Steam - The 'somewhat explain it all guide'

[Willem]

It just would be nice if the people that won't buy it would shut up about not buying it, it's getting ridiculous.

And I'm feeling the same way about the Steam fans who seem to think it's the greatest thing to ever happen to mankind.

If you have some arguments against steam, feel free to voice them.

Well that's what I and a few other people have been trying to do but we're just getting drowned out by the Steam evangelists. It's impossible to have any sort of rational debate as long as they come around with their rude and condescending attitude.

Don't be all offended if someone has a different opinion and actually likes steam though.

Obviously you haven't been following these discussions very closely. We're not the ones that are being offended by a different opinion. It's quite clear by their attitude that we're not allowed to have our reasons for not wanting it.

I apologize for jumping down your throat like I did, but I'm just getting sick of a few people here who can't make a post without it being insulting in some way. You were sort of coming across the same way.

 

[ori]

Moderator Action: The trolling and flaming in this thread stops here - if you have something to add to the discussion, do so without resorting to either.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Commander Bello]

Obviously you haven't been following these discussions very closely. We're not the ones that are being offended by a different opinion. It's quite clear by their attitude that we're not allowed to have our reasons for not wanting it.

I think this is a very important point and therefore I am highlighting it again.

As far as I have followed the discussion, the overwhelming majority of the so-called critics has not refused to accept that Steam may be a valid option for people who want to play mp games.
Nor have them denied that Steam may be an option for those, who want to have ever increasing "friend lists" and who want to boast with their achievements.

This is all fine.

What the critics are asking for is to have an option - just a mere option to be entitled to avoid a "service" which for them is not a service nor holds any added value.

Furthermore, to strengthen their point of view, these critics have pointed out phrases in the EULA, privacy policy and whatnotever of Steam which are questionable.

Actually, such things are what one would expect from a reasonable customer to do.

 

[Senethro]

But what the critics want is what they can't have. Steam can't be removed from the game at this late stage. If it could be then there would be a risk of a more draconian or awkward DRM being implemented.

 

[DRJ]

Reading the first posts, I really get the feeling this thread (as well as others on this forum) are initiated by a paid task-force of PR-posters, to calm down the community.

One thing is for sure: there is a sentiment of old civ gamers and probably even new ones about the distribution policies - to an extend that the company thinks it has to "fight" against this uprising.

That's good news IMHO as it shows that the "revolutionaries" are more and more taken as a serious enemy to battle against, indirectly confirming that some of the points that have come up really frighten them to become common knowledge - up to a point it may effect in a non-consumption of the product. This may result in different sales-figures than originally predicted when accumulating the money for the production of the product.


Let's see if the loss of the long-time-paying-old-fans will be compensated by the new policies.
In an other thread, Afforess said, we would "vote by our wallets" and although he is right, I am sad cause listening to critics could be much more worthy than trying to let the grown civ-communities fall apart, just for a "going short"- designing-aproach.
It's our children that shall play civ7 someday. Now, as civ5 will be boycotted, this could really scratch the image of CIV on the long term. Other games may take its place.

It's hard to establish confidence in a currency but very easy to destroy it.

 

[Sterf]

Reading the first posts, I really get the feeling this thread (as well as others on this forum) are initiated by a paid task-force of PR-posters, to calm down the community.

One thing is for sure: there is a sentiment of old civ gamers and probably even new ones about the distribution policies - to an extend that the company thinks it has to "fight" against this uprising.

That's good news IMHO as it shows that the "revolutionaries" are more and more taken as a serious enemy to battle against, indirectly confirming that some of the points that have come up really frighten them to become common knowledge - up to a point it may effect in a non-consumption of the product. This may result in different sales-figures than originally predicted when accumulating the money for the production of the product.


Let's see if the loss of the long-time-paying-old-fans will be compensated by the new policies.
In an other thread, Afforess said, we would "vote by our wallets" and although he is right, I am sad cause listening to critics could be much more worthy than trying to let the grown civ-communities fall apart, just for a "going short"- designing-aproach.
It's our children that shall play civ7 someday. Now, as civ5 will be boycotted, this could really scratch the image of CIV on the long term. Other games may take its place.

It's hard to establish confidence in a currency but very easy to destroy it.

This is a good example of the baseless paranoia I was talking about, and why there are still discussions about something that's not going away in a tiring circular fashion.

