Howei
Chieftain
@Vordrax: Did you read the full privacy policy? There you will find this, too:
What about this?
What about this?
Steam - The 'somewhat explain it all guide'
- Thread starter scrlk
- Start date
I'm not 100% sure you understand that (I'm not trying to be offensive or insult you, I just mean your interpretation might be off.) It means that if you go to Google and then get linked to Valve's website, Valve isn't responsible for any data collected by Google. And vise-versa, if you click a link on Valve's forums that takes you to CivFanatics, Valve isn't responsible for any data taken by CivFanatics.
It isn't strange or ominous at all, it literally means what it says.
eireksten
Protective/Organized
It would be pretty weird if Valve took responsibility for external web sites, wouldn't it? We can't really hope to blame them for what everyone else does.
And I don't care about anything that Steam has to offer, I just want to be able to play Civ5.
They also state that the terms are subject to change without notice, so I have no guarentee that's all that they will pass along to third parties later on, if they so choose to do so.
Again, that is subject to change without my knowledge or permission. Hardly an iron clad agreement now is it?
Hmm, about 44 current submissions out a total population of what, 30,000 registered users? Yes, that certainly represents a large portion of Civ players.
You're missing the point. I want to play Civ 5. I don't want to be forced to use a service I don't really trust and don't need. And I won't be buying Civ 5. I had intended on getting it on release day, but forcing me into using Steam changes all that.
Talk about a strawman argument. It stands to reason that it will require Windows, that's the most common OS out there. At least use a little logic when you're trying to argue a point.
There's alot more involved than simply entering my email address in a box. If you were to stop and actually think about it for a second, you'd realize that.
Commander Bello
Say No 2 Net Validations
Of course I am saying "I, I, I" since all what is of any importance for me is what added value any kind of feature gives to me.
And now have a look, if you will find my nick in any of the GOTMs or whatever.
All you will find is attending in succession games on C3C, years ago.
"Achievements" are of completely no value for me, it is just that easy.
I, for that part, call myself experienced, since I am observing what is going on especially in internet related business.
I see that customers are getting to be more and more bound by so-called "necessities" or -even worse- "benefits", which to a majority of them aren't providing any added value.
For somebody who needs to have "friend lists" at any available space in the internet, Steam may be fine.
It may be fine for anybody who is keen to play multiplayer games.
All fine with me, but not my kind of playing games.
Willem,
This is baffling. If you want to play Civ5, you'll live with Steam. If you don't like steam, don't buy Civ5. You've said that you won't buy it yourself. No need to explain why to people unless you're actually trying to convince other people NOT to buy it at this point. Your points have been discussed in many other threads on this forum. Unless you can present evidence that specifically points out the issues you have with Steam, it's not very convincing (like registering an account with an email, which is required now for every account on the internet).
And yes, of course you're posting because its all about you. But that's not how decisions get made for companies which have more than 1 person working in them. This reaction is natural for any product. Nothing is perfect, and I am sure not everyone here bought an iPad, owns a Mac, drives a SUV, or eats fast food regularly.
This is baffling. If you want to play Civ5, you'll live with Steam. If you don't like steam, don't buy Civ5. You've said that you won't buy it yourself. No need to explain why to people unless you're actually trying to convince other people NOT to buy it at this point. Your points have been discussed in many other threads on this forum. Unless you can present evidence that specifically points out the issues you have with Steam, it's not very convincing (like registering an account with an email, which is required now for every account on the internet).
And yes, of course you're posting because its all about you. But that's not how decisions get made for companies which have more than 1 person working in them. This reaction is natural for any product. Nothing is perfect, and I am sure not everyone here bought an iPad, owns a Mac, drives a SUV, or eats fast food regularly.
Howei
Chieftain
I read it like this: If i click on a link on Valves page, the target site may collect my personal data that was provided to steam, right? And Valve/Steam is not responsible for this?
Why don't they use a privacy policy like Amazon here in Germany? Amazon don't give any private data to a third party, unless being forced by law.
If Valve will change this, i will be a new steam user.
One follows the other. I don't like being forced to use Windows, but I have to use it or pray that WINE works with my software.
I don't see anywhere that they don't state they won't come to my house and kill me. OH SHI-
Seriously though, if you want to find me a link where it has changed in the past 6 years to become more invasive, we can discuss that.
See above.
Hmm, about 44 current submissions out a total population of what, 30,000 registered users? Yes, that certainly represents a large portion of Civ players.
You mention a Strawman later but I'm fairly certain you have no clue what it actually is, when you post something like this.
I'm sure their hearts are breaking. I know mine is.
See above. People are "forced" to use Windows because developers support it near-exclusively, not the other way around.
So you've signed up for it then? What all did you have to enter during the registration process?
