How many copies of Civ 5 do I need?

I put this on another thread but I'll say it here to. When you go out to buy a PS3 games are you allowed to play with your family at your own house? Yes, and you only need one copy. So why should you need two or more copies of Civ5 when your playing at your house? You shouldn't. Sure there's always hotseat but that becomes almost unplayable in modern times. So the only efficient way to play with family is through LAN. So therefore you should be able to play at more than one computer at a time.
 
When you go out to buy a PS3 games are you allowed to play with your family at your own house?
I'm no expert on consoles, but when you buy a PS3 game, aren't you only able to run it on a single PS3 machine at a time?

Multiple people can play with separate controllers on the same game. [Analogy to PC game; multiple people can play hotseat on a single computer.]

But that's not the same as running multiple copies of the same game on separate machines.
 
I'm no expert on consoles, but when you buy a PS3 game, aren't you only able to run it on a single PS3 machine at a time?

Multiple people can play with separate controllers on the same game. [Analogy to PC game; multiple people can play hotseat on a single computer.]

But that's not the same as running multiple copies of the same game on separate machines.

But as I stated, although I'm not sure if I was clear enough, I wouldn't compare that to hotseat in that respect. Hotseat is so slow once you get in the modern era and if you want to play it like a real civ game it must be on multiple computers so you don't have to wait 20 min for your turn.
 
But as I stated, although I'm not sure if I was clear enough, I wouldn't compare that to hotseat in that respect. Hotseat is so slow once you get in the modern era and if you want to play it like a real civ game it must be on multiple computers so you don't have to wait 20 min for your turn.

You have to wait 20 minutes for your turn in Civ IV when it's late game and war is going on in multiplayer... It's especially true if you're playing against someone like me who weighs in their turn as a matter of life or death :D

PS3 vrs PC is two different animals. Yes, on a PS3 you can play in certain games against other family members if you don't mind split screens and have purchased additional controllers. Mind you the console game costs more and another controller is $60. Anyway if you could, would you want to play Civ against someone in split screen mode?

So on the PC you get hot seat mode for 'free' at no additional costs. How are you getting the shaft on that? I don't get how people are willing to shell out $400+ on a PC, but are unwilling to pay a developer $50 for additional game copies that offer you the best value for your entertainment dollar on the planet. If you like Civ you'll easily log hundred of hours of game time in for $50.00. You ain't going to find that at a movie theater, concert, sky diving, miniature golf, or a night out on the town.

Can you legally install Windows on multiple computers with the same key? No. Can you install legally Bad Company 2, F.E.A.R., Crysis, Metro or any other PC game on multiple computers? No. I don't really get it, PC games have been like this from inception and nothing has changed.
 
Hotseat is so slow once you get in the modern era and if you want to play it like a real civ game it must be on multiple computers so you don't have to wait 20 min for your turn.

Whether you *like* hotseat or not is irrelevant to the legal point at hand.

The legal point is; one license means you get to run the application on one machine at once.

If you don't like the multiplayer version that allows you to play multiplayer using only a single machine, thats a totally reasonable preference, but it doesn't entitle you to run the game on multiple machines.

Legally; playstation games let you run on one machine at a time.
PC licenses are no different.

The correct conclusion here is; console games are designed better to run multiplayer on a single system. PC games aren't designed well to do that.
But thats a game design issue, not a legal issue.

I don't really get it, PC games have been like this from inception and nothing has changed.
Precisely. The only thing that has changed is that its now harder to break the license agreement.

[Note; there *were* a few games in past whose licenses let you do some multiplayer on multiple machines at once. Eg blizzard games that let you have both a normal install and then a "spawn" install which disabled all features except playing multiplayer with a full install.
Its a shame that there aren't any license agreements like that anymore.]
 
If I buy the game from Wal-mart there sure is a "retail copy". I'll have a physical CD and everything right?

I just can't run it without loading steam.

Difference with "normal" retail copy and retail copy with steramworks is that you can resell the "normal" retail copy (most sane countries has this stated in laws, IE Right of Resale, no licence agreement can overwrite this right even if the EULA can legally hold in your country) whereas your retail copy with steamworks is permanently tied to your account. You could sell the box and disc but data on disk would be useless to buyer as game is already registered in another steam account (and I believe you could still download the game from steam like any other game bought straight from steam store(?)).
 
Difference with "normal" retail copy and retail copy with steramworks is that you can resell the "normal" retail copy (most sane countries has this stated in laws, IE Right of Resale, no licence agreement can overwrite this right even if the EULA can legally hold in your country) whereas your retail copy with steamworks is permanently tied to your account. You could sell the box and disc but data on disk would be useless to buyer as game is already registered in another steam account (and I believe you could still download the game from steam like any other game bought straight from steam store(?)).

In theory that is correct, but in today's world of multiplayer games which dominate the landscape you have to tie your game to an online account. Obviously there are exceptions, but those are in the minority.

So for me anyway that's 95% of the games I bought in the last year.

In the land of consoles where devs are trying to kill off the used game market it's already dead in PC land and has been.
 
Whether you *like* hotseat or not is irrelevant to the legal point at hand.

The legal point is; one license means you get to run the application on one machine at once.

