Part three of Steam debate - split and archived.

[greypanther]

Good post quase.

You it seems are also stronger than I. I have given to an extent and now have three Steam games. I still will not buy direct from them, but I will reluctantly use them.

Of course with the steam free exe for AP, I remain hopeful that such will eventually appear for Rebirth, a year or two after launch. Egosoft have proven themselves to be way above average in the past and present, so I hope it will carry into the future.

[Slashman]

What remains to me is to not buy in the system at all, unless the policy changes. In case of Steam the people in this thread have opened my eyes and I decided that I will only use Steam for independent titles in the future. Many thanks to those who taught me this lesson.

So once again you are boycotting the system, by not actually boycotting the system. I thought you did that 20 pages back...

I am sick of it. Screw you Deep Silver, you totally lost me as a costumer for all your nice titles (e.g. King Arthur 2, Risen 2). Hopefully you will come to your senses soon enough before you close down like THQ my soon have to do. Best luck Egosoft!

That's right! Warn those large corporate entities not to invest millions on top of millions into casual/family games...errr...I mean Steamworks games. Sorry...alternate reality seeping in.

Do not take this personally, but I do not understand how one can willingly side with the big corporations rather than be on the customers side.

I know this might be hard to understand, but maybe some people are simply on the 'side' of getting a game they want and playing it. There may be people who have no agenda past playing a video game they like.

Further, there may exist folks who have no problem with the stated distribution system and have no desire to turn their non-existent aversion to it into a pointless crusade to 'fight the power' and 'stick it to the man'.

I personally don't have a problem with your opposition to Steam. I may not entirely agree with it, but I think its your right to take whatever stand you want with your ultimate right...which is to not consume something that you don't want or cannot use.

My stance is the same as always. If the horrors of account-bound software are so abhorrent to you that you feel you need to fight it, then you should do 3 things:

1) If you are in a country where EULA's of Steam and other developers using their platform are contrary to your country's laws, then bring it up with the relevant authorities in an attempt to have it corrected.

2) Do not consume from the service under any circumstances. You're feeding the machine if you do.

3) Start separate local and online campaigns to raise public awareness of the horror that is Steam and similar systems.


I strongly suspect that if you fall into the camp of people who cannot use Steam due to technical problems and internet connectivity/bandwidth reasons, then that is something that Egosoft is way more likely to try to address.

General public opinion of Steam isn't currently negative. You'd need to change that first, before Deepsilver/Egosoft relent on Steamworks altogether. That's just my opinion though...so take it for what it's worth.

Oh...here's something interesting: Football manager had a strong reaction to going Steamworks as well from its fans. It's currently the second most played game on Steam today.

[David Howland]

I would just add in ESs defence that after:-
1. Saying they could not do a disk version of RB for cost reasons and then producing a disk for AP.
2. Saying RB had to be exclusive Steam then producing the 'get rid of steam.exe' for AP.
I get the impression ES can do no more for us than what they have done, because they are contractually obliged to do so. So I hope they can do for RB what they have done for AP, because they can do no more. Lets just hope that this contractual obligation does not extend to all ESs games in the future?

[NUKLEAR-SLUG]

You Sir with your vehement defense of the way Steam and the other big publishers are trampling on customer rights, are one of the people that made me aware that the concept of account binding is absolutely wrong and it is on me to stop supporting this system. Thanks again for that.

You're welcome.

Do not take this personally, but I do not understand how one can willingly side with the big corporations rather than be on the customers side. It is like trying to understand Apple users and their same attitude towards people that say there are other, maybe even better products and ways to do something.

Why should I not side with a big corporation? Companies are not inherently evil entities. Certainly if a company's business practices regularly stray into the unethical/amoral then that company should be called to account. Refuse to support them, don't buy their products, etc. Support the ones that deserve it tho.

Egosoft for example is a company that supports it's consumers, has done for a long time, has many times given away freebies that they could easily have otherwise charged for and has shown no indication of changing that pattern of behaviour. In my opinion that makes them 'one of the good guys'. Valve too for much the same reasons.

Conversely why should it be the case that I must automatically side with the consumer? The customer, despite the old adage, is not 'always right'.

