Why All The Hate?

[Maniacal]

Did you only buy Civ5 to prove this point and make this post? That seems strange. Or were you planning on buying it anyways?

Even if he was going to buy it anyway this does seem like going a little too far to prove a point. Although Steam offline mode does usually work for most people, it isn't bug free and as with any software you never know if something else on your computer will cause it to stop working in some way but its impossible to tell what it is or if it is Steam or not. I had that happen to SotS1 on WinXP, it would bluescreen many hours into a game and made that save impossible ot continue, and the next save, but it works awesome for EVERYONE ELSE and on Win7 for me.

My internet was acting up yesterday, so I couldn't play an MMO, but I did play Fallout: New Vegas (with steam of course).

Which means that I have a RIGHT to use the software I paid for, and as such the whole "we can terminate your use of the software at any moment" is abusive. Thanks for proving my point and destroying your own.

A good part of the EULA are illegal, and for a lot of the rest, it's not because it's legal that it means it's acceptable or right.

Not in the USA, and regardless of the handful of court cases in Europe until someone brings it to court, wins and gets the court/government to force companies to change their EULAs there is nothing you can do about it anyway (except not playing any games).

Next time you want to be a lesson giver, try to actually read what is written rather than missing the points.

 

[Commodore]

Which means that I have a RIGHT to use the software I paid for, and as such the whole "we can terminate your use of the software at any moment" is abusive. Thanks for proving my point and destroying your own.

A good part of the EULA are illegal, and for a lot of the rest, it's not because it's legal that it means it's acceptable or right.

You're just furthering my point (again) about people being brainwashed into sheeps that support their own abuse.

Oh, and as an aside about your ridiculous two-page-long essay on how to play in offline mode, here is what I wrote :
"a required Internet connection to install a single player game and the like"
You can not install Civ5, even with a box bought in a brick-and-mortar store, without validating in on the Net. The fact that you can play in offline mode later is not what I was talking about. Next time you want to be a lesson giver, try to actually read what is written rather than missing the points.

As Maniacal stated, the EULA is not illegal in the USA. They have been challenged many times before and the courts have upheld them every single time. Are the EULAs somewhat abusive? Yes they are in my opinion. I just brought them into the argument to disprove the notion that gaming was this shining beacon of freedom until evil Steam came along and stole all your rights away. The gaming companies have never cared about your rights to play their games, they just care about the money you are willing to fork over for their product.

Oh and something is not illegal just because you don't like it. As far as I know the EULAs are upheld in Europe and most other parts of the world, so unless you can show me court cases from anywhere in the world that struck down an EULA, then I will not take the EULA is illegal argument seriously. I will agree that they are abusive, but as of right now they are not illegal.

As for me missing the point of your argument: I didn't miss it, I just chose not to address it. My little demonstration was addressing another point that was brought up earlier in this thread. There were those who stated that Civ5 could not be played in offline mode and that this was Steam's fault. My demonstration proved that it is not Steam's fault and that there is probably some other issue causing their offline mode to not work correctly.

Now, there are two reasons I chose not to address your point:

1. It is a non-issue. Seriously, where are you that you will ever be without internet for an extended period of time? I was in the severely underdeveloped farmland of Iraq for a year, getting mortars and rockets fired at us everyday and I still had internet. And this wasn't internet provided by the US Army either, this was a local internet provider using his own infrastructure. So if I can get internet in the middle of a warzone, then there should be no reason you should have to go without internet. And if you try to say that some people can't afford internet, well then they probably shouldn't be spending money on games either, since internet really isn't that expensive.

2. It's not a point that should be argued. Basically, you state that Civ5 needs an internet connection to be installed. Yes it does, so I can't argue that. However, the above paragraph demonstrates why needing an internet connection is not a problem.

And what is the big deal about needing to register your game online anyway? Is it really that much of an inconvenience to you? I doubt it since the online registration takes place automatically during installation so you don't even have to do anything. I used to take the same stance as you until I actually tried Steam, Impulse, and D2D and found that most of the horror stories were simply not true. I have yet to have my privacy invaded, I have never been denied access to the games purchased, and the software works perfectly fine on my computer with no slow downs, glitches, or errors.

