Skyrim and Steam

[Halororor]

Valve reserves the right to ban your account and cut off access to your games for any reason. Whether they abuse that power or not is irrelevant: It's the customer's lack of control over it that is being argued against. I don't like the use of my stuff being dependent on some overlord's permission, a benevolent one or otherwise.

 

Sure, they can at any time do so, but what are the actual chances of it happening? Highly unlikely doesn't even begin to describe it.

 

You may wanna revise your opinion of that.

 

I sincerely don't want Valve to touch any video game, ever. If you're too lazy to look at all my links, imagine if you had to play Oblivion with every mod that gets made by anyone installed on it. That is what Team Fortress 2 has become over the years. The Valve that actually cares about quality is long-dead.

 

Going to have to disagree with you there. Team Fortress 2 is STILL one of the best online team-based games out there. Scratch that, one of the best multiplayer games out there, despite any changes to the original formula. Blizzard constantly releases expansions to WoW that changes the entire game, and nobody moans about that. TF2 might have become more like an MMO than an FPS lately, but that's only made it that much better. Besides that, let's take a look at all of Valve's games over the last few years.

 

Half-Life 2- excellent

HL2- Episode 1- excellent

HL@- Episode 2- excellent

Portal- Beyond excellent

TF2- Excellent

Portal 2- Even more excellence

 

I don't get it. All were quality releases, averaging reviews scores above 80%, and in most cases, above 90%. What's Valve doing wrong aside from adding a few stuff to TF2 that a few people might not like? Hell, look at what they're doing for the gaming market. For under $50, I bought about 15 games in their summer sale. Games that aren't even old yet. How do they NOT care about their customers. Yeah, Valve support sucks, but Valve prides itself on not shafting their customers and making games to be proud of.

 

It's official Blizzard is requiring you to be connected to battle-net to play Diablo III, even in single player.

 

That's not even the least of it. They're prohibiting mods and they're adding an auction hosue where people buy and sell their equipment for real money, and Blizzard takes a cut from every transaction. Totally not getting D3 now, unless it goes on special on Steam. :P

[CamonnaTong]

Yeah Steam sucks. My NV was getting reinstalled and it got half finished because a pop up said Steam services are down, we cannot properly do your request or whatever. Now every time I try to reinstall NV it goes half finished. In other words, I can never play the game again unless I reinstall my Operating System. Plus I compared the average speed of the GTA4 on G4WL and then GTA4 on Steam. What is sad is that G4WL runs way faster, and faster yet when I use xliveless.dll which removes it. Now please tell me why Steam doesn't suck. I bet if NV wasn't on Steam many wouldn't have as much (If at all) performance problems. There's already proof with the other games. Why would NV be no different?

[EviloMEN]

Yeah. Diablo is totally different then TES, so I don't mind as much.The online PvP, and Item selling were the main draws for me. So I'm still going to buy it. On the bright side, I'll no longer have to worry about getting my account banned when selling items. Of course It's going to be over flooded with items, bringing priced down. I made a goodly amount of money selling items in High School. I'll miss the trading in the chat channel. At least they aren't charging players to use Battle-net.

[Alcrin]

Sure, they can at any time do so, but what are the actual chances of it happening? Highly unlikely doesn't even begin to describe it.

 

As I said, not the point. I don't want someone else to have the power to decide whether or not I can play my games.

 

Going to have to disagree with you there. Team Fortress 2 is STILL one of the best online team-based games out there. Scratch that, one of the best multiplayer games out there, despite any changes to the original formula. Blizzard constantly releases expansions to WoW that changes the entire game, and nobody moans about that.

