[POLL] Would you use Steam for Rebirth?

[EmperorJon]

A like the alternate one too

[StarSword]

^The evolution of a laugh.

[Nanook]

Let's get back to the issue of Steam and stop debating the debaters. If you have nothing constructive to add, please don't bother posting. The last few posts are essentially spam. Any more and they will be split and locked.

[weezl]

But at the same time, gamers have an equally legitimate interest in not having their games being bound to Steam. Even if Steam works fine today, this may not always be the case, and the recent Terms Of Use change indicates a rather patronizing attitude on Valve's part.

No no.. some gamers.

Games, like movies, like anything.. have a shelf life related to when they were made and how much they cost and how much I personally value them. I actually love Steam. It makes getting PC games ultra-convenient. And in the years I've been with Steam its just been a rocking system. Brick and Mortar is a fail at this point.. and Amazon isn't bad (I've certainly used it recently for a game that I couldn't get on Steam), but its just not convenient.

I appreciate that some folks have hate for it.. I personally couldn't care less if you hate it because of some rational point or because you like tin-foil hats.. to each his own (and respect from me for knowing what you like).. but lets keep the 'all gamers x' out of the argument. I don't know of anything where 'all gamers x' when it involves a choice. You are most definitely NOT speaking for me.

[weezl]

In short, Egosoft has an IMHO legitimate interest in Steam because it might improve their financial situation.
But at the same time, gamers have an equally legitimate interest in not having their games being bound to Steam.

Definitely sums it up well. What is everyone continuing to argue about?

First off, it does not sum it up well. Not everyone agrees, nor will they ever.. the only proof in this thread is that folks have their own reasons for preferring on thing over another. For some Steam rocks, for others its the work of the devil, and for others is a compromise that doesn't truly fit them, but it at least works.

I realize I'm stating the obvious, but its why the thread doesn't really have an end. Arguing about good/bad with Steam is like arguing about whether you like vanilla or not. Its just about personal preference.

I tend to see some of the bashing of Steam in the same light as I see other arguments about companies... its slightly paranoid. Its easy to come to bad conclusions and fear about the future, and it seems like a lot of the media/politicians rag on corporations really really bad.. that said, I HAVE seen legitimate points regarding negative aspects of what Steam provides/doesn't provide. At the end of the day we all have to make our own decisions about what we value, and go with that..

And so you understand my skin in this game, this is my chain of value:

I take very much a comparative perspective on personal entertainment.. a movie in the US for one person is $10.. two for $20. So if my wife and I go to a movie for 3 hours its about $7/hr. If I spend $40 on a game, I expect about 3-4 hours of entertainment at least.. if I get more it rocks, if less, I didn't pay enough attention to reviews/etc./or its just luck.

Now a game that goes significantly north of 40 hours or so is just outstanding in my opinion.. an extreme value for your dollar. Every hour after that is just pure gravy. Most people dont' reflect on that.. but think.. even if you really really love a movie and buy it on DVD, are you going to watch it 12-14 times in the first year? That is the level that some games actually reach in a week or two! Some games I've logged 400+ hours.. all for that measly $30-$40 I spent at the beginning.

Its all well and good to want to keep your games and get value out of them.. but I personally try to keep my perspective concerning how much this hobby costs and the comparative costs of other entertainment choices. I think, given what I've spent on books vs. games, games might actually be the better value! And I LOVE reading and have many books I've read multiple times!

And... for the record.. I want X-Rebirth on Steam.. (if that wasn't already obvious from my posts). I have all the rest of the X games on Steam.. and have enjoyed them all tremendously. I'm a seriously busy adult, and have rebuilt my system a number of times.. steam just installs, I download my favorite games, and I'm off the races again! And just to put the big period at the end of this sentence.. I'm an amateur historian.. I tend to make judgements about people/companies based on past behavior/statistics.. not guessing about the future. At this juncture Valve has built a lot of respect in the industry and amongst their customers, made great choices for gamers, and is in superb financial condition. It treats developers with respect and gives them extra profit, lowering the cost to us for many titles. This is all I need to know to decide I want to give them all my business. Its really as simple as that. If its a choice between Amazon/Brick and Mortar/Steam, I'll pick steam every day of the week. My loyalty is based on their past/current performance, not worrying about what might happen.

[weezl]

Maybe one day Ego will return to the good old days of providing space sims that are accessable to all, instead of shafting their own consumer base with bull third party solutions that are, at the end of the day, only put in place to maximise their profit. Good old fashioned greed.

Meanwhile, my cash goes to Good old Games.