Revolutionaries battling against the evil forces of digital distribution, and anyone with a differing opinion being a paid corporate shill. I mean, come on.

I can't roll my eyes far enough.

I apologize for jumping down your throat like I did, but I'm just getting sick of a few people here who can't make a post without it being insulting in some way. You were sort of coming across the same way.

Sorry if I came across that way, that's probably because I try to stay out of these discussions as much as I can but sometimes some of the arguments are getting too ridiculous and I can't help myself and post just how ridiculous I find them. And you can't deny there are some really paranoid /ridiculous things being posted.

 

[PieceOfMind]

To those who are baffled as to why some will criticise Steam and are sick of seeing people complaining about Steam, why don't you just steer away from these threads? If Steam really is the great system you say it is, it will become more popular regardless. An argument like this requires people from both sides to continue - it takes two to tango, if you will.

It actually feels like there are people who identify personally with Steam and when their favourite software Steam gets attacked they feel obliged to defend it vigorously. I wondered why this might be, and I would suggest it's because they have invested money and time into the system already therefore having a vested interest. How many people in any of these threads have you seen boasting of Steams' great features who haven't actually used Steam before? Just as if I went out tomorrow and bought a Xbox 1080, I would advocate it in future discussions because I want the system to succeed and so more likely have good games to purchase in the future. In the case of Steam, it's even worse because it's not just a piece of hardware but an actual service. Steam regulars want their Steam service to continue because they already own games on it. Any mass resistance to Steam and possible movement to an alternative non-Steam platform could jeopardize their existing games library.

Personally I care little enough about the games industry to be taking the position of boycotting Steam because it's heading gaming in the wrong direction. If game DRM ever gets really bad, there will always be maverics who release titles with minimal DRM, just as it sometimes happens these days.

Those against the Steam deal have every right to complain. They might at times have pretty stretched reasons for complaining, but so too do the Steam-lovers have pretty generous descriptions of the "positive features" of Steam. To this date, the one that still amazes me most is that they love being marketed to with Steam specials and prices - i.e. advertising. I like junk mail just as much as anyone but I don't look at it as being a thing that I should enjoy - it's just a tool that makes it easier to communicate potential deals between myself and a business.

 

[Aesir Rising]

I have more than 65 game library entries in Steam now, including the 4 extra links for the Civ IV complete that don't actually work.

I like Steam. The top post is rose-colored though and tells only half the story, so I'll add a couple of points.

About Offline Mode

Steam Client Offline Mode isn't. You must be online to go offline. I feel that people that jump to point to offline mode as some brand of magic sauce haven't actually used it. Each month (literally) offline mode fails for some reason or other. Sometimes the offline mode bug is specific to one game, sometimes the problem is systemic, affecting everything. Here are some recent examples where offline mode will either fail or create new/different problems effectively preventing use of a game:

Apr 29: Fix reconnect attempts while Friends/VAC is offline causing stuttering in the client and potentially in Steamworks games
Mar 2: Really fixed offline mode not always working
Feb 23: Fixed offline mode not working
Jan 18: Fixed cloud games attempting to sync when the client is in offline mode

Once a month, consistently, there is at least one game you can't play when offline. But, "hey," you say, "what are the odds of that game and downtime applying to you personally?" My answer to that is "Pretty damned high".

You don't know this unless you actually use offline mode, but innocuous-sounding issues like "Fixed cloud games attempting to sync when the client is in offline mode" really translate to "game crashes to desktop when attempting to sync because the error handling sucks and we need to patch in a fix to the Steam client, which you will need to go online to obtain so you can go offline again".

Custom Content and Modding
Steam uses exe stub launchers and non-default paths and for some games skips over some content you would otherwise have with a disk release. For these reasons modding takes a hit for some games on Steam, including certain popular Civ IV mods that affect exes or dlls. Early iterations of X2 and X3 had problems installing script updates where the installer couldn't find the path to the game, Railroad Tycoon III is missing the map creation tools and some other custom content utilities (not the map editor that is in-game, the creation tool itself), Sid Mieer's Railroads! can't get the transcontinental mod pack installed at all, some (not all) Elder Scrolls and Oblivion mods need to be finessed to the point where you wonder whether it is worth the time/effort, Hearts of Iron III data had to be manually ing edited just to get the Steam version to be compatible in online multiplay - and that was like 4 months where both Valve and Paradox completely failed to be able to get their own CRC checksum to match on the Steam install.