I'm also going to go ahead and say that those that want to buy physical copies of their games support the further destruction of the environment and contribute to the increasing cost of petroleum. Guess what they need to make all those discs you covet so much? That's right petroleum. Guess how they do it? They have to drill for the oil which destroys ecosystems. They then have to refine it, which gives off emissions that contribute to the destruction of the ozone layer. Not to mention the more petroleum that have to dedicate to the creation of discs means there is less for more important things, like fuel for the truck that delivers the food to the supermarket you shop at. Less fuel means prices go up, and if fuel prices go up prices for everything else goes up as well.

Now of course the impact game discs have on the price of petroleum is probably minimal, but people won't see it that way if Valve decides they want to start advertising Steam as "green gaming".

Plus, when that disc you love sooooo much ceases to function and you throw it away, where do you think it goes? Do you think it just magically disappears and goes to video game disc heaven? It goes to a landfill to just sit there and never biodegrade (of course it will biodegrade, but it will take generations to do so). Electrinc waste is fast becoming one of the biggest pollution challenges we face and you want to continue to contribute to it just because you don't want to be inconvenienced with online registration. Way to care about the planet there big guy.

 

[Akka]

As Maniacal stated, the EULA is not illegal in the USA.

Good thing the USA isn't the world.

Are the EULAs somewhat abusive? Yes they are in my opinion. I just brought them into the argument to disprove the notion that gaming was this shining beacon of freedom until evil Steam came along and stole all your rights away.

The difference being, Steam actually needs to be launched on the PC to play any game that is developped with it, datamine it (which is unacceptable, regardless of it being done regularly by lots of thing) and allows for remote deactivation of your software.
This is a far cry from the time when you could just install your game from your CD and play it, ignoring all the crap in the EULA, so YES it was quite better for the rights of the users before it.

And your whole point about requiring an Internet connection being a non-issue is both wrong and missing the main problem.
Wrong because yeah, you can find yourself in situation without Internet, even if they are temporary and few between.
And missing the main problem, which is about the PRINCIPLE. I should NOT be required anything but what is strictly necessary for the game to run. Internet connection for the solo part is not necessary, hence it should not be required. Year by year, software become more restrictive, and through being used of being abused, the sheeps that I denounced progressively becomes willing victim of this by supporting their own restriction.

Why ? That's the big mystery. There is no practical or moral reason to support being restricted more than what's strictly required.
The only reason I can see is the short-lived and rather pathetic feeling of acting cool, "nothing upset me" bravado that you would expect to find a teenager trying to look badass. But that would be quite depressing if it was really the case.

As for the pseudo-ecological idiocy, it's just so ridiculous and stupid that I feel even this acknowledgement of its existence is killing my neurons.

 

[Rub'Rum]

Akka, I agree with you in most respects. I know that, as a customer, I feel I was treated much better 10-15 years ago. Yet somehow, after reading a post that sounds like that, all I want is to disagree with you.

Also, don't dismiss issues by calling them stupid. Especially when they're not. Drop in the ocean of pollution, sure, but when the technology is there to repair a problem, we must use it. I work in environment related projects, I spend my whole days repairing things that are tiny droplets in the ocean of problems. Sometimes you do more than fix the problem, you also teach people and industries to start caring.

 

[NBAfan]

Steam is alright.
Now a service like Games for Windows Live is complete annoying crap.

 

[Akka]

Akka, I agree with you in most respects. I know that, as a customer, I feel I was treated much better 10-15 years ago. Yet somehow, after reading a post that sounds like that, all I want is to disagree with you.

I don't have the patience to be nice on the form against people who aren't nice on the substance.

Also, don't dismiss issues by calling them stupid. Especially when they're not. Drop in the ocean of pollution, sure, but when the technology is there to repair a problem, we must use it. I work in environment related projects, I spend my whole days repairing things that are tiny droplets in the ocean of problems. Sometimes you do more than fix the problem, you also teach people and industries to start caring.

I dismiss the issue because it is a stupid strawman. I'm more than aware of the environment problems. I'm also aware that they have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the issue at hand, because I'm talking about consumer rights and the answer is outlandishly going into the environment point. Which is totally unrelated, and hence completely irrelevant.

