DLC segregation and multiplayer

[AlpsStranger]

Congratulations to anybody with limited bandwidth and/or limited transfer rates.

"You are going to play our game? Fine, we are going to tell you what kind of internet connection you have to have..."

Welcome to 2010. Having no internet connection at home is now the equivalent of having no electricity or indoor plumbing.

Developers need no longer, realistically, consider those without internet access at all. Sorry about that, but I doubt they are demographically significant.

25% of PC game sales are 100% digital, FYI.

 

[trezno]

This topic was about multiplayer, and I think it's safe to assume that if you're playing online, you have no problems acquiring the patches and if your connection is capped that low, then MP online is not for you. (is MP offline even possible?)

I think most of the questions in this thread boils down to lack of information about MP in general. So please, 2k, enlighten us

 

[YoHo]

There are millions of people in the US and across the world that have no access to high speed internet or have FAPs on their almost high speed service.

Having said that, this is no worse than having to download a game patch...though possibly more often.

and as was pointed out, if you're in MP, then you probably aren't on a bad connection and if you're in SP, then you don't need to maintain compatibility so it's at your discretion to use the bandwidth or not.

the only time I could see DLC being an issue is if they release specific scenarios that alter fundamentals in the game for everyone. Obviously in those scenarios, everyone needs to have the required DLC. as I've said in other threads, that's essentially how other DLC games work.

 

[ShaqFu]

This topic was about multiplayer, and I think it's safe to assume that if you're playing online, you have no problems acquiring the patches and if your connection is capped that low, then MP online is not for you. (is MP offline even possible?)

I think most of the questions in this thread boils down to lack of information about MP in general. So please, 2k, enlighten us

Dunno if Civ5 supports PBEM/hotseat or not. If it supports PBEM, you could always save your game, put it on some sort of portable storage (disc/USB), and give/send it to someone else, a la correspondence chess. You could also play offline MP via LAN, although if you live somewhere with heavily capped bandwidth, it's unlikely your opponent will have a different version of the game than you.

 

[Tylerryan79]

I thought steam doesn't let you play your games unless they are fully patched? So even if you say don't auto download a patch, and your online, wouldn't it say you can't play until you update anyways? If I'm wrong then sorry for the confusion.

 

[ShaqFu]

I thought steam doesn't let you play your games unless they are fully patched? So even if you say don't auto download a patch, and your online, wouldn't it say you can't play until you update anyways? If I'm wrong then sorry for the confusion.

If you play offline and disable auto-patching, you should have no problem. If you really wanted to, I'm sure you could play Civ5 on version 1.00 from now 'til 2015 (although I honestly don't see why). It only complains about patching if you go online and enable auto-patching.

 

[Commander Bello]

Well if you're going to load a patch, then why are you complaining about bandwith? <blahblah>

I don't know what to tell you dude.

If you're at the point where you need to measure the size of DLC civs and maps to avoiding busting your monthly cap, .<blahblah>

If you have limited bandwidth, you really should know if you'll go over your cap before downloading big patches. <blahblah>

Welcome to 2010. <blahblah>.

Guys, really, sometimes it would be advisable to start thinking, before you post.

Do you actually realize about what you're talking here?

For you, it was ok that any user was forced to make use of an obscure piece of software.
After that, you were no longer hesitating to accept DLC - something which to come was heavily denied by some of you, as long as it was not proven.
And now it is ok for you that - according to the theories spread here - undesired data are sent to any user - whether he may need it or not.

And there is just no difference if this undesired software will be 1 MB, 10 MB, 100 MB or 1 GB.
If you are right in your assumptions, then Steam easily qualifies as kind of malware.

But YOU don't care - after all, it will be for the sake of YOU being enabled to play a bloody GAME!

You are really great! :suicide:

 

[cardgame]

Guys, really, sometimes it would be advisable to start thinking, before you post.

Do you actually realize about what you're talking here?

For you, it was ok that any user was forced to make use of an obscure piece of software.
After that, you were no longer hesitating to accept DLC - something which to come was heavily denied by some of you, as long as it was not proven.
And now it is ok for you that - according to the theories spread here - undesired data are sent to any user - whether he may need it or not.

And there is just no difference if this undesired software will be 1 MB, 10 MB, 100 MB or 1 GB.
If you are right in your assumptions, then Steam easily qualifies as kind of malware.

But YOU don't care - after all, it will be for the sake of YOU being enabled to play a bloody GAME!

You are really great! :suicide:

.wat.

 

[bjbrains]

Guys, really, sometimes it would be advisable to start thinking, before you post.

