Will it be steam based?

[Modiga-Disabled]

I'm just an uber Steam fanboy. Probably to the extent I'll buy something off Steam, even if I can get it cheaper at retail because I can download it in less time than ordering it online would take and I don't have to worry about disks in the future if I ever feel like playing it again.

 

[AlpsStranger]

I don't think digital distribution is the future.

Your bitterness betrays you. You *do* think it might be the future and you resent it

I'm a pretty big Steam/DDisto advocate myself, but I can respect that you aren't. What I cannot respect is the bare assertion that it is "not the future" when all the evidence says that it is.

EDIT: The Xbox Live Arcade is nothing but a big test market for going 100% digital. I will not be surprised if the consoles of 2020 don't have disk drives.

 

[The_J]

I don't understand why anyone would hate steam. Ultra convenient, no disks,

No disks in exchange to a force account, bound to a company.
I prefer the disks, i can do with them, whatever i want, and nobodys says me, what to do with them.

automatic updates

I'm sitting here on my gaming pc, and it has an ultra slow internet connection.
An automatic update over this conncetion, like for example for BtS 3.19 would last 5 hours.
Thanks, i can use the internet conncetion at the university to get it in some minutes. A forced update over an account would annoy me endless.

 

[Afforess]

I'm sitting here on my gaming pc, and it has an ultra slow internet connection.
An automatic update over this conncetion, like for example for BtS 3.19 would last 5 hours.
Thanks, i can use the internet conncetion at the university to get it in some minutes. A forced update over an account would annoy me endless.

Automatic Updates != Forced Updates. You can turn that off.

 

[Chalks]

No disks in exchange to a force account, bound to a company.
I prefer the disks, i can do with them, whatever i want, and nobodys says me, what to do with them.

Bound to a company in what way?

Steam has an offline mode, so you can play all your offline games without an internet connection... so what, you object to the valve company name being related to the game? But 2kgames and firaxis are cool? I don't understand. You dislike games that have been tainted by any company?

And obviously, like the other guy said, you don't HAVE to utilise their automatic update feature if you're connecting to the internet from 1990 - but you can play games while the updates download anyway so who cares if it takes 5 hours? It can run in the background and keep all your games up to date without any interaction. My launcher is just sitting there in the task bar and I know that I'll be instantly running the latest patch for all my games when ever I feel like playing them.

 

[Lord Tirian]

Bound to a company in what way?

You're forgetting his user title, paranoid maniac!

But seriously, I can see where he's coming from:
a) You and your games potentially trackable by a Valve (since Steam will establish a connection at least once for the first validation) - and you need to hand out your e-mail address, though that's more on the paranoia side (and then, you shouldn't use the internet anyway, unless you're surfing on TOR all the time).
b) You're required to have an internet connection to even install the game (since you need the validate it once), meaning if you don't have internet, you're out of luck. That's horsehockey, because not everybody has/wants internet.
c) It also means you're bound to the goodwill of Valve if they go belly-up - my old MoO2 CDs still allow me to play it, despite the implosion of Microprose. With Valve/Steam... only if they're nice enough to release appropriate no-Steam patches etc.
d) It is encouraging a shift towards a digital-only distribution.

Now, I have to say, these are mostly theoretical points - I have made great experiences with Steam and wouldn't mind the usage per se, but it still leaves a bitter aftertaste, since it's not my choice (for example, opt-in schemes are things I dig, like Sins of a Solar Empire - it works with the CD only, but if you sign up to Impulse, you get patches and can download the game again, as often as you want to, that's ultra-convenient and still nice for people who don't want to do that).

Cheers, LT.

 

[Chalks]

a) You and your games potentially trackable by a Valve (since Steam will establish a connection at least once for the first validation) - and you need to hand out your e-mail address, though that's more on the paranoia side (and then, you shouldn't use the internet anyway, unless you're surfing on TOR all the time).