Value
Steam has sales, like other stores do. Steam also costs more this past year or so for newly-launched triple A titles. For example, supreme Commander 2 purchased through steam cost eithe $5 or $10 more than buying at bestbuy or gamestop or amazon - and did not include one single bonus map (of 6 possible). Yet, no matter who/where you bought this game from, you are required to install and run Steam to play it.

I sometimes think Valve is working overtime to crush their competition and maximize profits - the things businesses in America do daily - but that's just another way of saying they hope to become an anti-competitive monopoly.

Anyway, I like Steam. It isn't perfect. That is to say, it has some serious technical problems on a fairly regular basis (Just ask the Tropico 3 people, or the Supreme Commander 2 pre-purchase people, or any of the people paying a premium for a triple A launch day title how their day 1 experience was...). Steam also imposes some increasingly-inconvenient limitations on use that I didn't have to contend with in years past. For example, I can't have my kids play some of the games I have... rather I would need to get a Steam account for them - and they're too young for me to be comfortable having them with their own account.

 

[Commander Bello]

Thanks for that clarification!

 

[Willem]

And you can't deny there are some really paranoid /ridiculous things being posted.

That's the case on both sides of the argument however, the anti-Steam faction certainly doesn't hold a monopoly on that score.

 

[Willem]

But what the critics want is what they can't have. Steam can't be removed from the game at this late stage. If it could be then there would be a risk of a more draconian or awkward DRM being implemented.

Maybe so. But bringing the controversy out in the open might convince some people to vote with their wallet come release day. Hitting them in the pocket book is the best way to send a message to a corporation, so 2K will know that they may not necessarily have made the wisest decision by going to bed with Steam. And while it might be too late for the initial release, there's still be plenty of time to remove it in the first expansion. Frankly though, I'm not convinced that it is too late. There's lots of time for them to rework the code and make it optional instead of required.

 

[Vordrax]

I have more than 65 game library entries in Steam now, including the 4 extra links for the Civ IV complete that don't actually work.

I like Steam. The top post is rose-colored though and tells only half the story, so I'll add a couple of points.

Et Cetera.

You know, I've always been something of a computer fanatic. I'm a programmer and I fix them all the time, so I guess I've never really minded "irritating" but simple things like wonky installs and whatnot for some of the mods (I actually helped someone install FCOM for a Steam Oblivion.)

However, it is very likely that I've not considered such issues in terms of less computer-savvy users, where they might be so infuriating to stop trying at all.

In other words, you do have a point. Now I've never had anything crash on Steam just because it was on Steam (and my Civ IV works perfectly, mods included.) But I can imagine for people who just want things to "WORK" (while they probably won't be playing mods very frequently, if at all) and don't have a lot of experience getting things that don't "WORK" to "WORK" might get to the point of hating the program.

Though I've only had to use Offline mode a few times for when I know my internet is going off (or if it is out and I'm already signed in) I've never had an issue with it. I can't vouch for people who are ALWAYS in Offline mode (and I don't really see the need for staying offline, personally- I find internet connectivity to be far more valuable than gaming, and if your biggest problem with not being able to play a game is that you don't have the internet, I'd recommend fixing the latter first) but I also don't see a logical reason why issues with the online Steam would affect the ability to use it offline.

Frankly though, I'm not convinced that it is too late. There's lots of time for them to rework the code and make it optional instead of required.

You don't just "remove" libraries from a game. Do you have any experience at all with software development?

 

[Aesir Rising]

I can't vouch for people who are ALWAYS in Offline mode

Oh I should have had this in my earlier post - I do not always use offline mode. I use it regularly though - one weekend a month a couple of hours each evening of that weekend and 3 - 4 weeks out of the year, typically vacations. The issue is that if there is a problem when you're away - it can't be fixed until you can get back online and get the update. So the downtime is frequent enough that telling people to "just use offline mode" is going to set folks up for failure.

 

[Vordrax]

Oh I should have had this in my earlier post - I do not always use offline mode. I use it regularly though - one weekend a month a couple of hours each evening of that weekend and 3 - 4 weeks out of the year, typically vacations. The issue is that if there is a problem when you're away - it can't be fixed until you can get back online and get the update. So the downtime is frequent enough that telling people to "just use offline mode" is going to set folks up for failure.