GoG and Impulse are both digital distribution system that have absolutely NO DRM, for example. No CD, no packaging. Samely, Steam-based games can still be sold in brick-and-mortar stores, which means CD and packaging.

Conclusion : this is a terrible strawman. You wonder why I don't answer nicely to people who use such intellectual dishonesty in their answers ?

 

[GoodGame]

In all honesty, Steam probably should commission a study to demonstrate that online distribution is "green" versus brick and mortar distribution. The landfill impact would probably be the biggest savings, rather than the plastics, since to an extent the plastic will be made as a byproduct of generating say gasoline products (although the price of plastic might also drive petroleum consumption).

 

[Rub'Rum]

It usually takes more words and energy to be unpleasant in a post than to just get to the point. Unless someone's the kind of person for whom it actually takes energy to avoid unpleasantness.

Also, it's not for no reason I go to gog.com first and foremost, and gamersgate after that for more recent games. Yes, DRM is a totally detached debate from environmental problems. I'd say at large, Steam is getting popular enough that it probably has a positive environmental impact, and that's useful for low-research consumers who would just be buying games in the store instead of using Steam. Now maybe they just need to be educated to the next level about DRM-free web-distribution services. But the current popularity of Steam is a step in the right direction on the environmental front. In any case, yes, you have a point, and I knew full well. Websites you describe are proof of it. You could just have said so.

 

[Skwink]

I often go to a location out on the woods without internet with my Laptop, and have never had problems with offline mode. I also leave steam open all the time, and that helps. If I try to start Steam without internet, then it won't work.

 

[Chibiabos]

Unless you buy it off of Origin, Green Man Gaming, Impulse or it has its own DRM. So quite often it really isn't.

Impulse does not have its own DRM and does not have to run to play games bought through Impulse ... unless things have changed since Gamestop took over.

It is unfortunate the CEOs and shareholders don't share the same view point, because they are usually the ones responsible for demanding DRM. Everyone knows it doesn't stop piracy, but clearly that hasn't stopped most publishers them trying more types of DRM. Strardock isn't the best example, since they never really followed their own "gamers bill of rights" very well. Besides a sometimes malfunctioning offline mode, Steam hasn't prevented me from playing my games or treated me like a criminal.


Steam barely uses any real amount of resources on your computer and should have no effect upon its performance (it would make a terrible gaming client if it did). As for Adobe, they have always sucked and there are several free (and much better) alternatives, like Sumatra PDF. As well as ways to turn off constant updates for various things (sometimes it is as simple as going in the "Options" menu). If you have too much software that is alwasy running processes that is your own fault.

I would love to see a comparison of Civ V running somehow without steam versus with steam. I don't know about you, but as satisfactory as my computer's performance generally is -- granted, its not a high end machine and wasn't even when the hardware was purchased about four years ago -- turn processing in Civ V easily exceeds a minute on a decent-sized map toward the Industrial era. I'd be willing to bet several seconds would be shaved if the game could run without Steam leeching resources.

And even if the difference is minor, its still my point -- Steam leeches a bit here, Adobe a bit there, every program constantly running even when not being used is resources that could otherwise be put toward, say, reducing the ridiculous amount of time it takes to process a turn (granted a number of people, myself included, put a fair amount of blame on Firaxis for lousy, inefficient programming ... but the fact so much software, like Steam, is there leeching resources even when not being used [in Steam's case to browse or buy games] is insult to injury. Feels like 'everyone else does this, so let's do it too' right up there with 'everyone else just litters this park we enjoy, so let's do it too!').

Because most people don't experience any major problems since the early bumpy days.

I remember specifically the December before last. There was no offline start option and Civ V was inaccessible and unplayable for more than a day, I think it was when some Call of Duty iteration (not sure, as I don't play CoD) debuted and Steam's servers seemed to be overloaded. Civ V tried to patch but couldn't. I know I wasn't the only one, several others complained about the same thing on the forum. Steam has been around for several years, you consider that 'the early bumpy days' just a little over a year ago?

 

[Oruc]

Not only does Origin have most of the same social features that Steam does, the in-game overlay and chat system in Steam is incredibly useful for more than just talking to friends as it greatly increases communication for gaming groups (ie clans) and events. While Origin's profile system is kind of lame, neither of them are "like facebook" anymore than X-Fire or MSN Messenger used to be.