Well, I guess it's probably a good thing I'm not trying to hide what games I play.. (?) And if you're worried about steam spamming you (which they don't) you can always just use a throwaway email address for it.

b) You're required to have an internet connection to even install the game (since you need the validate it once), meaning if you don't have internet, you're out of luck. That's horsehockey, because not everybody has/wants internet.

Forgive me for assuming that I'm probably not currently conversing with any of those people on this internet forum.

c) It also means you're bound to the goodwill of Valve if they go belly-up - my old MoO2 CDs still allow me to play it, despite the implosion of Microprose. With Valve/Steam... only if they're nice enough to release appropriate no-Steam patches etc.

That's pretty far fetched. Not that game companies never go bust, but valve is extremely successful and they are tied to so many third party games that they are probably even legally obliged to allow people to continue to play their games if they go under. This applies to pretty much all DRM these days anyway and Steam is one of the most unobtrusive out there - it's not like we're talking about Ubisoft's ******ed "disconnect from the net while playing a single player game and you lose your progress since the last save". I'd certainly trust Steam to stay afloat more than I'd trust 2k or firaxis.

d) It is encouraging a shift towards a digital-only distribution.

Welcome to the future. Assuming that gamers without internet connections are a tiny minority that is only shrinking, what is wrong with digital only distribution?

 

[Afforess]

c) It also means you're bound to the goodwill of Valve if they go belly-up - my old MoO2 CDs still allow me to play it, despite the implosion of Microprose. With Valve/Steam... only if they're nice enough to release appropriate no-Steam patches etc.

Actually, I see this as a good thing. Valve, barring the apocalypse in 2012, has proven they are here to stay. Meanwhile, EA and Ubisoft have shut down activation servers 2-3 years after games come out, saying F U to fans.

 

[Lord Tirian]

Actually, I see this as a good thing. Valve, barring the apocalypse in 2012, has proven they are here to stay. Meanwhile, EA and Ubisoft have shut down activation servers 2-3 years after games come out, saying F U to fans.

True, Steam is definitely the lesser evil here! I'd rather see Steam than any other insane online DRM (e.g. what the hell is wrong with you, Ubisoft!?). And it comes with a few cool extra perks.

But my cynicism (and I'm not that old, I'm not even out of uni yet!) makes me afraid: back then, people would probably have said the same about Interplay, Virgin Interactive or Spectrum HoloByte... now they're only living an undead existence as acquired once-famous brands.

Besides, there's the wholly political (and rather hypothetical, in this case) issue of privacy - but that's more a matter of principles etc. and is less important here (because, ultimately, games are something fairly trivial).

Cheers, LT.

 

[deanej]

valve is extremely successful and they are tied to so many third party games that they are probably even legally obliged to allow people to continue to play their games if they go under

They are now. But being successful now doesn't mean they will be 10 years from now. Collapse comes suddenly as often as not. Three years ago one would have been called insane for having so much as a fleeting thought that housing prices would not go up forever and ever.

I don't think they would be legally obligated to release a no-steam patch if they go under. Most game companies want to limit how long people can play so they will be forced to buy the new version that is exactly the same but with better graphics.

 

[azzaman333]

As I have thoroughly explained above, nothing of this worked when I bought the game because the distributor (sega), the developer (theCreativeAssembly) and the provider of Steam (Valve) rushed a sloppy release thus angering a great number of their fans.

Then you're doing it wrong.

Do they really? Maybe it's because they have had no experience of their own with Steam.

I know a lot more people who haven't had an issue with steam than those who have. I've been using steam to play various games for over 4 years without any major problems like you have experienced.

 

[negZero]

True, Steam is definitely the lesser evil here! I'd rather see Steam than any other insane online DRM (e.g. what the hell is wrong with you, Ubisoft!?). And it comes with a few cool extra perks.

But my cynicism (and I'm not that old, I'm not even out of uni yet!) makes me afraid: back then, people would probably have said the same about Interplay, Virgin Interactive or Spectrum HoloByte... now they're only living an undead existence as acquired once-famous brands.

Besides, there's the wholly political (and rather hypothetical, in this case) issue of privacy - but that's more a matter of principles etc. and is less important here (because, ultimately, games are something fairly trivial).