For example, if you owned a shop and I as a customer brought back a product after 6 months and demanded a refund would you accede to my demand because you're an evil corporate entity and the 'customer is always right'? Or would you point out the sign on your wall that clearly states your shop has a 30-day return policy so sorry, but no.

If I as a customer buy from your shop then I implicitly agree to your 30-day return policy/EULA. If I don't bother to read your return policy/EULA properly and just sign on the dotted line/Click OK then that's my fault for being so bloody stupid. I don't then get to tell you that, you know what, actually I don't really agree with your return policy/EULA so can I have my refund please?

If you install software on your machine then you agree to the licensing agreement that came with it. If you don't wish to abide by the licensing agreement then don't install it. You don't get to install it anyway and then at a later date decide, at your convenience, whether or not the rules should apply to you any more.

I would not have a problem if Deep Silver would publish the game on any digital platform available. I hear even Origin is open for third party publishers. Maybe use GfWL which is in my opinion also the better client than the Steam client because it is not as intrusive.

Deep Silver may well publish on other digital platforms but it will remain a Steamworks title even if they do because Steam is not just providing a distribution service, they are also providing an update/support service. As for GFWL, I dunno which version of that you used but it wasn't the one I did then because I'd be interested to know how you deem GFWL to be 'not as intrusive' as Steam.

I would just add in ESs defence that after:-
1. Saying they could not do a disk version of RB for cost reasons and then producing a disk for AP.
2. Saying RB had to be exclusive Steam then producing the 'get rid of steam.exe' for AP.

They didn't say they wouldn't produce a disk version, they said they wouldn't produce a disk only version. The disk version still requires registration on Steam. Likewise with Rebirth. At no point have they stated there will be no disk version, just that all versions, on whatever distribution media, will be Steam based.

[quase]

First off, I was only doing the same as you always claim to do. I am correcting false information about the situation of rights you have. If you care or not, does not interest me. I also do not care what you do with your money. If you keep on doing it the Steam-way though, I feel the need to show the impact of your action because it will influence me in the long term too. If only a few people start thinking about the implications of their actions, I am pleased.

There is no crusade or whatever paranoid conspiracy theory you think there is, to lower and ridicule my arguments. Why else would I still be buying stuff from Steam? Stacking from Tim Schafer just recently for example.
All I say that it is shortsighted and damaging our position as a customer. Working in a big corporation myself and dealing with "difficult" other corporation as our customers, I can assure you that the customer is and will always be king! Only the digital content industry seems to disagree and has the power to do so.
The reason for this is simple. If my customer is not pleased, he will go to another supplier. Now back to Steam, how do I get my game from another supplier again?

We can save us the hassle of discussion if Egosoft would announce that Rebirth is only a low budget title for less than 10 € because this is the maximum budget that goes into a Steam title. Although I changed my mind to only buy independent titles on Steam, I could make an exception if Rebirth will be for 10 € on Steam for its release. Deal?

By the way, Football Manager 2012 on Steam is a nice example of how account binding and content control works against a free market. The game is not available in my country on Steam. Maybe the football association did not pay for the rights to release the game here. Anyway, it is a pile of crap how most digital distribution is handled today.

[Slashman]

All I say that it is shortsighted and damaging our position as a customer. Working in a big corporation myself and dealing with "difficult" other corporation as our customers, I can assure you that the customer is and will always be king! Only the digital content industry seems to disagree and has the power to do so.
The reason for this is simple. If my customer is not pleased, he will go to another supplier.

Perhaps we've had wildly different experiences. I've worked in the tech support field for over 17 years and I can state with absolute certainty that customers have no more respect, integrity, honor or regard for their fellow man than corporate entities.

I've seen people damage systems, claim that they 'just stopped working' and demand that they be replaced under warranty. I've seen people lie about the things they did to cause problems and I've even had people call and complain to me about things that the techs under me did which were completely and provably false.

I've seen the 'king' customers attempt to take legal action against a company where I worked because they decided to go against our technical advice and ended up in a worse situation than they were in when they started. So maybe your brand of 'king' customers is on a whole other plain of godliness than the ones I've seen. But I can tell you for sure: People are people...they will run the gamut from foul and putrid to tolerable, decent and honorable.