If you don't like the multiplayer version that allows you to play multiplayer using only a single machine, thats a totally reasonable preference, but it doesn't entitle you to run the game on multiple machines.

Legally; playstation games let you run on one machine at a time.
PC licenses are no different.

The correct conclusion here is; console games are designed better to run multiplayer on a single system. PC games aren't designed well to do that.
But thats a game design issue, not a legal issue.


Precisely. The only thing that has changed is that its now harder to break the license agreement.

[Note; there *were* a few games in past whose licenses let you do some multiplayer on multiple machines at once. Eg blizzard games that let you have both a normal install and then a "spawn" install which disabled all features except playing multiplayer with a full install.
Its a shame that there aren't any license agreements like that anymore.]

My argument however is not that you can, but that you should be able to. I know it's illegal and that it is in the license. However I despise this policy would not like companies to use it.
 
My argument however is not that you can
Your argument was that a PC game was different from a PS3 game. It isn't, they both have the same kind of licensing terms; buy one copy, get to play on one system at once.

However I despise this policy would not like companies to use it.
I understand that the policy hurts you, and I don't envy trying to support 4 kids, it must be tough.
But this isn't really different from any other product; if you want multiple copies, you have to pay multiple times.

Should college roommates be able to get to install a single piece of software on two machines at once and use it simultaneously on multiple licenses? What about your neighbor? Or your good friend? Or a vague acquaintance? Or some total stranger who pays you $5? What is the qualitative difference between all these cases?
Is it just the age of the people using the software?

Software companies have to cover their development costs by spreading those fixed costs out over as many individual sales as possible.
The simplest way for them to do this is to have a one-license=one copy used at once.
The fewer copies they sell, the higher the price has to be on average for the rest of us.
 
Difference with "normal" retail copy and retail copy with steramworks is that you can resell the "normal" retail copy (most sane countries has this stated in laws, IE Right of Resale, no licence agreement can overwrite this right even if the EULA can legally hold in your country) whereas your retail copy with steamworks is permanently tied to your account. You could sell the box and disc but data on disk would be useless to buyer as game is already registered in another steam account (and I believe you could still download the game from steam like any other game bought straight from steam store(?)).

That is what I really don't like about Steam. If I move, change my e-mail address, and forget my login credentials unto steam, then my game is worthless.

I'm not sure about your last point. If bought the game from Walmart and run over the DVD with my car, could I re-download and install the game from Steam?
 
That is what I really don't like about Steam. If I move, change my e-mail address, and forget my login credentials unto steam, then my game is worthless.
Write them down somewhere safe? Take sensible precautions? You must have a banking password, a shopping password and a casual password memorised right? Use the one you think appropriate for Steam?

I'm not sure about your last point. If bought the game from Walmart and run over the DVD with my car, could I re-download and install the game from Steam?

Yes.
 
I have no problems with 1 copy = 1 computer licensing but then I only have 1 kid - not 4. ;)

If I had 4 kids I would probably be complaining about it too.
 
Write them down somewhere safe? Take sensible precautions? You must have a banking password, a shopping password and a casual password memorised right? Use the one you think appropriate for Steam?

Guess I'll just have to raise the priority of keeping track of my steam login.

Yes.

There are advantages to this I guess. I play lots of games and am tired of keeping track of DVDs and boxes and having them fill up my storage. I could throw the boxes and the 15 year old game away but somehow I can't bring myself to do that.
 
I don't know what your work policy is obviously, but you can tell Steam not to start with your OS. It would only need to be run "on demand" when you run Civ V from the shortcut.

You could also switch Steam to offline mode (after authenticating the game once while in online mode) to prevent it from patching or accessing the online features, if that's a concern.

I'll try and find out the policy on Steam next week. Many of these run in the background type of software is outright banned from being loaded. Some have bad security holes and even running them for a bit can expose your machine to being taken over. I don't know if Steam is on that list or not.
 
Its not very likely you would get hacked through Steam but it would be a potential new source of phishing attempts. I occasionally get a invite to a Steam group that is clearly sinister. Just decline everything you don't recognise.
 
I'd just like to point out also that once Steam is gone, so is Civ5 and all of their direct games. This is possible to happen, and people will probably be playing Civ5 when that happens. People are still playing Civ1 and 2!
 
Why would I need to sign up for an account if my only intent is to play the game off-line or without any internet content?
 
Why would I need to sign up for an account if my only intent is to play the game off-line or without any internet content?

You will have to run Steam every time you run Civ5, and you will have to connect to the internet at least once to register your Steam copy. So yes, you'll have to create an account.

But then you can tell it to remember your details, and never have to log in again on that computer.
 
Is buying a Civ5 DVD from a store considered a Steam copy as well? I can understand registering it the first but that should be it. I have a number of games that are eLicensed and each of them are only a one-time deal to get the activation code.
 
I'd just like to point out also that once Steam is gone, so is Civ5 and all of their direct games. This is possible to happen, and people will probably be playing Civ5 when that happens. People are still playing Civ1 and 2!

How likely do you think it that company that make shitload of money and is growing over 100% year-to-year is going to go bankrupt (and even if it does that no1 will buy it in such case). We are talking about privately owned company which is already worth billions dollars.
 
Back
Top Bottom