You're reading it incorrectly. I already told you how it is interpreted. If you choose to read into it in an illogical manner, I can't really do anything for you. It explicitly says data collected BY third party sites, which really truly means data collected BY third party sites, not by Valve.
Observe:
That means Valve takes no responsibility for information collected BY other websites and companies. If it is collected by Valve, it wasn't BY an external website or company. They are saying that just because an external website links to Valve's website(s) or you find a link to an external website on Valve's website(s), does not mean that those external websites are bound to Valve's laws. Which they are not, legally.
...That IS what they say. I literally linked earlier where they said that the only times third parties have access to personal information are these cases:
When required by law;
When that third party is performing maintenance and might have access to it for that necessity, in which case they are also bound by the same privacy policy;
When the user gives express permission per incident.
Let's use your Amazon example.
Valve's policy, that you have quoted, states that if you are on Amazon, and you click a link to Steam-Powered, Valve is not responsible for any information that Amazon has collected from you. I cannot fathom how anyone could gather any other meaning from that.
Ok, well when you are personally financing their project. this will probably mean more to them than nothing. I mean, if you already state you won't buy it, why would they care about any further opinion you express? They built it to use Steam because there are more users than YOU on Steam.
You'll find me on none. Yet I also see that there are user submissions, despite the fact that neither your name nor mine is on the list. How strange, that the world somehow continued to turn without our participation.
See above. The number of people who care outnumber the number of people who would refuse to buy it because of their inclusion.
How can anyone argue with such a sparkling pedigree of knowledge?
Value is a function of perception. A pound of gold is surprisingly useless to a man dying of thirst in a desert. You forget that technology, including that for entertainment, in a capitalistic society, evolves by profit. I'll be frank: why should anyone care that you think a feature is useless in the grand scheme of things? Especially when you don't desire these features and, most likely, haven't tried them. Sales have historically made a statement that you're wrong, and the sales of this game will continue to make a statement for- or against.
So then why are you here?
What about the fact that Impulse DRM is strictly better (one time activation too, similar policies regarding account etc. but no need to actually run Impulse ot run the game)?
What about the fact that I, and some other people here, don't like to have to run a separate program in order to run a single-player game?
These concerns you may find ridiculous, but they are not misinformation. The only value of Steam, to me, is being able to run Civ V. It's a huge value, but there is no reason why it should have been needed. Steam gives me no other added value, and no other game I own requires Steam to run. Therefore, this requirement I feel is unnecessarry. I'd have to make do with it to run the game, but frankly, getting a no-Steam patch sounds as necessary as a no-CD patch so I don't have to have that extra program running.
Companies want to optimize the money they get.
CFC doesn't.
I would prefer "no evil".
That we have the choice only between "evil" and "less evil" is the fault of the persons who have chosen "less evil" in the past, when it has been "evil".
Yes, and that's why we are complaining about steam.
We don't like being forced to use steam, but we have to use it or pray, that the devs will make another descission (which they don't, i know).
Expressing that we don't buy it is enough for posting here.
And i doubt your comparison.
There are probably just more users on steam who don't care or don't know.
Because of this it's important to keep this discussion alive.
Howei
Chieftain
@Vordrax: I understand. But the pp is not similar to Amazons, because they will not give my personal data to another company when i buy a game there.
Other point: They can change their pp when they want to. So maybe they change it a way I don't want. So the are two ways for me then: Accept it, or my account will be closed and all my games are gone. With a DVD at home and no forced account i will be able to play on.
Other point: They can change their pp when they want to. So maybe they change it a way I don't want. So the are two ways for me then: Accept it, or my account will be closed and all my games are gone. With a DVD at home and no forced account i will be able to play on.
Oh please! At least use a valid argument. Obviously you are yet another Steam evangelist out to convert us "heathens". I've found that there's no point in trying to discuss anything with fanatics so you can join Chalks on my ignore list. I just don't have time for people who aren't willing to accept that other people might have different opinions than themselves. I have my reasons for not wanting to use Steam. If you don't consider them valid that's your problem, not mine. I'm really getting baffled by the reaction of the Steam supporters. You act as if it's a personal insult that we don't like the fact that Civ 5 will require it. That's our choice and you have no right to say we we're not allowed to make it.
Impulse doesn't offer nearly the features or game selection that Steam does. I love Stardock and their games, and have used Impulse for my GalCiv and Sins, but I wouldn't call it a superior platform. As far as DRM is concerned, you might as well complain that it's not open source. The "DRM" of Impulse and Steam are functionally the same, the only difference being that Steam games are more integrated into the program. If running Steam has caused you problems, post them here.
Then drop your OS. Or don't buy the product. When I don't want a game that uses SecuROM, I don't complain about SecuROM. I just don't buy the game. If enough people buy it despite that, then so be it. You don't see me on the Steam forums *****ing about the few games that force SecuROM. You know why? Because I didn't buy, and don't plan on buying, those products. They'll sell or they won't.