The only difference between the customer and corporate entities is that whenever a corporate entity does something bad, it tends to affect a whole lot more people and is made much more public.

This isn't me saying I support corporate entities over the consumer, its me being realistic in the expectation that no company serving millions of consumers can ever universally satisfy them. Something about every game released by Egosoft pissed off some people enough that they didn't buy it or thought it wasn't worth the money. Just like every game in existence that has come before it. Steam is going to be no different. Some people absolutely won't use it, some people won't care and some people will prefer it.

[quase]

The difference is that a corporate identity has no face, the individual customer has though. Sure the customer will always try to get the upper hand when it comes to a service. Nevertheless the corporation will have to obey in the sense of good business relationship or else the customer might leave.

It is a matter of service to obey the customer. When you worked in the service sector, you should know best to stay calm and polite, just offer the best service you can and do what the customer asks for because every customer is important. It is their/our damn right to cry and complain because they/we paid for it! It does not hurt you personally to give the customer what he wants and the costs for the corporation are evanescent compared to the reputation lost/gained by your customer support. A pleased customer will return and buy your product again.

What Deep Silver is doing by going Steam-only is cutting off the business relationship with customers that will not use Steam. Am I entitled to demand a Steam-free copy of the game. Sure as hell because I (would) pay for it.
The luxury of the content industry to ignore these demands only shows how dependent we are already and I think we should not accelerate it even further by buying full price titles on Steam. Everybody is free to join my agenda.

[NUKLEAR-SLUG]

First off, I was only doing the same as you always claim to do. I am correcting false information about the situation of rights you have.

At no point did I suggest you weren't.

However, regarding the issue of rights, such things are variable depending on the particular law of the land. I make no dispute as to the accuracy of what you posted, I'm sure it's entirely correct, but that only holds true for your justice system. Applicable laws elsewhere vary so what you claim to be true as to your rights isn't something that can be held up as a gold standard for everyone.

Working in a big corporation myself and dealing with "difficult" other corporation as our customers, I can assure you that the customer is and will always be king! Only the digital content industry seems to disagree and has the power to do so.
The reason for this is simple. If my customer is not pleased, he will go to another supplier.

I also work in a customer centric industry. However customer centric or not that doesn't mean I'm going to bend over backwards to cater to their every whim. If a customer has a legitimate concern then every effort will be made to resolve their problem. If they're just a drain on resources then frankly if they go to another supplier then they're doing me a favour. Customers are indeed valued, however not all customers are of equal value. Case in point, examples as provided by Slashman.

Now back to Steam, how do I get my game from another supplier again?

If your game publisher doesn't release a non-Steam format game then the simple answer is you don't. Tough luck.

Now you might think that's an unreasonable viewpoint to be taking, but there's been a few games I've played on console that I'd quite like to play on PC. Unfortunately they're console exclusives so unless the developer suddenly finds an urge to port over to PC I have my consumer right to either buy a console or go without. I could of course contact the developer and ask that they consider a PC port, but I most certainly am not entitled to expect one.

We can save us the hassle of discussion if Egosoft would announce that Rebirth is only a low budget title for less than 10 € because this is the maximum budget that goes into a Steam title. Although I changed my mind to only buy independent titles on Steam, I could make an exception if Rebirth will be for 10 € on Steam for its release. Deal?

I'll say the exact same thing I do when people complain about DLC. If you think Rebirth will only provide you 10€ of entertainment then don't spend more than that.

By the way, Football Manager 2012 on Steam is a nice example of how account binding and content control works against a free market. The game is not available in my country on Steam. Maybe the football association did not pay for the rights to release the game here.

Maybe they didn't, in which case you wouldn't have got a disk release in your country either. Maybe you should take it up with FIFA?

[angrytigerp]

It is a matter of service to obey the customer. When you worked in the service sector, you should know best to stay calm and polite, just offer the best service you can and do what the customer asks for because every customer is important. It is their/our damn right to cry and complain because they/we paid for it! It does not hurt you personally to give the customer what he wants and the costs for the corporation are evanescent compared to the reputation lost/gained by your customer support.