So economic realities aren't important to you? Just a hint here..

Based on some posts in this thread, and general info available out on the internet.. some basic math is in order..

From brick and mortar, at a $40 price point, a normal company at the end of the day will make $4-5 per copy sold (and I think I'm being generous here..).

From Steam, since its a 70-30 split, if they can successfully sell at that same price point, that is $28 per copy.

Now.. those same companies have to cover their costs.. and hopefully make enough money to invest in some growth. based on the numbers above, a company that uses steam only has to sell 20% the number of copies that it would need in brick and mortar to make the same amount of money. In a genre like space sims, that could mean the difference between have a moderate success and going out of business. And consider that since they can make so much extra per copy, they actually can choose a lower price point and attempt to sell more.

I for one prefer EgoSoft making money, staying in business, supporting their products.. and I figure if the make extra, they will either:

line their pockets (fine with me.. great game.. they deserve it)
expand their company (more preferred by me, since I like what they do).

My question to you is, how can you not see this? We all need money to eat, and extra money gives us opportunities to do more of what we love.. Egosoft makes games.. my guess is extra dollars means more great stuff from Egosoft... Your argument seems to indicate that you'd turn down that next raise in preference to being 'not greedy'... or am I misreading you?

Over the years I've always tried to provide maximum value to my employers.. since it translates to 1) more interesting work (good); and 2) much better pay (GREAT!). I'm guessing at least point #2 is important to you.. or you are rich enough to not care about it..

[Sibilantae]

First off, it does not sum it up well. Not everyone agrees, nor will they ever.. the only proof in this thread is that folks have their own reasons for preferring on thing over another. For some Steam rocks, for others its the work of the devil, and for others is a compromise that doesn't truly fit them, but it at least works.

If I decided to go against Steam right now for the reasons that people like Rabiator and Eladan especially have been putting forward, it would most certainly be for a legitimate reason. It took many pages of debate to get to that point.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but towards the end of the last thread (before it was split into this one), we got to what was pretty much a stalemate: "anti-steamers don't like the changeable TOS and account-binding [among other things], pro-steamers don't mind it/can live with it."

If there is at least one legitimate reason not to use Steam, which is generally applicable, then it is a true statement that gamers have a legitimate reason not to use Steam . What they choose, based not only on this reason but on others, of course is up to them.

So, in short, Egosoft has a legitimate interest in Steam - I believe we can all (mostly) agree on that.
If there is at least one legitimate reason not to use Steam, then gamers have a legitimate interest in not having their games bound to Steam. Whether they ascribe to this interest is another matter.
I might disagree with Rabiator that gamers do not have the interest in general, but rather a reason for said interest, but I think that comes down to quibbling.

[Rabiator der II.]

But at the same time, gamers have an equally legitimate interest in not having their games being bound to Steam. Even if Steam works fine today, this may not always be the case, and the recent Terms Of Use change indicates a rather patronizing attitude on Valve's part.

No no.. some gamers.

Games, like movies, like anything.. have a shelf life related to when they were made and how much they cost and how much I personally value them. I actually love Steam. It makes getting PC games ultra-convenient. And in the years I've been with Steam its just been a rocking system. Brick and Mortar is a fail at this point.. and Amazon isn't bad (I've certainly used it recently for a game that I couldn't get on Steam), but its just not convenient.

Granted, some gamers don't mind Steam. But I still think there are enough who dislike it, and that their reasons are valid.

Considering the shelf life thing, I accept that as long as it is an unintended side effect of technology changing. For instance, current Windows versions no longer supporting DOS games. That is something a games developer in the early 1990s could not have planned for.

What I really dislike is if shelf life limiting factors are built into the game without a reason that lies in the game design. For instance, a dependency on an internet service like Steam for single player games .
I don't mind it for MMOs by the way. Those need a central server for legitimate reasons .

[eladan]

From brick and mortar, at a $40 price point, a normal company at the end of the day will make $4-5 per copy sold (and I think I'm being generous here..).

From Steam, since its a 70-30 split, if they can successfully sell at that same price point, that is $28 per copy.

Now.. those same companies have to cover their costs.. and hopefully make enough money to invest in some growth. based on the numbers above, a company that uses steam only has to sell 20% the number of copies that it would need in brick and mortar to make the same amount of money. In a genre like space sims, that could mean the difference between have a moderate success and going out of business. And consider that since they can make so much extra per copy, they actually can choose a lower price point and attempt to sell more.

