloads are desireable.
That, in all honesty, is not the attitude of a free, responsible man who decides for himself.
What one desires, should be left up to him, not to others.

By the same token, you would agree to monthly fees for making use of Steam - "if the developers desire it to be so, the fees are desireable".

Or would it suddenly make a significant difference that in the latter case you were concerned in a negative way?
 
It is unnecessary, as there is still the chance that I might not want it.
What I want and what I don't want, and even more, when I want it, dear Sir, I would like to ask you to leave up to me.


A patch per definition is software which corrects faulty behaviour of the original software. Therefore it is also called bugfix.

That, in all honesty, is not the attitude of a free, responsible man who decides for himself.
What one desires, should be left up to him, not to others.

You can disable Steam auto-patching and update Steam games just like "normal" games: download the patch from the website, apply it manually.

I don't really understand what you are complaining about. If you want a DLC, you will download it. If you don't want it, you won't download it. It's not that difficult...
 
lietknes, can patches for other steamworks games be downloaded manually? Can you give examples?

I only have 1 game on Steam, but yes for that game I set auto-patch to OFF, I downloaded the patch from the game developer website and applied it normally. Didnt have any problems.

The only difference with a non-steam game is that the path is a bit longer.
Instead of:
c:/games/mygame
you have
c:/games/steam/steamapps/common/mygame

To be honest I hardly notice that Steam is installed, I set the icon in the tray bar to auto-hide and I chose not to start Steam at windows boot. When I want to play the game, I launch it normally from the windows start-menu, the steam app then starts automatically but all you see is a small "connecting" window that disappears in a second.
 
I only have 1 game on Steam, but yes for that game I set auto-patch to OFF, I downloaded the patch from the game developer website and applied it normally. Didnt have any problems.

The only difference with a non-steam game is that the path is a bit longer.
Instead of:
c:/games/mygame
you have
c:/games/steam/steamapps/common/mygame

To be honest I hardly notice that Steam is installed, I set the icon in the tray bar to auto-hide and I chose not to start Steam at windows boot. When I want to play the game, I launch it normally from the windows start-menu, the steam app then starts automatically but all you see is a small "connecting" window that disappears in a second.
I do the same thing insofar that I launch games from my desktop like any normal game. There is then a noticable popup of steam launching, but that is about the extent that I note steam.
 
A patch per definition is software which corrects faulty behaviour of the original software. Therefore it is also called bugfix.

Actually a patch can also be "providing additional content", i.e "civ 5 will release a patch to give the additional multiplayer option of play by mail", this is not a bugfix but it is a patch.
 
Also some patches fix bugs while introducing new ones. These files are still patches even though they do not correct faulty behavior per se. :)
 
Should have a warning like ciggies. "Warning This game will update causing stress and uncontrolled game rage"
 
I don't really understand what you are complaining about. If you want a DLC, you will download it. If you don't want it, you won't download it. It's not that difficult...

Look here and you will see that a lot of people are disagreeing with you.
 
DLC is a marketing ploy encouraged by SecuROM. That fact alone puts DLC in a negative light in my opinion.
 
DLC is a marketing ploy encouraged by SecuROM. That fact alone puts DLC in a negative light in my opinion.

I've read Hitler considered himself a vegetarian.

I hope you eat meat, Greybriar, because I don't tolerate Nazism on my message boards.

Moderator Action: Hmmm...Thunderfall might take issue with you about just whose boards these are ;). In addition, you might keep in mind that name calling is generally not part of civil discussions. thanks.
 
I've read Hitler considered himself a vegetarian.

I hope you eat meat, Greybriar, because I don't tolerate Nazism on my message boards.

Godwin's law. Lock this thread. ;)
 
Godwin's law. Lock this thread. ;)

I was actually gonna go for something a little more contemporary, but I figured "why the hell not, I'll go with the classic". :p

Though is it fair to completely dismiss the merits of DLC just because Securom supports it? That was my point.
 
I only have 1 game on Steam, but yes for that game I set auto-patch to OFF, I downloaded the patch from the game developer website and applied it normally. Didnt have any problems.