I actually work in a service industry myself, and I know that "customer is always right" means "customer is always right within the boundaries of corporate policy". If we change the policy to be no returns after 30 days where before we gave customers 6 months, then the new policy says 30 days -- no amount of customer loyalty, "oh but it USED TO BE 6 months!" anything like that will change the fact that the new policy is 30 days. Similarly, if Egosoft transitions to Steam-only distribution, that's their prerogative, and it's undoubtedly fueled by SOME profit margin somewhere, where they believe they make more by integrating Steamworks and distributing in a digital format alone (or perhaps they count on new customers, as I've said several times before they got a LOT of new X fans thanks to Steam sales). And that's... the new policy. Where I work, we don't weep over the handful of customers who won't buy this or that product anymore because the price went up, we know that the higher profit from the customers who WILL purchase it makes up for the loss. If they can retain 70% of their customers (I'll be VERY generous here and say 30% of people will never again play X thanks to Steam) but their product revenue increases 150% (due to increased directly-to-Egosoft's-pocket money thanks to digital distribution), they've already made more money despite having that disappearing customer base. This is on top of new customers brought in due to Steam's little ad box with new games and/or special deals that appears when you quit a game (which, I'll admit, has actually gotten me to look into some titles).

Their only reputation being lost is among the few adamant "I'm literally never going to install Steam ever" people, of which there really are very few -- you even admitted yourself, Quase, that you will use Steam in a limited role. Even if you only ever buy and play one game through Steam, you've already violated the ideal you claim to hold. For the most part, people are Steam-neutral (accepting that it's part of the installation now, and just shrugging their shoulders) or even favorable of a Steam distribution (myself included, thanks to the beauty of integrated patching so I don't have to keep checking for new updates to fix issues, finding out there's a patch that's been out for months that I didn't even know about, etc.)

What Deep Silver is doing by going Steam-only is cutting off the business relationship with customers that will not use Steam. Am I entitled to demand a Steam-free copy of the game. Sure as hell because I (would) pay for it.

And as I said, you already admitted to situational Steam use. Even if you end up not doing it for Rebirth, there's plenty of people who will say "okay, just this one title". You are very much entitled to demand a Steam-free copy, that's the wonders of a free economy, but by no means is Egosoft/Deepsilver obligated to provide. I think the sense of entitlement by all the Steam-hating "loyal customers" is skewing their perceptions a bit, you think that Egosoft will bend over backwards to accede to your demands when, clearly, SOMETHING motivated them to choose this mode of distribution, and I don't think customer support was it. I'm sorry that you will no longer play X games because of this decision, but hey, my grandfather was a movie buff but refused to get a DVD player until 2008 or something like that, and thought companies should keep making VHS tapes (I'm dead serious with this anecdote). He didn't see why he should bother with DVDs, VHS tapes have always worked before, clearly it was just a money grab, etc. etc. When in reality, we know DVDs are cheaper to manufacture and distribute, for most people offer a better quality of product by comparison, and so on.

See the similarity? It may be an issue for you to get Steam because CD-only distributions never did you wrong in the past, and you are trying to make it seem like Egosoft is CLEARLY doing this to victimize customers (well, David Howland is a bit more vocal in this opinion, he seems to think Egosoft hates its customers now), but there are likely more factors involved than customer satisfaction. As mentioned previously, Steamworks allows Egosoft to patch without maintaining their own servers or using additional third parties like filefront, etc.; there's the question of how much money they make on the turnaround from the customers that DO buy digitally (remember, if they sell digital copies for the same price as hard copies at first as happens with most releases nowadays, and loyal customers who don't mind Steam buy then, they make MASSIVE profitssss); and there's the speculative allure of new customers thanks to a Steam-integrated system (believe it or not, some people are actually the opposite of you, and will ONLY buy Steamworks or otherwise digital copies, see the posts earlier ITT where someone mentioned ONLY being able to buy certain games because of Steam).

Now you might think that's an unreasonable viewpoint to be taking, but there's been a few games I've played on console that I'd quite like to play on PC. Unfortunately they're console exclusives so unless the developer suddenly finds an urge to port over to PC I have my consumer right to either buy a console or go without. I could of course contact the developer and ask that they consider a PC port, but I most certainly am not entitled to expect one.

