Steam

[secksegai]

Can't remember for sure which game it was, (probably FO3) that users who bought on Steam were now limited to 5 total installs EVER.

 

Really? I thought your downloads were unlimited. That's what I've read everywhere.

 

Must have been another game then. Just started searching since I finally got curious enough to take the time to look.

 

http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?p=17037164&posted=1#post17037164

 

For the computer savvy user, it means more steps and a bit of a hassle. For the average user, it can mean nothing (as they'd never notice) to headaches galore depending on the person and their tech support help.

[ostracized]

Honestly, it sucks for people that have trouble with it. But what are the alternatives?

 

You buy a hardcopy and something goes wrong (lose the key, lose the disc, disc stops working etc) you get to start over and buy a new copy. You can make a backup but most casual gamers dont know how to correctly or simply dont think they should need to.

 

Hardcopies take up shelf space at stores and in warehouses... the PC gaming took a nose dive as sales fell when the consoles started getting powerful enough to really draw people in. So with just hard copies we get no innovation because no-one wants to take a chance on wasting sales space. Cloud style gaming and game downloading helped the PC games stay afloat.

 

As far as patches breaking mods... thats something that has happened since the beginning of "moding" pc games. You are changing something the developer is still responcible for. It is NOT their fault your mod gets messed up. It sucks... but you cannot blame a game developer for this fact.

 

 

Steam has issues. But from someone that has seen the rise of PC games (started playing PC games with text based adventure games on a TRS80) Steam and the future of cloud gaming is good for the industry as it allowed game designers to once again experiment with features and ideas and freedom to really try new things that if they stayed with the old model of business (hardcopy ONLY) they would have more then likely been 5 years behind where we are now.

[minngarm]

I've read Arwens posts, and it sounds like basic gamer frustration to me. Nothing unexpected from the situation, but I wouldnt take it to be a final decision. As with all of us "regular"/"hardcore" gamers he/she will just take some time to chill out about it and then get back in the fray. Now, while steam having server issues does effect a lot of problems for its users, you still have the offline mode option to play single players, or even LAN/VPN games. Which I think more or less puts you back on par with any other method of purchasing a PC game.

 

As for the install limit, I have not heared of that until this thread, my FO3 is not from steam however so I couldnt be sure of it, and would certainly agree that purchasing something means I should be able to install it as many times as I want on as many machines as I want (glares at the windows 7 cd on my shelf -.-). However I dont think its necessarily a steam issue in that case, as steam would only inact it if the developer insisted on it being such. So rather then say it is specificaly steams fault, it would be better phrased as being the games developer/publisher who is trying to lord over your usage of their product.

 

Reflecting on that, I have to wonder if its steam "we" are truly mad at, or the fact that steam brings to the front all the things in the industry we like and dislike in equal measure. Is it the service itself, or is it the methodology of gaming tycoons who strip away at our community involvement in bettering our gaming experience with their piracy paranoia?

[secksegai]

I've read Arwens posts, and it sounds like basic gamer frustration to me. Nothing unexpected from the situation, but I wouldnt take it to be a final decision. As with all of us "regular"/"hardcore" gamers he/she will just take some time to chill out about it and then get back in the fray. Now, while steam having server issues does effect a lot of problems for its users, you still have the offline mode option to play single players, or even LAN/VPN games. Which I think more or less puts you back on par with any other method of purchasing a PC game.

 

As for the install limit, I have not heared of that until this thread, my FO3 is not from steam however so I couldnt be sure of it, and would certainly agree that purchasing something means I should be able to install it as many times as I want on as many machines as I want (glares at the windows 7 cd on my shelf -.-). However I dont think its necessarily a steam issue in that case, as steam would only inact it if the developer insisted on it being such. So rather then say it is specificaly steams fault, it would be better phrased as being the games developer/publisher who is trying to lord over your usage of their product.

 

Reflecting on that, I have to wonder if its steam "we" are truly mad at, or the fact that steam brings to the front all the things in the industry we like and dislike in equal measure. Is it the service itself, or is it the methodology of gaming tycoons who strip away at our community involvement in bettering our gaming experience with their piracy paranoia?

 

After going through that link I listed after, pretty sure FO3 doesn't have the install limit but I wasn't very thorough glancing through it.

 

When I first started using Steam years ago, I thought it was amazing (at the time) and had amazing potential for changing the ways people purchase games. Retail has plenty of limitations, and by utilizing the internet to distribute product, you resolve at least several of those issues. Like how Apple changed the way a great deal of people purchase music, Steam had the potential of doing the same for games. I think a lot of my own personal frustration with it is that instead of encouraging the user to purchase on-line, it tends to do the opposite. I know I personally would rather purchase a game retail (assuming the option is available) as I'm not only going avoid steam-related issues (unless it requires it or something similar like Microsoft Live) as well as have a physical back up should I need to reinstall for whatever reason.