 

In case it was too subtle for you to get, my complaint was not about changes in the formula. My complaint is the TF2 team constantly pushes poorly thought out, untested, unoptimized, occasionally overpowered, and often simply ridiculous items and gimmicks with no purpose other than capitalizing off of cheap skinner box tactics. On top of this, obtaining the new must-have power weapons (e.g. Tomislav, linked) is becoming more and more difficult without just buying them from the store: The new items are in sets meaning their drop rate is much lower than the achievement items, and the drop cap as well as the constant influx of new droppable items means you have basically 0 chance of getting what you want by waiting for it to drop randomly. Which means you need to craft them if you don't want to pay, and crafting prices have been rising with every new update. Free to Play is the only positive thing to be introduced to the game in over a year now.

 

It's the classic temptation of microtransactions that happens in every single game where they're used: The developers attempt to make a quick buck by selling advantages. While the gameplay advantages you can get from the store are not yet as dramatic as in some other games, this does not excuse the behavior. Valve is no longer the quality-obsessed game developer they once were, and I guarantee the crap will only escalate.

 

TF2 might have become more like an MMO than an FPS lately, but that's only made it that much better. Besides that, let's take a look at all of Valve's games over the last few years.

 

Half-Life 2- excellent

HL2- Episode 1- excellent

HL@- Episode 2- excellent

Portal- Beyond excellent

TF2- Excellent

Portal 2- Even more excellence

 

I don't get it. All were quality releases, averaging reviews scores above 80%, and in most cases, above 90%. What's Valve doing wrong aside from adding a few stuff to TF2 that a few people might not like? Hell, look at what they're doing for the gaming market. For under $50, I bought about 15 games in their summer sale. Games that aren't even old yet. How do they NOT care about their customers. Yeah, Valve support sucks, but Valve prides itself on not shafting their customers and making games to be proud of.

 

With the exception of Portal 2, all of those games were released in 2007 or earlier. Hardly a comeback to the claim that Valve has recently gone downhill, no?

 

As for Portal 2, the characters and dialogue are really the only thing I could call quality about it. The puzzles were all mind-numbingly simple and linear, and every last one of the fast-paced puzzles we saw in the trailers were cut. I don't think a single puzzle took longer for me to figure out than a single glance at the testing area. And to top it off there weren't challenge maps like in the first game. I know, I know, custom mapping is possible, but this isn't the point. Relying on your customers to fix the problems in your half-finished product for you is a tactic we've gotten used to from other game companies but it is not something "to be proud of."

[Herculine]

As I said, not the point. I don't want someone else to have the power to decide whether or not I can play my games.

 

 

 

^ THIS ^

[Halororor]

As I said, not the point. I don't want someone else to have the power to decide whether or not I can play my games.

 

It's much the same as a store telling you they reserve the right of admission, so they can throw you out at any time. Or an ISP reserving the right to cancel your internet contract at any time. Or your satellite television provider being able to decide to stop transmitting a certain channel to you whenever they feel like it. Why feel threatened by something which is so unlikely to happen. Do you feel threatened by being around your dog simply because it can decide to bite you without warning at any time? Even that is more likely to happen than Steam banning your account for no reason.

 

In case it was too subtle for you to get, my complaint was not about changes in the formula. My complaint is the TF2 team constantly pushes poorly thought out, untested, unoptimized, occasionally overpowered,

 

Most balance issues get sorted very quickly. I'll admit, they don't always iron out all the bugs. My Planeswalker Goggles currently have major clipping issues with most hats.

 

and often simply ridiculous items and gimmicks with no purpose other than capitalizing off of cheap skinner box tactics.

 

TF2 is a ridiculous game at heart. Besides, I love my Holy Mackarel.

 

On top of this, obtaining the new must-have power weapons (e.g. Tomislav, linked) is becoming more and more difficult without just buying them from the store: The new items are in sets meaning their drop rate is much lower than the achievement items, and the drop cap as well as the constant influx of new droppable items means you have basically 0 chance of getting what you want by waiting for it to drop randomly. Which means you need to craft them if you don't want to pay, and crafting prices have been rising with every new update. Free to Play is the only positive thing to be introduced to the game in over a year now.

