Round 4 of Would you use Steam for Rebirth thread

[Nagittchi]

Uhhhh, correct me if I'm wrong, but if Steam "owned shares" of Egosoft (lol), wouldn't they instead own shares in DEEPSILVER, the PUBLISHER for the X games?

[EmperorJon]

Yes, probably, I don't know.

[Vayde]

Are steam and other digital download provides partly responsible for the demise of the GAME store chain?

[EmperorJon]

Probably party, but I'd say GAME is more responsible for that...

[Deleted User]

Are steam and other digital download provides partly responsible for the demise of the GAME store chain?

Probably. Digital downloads are here to stay.

But there is distinction between digital downloads. That distinction is DRM, i.e. how the publisher continues to gain from your cold hard cash - the one thing that matters to them (and should to you). Steam also continues to gain from your cash and is completely unaccountable for any servicey they provide, whilst remaining a necessary component for your license (you know, the one you paid Egosoft for). Meanwhile the customer loses freedom to use the product they have paid for.

This is half the problem:-

I highly doubt most people sit down and go: 'I'm looking at my choices of digital or retail and I'm not buying digital because it's Big Brother DRM that wants to control my brainwaves.'

Most people who wish to purchase a particular product do so. If they can't, they seek alternatives.

Most people weigh up alternatives and buy a product accordingly. That includes what could have been done with a retail product prior to steam and what you can do with any version of steamworks.

To suggest that not buying into steam is

because it's Big Brother DRM that wants to control my brainwaves.'

is just, errrr, contolling your brainwaves?

[DnBrn47]

I would absolutely use steam, I've been using it for years and have tons of games on it. Have yet to have a single issue that I couldn't easily solve myself.

I don't have any of the issues that a lot of people complain about. Hell I even use origin and impulse as well. It's just really convenient to buy a game at home, meanwhile a lot of the times I can't find games at the local store for the PC or there are simply games I'd never know about without these digital platforms.

The only thing I don't like about them is they take a chunk of the pie from game developers, but nothing can be done about that. Not buying from steam, impulse, origin or otherwise only cheats me out of the game completely when I can't find it at the local store and the developer isn't shipping it directly.

[Nagittchi]

I wouldn't say Steam is to entirely to blame for the lack of physical copies of PC games. That would be in part of most modern countries increasing speed for downloads. Anyone remember the days of 56k modems? lol. If for example, one of my all time favorite games of my childhood, Privateer, was able to be downloaded. It would take probably the same time for that game to be downloaded compared to a 10GB game now. NOT to mention the terrible connectivity of some modems.

In addition, believe it or not, gaming has increasingly been more popular with people; not just for nerds anymore. With the more "casual" gamers, over the years, people look towards consoles, since its more simple for them to turn on and start a game. Sales of console games have increased while PC game sales have either declined or just increased not quite at the speed of console games. So what do you think GAME, Gamestop, EB, etc would want to fill their shelves up with more?

The last time I went into a brick and mortar store for a PC game was probably Battlefield 2 (4 CDs to install, since I didnt even own a DVD drive back then haha), and there were hardly any PC games behind the counter.

Other than that, Steam really doesn't have any gamebreaking DRM; the DRM mainly comes from the publisher. I've steered away from Ubisoft games recently since they required you to have a connection to the internet to even play SINGLEPLAYER games. You could even have a physical copy of the game, yet still need to go through their UPlay!

I heard they've become more lenient on their DRM though...

[DrATty]

The wariness of Steam that I have are with a list of 'what-ifs?' that I can't fix by tinkering or getting fast broadband. For instance, what if I move country?
I was stung by EA after a computer failure left me unable to re-activate my games. They were disk-based games, but the worries about DRM still apply.
As the system stands, it is possible to lose purchases. It might be unlikely but I'm not about to try my luck with an expensive collection. Nowhere does Steam make any guarantee that my games will be available to me in the future.

[strude]

my boxes are covered by insurance and would be replaced ...

Good luck getting a box (or disk) replacement on any title over a couple of years old though.

And how do you EmperorJon, know, that none of the management or owners of Steam, own any share or shares in ES?

Valve already have what practically amounts to a cash printing machine. What possible interest could they have with wanting to own a small developer like Egosoft?

Egosoft is the beginning of the world domination push. Steam will use it's position as a maker of niche space sim games to enthrall the masses...

Maybe they want the Xenon code

[Slashman]

Most people who wish to purchase a particular product do so. If they can't, they seek alternatives.

Most people weigh up alternatives and buy a product accordingly. That includes what could have been done with a retail product prior to steam and what you can do with any version of steamworks.

Your last paragraph is something I strongly question with regard to the average purchaser of games. The average purchaser of games simply wants to play the game and gets the game from the source that is most convenient.

If someone is accustomed to buying games in a box from a store, that is what they will attempt to do until and unless it becomes inconvenient. That the game requires a 3rd party account is probably not something that most people question these days.