Do you actually realize about what you're talking here?

For you, it was ok that any user was forced to make use of an obscure piece of software.
After that, you were no longer hesitating to accept DLC - something which to come was heavily denied by some of you, as long as it was not proven.
And now it is ok for you that - according to the theories spread here - undesired data are sent to any user - whether he may need it or not.

And there is just no difference if this undesired software will be 1 MB, 10 MB, 100 MB or 1 GB.
If you are right in your assumptions, then Steam easily qualifies as kind of malware.

But YOU don't care - after all, it will be for the sake of YOU being enabled to play a bloody GAME!

You are really great! :suicide:

Nice job. You just completely clipped sections of our posts, and tried to equate some extra mb of downloading (to allow DLC to work in MP) as malware? Have you really lost it? You're raging why exactly? You're not being 'forced' to use steam any more than you're being 'forced' to play the game at all. It's a part of the civ 5 in the same way that hexes are.

 

[12agnar0k]

Its not malware. Please dont refer to it as such. Just because something is undesired does not make it malware.

 

[ZimbuTheMonkey]

For you, it was ok that any user was forced to make use of an obscure piece of software.

No one forcing you.
It isn't obscure.

After that, you were no longer hesitating to accept DLC - something which to come was heavily denied by some of you, as long as it was not proven.

I don't even understand what this sentence means. DLC is fine. 0-day and overpriced DLC is not, that has always been my position.

And now it is ok for you that - according to the theories spread here - undesired data are sent to any user - whether he may need it or not.

It isn't undesired.
It isn't to "any user". Disabled it or don't buy the game.
It is needed to play multiplayer.

And there is just no difference if this undesired software will be 1 MB, 10 MB, 100 MB or 1 GB.

No one said there was no difference between those file sizes.
It isn't undesired.

If you are right in your assumptions, then Steam easily qualifies as kind of malware.

Except Steam isn't pushing malware on us. You know, just that small difference.

But YOU don't care - after all, it will be for the sake of YOU being enabled to play a bloody GAME!

Yeah, cause those files update my game and make it compatible with others.


Sorry Bello, your complaints aren't shared by 95% of the Steam player base. Just don't buy the game, please. Steam isn't for people like you. And please stop pulling a "Fox News" on us by your selective quoting method.

 

[bjbrains]

Its not malware. Please dont refer to it as such. Just because something is undesired does not make it malware.

Even more importantly: It's undesired by *you*, not everyone. Your opinion isn't absolute truth and you shouldn't try and state it as such.

Oh, and I find it really hard to take it seriously when you clip small sections out of longer posts. Stop quote-mining everyone to try to prove your point, and ignoring any actual arguments.

 

[ShaqFu]

And there is just no difference if this undesired software will be 1 MB, 10 MB, 100 MB or 1 GB.
If you are right in your assumptions, then Steam easily qualifies as kind of malware.

But YOU don't care - after all, it will be for the sake of YOU being enabled to play a bloody GAME!

If requiring patches to ensure operational multiplayer games constitutes malware now, then the game industry has some very serious problems on its hands. And I'd like to deal with the "undesired software" that made Redcoats the same strength as every other Rifleman; perhaps I should contact Symantec about updating their virus index?

 

[Ricci]

If requiring patches to ensure operational multiplayer games constitutes malware now, then the game industry has some very serious problems on its hands. And I'd like to deal with the "undesired software" that made Redcoats the same strength as every other Rifleman; perhaps I should contact Symantec about updating their virus index?

Malware or not is truly a matter of opinion. I think Bello has a point here, to the extent of his personal feelings about the acceptance of a whole new system in gaming.
Along the last 2 decades games have managed to develop from a single sole & definitive version at first (delivered in a pack of diskettes) which could not be modified at all and from which the users wouldn't expect any patch, expansion or even sequel for many years to come; followed by years were we could enjoy patches (games being revisioned by the Devs), sequels became more popular, internet community and even modding; ultimately we had the option to download not only these revisions from the net but even the entire game, where the first symptoms of disagreement showed out I think. Ultimately we have this steam thingy which allows to have so many versions of a game running simultaneously that whenever one wants to go MP you need to be updating who knows how many MB for how much time, etc, perhaps without even having to make a single click/decision. If a customer wants to install and play the game he has to be connected for activation, if he wants to have the game ready in two different computers he has to purchase again (is this even real and concluded?? It's hard to believe).
These together with some other nasty issues (I wouldn't say obscure.. haha) the new gaming model brings along I don't know whereas it's advantages compensate for.
The thing is, I can perfectly understand that someone is worried about loosing too much ground as a customer and a gamer embracing/accepting this new model, regardless of the so called benefits it might have.
Actually, we as players might have now some serious problem on our hands and decisions to make.