I for one prefer EgoSoft making money, staying in business, supporting their products.. and I figure if the make extra, they will either:

line their pockets (fine with me.. great game.. they deserve it)
expand their company (more preferred by me, since I like what they do).

Your point sounds like a good one, if you only think of your customers as 'potential sources of profit', and don't take into account that they may have different desires or circumstances.

One issue with your argument is that if Egosoft distribute their game exclusively on steam, they simply won't get $28 dollars of profit from me, because I can't play the game. Similarly, others, whether or not they have what others consider a legitimate reason not to use steam, they still won't be buying, so no profit from them, either.

Still another group, are those who will reluctantly use steam, though they would rather not. ES will get the money from them, but it may cause lasting ill will.

Call me crazy, but surely ES would be better off catering to all their fanbase, and at least getting $4-$5 dollars from me and others rather than $0? It also means keeping your customer base happy, which I seem to recall used to be considered good business sense (not so popular these days, for reasons which are still unclear to me.)

Apart from boxed copies, why not use another digital distributor, one whom many of the non-steam group would accept, like GOG? Still get the high return, and satisfy a further group of your customers. ES would even get the $28 dollars from me (and others) by doing that.

Someone from ES (probably CBJ) did mention that there is an extra cost to multiple methods of distribution. How high the cost is, only ES would know. Whether it's high enough to justify alienating a considerable proportion of your customer base, I'd be skeptical of. (The poll, whether accurate or not, at least establishes that there are a significant minority who won't buy the game on steam)

[perkint]

Someone from ES (probably CBJ) did mention that there is an extra cost to multiple methods of distribution. How high the cost is, only ES would know. Whether it's high enough to justify alienating a considerable proportion of your customer base, I'd be skeptical of. (The poll, whether accurate or not, at least establishes that there are a significant minority who won't buy the game on steam)

It's not just the distribution costs, although there are some. It is also the development costs. This is not a post trying to disagree with you, just trying to elaborate on what you mention, from what I remember from earlier posts/discussions.

1. Producing each box (along with manuals, etc) is a hard up front cost. Distributors obviously won't like this because they may produce 10,000 and only sell 5,000. Any form of digital distribution goes a long way towards solving this (including GOG as has been suggested more than once).

2. Steam is being used for XR probably for DRM (still not confirmed as far as I'm aware?) and for the SteamWorks API to provide in game functionality. Now you may not want the functionality (fairly sure the actual functionality from the API has not been confirmed, but things like in game browser, chat, etc are very likely) and I certainly don't. However, there is an obvious extra cost from ES's part to provide and support another version of the program with maybe alternate DRM and certainly updated coding to remove the API functionality.

And that's without even taking into account any possible clauses in the contract ES have with DeepSilver (confirmed a long time ago DS are using SteamWorks for all their games now) which prevent choice/would incur costs, or any similar clauses between Steam & DS (and therefore ES by implication in this case). We are not privy to either of those contracts or their terms.

So however disappointing it may be for some (me included, although I am fortunate enough that I can, will and do use Steam - doesn't mean I completely like it though!), I would have thought most can see how providing a Steam free version could cost Egosoft?

This obviously doesn't counter your point about whether it costs more than the loss of custom, but that one is relatively simple to (sort of) answer: Egosoft & DeepSilver are in the business of making & distributing Space Sims (and others, for DS). They probably have a better idea than anyone here what the costs are (and they know the terms of the contracts both are bound by) and how much custom they'll lose. If they believe it's economically viable and contractually possible, they'll do it. If it ain't, they won't!

All we can do is wait and see. And hope!

Oh, and is proven by the 100s of pages in the previous 4 iterations of this thread, we can whinge and argue about it whilst we're waiting

Tim

[weezl]

First off, it does not sum it up well. Not everyone agrees, nor will they ever.. the only proof in this thread is that folks have their own reasons for preferring on thing over another. For some Steam rocks, for others its the work of the devil, and for others is a compromise that doesn't truly fit them, but it at least works.

If I decided to go against Steam right now for the reasons that people like Rabiator and Eladan especially have been putting forward, it would most certainly be for a legitimate reason. It took many pages of debate to get to that point.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but towards the end of the last thread (before it was split into this one), we got to what was pretty much a stalemate: "anti-steamers don't like the changeable TOS and account-binding [among other things], pro-steamers don't mind it/can live with it."

If there is at least one legitimate reason not to use Steam, which is generally applicable, then it is a true statement that gamers have a legitimate reason not to use Steam . What they choose, based not only on this reason but on others, of course is up to them.