Aye, this is my point. There are many titles I want on PC (e.g. DEMON'S SOULS GRAhGHGHGH), but that simply won't happen. Petitions were made, and From turned around and said "thanks for the hundreds of thousands of requests, but we're never releasing on PC sorry". Am I going to go sit on From's forums and keep posting demands that they make a PC version, that I enjoyed Armored Core 4 when I still had a 360 and now, as a loyal From customer, I demand and DESERVE a PC copy? Well, I could, but it's not going to change their policy. It's a similar case here, the "Anti-Steamers" (okay, seriously, that "Steamer" thing is really derogatory and annoying, but I'll use it to simplify my statement) played a different game (X3 TC, earlier X titles) from Egosoft on a different platform (hardware-based PC distribution), now you want them to take their new game (Rebirth) and put it on that same platform when they've explicitly said they're going with another (software-based PC distribution), you think that because you played every other title from Egosoft that they MUST acquiesce, every customer counts, but... not really.

[quase]

That is the problem with the service nowadays it seems. I go out of my way as often as I can to please my customers, but as soon as I am a customer , I am kicked in the arse by some corporate person. Tell me why I should smile and say yes, the next time my customer is refusing to pay 1.000 € for something that he obviously was responsible for or that was even his own fault? The problem seems to be that in my business we only have a few corporate level customers while the games industry deals with individuals. If we lose a customer, we might as well close the business next year.
Anyway, a major difference for sure, but how anybody can say that not every customer is equally important is beyond me? What kind of business strategy is that? I can forgo this and this customers money because there will be another one. Bad business, bad reputation, shortsighted strategy!
*No need to answer this paragraph I was just rambling.*

In case of a PC game like Rebirth, yes which still is a PC game even with Steam, it would be so easy to cover all of the market. It is not a question if the game will be available on Android, iOS, PS3 or your refrigerator. Just leave out the Steam-binding and you could publish the game on Origin, GfWL, GoG.com, Desura, Impulse or even Steam. The shelve version for offline folks without any binding to anything should be out of question anyway.

[NUKLEAR-SLUG]

The problem seems to be that in my business we only have a few corporate level customers while the games industry deals with individuals. If we lose a customer, we might as well close the business next year.

Anyway, a major difference for sure, but how anybody can say that not every customer is equally important is beyond me? What kind of business strategy is that? I can forgo this and this customers money because there will be another one. Bad business, bad reputation, shortsighted strategy!

If your business is in the position that losing a customer would result in financial ruin then I'd have to ask if your 'give them whatever they want' customer service approach is less about giving good customer service and a lot more to do with having absolutely no other choice in the matter.

As far as business strategy goes then is it really less shortsighted and that much more forward thinking to be in the 'bend over and take it' position? What happens when your customers decide to renegotiate their deals with you to their advantage? You can't exactly say no can you? Great for them I'm sure, but not very good for your business I wouldn't think.

[David Howland]

Come On NUCLEAR-SLUG,
All this talk of yours about providing the client with XACTLY what they wish?
Anyone would think the Steam-Free disk was some impossibly difficult, new, exotic demand?
It is NOT! The steam-free disk was the traditional game platform, the industry is there to provide it and the oldest loyal players are only asking for what has made ES the success it is today. Most clients asking for the SFdisk, will pay double the price Steamers pay, this is not an unreasonable request, in fact to STOP providing it, is a betrayal by ES!
The only reason we are in this position today is ES have signed one or two unwise contracts with DS and Steam, they have, for the time being, got ES by the short and curlies, lets hope the situation is not permanent?

[NUKLEAR-SLUG]

Come On NUCLEAR-SLUG,
All this talk of yours about providing the client with XACTLY what they wish?

Which talk would that be then?

Anyone would think the Steam-Free disk was some impossibly difficult, new, exotic demand?
It is NOT! The steam-free disk was the traditional game platform, the industry is there to provide it and the oldest loyal players are only asking for what has made ES the success it is today.

Nobody has said it's a physical impossibility, what Bernd has said is that to do so would mean Egosoft building and maintaining two seperate code streams with all the additional support costs that doing so entail and that Egosoft is moving away from that position to consolidate into one source that they can centrally support more easily and efficiently using the inbuilt functionality provided by Steamworks.