 

Well, as you've mentioned, the game has gone free to play. It's obvious they're going to make the more valuable items scarcer in order to make up for the fact that they're no longer making money from selling the game. Besides, if you got what you want every time in a drop, it wouldn't be such random drops now, would it? Makes finding an item you really like that much more rewarding.

 

It's the classic temptation of microtransactions that happens in every single game where they're used: The developers attempt to make a quick buck by selling advantages. While the gameplay advantages you can get from the store are not yet as dramatic as in some other games, this does not excuse the behavior. Valve is no longer the quality-obsessed game developer they once were, and I guarantee the crap will only escalate.

 

That's a subjective opinion. You can still play the game with all vanilla items and never be at a disadvantage. The game rewards skillful gameplay, not who has the better weapon, which is an excellent example of microtransactions in my book. And what's even better, they give you free stuff. They could have just gone the way all other developers go and force you to pay if you wanted other things than the stock weapons. Honestly, people shouldn't complain when they're getting slightly less free stuff than previously. Free stuff is free stuff.

 

With the exception of Portal 2, all of those games were released in 2007 or earlier. Hardly a comeback to the claim that Valve has recently gone downhill, no?

 

As for Portal 2, the characters and dialogue are really the only thing I could call quality about it. The puzzles were all mind-numbingly simple and linear, and every last one of the fast-paced puzzles we saw in the trailers were cut. I don't think a single puzzle took longer for me to figure out than a single glance at the testing area.

 

In that case, congrats. You are some kind of genius. I hope you get some kind of Nobel prize. :P I found most of the puzzles in Portal 2 to be a lot more challenging than the first game, as did most other people I've spoken to so far. I dunno, maybe we've just got below average IQs. ;) Besides that, Valve put in the same level of detail, there was very little bugs or problems, the voice acting was superb, the script was superb, the visuals were superb despite it being an ageing engine. In short, it was everything most of us have come to expect from a Valve title over the years, and you could see the same amount of care and dedication that went into developing Half-Life 2 went into Portal 2. I can also do no less than expect the very best from whatever the next game in the Half-Life series would be.

 

And to top it off there weren't challenge maps like in the first game. I know, I know, custom mapping is possible, but this isn't the point. Relying on your customers to fix the problems in your half-finished product for you is a tactic we've gotten used to from other game companies but it is not something "to be proud of."

 

It was also actually a fully-fledged game this time around, and I spent more than double the amount of time finishing it than I did the entire Portal + Challenge Maps. Maybe it would have added to it's longevity had it had Challenge maps, but I felt I got enough value for my money from the game.

[Herculine]

I'm sorry, but if you would prefer not to have internet in 2011 you might want to go back to 2001. Not even the poor people in my country can go without the internet for a day. The internet has become an extension to everyone's daily activities yeeeears ago. It's time to catch up.

 

 

 

What country are you in, and what poor people have you been talking to?

 

 

 

Here in the United States of America, most of the poor people I know would much rater have something to eat and a warm, dry place to sleep than the ability to "Tweet".

 

Obviously I don't mean hobos and bums. :/

 

And I'm from South Africa. Might wanna look that up on a map sometime.

 

I decided to take your suggestion and investigate this further. According to sources like THIS and THIS, the percentage of the South African population that uses the internet has

been between 10-15% for about a decade now. You can't really call that "everyone".

[LeopoldCrank]

I'm sorry, but if you would prefer not to have internet in 2011 you might want to go back to 2001. Not even the poor people in my country can go without the internet for a day. The internet has become an extension to everyone's daily activities yeeeears ago. It's time to catch up.

 

 

 

What country are you in, and what poor people have you been talking to?

 

 

 

Here in the United States of America, most of the poor people I know would much rater have something to eat and a warm, dry place to sleep than the ability to "Tweet".

 

Obviously I don't mean hobos and bums. :/

 

And I'm from South Africa. Might wanna look that up on a map sometime.

 

I decided to take your suggestion and investigate this further. According to sources like THIS and THIS, the percentage of the South African population that uses the internet has

been between 10-15% for about a decade now. You can't really call that "everyone".