So, in short, Egosoft has a legitimate interest in Steam - I believe we can all (mostly) agree on that.
If there is at least one legitimate reason not to use Steam, then gamers have a legitimate interest in not having their games bound to Steam. Whether they ascribe to this interest is another matter.
I might disagree with Rabiator that gamers do not have the interest in general, but rather a reason for said interest, but I think that comes down to quibbling.

I didn't say YOU wouldn't have a legitimate reason, I'm objecting to the formulation 'gamers have a legitimate reason'.. that is a syllogism. It does not follow from the evidence and cannot be logically argued. Its why I said 'some gamers have a legitimate reason'. If its important to you, cool.. I may not agree but I can see your point.. I can also see it applies to a portion of gamers.. yup.. totally. But it has no effect on me (and further does NOT represent my view), and I'm pretty sure many gamers feel as I do (Steam subscribership numbers are in the multiple millions.. that doesn't exactly argue for all gamers disliking Steam), hence my original statement, which still stands.

I've seen these types of arguments literally for years in gamers forums where folks are trying to make some point the change a game based on less than factual evidence.. Some games have actually changed based on this type of stuff to the detriment of the game and its customer base! This point might seem minor, but its not. Given the evidence I see on this website alone, Steam is a clear win. And given the typical folks that would post in a forum like this, I'm guessing the winning percentage is lower that it would be if the poll was perfect (but its just a guess.. I couldn't possibly know!).

At the end of the day Egosoft must balance what it sees here with the need to service its non Steam oriented customer base, and its own needs to stay in business. Given the general state of the sandbox/space-sim market, they have a number of hard decisions to make. In an ideal world they could just do it all and everyone would be pleased.. but I doubt that is the case (although I hope it is!). This game, although appealing to me and folks on these forums, very much lives on the fringe (sadly). Most folks would rather play Call of Duty, WoW, etc. My arguments aren't meant to say those that don't want Steam should just go hang.. I just understand the realities Egosoft is facing.. and at the end of the day, I'd like to see them stay in business and feed their familes.

[eladan]

1. Producing each box (along with manuals, etc) is a hard up front cost. Distributors obviously won't like this because they may produce 10,000 and only sell 5,000. Any form of digital distribution goes a long way towards solving this (including GOG as has been suggested more than once).

I'd be surprised if ES don't produce a boxed version for Rebirth, as many steam users prefer not to have to download the whole game. Probably not an issue if they do, although there would be the added hassle of having two different boxed versions. Manual? What manual?

2. Steam is being used for XR probably for DRM (still not confirmed as far as I'm aware?) and for the SteamWorks API to provide in game functionality. Now you may not want the functionality (fairly sure the actual functionality from the API has not been confirmed, but things like in game browser, chat, etc are very likely) and I certainly don't. However, there is an obvious extra cost from ES's part to provide and support another version of the program with maybe alternate DRM and certainly updated coding to remove the API functionality.

The DRM is definitely a point. I have not yet seen anyone from ES subscribe to the idea that DRM is unnecessary, even though they generally remove it after a couple of years. Doubtful they would want to release without DRM of some kind (which means GOG is out unless ES/DS are convinced otherwise.)

About supporting two versions - difficult to comment on this except to say that if the game is written with steam calls interspersed throughout rather than keeping things tidy in separate modules, the devs should be shot. It should be easy to code steam to be optional, and making a copy with/without steam should be as easy as a #define STEAM. Should be. May not be, if the devs aren't tidy coders or are under too much pressure to keep things tidy.

And that's without even taking into account any possible clauses in the contract ES have with DeepSilver (confirmed a long time ago DS are using SteamWorks for all their games now) which prevent choice/would incur costs, or any similar clauses between Steam & DS (and therefore ES by implication in this case). We are not privy to either of those contracts or their terms.

Yep, agreed. That's my main worry, that there is a licensing deal in place that absolutely prevents anything but steam. If so, not much that can be done. (Gods I hate hate hate exclusivity deals. They're intrinsically anti-consumer.)

[Pesanur]

2. Steam is being used for XR probably for DRM (still not confirmed as far as I'm aware?) and for the SteamWorks API to provide in game functionality. Now you may not want the functionality (fairly sure the actual functionality from the API has not been confirmed, but things like in game browser, chat, etc are very likely) and I certainly don't. However, there is an obvious extra cost from ES's part to provide and support another version of the program with maybe alternate DRM and certainly updated coding to remove the API functionality.

I have mi doubts about this, most of the games studios that launched their late games as steam-only have been to use steam as DLC's delivery platform, you know, edit and unfinished or ridicously short game at high price, and ask more money to add the missing features or new missions.