The only thing that is like Facebook is Battlelog for BF3, which actually works quite well and the similarities in its design to Facebook make sense because it lowers the learning curve and works better than FB most of the time.

Why did you just sidestep the other bigger issue? Why do I need to run Steam to play a game? Origin, which people whine about, is better then steam with this.

 

[G-Max]

Personally, what got me into the anti-Steam crowd was when I went to install the DEMO version of Half-Life 2. I couldn't install the demo without also setting up a Steam account. That level of intrusion would be unacceptable even in the full version of a game, but the demo? Seriously?

what troubles me is how 'control' over the implementation of a product has shifted from the user to the distributor. Call me old-fashioned, but I believe that if I have in my hand a CD/DVD that I have paid for, I should be able to use its contents in full without having to expose myself to the World Wide Web, even for a moment.

Indeed. This is why I only have the starter edition of WoW.

I hate singleplayer games that somehow need you to be connected to the internet at any point. However, yeah, every other game seems to be doing it at this point, so I might as well go with Steam, who is the lesser of all these evils in my opinion, if I have to be online, I might as well be online with awesome functionality and epic small prices. So yeah, now you go out, buy your disk, but without the internet services required to activate or maintain your game activated, your "disk" will be useless to you 15 years down the road.

This is the same mistake that I made when I bought Madness Returns. From now on, I have an official policy of not buying any game Moderator Action: <snip> Discussion of pirating software is not allowed in our forums.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Commodore]

I don't have the patience to be nice on the form against people who aren't nice on the substance.

This was actually a nice, well-mannered discussion until you came along. Sure there were disagreements, but it didn't get nasty until you came here trying to act all intellectually superior to everyone who doesn't agree with you.

And your whole point about requiring an Internet connection being a non-issue is both wrong and missing the main problem.
Wrong because yeah, you can find yourself in situation without Internet, even if they are temporary and few between.
And missing the main problem, which is about the PRINCIPLE. I should NOT be required anything but what is strictly necessary for the game to run. Internet connection for the solo part is not necessary, hence it should not be required. Year by year, software become more restrictive, and through being used of being abused, the sheeps that I denounced progressively becomes willing victim of this by supporting their own restriction.

I know, I went for months at a time in Iraq without internet and I can say that I could still play every single one of my games without fail. I was able to reliably start Steam and play my games without an internet connection so you still have not proven to me how Steam ruins the gaming experience. I have shown and explained the many ways in which digital distribution and Steam enhance the gaming experience.

I also fail to see how I am a mindless sheep just because my personal experience and the experience of those around me has been amazing. I'm sorry that I don't feel bad for someone whose computer doesn't do well with Steam. Yes, you do need an internet connection to install the game, but you do not need one to play the game. This is a minor inconvenience at worst, and it surly isn't something to waste time getting angry over.

You bring up needing an internet connection to play a single player game. How many times do I have to show this is not true at all? Or are you just going to ignore the evidence I post so you can keep perpetuating your lies about Steam? You strike me as the kind of person who would have supported the Catholic Church's decision to put Galileo on house arrest for saying the earth revolves around the sun.

I've also never once heard of anyone having their games "remotely deactivated" for absolutely no reason. The people that have had their access to software deactivated are the ones who do something illegal with their software such as pirating or allowing others to access their Steam account and install games without paying for them. Basically, if you just mind your own business and play your games you don't get hassled. If you start doing things you shouldn't be doing then you get your games taken away from you. Didn't your parents ever teach you that if you don't play nice you get your toys taken away? It's pretty much the same concept here.

 

[Akka]

I know, I went for months at a time in Iraq without internet and I can say that I could still play every single one of my games without fail. I was able to reliably start Steam and play my games without an internet connection so you still have not proven to me how Steam ruins the gaming experience.

