Civ 5 will be bought when it's $20 or less. Steam reduces the price I'm willing to pay for it.
And the first thing I'll try to do after buying it is figure out a way to make it not run on Steam.
Hear, hear.
This is something several people don't seem to grasp. How this whole thing basically works is that when you have a product people have an idea of how much they are willing to pay for that product. If you add something to it, depending on what it is, it either increases or decreases the value people feel they are getting and want to pay for it. DRM is a prime example of a 'feature' that reduces the value of the product for the consumer, so he's not willing to pay as much for a product with DRM than he might've paid for one without it. Thanks to the basic nature of DRM, it will always inconvenience you, though the level varies from mild to unacceptable.
Now, when it comes to Steam, some people value some of the things it has, while other people, often those who have used computers for 15+ years, have better than average knowledge about how they work, and like to do things themselves to know they're being done properly, see it as useless at best. For some it means they're going to buy from Steam in any case, for others it means they're not getting anything from there and will avoid anything that requires it.
Back to the values. Basically, when I buy a physical copy that (too bad this is rarely the case anymore, but let's take a look at a good example) doesn't require any 3rd party clients, has no need for online activation and, on the whole, works out of the box I'm willing to pay full price for it. Let's call that 50. Add any level of DRM and the value I'm willing to buy drops. I probably wouldn't buy any of the new Ubisoft titles even if I got them for 5, though if any of them was of specific interest for me I just might make an exception. But probably wouldn't.
Digital distribution? Well, obviously I'm not getting a handy media that looks nice on the shelf and all, but somebody's got to save the world... so digital distribution itself doesn't reduce the amount of money I'm willing to pay drastically. Let's say that (again, in an optimal case. Think GoG, except with modern titles) we have a shop that doesn't require a client program at all. You make a purchase and you can download a DRM-free install file you're free to do whatever you want with and it installs normally like any other file. Yeah, I'll pay 40 for that. I need to use a client to download the install file? Well, as long as I can still access the file outside the client and do what I like with it it's no big problem. I might actually still be willing to pay 40 for a new title. What, you're telling me I need the client to install the file? That's a bit worse. What happens to my games library when (given enough time there's no if, only when, and some of us don't just abandon our games after the first three weeks) the company goes bust, decides to change their business model or maybe someone cracks their database or my account and starts screwing up? Not to mention me not being able to easily use the file. Let's call it 25-30.
And then someone suggests that you shouldn't even be able to run the games outside the client. Major, major inconvenience. With terms like those I'd be willing to pay 5 for a new major title.
It has nothing to do with a publisher's right to decide how they sell their product. Sure, yes, they have every right to decide how to sell it. But every consumer also has every right to disagree with those decisions and decide not to buy a product if price and value don't meet when their personal preferences are applied.
![[pissed]](/images/smilies/pissed.gif "Pissed [pissed]")