The only difference with a non-steam game is that the path is a bit longer.
Instead of:
c:/games/mygame
you have
c:/games/steam/steamapps/common/mygame

To be honest I hardly notice that Steam is installed, I set the icon in the tray bar to auto-hide and I chose not to start Steam at windows boot. When I want to play the game, I launch it normally from the windows start-menu, the steam app then starts automatically but all you see is a small "connecting" window that disappears in a second.
This is good, if true. It is exactly this possibility that I have been asking Greg to confirm/deny or explain for some time, without results. IF it is possible to download patches, and hopefully the at-registration download as well, on a different computer, even if only from steam, then it makes the possibility of limited bandwidth gamers being able to use this game viable again.
Sadly, with the reluctance of 2K to make ANY comment on this, I fear it to be unlikely to be true. PLEASE, 2K, say something, anything, regarding this. Even if it is, sadly, to confirm it is not possible, or it is still not worked out, but something, please!
 
This is good, if true. It is exactly this possibility that I have been asking Greg to confirm/deny or explain for some time, without results. IF it is possible to download patches, and hopefully the at-registration download as well, on a different computer, even if only from steam, then it makes the possibility of limited bandwidth gamers being able to use this game viable again.
Sadly, with the reluctance of 2K to make ANY comment on this, I fear it to be unlikely to be true. PLEASE, 2K, say something, anything, regarding this. Even if it is, sadly, to confirm it is not possible, or it is still not worked out, but something, please!

The real question to ask right now , is the game he has downloaded the patch for, and then updated his game, a Steamworks game, or just a game you can buy on steam? If its just a game that you can buy on steam, like civ iv, then maybe thats why he could do that. For a steamworks game, like Civ V, will there even be patches floating around on the net to begin with?
 
This is good, if true. It is exactly this possibility that I have been asking Greg to confirm/deny or explain for some time, without results. IF it is possible to download patches, and hopefully the at-registration download as well, on a different computer, even if only from steam, then it makes the possibility of limited bandwidth gamers being able to use this game viable again.
Sadly, with the reluctance of 2K to make ANY comment on this, I fear it to be unlikely to be true. PLEASE, 2K, say something, anything, regarding this. Even if it is, sadly, to confirm it is not possible, or it is still not worked out, but something, please!

Given that this game is steam only there is basically no chance of a downloadable standalone patch. Other games have those because there are versions of the game that need to be patched outside of steam.
 
I was actually gonna go for something a little more contemporary, but I figured "why the hell not, I'll go with the classic". :p

Though is it fair to completely dismiss the merits of DLC just because Securom supports it? That was my point.

Considering the hatred many gamers have for SecuROM, an endorsement by SecuROM for ANYTHING connected with PC gaming ought--at the very least--to arouse some distrust among gamers.
 
Question for 2K Greg about the MAC version (if there is going to be a MAC version, which is another question).

If you bought a Steam game on Steam for Windows, you can also download the MAC version at no extra charge when it becomes available. However, it says that for non-Steam games this depends on the publisher.

Question: for people who now buy the Windows version on Steam, will they automatically have the right to the MAC version without extra charge when it becomes available? Or will the MAC version be sold separately even if you already have the Windows version?
 
I have one question maybe it was asked earlier just have no time to search through 43 pages.

I want to play Civ V on my work PC (its more powerful than home one). The problem is an internet connection is established via proxy on my work and i also do not certain about what ports (that may be necessary for steam client to work) are open.

The question is: will i be able to play Civ V (single player) on my work PC (with proxy and firewall) by any means? Should I buy a box version (not download) for this? It would be pity if i will not be able to play the game because of steam.

Thanks.
 
Considering the hatred many gamers have for SecuROM, an endorsement by SecuROM for ANYTHING connected with PC gaming ought--at the very least--to arouse some distrust among gamers.

Hitler Ate Sugar is STILL just as bad an argument as ever. Jack Thompson defending Mass Effect suddenly does not make it a bad game. If you're going to argue it sucks, argue it sucks on its own merits.

Disclaimer: this post was for demonstrative purposes. While I coincidentally hold the views I linked, I believe businesses are within their rights ethically to use such a sales model so long as it is an honest reflection of continuing production of content (read: they aren't intentionally withholding content for a misleading price point).

Also, has there been any word on the upgrading to obsolete versions/downgrading versions (even if it needs to be done from a clean install), without a massive kludge?
 
Top Bottom