Agreed. I haven't run into "downtime" that I was present for, per se (Steam holds only about 1/5 of my games) but I have seen some very ill-timed updates that were probably fixing issues previously. It's not the ultimate panacea, it's just a debate stop-gap against people who are claiming that you have to always be online for Steam to work, which isn't true.

 

[Senethro]

Maybe so. But bringing the controversy out in the open might convince some people to vote with their wallet come release day. Hitting them in the pocket book is the best way to send a message to a corporation, so 2K will know that they may not necessarily have made the wisest decision by going to bed with Steam. And while it might be too late for the initial release, there's still be plenty of time to remove it in the first expansion. Frankly though, I'm not convinced that it is too late. There's lots of time for them to rework the code and make it optional instead of required.

If you had more awareness of the industry in general and if any of us had access to the sales figures of Civ4 on Steam I'm sure you'd see that you're backing a lost cause. Bigger games have had no problems going with Steam. Indeed they've often had very noisy boycotts and yet on Day 1 we see a large number of them caved and bought the game anyway.

How willing are you to bet that the demographic of anti-steam strategy gamers is bigger than the Steam casual players who will try out this game they've heard of from the Steam publicity and sales?

 

[Senethro]

You know what? I've just thought of an approximate metric for Steam sales of Civ. Check this out.

http://store.steampowered.com/stats/

Click on the "View top 100" tab and Ctrl-F through for Civilization. You can see some numbers for simultaneous online logins, around about 4200 total peak logins across all games and expansions. Are these high or low? I'm not sure, lets compare them against Steam compulsory games.

6000 for the single player of Modern Warfare 2, which I think was the biggest selling mainstream game of last year. Another 6000ish for Dawn of War 2 and expansion, 9000 for Empire: Total War.

We don't have information on how many people were playing any of these games in offline mode, so theres still some mystery. However we can clearly see by comparing Civilization, a 7 year old game with an expansion pack 3 years ago, against modern Steam compulsory high sellers, that the Steam demographic of Civilization players is big.

Sorry to be all but we're the demographic thats going to get catered to.

 

[Willem]

If you had more awareness of the industry in general and if any of us had access to the sales figures of Civ4 on Steam I'm sure you'd see that you're backing a lost cause.

I don't care. It's called principles and some people are willing to stick to them rather cave into expediency. I'm sure there's been lots of situations where people were told they were backing a lost cause and ended up being on the right side in the end. Vimy Ridge comes to mind right now.

However we can clearly see by comparing Civilization, a 7 year old game with an expansion pack 3 years ago, against modern Steam compulsory high sellers, that the Steam demographic of Civilization players is big.

And that's exactly one of my concerns about this move. By giving Steam an exclusive to Civ 5 it could set the stage for yet another near monopoly in the computer industry. By shutting out companies like Direct2Drive, 2k is giving Steam a huge boost because of the size of the Civ fan base. We already have Microsoft and Intel having a near stranglehold on their respective markets, we really don't need another mega corp having a major advantage in the digital distribution area as well. That's not good for the gaming community in the long run.

 

[Senethro]

Noone will sing songs of your glorious defense of your principles. Also why are you people comparing Steam to drug dealing and murder and being against Steam to success in an ugly war? Lack of perspective?

 

[Willem]

Also why are you people comparing Steam to drug dealing and murder and being against Steam to success in an ugly war?

It was the only analogy I could think of, sorry. And I've never compared Steam to those things. I've mentioned on several occasions that I'm sure it provides a good service to some people. I have no problems with it as long as it's an option, not a requirement. The bottom line is that I'm not about to cave in and suddenly start saying that this is a good move just because the majority of players may think otherwise. I don't think it's a good move at all, for a variety of reasons, and my view on that is not about to change anytime soon.

 

[Commander Bello]

Noone will sing songs of your glorious defense of your principles. Also why are you people comparing Steam to drug dealing and murder and being against Steam to success in an ugly war? Lack of perspective?

Oh yes, some will do.

And regarding the "perspective" thing...
For Civ4, apparently there have been choices. You as being a fan of Steam (which is your good right to be so) had the option to get it via Steam.
Others had the option to get it on CD/DVD and not having to be bound to a digital download service.

I for my part prefer to have options. You seem to be of another kind. So be it.