I am not trying to further continue a discussion, but my point is that i don't believe that a large portion of the most rabid civ fan-base (the same people i have been arguing with over range, movement and transportation dynamics for months now) won't buy the game simply because they don't like the box its shipped in.
[Poll] (no Discussion please) Civ5 enforces Steam - Will you buy it?
- Thread starter CivFanMUC
- Start date
I am not trying to further continue a discussion, but my point is that i don't believe that a large portion of the most rabid civ fan-base (the same people i have been arguing with over range, movement and transportation dynamics for months now) won't buy the game simply because they don't like the box its shipped in.
Taalen
Chieftain
I was pretty much just pointing out your wording which I found a little weird, though I suppose you meant Steam being mandatory opposed to being an option
In any case, I definitely don't trust in the average nerd-rage gamer's ability to stick to a boycott over principle, either. Unfortunately. But there also are some who will not yield in a matter of principle. In my personal case it won't be the first game I skip for the very same reason, and I'm afraid it probably won't be the last.
Sorry, I'm afraid this is turning rather into the direction of a discussion, but I'm doing my best to keep this from developing into a debate - that's basically all we see in other threads on the subject, and there's nothing constructive about it. So, basically what's keeping me, personally, from using Steam is pretty much just the requirement to run the client to play the game. Of course there are other quirks that push my buttons for pretty much the same reasons (being a bit of a control freak and all), but that's the main problem. If Steam client was only ever used to download the install file I'd probably become a customer today. If it was used to download and was required to install, I might eventually become a customer. But it having to run all the time? No thank you. Has nothing to do with how much RAM or CPU it eats. Simply a matter of principle about who calls the shots on my personal computer.
Again, terribly sorry for going against the spirit of the thread, but with all the hate flying in all the other Steam-related threads I probably couldn't have kept myself from getting agitated.
Ahovking
Cyber Nations
hahaha
just wantet to not get this poll closed too (see http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=363645 ^^)
this.
in the german "Civforum" theres a poll just like this one here - with a similar result: http://www.civforum.de/showthread.php?t=67478
40% will buy the game, 13% of them grumbling, 60% won't buy it...
Personally I dont think anything could stop me from buying Civilization V. I really enjoyed Civilization IV and I want the sequel.
Steam isn't bad, most of the people who don't like it don't like it "out of principle", not because it's actually bad. Every one of my PC gaming friends uses Steam and thinks it's the greatest thing to ever happen to PC gaming.
26 people on an internet poll said they won't buy it. That won't sway 2K, because they're saving hundreds of thousands of dollars and lots of time using Steamworks for free instead of paying for SecuROM and developing multiplayer matchmaking from scratch.
Steam isn't bad, most of the people who don't like it don't like it "out of principle", not because it's actually bad. Every one of my PC gaming friends uses Steam and thinks it's the greatest thing to ever happen to PC gaming.
26 people on an internet poll said they won't buy it. That won't sway 2K, because they're saving hundreds of thousands of dollars and lots of time using Steamworks for free instead of paying for SecuROM and developing multiplayer matchmaking from scratch.
Jeckel
Great Reverend
No, I will not buy any game that forces the use of Steam. I have purchased every other Civ title and expansions on the release day. I spent 4 years of my life modding Civ4 almost constantly.
I will not buy any product that forces me to use an unnecessary service like Steam and if Civ5 requires Steam then it will be the first Civ product that I will not pay money for or support.
Shame on you Firaxis, shame.
I will not buy any product that forces me to use an unnecessary service like Steam and if Civ5 requires Steam then it will be the first Civ product that I will not pay money for or support.
Shame on you Firaxis, shame.
I don't understand why there are such strong negative reactions to something that will likely never even bother you in practical use.
Chalks
The blue pieces
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2010
- Messages
- 1,097
Because people like to get all irate about things because it makes them feel important.
Hopefully in a week or so all these people will have calmed down or gone away to leave the rational portion of the forum in peace.
Moderator Action: Trolling - warned
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Because if we'd support it, it would become standard, and then it will sure bother us in our practical use.
And even if it will not probably: Probably versus never is a simple descission.
I would not bet on this
.
Jeckel
Great Reverend
Because I value my freedom and I have no need of an extra layer between me and my games. If I want to play a Civ game, there is no reason I should ever need to know the word Steam or, much less, need an account at some web service when all I want to do is play a LAN game.
That simple, from a game play and a programming perspective, Steam is unnecessary and shoves the internet between a player and a game when there is no need for it.
Ha, I've been around since before Civ4, so I doubt I'm going anywhere. Maybe you don't have a problem being told how to use your computer and when you can play your games, but I and plenty of others do.
I couldn't agree more. If it wasn't for people standing up for their rights as consumers, you can bet all games would have limited installations and always-online requirements.
I understand that viewpoint. Offline Mode exists for this reason. You just activate once, set Steam to Offline Mode, and you can play without an internet connection.
Jeckel
Great Reverend
True, but only one required internet connection is only slightly better. However, a non-internet game, which Civ is, should never require an internet connection, ever. I should be able to buy it at the store, take it to my shack in the woods and have a LAN party with my hermit and hobo friends without worrying about getting each and every computer to an internet connection just to install a game that I am only ever going to use in single player or LAN mode.