 

^^ This ^^

[Halororor]

I decided to take your suggestion and investigate this further. According to sources like THIS and THIS, the percentage of the South African population that uses the internet has

 

been between 10-15% for about a decade now. You can't really call that "everyone".

 

You might want to get statistics from more recent surveys. Yours is a bit old. Look here and here and here for mobile internet users and check here to see how the South African userbase for both Twitter and Facebook grew in a very short time. Check here to see that by June 2011, internet usage in South Africa has grown to 6.8 million. Sure, it's still not *everyone*, but it's a growth of about 5% since the usage stats you linked that were taken from 2008. That's a lot of users. That's a lot of growth for 3 years. Why this staggering growth? Because internet is becoming a necessary part of our daily lives.

 

Also take a look at cellphones in use in South Africa. It's an old statistic from 2007, and it should have grown more than that. So, let's be generous and say about 30% of the population who have cellphones have older phones dating to before the era of mobile internet. That's probably being ver generous, but it still leaves you with 50% of the population who can navigate the web using their phones. But that doesn't really mean quite as much, because the debate is about Steam, and people are hardly going to use the internet from their mobile phones to use Steam, and a large part of the population probably don't now how to use the internet from their phones either.

 

Also take a look at what I said. I said poor people, yes, but not poor as in wondering where their next meal is coming from, poor as in low income bracket. Not low to non-existant income bracket. You can hardly expect the people living in shantytowns to have access to internet. With the way prices have been plummeting lately, I find it hard to believe the growth the internet industry has been seeing these last two years is going to slow down anytime soon. Internet is fast becoming affordable to almost anybody. Not decent internet, mind, but for the same price I paid for a 1gb bandwidth capped account 3 years ago, I'm using an uncapped offerring now. It's still ridiculously overpriced, but it's probably going to be even cheaper in two years' time.

Edited August 2, 2011 by Halororor

[LeopoldCrank]

I decided to take your suggestion and investigate this further. According to sources like THIS and THIS, the percentage of the South African population that uses the internet has

 

been between 10-15% for about a decade now. You can't really call that "everyone".

 

You might want to get statistics from more recent surveys. Yours is a bit old. Look here and here and here for mobile internet users and check here to see how the South African userbase for both Twitter and Facebook grew in a very short time. Check here to see that by June 2011, internet usage in South Africa has grown to 6.8 million. Sure, it's still not *everyone*, but it's a growth of about 5% since the usage stats you linked that were taken from 2008. That's a lot of users. That's a lot of growth for 3 years. Why this staggering growth? Because internet is becoming a necessary part of our daily lives.

 

Also take a look at cellphones in use in South Africa. It's an old statistic from 2007, and it should have grown more than that. So, let's be generous and say about 30% of the population who have cellphones have older phones dating to before the era of mobile internet. That's probably being ver generous, but it still leaves you with 50% of the population who can navigate the web using their phones. But that doesn't really mean quite as much, because the debate is about Steam, and people are hardly going to use the internet from their mobile phones to use Steam, and a large part of the population probably don't now how to use the internet from their phones either.

 

Also take a look at what I said. I said poor people, yes, but not poor as in wondering where their next meal is coming from, poor as in low income bracket. Not low to non-existant income bracket. You can hardly expect the people living in shantytowns to have access to internet. With the way prices have been plummeting lately, I find it hard to believe the growth the internet industry has been seeing these last two years is going to slow down anytime soon. Internet is fast becoming affordable to almost anybody. Not decent internet, mind, but for the same price I paid for a 1gb bandwidth capped account 3 years ago, I'm using an uncapped offerring now. It's still ridiculously overpriced, but it's probably going to be even cheaper in two years' time.

 

I think you'll find that Herculine is actually still quite correct in her assertions. Yes, it is 6.8 billion, but this is in a population of 48 billion, just 14% of the population. So her assertions that just 10%-15% of people in South Africa have had internet in the past decade. is still completely valid.