The average Joe Blow who has a workable internet connection and plays games in a a casual to moderate capacity is not sitting down and meditating on the fact that he/she may lose their games when Steam goes down, or that Steam is spying on them or that they can't resell their Steam game.

Your assertion that 'most' people do that is pretty unlikely. Most people do not spend their time following gaming on forums and debating the philosophical and legal implications of 3rd party account ties to games.

I've personally gotten into debates with developers on this kind of thing and its something that we 'hardcore' gamers don't get. Most people see a game, think its cool, buy it, play it, and then move onto the next game.

We are the exceptions. We are the people who will try to get the most out of each title. We are the ones who will mod and tweak and analyze and min/max and agonize over our in-game decisions. But the bulk of the people who buy games are not us. They simply don't care that much.

Sure there are outliers who will take a closer look than the average guy, but they are just that. Outliers.

[Deleted User]

Most people who wish to purchase a particular product do so. If they can't, they seek alternatives.

Most people weigh up alternatives and buy a product accordingly. That includes what could have been done with a retail product prior to steam and what you can do with any version of steamworks.

Your last paragraph is something I strongly question with regard to the average purchaser of games. The average purchaser of games simply wants to play the game and gets the game from the source that is most convenient.

If someone is accustomed to buying games in a box from a store, that is what they will attempt to do until and unless it becomes inconvenient. That the game requires a 3rd party account is probably not something that most people question these days.

The average Joe Blow who has a workable internet connection and plays games in a a casual to moderate capacity is not sitting down and meditating on the fact that he/she may lose their games when Steam goes down, or that Steam is spying on them or that they can't resell their Steam game.

Your assertion that 'most' people do that is pretty unlikely. Most people do not spend their time following gaming on forums and debating the philosophical and legal implications of 3rd party account ties to games.

I've personally gotten into debates with developers on this kind of thing and its something that we 'hardcore' gamers don't get. Most people see a game, think its cool, buy it, play it, and then move onto the next game.

We are the exceptions. We are the people who will try to get the most out of each title. We are the ones who will mod and tweak and analyze and min/max and agonize over our in-game decisions. But the bulk of the people who buy games are not us. They simply don't care that much.

Sure there are outliers who will take a closer look than the average guy, but they are just that. Outliers.

Joe Blow, Johnny Gamer, when will it stop?

You talk of elitism.

There should be no exceptions when it comes down to the facts of what steam is doing.

[Jumee]

what if I move country?

I have, I used steam back home, now I am studying in England and still use Steam - and can access all the games I bought back home and in the UK

[Slashman]

Joe Blow, Johnny Gamer, when will it stop?

When will what stop?

You talk of elitism.

How is that elitism? Would you rather I said 'the broader gaming demographic' or some such other convoluted line that means the same thing as the average man on the street?

There should be no exceptions when it comes down to the facts of what steam is doing.

What facts? What is it doing? All I've been hearing is speculation that 'Steam is probably doing this' or 'Steam is likely going to do that' along with people accusing Valve of plotting to buy out and control Egosoft and every other developer who is using it and all kinds of other unsupportable nonsense.

About the only valid things I can take seriously from the non-Steam side of this argument are that people with limited/non-existent internet connections have major trouble using Steam, along with some people who have specific problems running the software due to limitations imposed by their work, or their own personal code of system security.

Please let me know what exceptions are being made regarding facts about Steam.

[strude]

Joe Blow, Johnny Gamer, when will it stop?

When will what stop?

Well crafted and thought out arguments where the only rebuttal is criticism of the "figures of speech" used. It's got to stop damn it!

[NUKLEAR-SLUG]

The only thing I don't like about them is they take a chunk of the pie from game developers, but nothing can be done about that. Not buying from steam, impulse, origin or otherwise only cheats me out of the game completely when I can't find it at the local store and the developer isn't shipping it directly.

Steam actually takes LESS overall from the developer as the developer can release independently of a publishing house. So when you by from Steam you're potentially ensuring the developer gets more profit than if they had to take the publisher->retailer route.

[Slashman]

Joe Blow, Johnny Gamer, when will it stop?

When will what stop?

Well crafted and thought out arguments where the only rebuttal is criticism of the "figures of speech" used. It's got to stop damn it!

I'll try to do better next time...

[Deleted User]

Joe Blow, Johnny Gamer, when will it stop?

After this hopefully:-

Johnny Gamer is not important

and also this:-

The average Joe Blow who has a workable internet connection and plays games in a a casual to moderate capacity is not sitting down and meditating on the fact that he/she may lose their games when Steam goes down, or that Steam is spying on them or that they can't resell their Steam game.

You talk of elitism..

How is that elitism? Would you rather I said 'the broader gaming demographic' or some such other convoluted line that means the same thing as the average man on the street?

We are the exceptions. We are the people who will try to get the most out of each title. We are the ones who will mod and tweak and analyze and min/max and agonize over our in-game decisions. But the bulk of the people who buy games are not us. They simply don't care that much.