I get peeved by DRM period, but beyond that I've touted Firaxis as one of the shining examples of a good game developer that didn't need to resort to such underhanded techniques to try and squeeze dollars out of their customers. I would expect this kind of unethical behavior from EA or Ubisoft, but from the holders of the Civ franchise..? I'm blown away and very disappointed.
Chalks
The blue pieces
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2010
- Messages
- 1,097
What I have a problem with is people going "Brarararararararararar hate steam" without any reasoning behind it.
If Civ 5 installs a new 3d engine DLL on your hard disk, do you complain? Why not, they're telling you what to put on your computer?
If Civ 5 installs a multiplayer connectivity library, do you complain? Why not, they're telling you what to put on your computer?
If Civ 5 installs an optional automatic update and content distribution component on your system designed to allow you to optionally acquire extra data for the game, do you complain? Why not, they're telling you what to put on your computer?
Oh, but if parts of this fundamentally vital system has the word "Steam" written on it, oh, then we'll never hear the end of it! Brarararararararararararar it's Steam! Oh noes. Only the ultra popular content distribution platform! What ever shall we do?
A one time online activation is an entirely reasonable form of DRM.
Every other aspect of Steam that makes it different from a custom launcher written by Firaxis is completely optional and able to be disabled.
Everyone needs to just get over it because it's not going anywhere.
NovaSilisko
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2010
- Messages
- 69
I've never had any problems with steam, I'm fine with it being mandatory. Just don't think the Deluxe edition should be a steam exclusive, and people without internet are out of luck.
Feels like a lot of debate about steam is about misunderstandings/lack of documentation on all it's features, but that's not for this thread.
Feels like a lot of debate about steam is about misunderstandings/lack of documentation on all it's features, but that's not for this thread.
Phil Ken Sebben
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2007
- Messages
- 47
Steam isn't just OK - it's awesome, and it is a large part of the reason why PC Gaming is still alive and kicking today. I honestly cannot imagine playing online games without Steam. All my friends have it, I buy all my games through it, and it's super-user friendly.
It patches the games for me, I can install and uninstall on a whim without any trouble. It has cool achievements. It has a built-in store, friends list, community, and is 100% reliable. What more do you want?
And no, I'm not some guy Valve hired, I am honestly satisfied with the system, and I would suggest everyone gets it. It hits all the right notes. Unlike Windows Live...
It patches the games for me, I can install and uninstall on a whim without any trouble. It has cool achievements. It has a built-in store, friends list, community, and is 100% reliable. What more do you want?
And no, I'm not some guy Valve hired, I am honestly satisfied with the system, and I would suggest everyone gets it. It hits all the right notes. Unlike Windows Live...
I'm only learning the proper meaning of the phrase, but aren't you essentially arguing by "strawman"?
Put words in the mouth of those you don't agree with, make them look irrational/stupid/ignorant and then invalidate them. However, I will grant you that some are very bad at expressing their concerns without emotion getting the best of them.
The trouble is, some people (maybe including you, maybe not) get hung up on the people with the irrational complaints. Probably best to ignore them and argue with the people who can bother to reason. Or is Steam so important to you that you feel obliged to defend it at all costs?
There's a lot of rational dislike of Steam (or more correctly dislike of being forced to use Steam) and a lot of irrational dislike of Steam. That's just human nature when you think about. Compare it with the irrational and rational like/dislike of operating systems, especially Mac vs. Windows. The more you ignore or discount the views of those who have rational reasons to dislike Steam, the more resistance you will face. The easy path is just to show how ignorant the irrational haters of Steam are. Think about it a bit. I will too.
For many of us, this is the first time intrustive DRM has bit us in the ass.
Usually it's been games like MW2 that have had the nasty DRM. Civ and its competitors (Stardock,Valve) have either had reasonable DRM, or easily cracked DRM after a few days.
Ultimately, we're the ones who are going to decide whether Civ's future is nasty DRM or not. The only way to do that is to make this game flop due to the DRM. I'm willing to sacrifice Civ V for Civ VI being better.
Steam is NOT a one time activation. If it was, then I can have Steam, install the game, uninstall Steam or run the program independently of Steam, then be able to run the game just fine. You can't do that. If you could, I'd have no problem with this.
For a single-player game, that's what I demand in order to be willing to pay full price for it.
Usually it's been games like MW2 that have had the nasty DRM. Civ and its competitors (Stardock,Valve) have either had reasonable DRM, or easily cracked DRM after a few days.
Ultimately, we're the ones who are going to decide whether Civ's future is nasty DRM or not. The only way to do that is to make this game flop due to the DRM. I'm willing to sacrifice Civ V for Civ VI being better.
Steam is NOT a one time activation. If it was, then I can have Steam, install the game, uninstall Steam or run the program independently of Steam, then be able to run the game just fine. You can't do that. If you could, I'd have no problem with this.
For a single-player game, that's what I demand in order to be willing to pay full price for it.
Similar threads