[Slashman]

I have mi doubts about this, most of the games studios that launched their late games as steam-only have been to use steam as DLC's delivery platform, you know, edit and unfinished or ridicously short game at high price, and ask more money to add the missing features or new missions.

Yeah...I HATE that I only got 260 hours out of Skyrim with no DLC added. That was highway robbery!!

Seriously though, Steam or not, most games now use DLC. I've played several games over the past few years that have had extensive DLC that I have not felt compelled to get. Saint's Row the Third has a ridiculous number of DLC packs but the game is fine without them(actually better since they add a lot of over-powered weapons).

Fallout: New Vegas was fine without any of it's DLC and what was added was actually worth getting. Fallout 3 as well although there was one DLC that continued the story after the main game ended. Batman: Arkham City/Asylum had lots of DLC but nothing I'd classify as necessary or missing from the main game. Dues Ex:HR also had DLC but I have yet to feel like I'm missing it having only bought the base game. Orcs Must Die 1 and 2, Serious Sam 3 etc.

I think that dev studios are mostly aware enough now that they don't gut their games to a noticeable extent to encourage DLC sales. There are exceptions of course, but it still invalidates your argument that the main reason for Steam-only releases is DLC.

Also invalid is your argument that it's an excuse to release unfinished games. Egosoft hasn't exactly had a great track record with releasing bug-free and problem-free games, and Rebirth is their first full Steam-only title.

Also, no customer is entitled to free new content for a finished game after release. It's a great thing when a dev studio does it and it is to be encouraged, but it is not your right as a customer to keep getting more after you pay for a game. One could make the argument for patches to address bugs and broken features(if any), but new content is not a given.

[Deleted User]

2. Steam is being used for XR probably for DRM (still not confirmed as far as I'm aware?) and for the SteamWorks API to provide in game functionality. Now you may not want the functionality (fairly sure the actual functionality from the API has not been confirmed, but things like in game browser, chat, etc are very likely) and I certainly don't. However, there is an obvious extra cost from ES's part to provide and support another version of the program with maybe alternate DRM and certainly updated coding to remove the API functionality.

There would be no tangible extra cost in removing Steamworks DRM or API, other than disabling it in the first place.

Hence the no-steam executable for Albion Prelude.

[A5PECT]

There would be no tangible extra cost in removing Steamworks DRM or API, other than disabling it in the first place.

Hence the no-steam executable for Albion Prelude.

AP isn't an applicable analog to Rebirth in terms of Steam dependency. AP is based upon the original X3 engine, which was created without Steam integration.

Rebirth is a completely new engine, designed explicitly with Steam integration and even uses Steam's programming API. How integrated and how dependent the game is on the API is privy to Egosoft, apparently. But you can't claim that removing Steam from Rebirth will be easy just because removing Steam from AP was easy. The former is in a completely different situation regarding development and programming.

[StarSword]

And the broken record continues...

@fox jumps: Have you ever done any coding?

With programming you can't assume something is easy to do. As a computer science student and sometime modder of Escape Velocity, I can tell you that sometimes what looks like an easy job from the customer's perspective is a pain in the @$$ for the programmer.

[Deleted User]

There would be no tangible extra cost in removing Steamworks DRM or API, other than disabling it in the first place.

Hence the no-steam executable for Albion Prelude.

AP isn't an applicable analog to Rebirth in terms of Steam dependency. AP is based upon the original X3 engine, which was created without Steam integration.

Rebirth is a completely new engine, designed explicitly with Steam integration and even uses Steam's programming API. How integrated and how dependent the game is on the API is privy to Egosoft, apparently. But you can't claim that removing Steam from Rebirth will be easy just because removing Steam from AP was easy. The former is in a completely different situation regarding development and programming.

My statement still stands.

[Deleted User]

And the broken record continues...

@fox jumps: Have you ever done any coding?

With programming you can't assume something is easy to do. As a computer science student and sometime modder of Escape Velocity, I can tell you that sometimes what looks like an easy job from the customer's perspective is a pain in the @$$ for the programmer.

Understood. But Ego managed it after a backlash on these forums with Albion Prelude and I hear the guys over at the bay do it within 24 hours for free.

[Nanook]

....
Understood. But Ego managed it after a backlash on these forums with Albion Prelude and I hear the guys over at the bay do it within 24 hours for free.

If you're implying what I think you are, you'd be wise to not say another word along those lines. Otherwise, your stay here may be ending very soon.