The fact that traditionally they've released their games on DVD is entirely irrelevant. Backtrack a few extra years and the traditional media for a game release was the humble floppy disk. Do you advocate we all go back to installing from a 2 foot high stack of 3.5" floppies?

The world moves on. CD/DVD superceded the 3.5" floppy and digital distribution in turn is superceding disk delivery. You don't have to like it but that's the direction the industry is moving in. Either hop on the train or get left behind.

The only reason we are in this position today is ES have signed one or two unwise contracts with DS and Steam, they have, for the time being, got ES by the short and curlies, lets hope the situation is not permanent?

In your opinion perhaps, but the industry as a whole seems to substantially disagree with your assessment as more and more developers are moving towards digital distribution. You would think that if Steam were this terrible evil corporation that tricks developers into signing unfair contracts and then cruelly exploits them then other developers would show a little more caution and avoid it like the plague, yet more and more are instead flocking to it.

Why is that do you think?

[Slashman]

In your opinion perhaps, but the industry as a whole seems to substantially disagree with your assessment as more and more developers are moving towards digital distribution. You would think that if Steam were this terrible evil corporation that tricks developers into signing unfair contracts and then cruelly exploits them then other developers would show a little more caution and avoid it like the plague, yet more and more are instead flocking to it.

Why is that do you think?

C-O-N-S-P-I-R-A-C-Y!!!!!

[David Howland]

I do not think Steam is particularly evil, no more than any other large DRM! It is just a business like most others, looking out for its own interests. The problem is business people do not operate with the same ethics as most people. Most people put themselves and their family first, with the very limited means at their disposal. Some will rise above this and put society or their country first. Business leaders though usually put the interests of their business first. This is okay until the business gets too big for a country to control or operates in a sphere where a country has little jurisdiction, such as the internet. Of course politicians reassure us that if they cannot control the market, competition in the market will control a company. This may be the case to some extent until a company gets so big the competition is irrellevant. Then we see interesting but catastrophic wrestling such as; Microsoft v US govt. or Google v China.
Getting back however to DRM, I view DRM on the internet like supermarkets on the High Street. Supermarkets offer the best prices through economy of scale destroying all shops selling superior goods. Once they have cleared competition from the village High Street they use their muscle to exploit suppliers turning farmers into slaves.
DRM is operating in a very similar way; first Steam has persuaded ES to not use the oposition, steam-free disks. Once ES is well truly dependant on their rental system, they can dictate to ES, their financial cut!
But there is nothing wrong with that NUCLEAR-SLUG? Thats just business!

[quase]

If your business is in the position that losing a customer would result in financial ruin then I'd have to ask if your 'give them whatever they want' customer service approach is less about giving good customer service and a lot more to do with having absolutely no other choice in the matter.

As far as business strategy goes then is it really less shortsighted and that much more forward thinking to be in the 'bend over and take it' position? What happens when your customers decide to renegotiate their deals with you to their advantage? You can't exactly say no can you? Great for them I'm sure, but not very good for your business I wouldn't think.

Off-topic first:
I am working in a business where there are only a small number of OEMs. We are a tier one supplier, a big player so to say and there are only a few of these tier one suppliers either the OEMs can choose from. Our position is challenged by our competitors of course, but the OEMs will not want to reduce the competition by always choosing only the cheapest one. It would be shortsighted to dry out competition for the OEMs which would result in a market dominance of one of the suppliers. Fair business, live and let live is the key. Of course, technical aspects, our expertise and our services may be an essential argument if our price can not fully compete with that of one of our competitors.

Back to topic:
If at all, the price for a disc based game should be the same with or without Steam. I would pay (much) more for a DRM free game without account binding, but many others certainly won't. The price for a digital distribution though, should be far less of course and that is where Steam (and other digital distributors) horribly fail. In fact games are on average 10€ more expansive as digital-only version through Steam than they are on the shelves. Maybe not in the rest of the world, but at least here in Germany, go figure ...
Now I could import a cheap copy from the UK or the USA and activate it through Steam, but a region lock is only a click away. How come the industry always screams for free global markets, but if the customer wants to benefit from the "free" global market, I am supervised by account binding systems with nice region locks? Without Steam I could import the game, install it and play it. I could even play a uncensored version of the game which can be impossible when account control systems deny me to use the software. Even though I am an adult, allowed to own and play the uncensored version according to local law, but Steam just does not make the necessary age verification and instead just gives me the censored version of the software (or even refuses to activate a game).
Granted again, probably not a problem with Rebirth, but certainly a problem with Steam.