Cheers, LT.

Valve has gone on record that if they ever do go out of business and have to shutdown Steam, there going to unlock all games brought off of it.

Valve we care about our paying customers

 

[Shiggs713]

steam rocks but for big title games I still prefer a hard copy.

 

[the343danny]

Steam will be awesome, just having it be required I know will piss people off, and many people wont buy it, which means less money for Firaxis (they deserve it) and less people playing, leading to less demand for good mods.

But... people here are complaining about Empire. IMO that was more of a CA mess up, and the entire game was a mess. Now look at Napoleon. I havent heard of an issue with Steam registration, and the game is really bug free. Coincidence? I think not. Not to mention Steam waay improved multiplayer and even allowed drop-in battles (a friend can drop in and command your enemies army) in single player campaigns

 

[cspyr0]

I agree with most of you guys that Steam is awesome. I'll definitely be buying Civ5 on it assuming there's no additional DRM.

The only legit reason I can see to hate Steam is requiring an internet connection to activate and download the game, and that you have to make an account with them. But if you've been keeping an eye on the big titles coming out of Take Two, you'll notice a growing trend of requiring Windows Live and/or other online measures that have the same problems. I guarantee that non-Steam versions of Civ5 will have something annoying like that at release.

 

[Chalks]

I don't think they would be legally obligated to release a no-steam patch if they go under. Most game companies want to limit how long people can play so they will be forced to buy the new version that is exactly the same but with better graphics.

Although this may be true, unless you are theorising that steam will go down after nobody has released a game on it for 6 months, there WILL be LOTS of companies with a bunch of games on there that have only been out a few months - some only a few weeks. Hundreds of thousands of copies sold through steam in the first week, no doubt, then POP none of them work any more.

After looking into it, it appears that they're not obliged to fix it, however, they already have code to disable authentication:

"Unless there was some situation I don't understand, we would presumably disable authentication before any event that would preclude the authentication servers from being available." He added, "We've tested disabling authentication and it works.

[Source]

 

[The_J]

Lord Tirian, Deanej .

Automatic Updates != Forced Updates. You can turn that off.

Ah, sorry, didn't know that.
But is there the possibility just to download a patch for a steam game without using the automatic update?

And obviously, like the other guy said, you don't HAVE to utilise their automatic update feature if you're connecting to the internet from 1990 - but you can play games while the updates download anyway so who cares if it takes 5 hours? It can run in the background and keep all your games up to date without any interaction. My launcher is just sitting there in the task bar and I know that I'll be instantly running the latest patch for all my games when ever I feel like playing them.

My connection is also instable. It sometimes crashes randomly after a half hour, and then i have to restart my computer to get it work again.
-> This thing really matters for me.

Well, I guess it's probably a good thing I'm not trying to hide what games I play.. (?) And if you're worried about steam spamming you (which they don't) you can always just use a throwaway email address for it.

That you can circumnavigate a thing is clear to me, but it's not good. Is the same like to say, if you don't want to get observed by the state, then go into the underground.
I don't want to circumnavigate these things. I don't want to be forced to use something, which i do not want.

Forgive me for assuming that I'm probably not currently conversing with any of those people on this internet forum.

That you're talking here to people in an internet forum, doesn't mean, that they have internet .
I've used for more than a year just the internet connection from my university without having internet at my gaming pc. I've also been active here for that time.
And at this time, i wanted to try out the spore demo, and i couldn't, because i didn't have an internet connection. This sucks.

Welcome to the future. Assuming that gamers without internet connections are a tiny minority that is only shrinking, what is wrong with digital only distribution?

Some people just like hardcopies more.
A disk is something which i really own, there i can feel that.
It also gives the possibility that you'll get a nice manual, which i really want for civ (interesting, that nobody has made a thread about this already).

 

[mdwh]

The criticism here is not digital distribution, but DRM - Digital "Rights" (their rights, not yours) Management. Digital distribution may be a future, but I sure hope that Digital Restrictions, er Rights Management isn't the future.

