I realize it might be hard to imagine, but: what if the developers just simply did NOT USE STEAMWORKS? Is that still possible you think?
Or have developments in the past few years made it impossible for game developers to actually make games without using Steamworks?
Lets see, hmmm. Paradox games makes games without Steamworks. Civ4 was made without Steamworks. Fallout3 was made without Steamworks, and on and on we go, innumerable games have been, and I expect will be made without Steamworks.
Was this a trick question?
Assuming for just a second that Steamworks really does make it IMPOSSIBLE for the game to run without Steam (which the putative "failsafe codes" for when/if Valve ever went out of business bring into question), then as I see it, the developers have two choices: (1) Use Steamworks, gaining whatever benefits it brings, and alienating 25 to 50% of their customers (assuming those studies are representative, which they may not be, granted). (2) Figure out how to make the game without Steamworks, and/or negotiate with Valve to get them to release enough of that "failsafe code" functionality that some non-Steam versions of the game can be made to run without the Steam Client app or networking to Steam.
Number 1 likely involves some loss of revenue from (a) initial missed sales, compounded by (b) continued and moderated reduced sales as a result of the discontent resulting from releasing it Steam exclusive. It would be a matter for the publisher to estimate if the benefits of using Steamworks were sufficient to compensate for those losses.
Number 2 likely involves bigger slice taken by Valve.
Okay, let's take this scenario. I am a developer for a major game, and I need all of the features I listed in my previous post:
Please bear in mind, your alternative has to offer automated patching, online sales, easy downloads within a single client (none of this download installer in firefox, then installer installs a second client which then downloads just that one game), community features, achievements, multiplayer, possibly the VAC system, cloud space for saves/settings, ability to easily beta test the game with a select group of people, development tools, statistic, bug reports, customizeable installers, encryption of pre-distributed media..I could go on, but I think my point is made. Oh wait, I forgot the one last thing, your alternative has to have an install base in the millions, for starters.
No, I have several options. I can use Steamworks, which I know has all of these features. I can roll my own, then I will for sure have all these features. I can also forego most of them, or find inferior substitutes.
I also have a deadline and a budget. If I meet the deadline, I sell more units. If I meet the budget, I can sell each unit for less, and make the same amount of profit.
Lets analyze the last two options first.
Rolling my own: I need several developers, high-level developers too at that, who can make the framework, the backend service and then integrate it all into the game. This will cost me a nice chunk of my budget and a good amount of my developers' time. Now everything else has to be hurried along or I risk not shipping on time. The market wont care if I have these shiny features when my game is late to ship. If I do hurry, some of the parts of the game will be of lower quality. I also can't afford quite everything now, because some of my budget went into this framework. Maybe Ill get worse voice actors, or maybe Ill have to skimp on QA. Either way, Im selling less units, making less profits, and am less likely to get funding for another game.
I also end up with back-end costs for distribution, I need to have more physical retail channels, so I pay even more for shelf space. My profits are even lower now, and due to the inferior quality of the game, long-term sales are low.
Foregoing all these features is even worse. I may be on time and on budget, but my game gets hammered in reviews. Although I sell quite a few units, its less so than if I had all the features. I dont have support costs, but no one wants to play my game after a couple months anyways, and again, profits are shot.
Now the Steamworks option: I get valve to do all the heavy lifting, and get a couple guys to integrate Steamworks into my game. I pay licensing fees, but now I have a guaranteed audience of millions, I dont have the back-end costs, Im still on budget, still on time. Game is a success.
This is the games industry. This is the software industry. Yes, before, games did not use Steamworks, because partly, Steamworks was not available, and partly because the benefits were not yet recognized. Digital distribution was not a very viable option, so all companies were vying for the same shelf space, balancing out the market a bit. Now though, you need digital distribution to succeed, and so, the features Steamworks brings to the table are mighty attractive. If you skimp on these features, you will be compared to companies that didn't, and it will be a black mark on your company's record.
Some companies succeed outside of this formula, and good on them. I applaud them, and thoroughly support them. But I also realize that without said formula, there would be no pc games market, and no one would be successful. You on the other hand seem to be running around with your fingers in your ears, yelling "lalalala, I cant hear you!" Pretty much every point you brought up has already been addressed, but you, like a bovine, keep regurgitating the same arguments.
Nail -> head.
- This is the last time I'm answering your posts - It's just so tedious and obviously all that can happen is thatr we agree that we disagree. Done. Moderator Action: Trolling 