Sure there are outliers who will take a closer look than the average guy, but they are just that. Outliers.]

I would just rather you refrain from including me in your terms of 'we', as I hold no opinion of yours.

Whilst I expect you to point out perceived benefits of an account binding system, please remind others how many games you have invested in steam in order to show your impartiality.

[Deleted User]

Steam actually takes LESS overall from the developer as the developer can release independently of a publishing house. So when you by from Steam you're potentially ensuring the developer gets more profit than if they had to take the publisher->retailer route.

Hope the consumer bears that in mind when they potentially purchase the license.

[angrytigerp]

I would just rather you refrain from including me in your terms of 'we', as I hold no opinion of yours.

You hold that you will be playing and replaying this game for a long enough time in the future that you express concern over potential economic failure of a system like Steam, even assuming they don't remove authentication, relevant quote by Gabe Newell:

If you right click on a game in Steam, you'll see that you can back up the files yourself. 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.

We've tested disabling authentication and it works.

In that regard, you are not a gamer who will finish the game, then leave it behind, as the average gamer -- average joe, johnny gamer, if you're really trying to use the idioms as a point of contention then you must realize you already have been refuted sufficiently -- is wont to do. And as such, you share a significant opinion with him, and I, and probably everyone else on this forum.

Whilst I expect you to point out perceived benefits of an account binding system, please remind others how many games you have invested in steam in order to show your impartiality.

First of all, there are several benefits to the DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION service known as Steam, with the agreement made by the user that they maintain an account for the easy centralization of transactions and the entire social system it entails. Even Good Old Games, a digital distribution site which prides itself on having 0 DRM, maintains accounts. Are they suddenly evil because they must maintain an account to ease the whole, you know, distribution thing?

Spoiler

Show

well, of course you'll say yes because you hate all things digital distribution, but that's beside the point.

That said, you're trying to set him up for a rebuttal based on attacking his personal veracity rather than that of his claims, and even if the tactic weren't a poor one for good debate, it also is faulty. A person arguing for department stores 80 years ago when they first showed up doesn't have their argument that it makes shopping much more convenient rendered void because they've patronized said stores, it only proves their point that much more.

Slashman (I think it was slashman) has patronized Steam because they provided him with good service and he benefited from its features, and he is extolling it because of it. He doesn't need to be "impartial", but has done so anyway, explicitly pointing out that he acknowledges problems with Steam (that there are unforeseen software issues, or for those without sufficient internet bandwidth). Are you insinuating that you are impartial, then? Your "impartiality" has so far manifested in the form of conspiracy theories that Valve is buying up the stock of every company which openly agreed to enter a distribution arrangement using Steam for some mass video game takeover; unsubstantiated assumptions that Steam, when (not if, a definite WHEN) it shuts down in spite of the millions Valve is making to maintain the service, will not release authentication (despite Gabe Newell stating, off the record, that he doesn't see this as a likely scenario, and that they have in fact tested a scenario in which they must disable authentication in the case of server shutdown); and, of course, the many, many personal attacks on Steam users because, since they like something you don't like, that makes them terrible people.

Yes, clearly you are the impartial one here.

[quase]

Please people do not take this personal too much, but this is just ridiculous as often by the Steam crowd in this thread. Tiger for example, to say that everybody who is against Steam, only does so because he is against digital distribution or Slashman for example who continues to deny any argumentation against Steam apart from technical hardware issues.
Do "you" think me and others that share my opinion are simply idiots who are just here because of the "sake of being against something", in this case being against Steam? You can say if you think so, I won't hold any personal issue with it (just in case a moderator would impose sanctions if you say so), but I really would like to know this, so we would be clear for the rest of the discussion and I could simply ignore all your hollow, shallow, shortsighted argumentations you keep on coming up with to talk down any argument that is not a technical one. Even though, on a second thought, technical issues are not existing either if you get a good workaround for it, do they? There are workarounds for everything and as long as we can play the game it does not matter how customer friendly and convenient they are, do we?

Also please let GOG.com out of your account binding argumentation!
There is a huge difference between GOG.com and Steam (apart from the DRM policy). When you downloaded a game from GOG.com you never need to visit the site again because you get an offline installer in the download. You can of course redownload the game over your account if you lose this installer for some reason, but you definitely do not need to go online and verify your legal purchase again and again if you have the installer on your PC or a backup DVD. On Steam you have to verify your license every time you install your game, even if it is from a backup. (This is by the way also a not fully correct position in the poll because their is no way to just activate a game once and play the game forever. You have to activate the game again and again every time you install it or whenever Steam asks for it.)
If Steam would work without the damn client-software directly in the browser like GOG.com and also allow you to download a full offline installer, than we can talk about a comparison between the two platforms again. This is also all I expect form digital distribution, the distribution only, not that the purchased software remains under control of the content provider.