* As pointed out, it isn't always cheaper, depending on your region. Also I believe it's possible to allow region locking for games. Indeed, be careful of doing this:

Make sure you set your profile to United States. You also have to pay in US dollars.

Otherwise you get lumped on the Aussie Steam server with no access to R18+ games, and twice the price games. Oh, and a lot of DLC is not available on the Aussie server.

Examples:
Dragon Age: Origins. From EB games in Australia == $109.95 AUD
Dragon Age: Origins. From Steam == $49.99 USD =~ $56.18 AUD

Otherwise you risk being locked out (e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Orange_Box#Region-specific_versions ).

* Patches are installed whether you want them or not (e.g., issues such as incompatibilities or increasing the requirements).

* No resale is possible.

* Is it true that some games can have activation limits, so you can only install or reinstall a number of times?

* On a similar note, good luck with (re)installing if the activation servers are no longer available. There have been numerous cases of DRM system failing, when the system is closed down for whatever reason:

Actually, I see this as a good thing. Valve, barring the apocalypse in 2012, has proven they are here to stay. Meanwhile, EA and Ubisoft have shut down activation servers 2-3 years after games come out, saying F U to fans.

But you're still betting on them staying around, and not shutting down any activation.

Although this may be true, unless you are theorising that steam will go down after nobody has released a game on it for 6 months, there WILL be LOTS of companies with a bunch of games on there that have only been out a few months - some only a few weeks. Hundreds of thousands of copies sold through steam in the first week, no doubt, then POP none of them work any more.

Yes, exactly.

But with current games, presumably the companies would secure alternative distribution possibilities, and maybe offer something to users. If you're lucky. But no chance for older games.

 

[Adam7Eight]

I use Steam, but only to purchase older games that are harder to find and are usually under $20.

If it's relatively new I have to have a copy of it in my hands though.

 

[Chalks]

LMy connection is also instable. It sometimes crashes randomly after a half hour, and then i have to restart my computer to get it work again.
-> This thing really matters for me.

The issue here clearly has nothing to do with steam, but to do with your computer system. You can't say steam is bad because your computer is fundamentally broken. If your hard disk breaks are you going to argue that it is a bad things that games need to be installed, and that they should all just run off the CD because your hard disk is broken?

That you're talking here to people in an internet forum, doesn't mean, that they have internet .
I've used for more than a year just the internet connection from my university without having internet at my gaming pc. I've also been active here for that time.
And at this time, i wanted to try out the spore demo, and i couldn't, because i didn't have an internet connection. This sucks.

Digital distribution methods are bad for people without internet access, but fortunately they are a tiny minority. Like directx is bad for people who want to play their games on windows 3.1. There comes a time when you have to decide whether or not you want to live in a technological stone age or if you want to be able to enjoy the latest stuff. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be that hard for you to acquire a stable internet connection on a system capable of playing the game.

On the tangent of spore, however, I think you dodged a bullet there. It was a terrible game.

Some people just like hardcopies more.
A disk is something which i really own, there i can feel that.
It also gives the possibility that you'll get a nice manual, which i really want for civ (interesting, that nobody has made a thread about this already).

Even if you do really really like disks (they're shiny after all), this is not a "steam is bad" reason, but rather "physical distribution is also good".

Fortunately - just because a game is on steam, it doesn't mean it can't be physically distributed. Half-life 2 was. Every major steam powered game is still physically distributed as well as digitally distributed.

The addition of steam to the mix means that when you next come to install the game, you don't need to dig out your CD (which you've probably lost) or the CD key (which you've definitely lost) to play again.

But with current games, presumably the companies would secure alternative distribution possibilities, and maybe offer something to users. If you're lucky. But no chance for older games.

Alternative distribution possibilities are not the issue if they've already distributed the game to thousands of people. They've already bought the game - selling it to them again through an alternative distribution channel is somewhat missing the point.

The resolution to this issue would be for steam to disable activation, which they can do. And they would do it for every game rather than just picking random ones to deactivate while knowing that all the others will be unplayable.