 

For multiplayer games, Steam tends to integrate "seemlessly" in most cases. But this current trend of requiring on-line connections for games with a strong single player aspect does not appear to be benefiting the PC Gaming community. Command and Conquer 4 is a prime example of how relying on an internet connection to play a game can cause a multitude of issues leading to bad experiences for the customer, especially when that customer has little interest beyond the single player campaign. For games like FONV, steam issues only exacerbate user frustrations with the game as they're already problematic from the start ---

 

While PC Users have the benefits of mods without having to mod their own console, console users don't have to worry about drivers, software conflicts, hardware conflicts, etc, and get better support. Unlike PC users, console users can't create mods/modify settings and/or software to resolve their issues, but that also makes them more dependent on the Game Company. In either case, console gaming becomes more favorable for most people. After all, they don't have to worry about upgrading video cards or miscellaneous parts to make it work, they invest in the console and it lasts for several years - PCs don't have that luxury. Not sure what would be left of the PC gaming market if Consoles started taking over the MMO arena.

 

Luckily we've still got Blizzard. It's kinda sad to see how a game as old as Diablo 2 seems to get better support than some of these newer releases.

[AWarGuy]

Nothing is wrong with Valve, they are one of the most generous Gaming developers in existence, cheap prices, Xmas sales, updates, free DLC etc

No company would dare to things that Valve do, they care for the Gamer and not after a profit (of course they have a lot of money)

[frank lee]

they care for the Gamer and not after a profit (of course they have a lot of money)

 

I wouldn't dream of disputing your superior knowledge but to clarify, your saying they are a charity? Some sort of institute or philanthropic foundation for the advancement of gamers interests? Like I say you know more than I on this, but that seems . . . Unlikely.

[minngarm]

This is not the 90s, certainly we can all be adult enough to realize and affirm that business IS about profit. However there are many diffrent routes to said profit. While Valve does take a preferable route that helps support and encourage the gaming and modding community, they do not forsake profit for this. Infact, the realize that a lot of their own staff comes from those types of individuals who modded games in the yester-years. So for them what may seam like a charity discount or give away to us, is a tactfully employed advertising and recruitment ploy.

 

There is nothing "evil" about making profit, its what the world economy is based on, its why we have progression.

[wallywantit]

Hi

I absolutely support Steam and its endeavors to try to enforece some semblance of DRP

Its not perfect but it does at least try to protect PC development companies from having there products ,which can take years to develop ,from being pirated

 

Im not sure if some people on these forums are annoyed with Steam because the latest patch has broken some Mods ?

 

I think it's having the opposite effect.

[secksegai]

Hi

I absolutely support Steam and its endeavors to try to enforece some semblance of DRP

Its not perfect but it does at least try to protect PC development companies from having there products ,which can take years to develop ,from being pirated

 

Im not sure if some people on these forums are annoyed with Steam because the latest patch has broken some Mods ?

 

I think it's having the opposite effect.

 

That surmises the basic point at least a few of us are trying to make. Protecting your product is one thing, but when said protection results in losing more repeat business than actual piracy prevention, it's time to readdress priorities. I would say piracy is much more rampant than when I first started using computers years ago, so the anti-piracy drm hasn't been serving its purpose enough to justify all the problems created for actual customers. When you start punishing paying customers, you alienate your customer base, reducing profit in the end.

 

I don't think its plausible to fully eliminate "piracy" as its defined by copyright laws, but I do think a better solution can be found that doesn't punish the customer so frequently.

[frank lee]

Once more, at least half of the pirate copies will be sold, pre hacked, on disk. In street markets all across the world, one person has either downloaded a hacked copy or in places like Mumbai or Manila with loads of local programming talent just hacks it on the spot.

An STEAM isn't going to even slow that down! Its not going to make the slightest difference. And as I cannot bring myself to believe the devs are completely stupid and unaware of this then I have to ask what else are they getting out of it? because it isn't security.

At this point I'll let my paranoia off the leash. Supposing a cabal of people with a vision for the future of PC use wanted to get the public accustomed to not having control of their PC's systems. Oh wait, they have already done that most of us have more idea of whats going on on the other side of the planet than whats happening in our 'system32' folder. So maybe Steam is a tool for manufacturing consent for null ownership, where simply paying for something gives you no rights whatsoever (except paying again and again!)

If that sounds wild try, weaponization of internet space! does anyone here doubt that your steam installation couldn't cripple or destroy your operating system if it was directed to? Military intelligence assessments are based on what an opponent 'Could' do, not! what they currently 'want' to do. And if you believe that the folk behind Steam put 'Your' interests first . . . You are hallucinating! And in the extremely unlikely event that, that were the case, what about next month, next year. . .

 

Well I think we've heard enough from paranoia, interesting place to visit but you wouldn't want to live there eh?

 

But as for "There is nothing "evil" about making profit, its what the world economy is based on, its why we have progression". Er, well in many cases yes there is, that's why its down the $h!tter and ask someone in Zimbabwe about progress.