 

[12agnar0k]

Malware or not is truly a matter of opinion.

Wrong, a person can have the "opinion" that the moon is made out of blue cheese, however that doesn't mean thier opinion has any basis on reality. Malware is clearly defined, "Malware, short for malicious software, is software designed to infiltrate a computer system without the owner's informed consent."
This is not what Steam is, just because you don't like a programme doesn't make it malicious. To have the "opinion" that it is, is pure fantasy. And not the kind of well it might be and might not be fantasy like "does god exist" but just pure out of your mind crazy. That's not a lampost! Its a tree! Because I said it is!

 

[AlpsStranger]

Guys, really, sometimes it would be advisable to start thinking, before you post.

I fully realize and stand by what I am saying. I have thought about it quite a lot, actually.

Do you actually realize about what you're talking here?

Sure. Do you?

For you, it was ok that any user was forced to make use of an obscure piece of software.

Steam? Obscure? You are not a stupid man, Commander Bello, but I do think you are quite delusional. Steam is not obscure outside of the confines of your own head.

After that, you were no longer hesitating to accept DLC - something which to come was heavily denied by some of you, as long as it was not proven.

I don't recall denying it. If I did I was clearly wrong.

And now it is ok for you that - according to the theories spread here - undesired data are sent to any user - whether he may need it or not.

I have yet to desire to cheat with tanks or overflows. I don't mind playing the game the developer designed, and I generally prefer the newer patches.

And there is just no difference if this undesired software will be 1 MB, 10 MB, 100 MB or 1 GB.

Not to me.

If you are right in your assumptions, then Steam easily qualifies as kind of malware.

In a sort of mountain-out-of-a-molehill drama queen way, yes.

But YOU don't care - after all, it will be for the sake of YOU being enabled to play a bloody GAME!

If I listen to you it will be so that you can play a game without a few software features you don't particularly like. The stakes are quite small for both sides of this argument.

You are really great! :suicide:

Please don't become an hero. I prefer your brand of doom and gloom to that *other* one. He really is crazy. You're just cranky

 

[MajorDisaster84]

Besides that, the key phrase is, "without the owner's informed consent." Steam, like it or not, is ultimately on your computer because you made the decision to purchase the game, knowing the extant link between it and Steam. Therefore, by extension any action it takes, you are responsible for because you made the decision to install it.

Furthermore, requiring a game to have an internet connection, even just for install...how is that different from requiring it to have a DVD-ROM drive for the same purpose?

 

[Ricci]

Wrong, a person can have the "opinion" that the moon is made out of blue cheese, however that doesn't mean thier opinion has any basis on reality. Malware is clearly defined, "Malware, short for malicious software, is software designed to infiltrate a computer system without the owner's informed consent."
This is not what Steam is, just because you don't like a programme doesn't make it malicious. To have the "opinion" that it is, is pure fantasy. And not the kind of well it might be and might not be fantasy like "does god exist" but just pure out of your mind crazy. That's not a lampost! Its a tree! Because I said it is!

I won't go on philosophical terms with you my friend. Though I have to admit this time I red malware as software of bad quality (badly designed to this particular). Malicious software then, I do not know nor can I asses with the information we have about steam's intentions.

 

[AlpsStranger]

I won't go on philosophical terms with you my friend. Though I have to admit this time I red malware as software of bad quality (badly designed to this particular). Malicious software then, I do not know nor can I asses with the information we have about steam's intentions.

Intentions? Are you implying that Steam was just a big scam all along? Any day now they are going to harvest credit card numbers by the thousands and move to Mexico.

Yeah, Steam is pretty fly by night. It's run by a tiny little indy company lead by some dude named Gabe that nobody has ever heard of. He made a bunch of money working for some other obscure outfit called "My crow soft" or something before making some game called Half-Life that, again, never really hit the mainstream. I really don't see how people can trust their accounts to such an obscure little outfit.

 

[Ricci]

Intentions? Are you implying that Steam was just a big scam all along? Any day now they are going to harvest credit card numbers by the thousands and move to Mexico.

Yeah, Steam is pretty fly by night. It's run by a tiny little indy company lead by some dude named Gabe that nobody has ever heard of. He made a bunch of money working for some other obscure outfit called "My crow soft" or something before making some game called Half-Life that, again, never really hit the mainstream. I really don't see how people can trust their accounts to such an obscure little outfit.

I'm really not implying anything. But you made me laugh good!!