They are ridiculous concerns. People had similar complaints about Half-Life 2. Do you know what happened? It became wildly successful. Steam wasn't as bad as they thought, people who had never actually used it before getting on the soapbox and screaming about it. In fact, the only DRM I've actively petitioned against that I haven't actually experienced firsthand (and I have experienced almost all of them) was Ubisoft's new DRM, because it requires a constant connection to a server cloud. Steam requires a single connection when you first start it. It is more of a free integrated service than an invasive DRM, and no offense, but it's hard for me to respect the opinions of individuals who complain about it without even trying it.
It is no coincidence that almost all of the people on this board arguing for Steam are the ones who have actually used it, and the ones arguing against it are people who have never touched it. Correlation does not imply causation, but I mean really. If it were a huge hassle, you'd have the Steam users agreeing that it shouldn't be required. Or else you think we've all been paid by Valve.
Obviously you should be a lawyer, what with all your intelligent and provocative points. And if the facts don't agree, that's the judge's problem, not yours.
You are aware, of course, that Amazon includes a similar clause in their privacy policy that states that it can and does change? If anything, the main difference is that Amazon's policy is written for the layman, rather than in lawyer-speak. They are functionally no different.
EDIT: Gah, so many things to reply to.
Yes, I'm sure they are the ignorant ones. The intelligent ones are those arguing conspiracy theories on a video game message board.
Howei
Chieftain
But then i can choose not to by there in the future, and all the things i bought there are mine.
Now that is a valid concern. However, changing their privacy policy to one that would become rather invasive would invite class-action lawsuits against the company. What do you think the likelihood of them ACTUALLY changing it to something that allows them to give away your personal information? There is such a thing as reasonable concern, based on the likelihood of events. Historically (I keep having to use this), companies that violate this covenant get hit hard. I don't know if you recall, but Blizzard tried to do it with B.net and Starcraft, in order to collect data for discovering pirates. They were class-actioned rather strongly, and of course that changed rather quickly.
Valve has never had a privacy policy that allowed them to sell PII without user consent (and if they did, it's still a really hard thing to protect in a EULA in an actual case- EULAs are notoriously hard to defend when they have stupid things in them), and it would destroy their company if they changed it to thus. So realistically, do you actually think it would happen?
But nothing speaks against complaining against it, right?
We are free, we can complain about everything we want to.
And at the moment we want to complain about steam.
We mainly complain that we don't want to use it.
We don't care about anything it provides. We don't want to use it.
Yes, but what will i do, when they cahnge anything?
I'll buy somewhere else.
With steam and Civ5 i don't have this option.
Commander Bello
Say No 2 Net Validations
Yet, for now, CivFanatics does not require me to log in for any modification.
Nor is it necessary to log into CF for playing Civ4.
You are seeing the difference?
Which in turn means of having paid for it months ago and by that granting the distribution service (Steam) a credit - yet without interest.
You are correct, there are much more users than just me.
And quite some of them are of the same opinion as I am and therefore will not buy the game.
In turn this means that 2K have shot themselves into their own feet.
Undoubtably, it does. Yet, much worse than the other way around.
As we see, some people simply can't.
Quite correct. And so are Steam's so-called "achievements", aren't they?
The T-Rex evolved as well. Are they still running around?
I do not need to try out automatic weapons to know that they may be lethal.
So, the argument of not having tried Steam is quite invalid when it is obvious that there is no point in having to use Steam for the purpose of a single-player game.
To enlighten the people who urgently do need such enlightenment.
Take me like a teacher: sometimes it is hard to teach even the less qualified students, yet the teacher stays uncomplaining and still does his best.
And I'm telling you that your reasons are bad, just as you are telling me that your reasons are good.
I'm not asking for an action, you are complaining, that is obvious. I'm asking for a purpose. Do you believe your complaints will change anything?
The difference between us is this:
You are complaining without any clear goal or purpose, since it's obvious that they cannot change it. I am attempting to help individuals who are on the fence by explaining how Steam actually works. If you change peoples' minds, you are doing so with semi-baseless conjecture and are robbing them of the potential for experiencing the game. I am actually providing data from a real user (myself) that will help them decide if the benefits outweigh the potential issues.
In other words, your concerns are those shared by pretty much everyone who has at least some sense of security. You're not really adding any factual information, just an extra voice to dissent. Meanwhile, I have an actual opportunity to change peoples' minds. No one who is actually using Steam will suddenly decide that it is an evil force, because we know it's not- but there are people who are afraid of Steam that might change their minds and actually use it.
I've answered this earlier, though you might have posted after I did.
Similar threads
- Poll