I don't remember saying that Steam ruined the "gaming experience". I said it trampled over consumer's rights. You could start Steam and play the game already installed, yep.
Could you have installed a game requiring Steam ? No, because it requires Internet connection.
Does Steam datamine your info on your computer ? Yes. Your argument may be "I don't notice" or "I don't care", but that's not an argument about Steam not being invasive, that's just stating a fact about you not caring about.
Can Steam deactivate your game at will and is the EULA stating they can do it ? Yes. The fact they don't do it is one thing, but the fact they CAN and have the theorical RIGHT TO is not something I'm willing to consider as meaningless or not worth being mad about.

I also fail to see how I am a mindless sheep just because my personal experience and the experience of those around me has been amazing.

Probably because it wasn't my point.
My point about people being "sheeps" is that people don't care about their consumer's rights being trampled upon as long as it's convenient and/or they don't notice.
Steam is choke-full of things that should never happen, but people don't care because they are just (for now) a minor annoyance, or something they don't realize/care about (see the first part of my answer above about datamining or ability to deactivate the game, it's exactly what I'm talking about).

I'm sorry that I don't feel bad for someone whose computer doesn't do well with Steam. Yes, you do need an internet connection to install the game, but you do not need one to play the game. This is a minor inconvenience at worst, and it surly isn't something to waste time getting angry over.

Yes it's a minor inconvenience. No it's not a waste of time getting angry over.

The slippery slope is based on minor inconveniences adding up. Ubisoft and Blizzard are already pushing for permanent Internet connection. With the growing majority of people having access to cheap and permanent broadband, they can make seem this new push as another "minor inconvenience". And so on.

What infuriate me is the casualness with which people shrug about their consumer's rights, just because it's only a "minor inconvenience", and how much they seem to not care about where they are headed (violating privacy seems pretty major to me, and it's becoming more and more pervasive, with more and more people saying "I don't care").

You bring up needing an internet connection to play a single player game. How many times do I have to show this is not true at all?

I bring up needing an Internet connection to INSTALL a single player game.
I've already pointed it this very difference to you, BTW. I may be agressive, but ignoring what someone says to put words in his mouth is a sure way to provoke and justify such agressivity.

You strike me as the kind of person who would have supported the Catholic Church's decision to put Galileo on house arrest for saying the earth revolves around the sun.

Can you explain me how you link "caring about your rights" with "fighting against science" ?
For all the accusations about how I'm not nice, this scream pure, raw, ad hominem to me.

I've also never once heard of anyone having their games "remotely deactivated" for absolutely no reason.

Cf the first part of my answer : the problem is not that they do it, the problem is that they are allowed to do it.

The people that have had their access to software deactivated are the ones who do something illegal with their software such as pirating or allowing others to access their Steam account and install games without paying for them. Basically, if you just mind your own business and play your games you don't get hassled. If you start doing things you shouldn't be doing then you get your games taken away from you. Didn't your parents ever teach you that if you don't play nice you get your toys taken away? It's pretty much the same concept here.

Yeah, it's pretty much the same concept : people being treated as children by a company, and accepting it.
Sorry, Valve isn't my dad, and I don't intend to ever let it becomes him.

 

[Maniacal]

Akka, I'd love to see you take this issue to court (and you'd have my full, honest support in it too).

EDIT: Quote removed because I never intended to quote it in the first place, had no reply and am unsure how it got into my post.

Why did you just sidestep the other bigger issue? Why do I need to run Steam to play a game? Origin, which people whine about, is better then steam with this.

Not having a response to something that doesn't need to be responded to yet again is not sidestepping the issue. Origin is still almost brand new (and little more than a glorified EA Download Manager) and will be required to run with more and more EA games (which is entirely pointless for the time being anyway as unlike Steam it doesn't keep track of achievements, hours played, screenshots, etc). As it is it only is required to run for BF3 and there really is no reason why.

That isn't to say it wouldn't be great to be able to run games without Steam running as usual in Offline mode (or just a vastly streamlined, simpler and less buggy offline mode at the very least) and most of its best features rely on an internet connection anyway. However when online I couldn't care less because I'll have Steam running anyway since I find it to be incredibly useful.

Impulse does not have its own DRM and does not have to run to play games bought through Impulse ... unless things have changed since Gamestop took over.

Yeah it has been a while since I used it and forgot about that. I don't think GameStop has changed that, not yet anyway.