[Edit]
By the way, seeing that AP is made Steam-free, how much hassle can it be to make game Steam-free. All this talk about having to maintain different codes seems more than far fetched if you ask me. Overall the Steam framework is just what it says, a framework. Leave out the frame and you run the game just like any other game before Steam.
Other independent developers offer DRM free and Steam-free versions of their games (e.g. Vessels by Strange Loop Games, a brilliant game by the way) over their own website, as well as a Steam version. I see no reason why Egosoft could not do so as well (except for the contract with Deep Silver maybe).

[Slashman]

Once they have cleared competition from the village High Street they use their muscle to exploit suppliers turning farmers into slaves.
DRM is operating in a very similar way; first Steam has persuaded ES to not use the oposition, steam-free disks. Once ES is well truly dependant on their rental system, they can dictate to ES, their financial cut!
But there is nothing wrong with that NUCLEAR-SLUG? Thats just business!

Have you seen this happening to other developers that use Steam? I'm asking because every time I see a small developer talk about their relationship with Steam, its nothing but positives. I know, I know!! It's all made up for the press right?

I find it interesting that no developer to date has outed Valve's extortion policies. And trust me...there are a whole lot of them that publish games exclusively on and through Steam. Even companies as large and established as Bethesda who could put their game out on anything, have chosen to use it and from what I'm seeing have been giving a lot of benefits to their customers by taking advantage of the services it offers.

This is where my problem with this line of argument comes from. If people who are OK with Steam show its positives and benefits, we get told that the evidence is made up or being spun incorrectly. However, speculation about evil things that Steam has yet to do is treated as fact because negatives are the only possible future outcome for using a system like Steam.

It's like a 'guilty with no possibility of ever being proven innocent' trial.

[David Howland]

Supermarkets have behaved like this over most of Britain.
As for DRM this is nothing special, it is kindergarden level business practice. That though is not the ultimate result, once ES are dependant on Steam, they could turn round and say to ES, would you like to forget the cash cut for ten years and pay us with 30% of the company shares. Ten years later they could repeat and ES becomes the game development arm of Steam or DS?
Also if this comes to pass, most of the business world will not say, "how dreadful Steam gobbling up ES like that". Instead they will say, "Was it not good of Steam, to step in and save ES like that?".

[Slashman]

Supermarkets have behaved like this over most of Britain.

Which has everything to do with a digital distribution service that has proven itself time and again to be nothing but helpful for small, independent game developers?

As for DRM this is nothing special, it is kindergarden level business practice. That though is not the ultimate result, once ES are dependant on Steam, they could turn round and say to ES, would you like to forget the cash cut for ten years and pay us with 30% of the company shares. Ten years later they could repeat and ES becomes the game development arm of Steam or DS?

Valve and Steam are worth billions. You think that they would otherwise have trouble acquiring other game developer studios which are even more lucrative than Egosoft if they wanted to?

Valve is actually content to help fund and develop promising people from their modding community and other small groups with games that they think are worthwhile. Like Garry's Mod and DOTA 2. They don't feel pressured to work on games with the same level of urgency that other developers have because they are in a position to take their time and they shift from project to project on whim. Which is why we still don't have a Half-Life 2 Episode 3...

Also if this comes to pass, most of the business world will not say, "how dreadful Steam gobbling up ES like that". Instead they will say, "Was it not good of Steam, to step in and save ES like that?".

I have to say that this is one of the most amusing and wild posts I have seen here in a while. I think you actually win out over the old one...and that's not easy to do.

Still, it again proves my point that this is about accusing Steam of doing things that they haven't done, have shown no signs of doing but stand convicted of.

[EmperorJon]

Indeed, much of this thread can be summed up by:

"But what if this happens!?"
"But what if it doesn't!?"