I would love to see a comparison of Civ V running somehow without steam versus with steam. I don't know about you, but as satisfactory as my computer's performance generally is -- granted, its not a high end machine and wasn't even when the hardware was purchased about four years ago -- turn processing in Civ V easily exceeds a minute on a decent-sized map toward the Industrial era. I'd be willing to bet several seconds would be shaved if the game could run without Steam leeching resources.

Considering Steam has absolutely no influence on the singleplayer part of Civ5 aside from achievements, rarely takes up 100 MBs of RAM (if that, currently it is running at 20 MBs which is completely negligible with 4 gigs of RAM), and that the Mac version from the Appstore that doesn't have Steam (or multiplayer) runs almost exactly the same as the Steam version I'd say no.

Civ5 is just poorly optimized.

And even if the difference is minor, its still my point -- Steam leeches a bit here, Adobe a bit there, every program constantly running even when not being used is resources that could otherwise be put toward, say, reducing the ridiculous amount of time it takes to process a turn (granted a number of people, myself included, put a fair amount of blame on Firaxis for lousy, inefficient programming ... but the fact so much software, like Steam, is there leeching resources even when not being used [in Steam's case to browse or buy games] is insult to injury. Feels like 'everyone else does this, so let's do it too' right up there with 'everyone else just litters this park we enjoy, so let's do it too!').

If anywhere from ~20 MBs (completely closed but still running in the tray with no games running) to ~100 MBs (all of its windows open and store webpage loaded) affects your computer at all you should not only upgrade from Windows 98/2000 but get a computer with more than 512 MBs of RAM. You are also more than free (and capable) to shut off Steam when you are not using it as well as making sure other unnecessary process are not running.

I remember specifically the December before last. There was no offline start option and Civ V was inaccessible and unplayable for more than a day, I think it was when some Call of Duty iteration (not sure, as I don't play CoD) debuted and Steam's servers seemed to be overloaded. Civ V tried to patch but couldn't. I know I wasn't the only one, several others complained about the same thing on the forum. Steam has been around for several years, you consider that 'the early bumpy days' just a little over a year ago?

I remember playing whatever Steam game I wanted to just fine that day Valve has also upgraded their servers over the last year as well, and I don't recall there being problems like that when MW3 released last November, or Skyrim.

 

[G-Max]

ab hominen

*facepalm*

Origin is still almost brand new (and little more than a glorified EA Download Manager) and will be required to run with more and more EA games

After the horrors of Madness Returns and Tiberian Twilight, I've sworn to never buy another EA game again. I actually should have learned my lesson after Tiberium Wars (I skipped Generals because I knew it would be crap)... but yeah, lesson learned. If I ever upgrade to a full WoW account, it will be solely for the purpose of giving the middle finger to EA by supporting Vivendi.

 

[Maniacal]

. If I ever upgrade to a full WoW account, it will be solely for the purpose of giving the middle finger to EA by supporting Vivendi.

Vivendi has absolutely NOTHING to do with WoW anymore as they merged with Activision Blizzard, and Activision is even WORSE than EA.

 

[Akka]

*facepalm*

Corrected

 

[G-Max]

Vivendi has absolutely NOTHING to do with WoW anymore

LOLWUT? Vivendi owns Activision Blizzard. Activision Blizzard runs WoW. How can they possibly have nothing to do with each other?

as they merged with Activision Blizzard

Correction: Vivendi Games merged with Activision Blizzard. Vivendi Games was a subsidiary of Vivendi Universal, now known simply as Vivendi.

Activision is even WORSE than EA

EA bought Westwood, forced them to release Tiberian Sun before it was finished, produced the completely nonsensical Red Alert 2 and C&C-in-name-only Generals, then liquidated Westwood and drove the entire C&C franchise into the ground with the increasingly horrible Tiberium Wars, Red Alert 3, and Tiberian Twilight. What has Activision done that could possibly compare, aside from breeding a generation of CoD-tards?

 

[Thrawn]

LOLWUT? Vivendi owns Activision Blizzard. Activision Blizzard runs WoW.

Actually, Activision Blizzard owns both Activision and Blizzard Entertainment. Blizzard runs WoW. You're right on Vivendi being the majority owner of Activision Blizzard though.