[Johnny]

I'll point out the obvious but largely ignored, Steamworks is more than just a DRM option. Whilst a number of the tools may be irrelevant for a single player game, as a package Steamworks may well be extremely attractive to developers.

[m Gardner]

Ill buy it regardless, I like steam ok, but I don't care what they do.

[Skivs]

if it was just some FPS or RTS or just RPG, heavens who cares, most games... i'd buy on steam

Skyrim... HELL NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it makes modding a pure pain in the ass. however 'tis ok if they release it on steam, i'll just not buy it there, as long as its not required.

Unless steam will magically start to install the games "Normally" and not in a "/program files/Steam/xxx/xxx/xxx/xxx/1234567/" folder then this would be hell, and it would lower my opinion on bethesda softworks. However. since i trust that Bethesda Softworks and Game Studios are not purely stupid. i am 100% sure that skyrim will not require a [censored] program like steam. possibly something less [censored] tho.

[Alexandra walker]

Systemshock.wont be alone unless consoles allow mods, keyboard, mice or steam becomes dial-up friendly & starts letting people choose what patch they want to apply, I don't see either happening as things are.

added: I often hear people say "Steam is saving PC gaming." but is it truly saving it or just offering a slow death

Again with the Steam forces patches rumours. No, it doesn't. By default the auto patcher is on, but you can turn it off in the game properties simple as that. Also when I bought the orange box by retail. I had dial up, and I didn't find Steam unfriendly, albeit I wasn't much of a fan back then.

PC Gaming is far from dying. Actually its rising from the dead. Back in early 2000s everybody played PS2, Gamecube, or Xbox. Not much was offered for PC gaming. Then comes the next gen consoles PS3 and Xbox 360. They are dated now. A decent PC can trump a console in Terms of graphics, and performance. This has only been happening recently with DX 11 and such. Steam now offers convenience in purchasing and playing games. With its User friendly interface casual gamers can purchase new games and get them patched without a hassle. I know its hard to except, but Steam is the future.

Typing in a code or a password isn't that annoying. The only reason you would want no DRM is so that you can make illegal copies of a game and give it to all your friends. I get very weary of people who don't like DRM.

That is a very disgusting and offensive comment. Just because you have never had a DRM scheme cause issues with your setup does not mean that all DRMs are harmless. I don't find disc check or serial keys that annoying, but apparently enough people do that they constantly give it as their favorite feature of using Steam.

Unfortunately, that is often the case. I know a guy personally who'd do that. And thats his reason for hating Steam.

[Dewayne Quattlebaum]

if it was just some FPS or RTS or just RPG, heavens who cares, most games... i'd buy on steam

Skyrim... HELL NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it makes modding a pure pain in the ass. however 'tis ok if they release it on steam, i'll just not buy it there, as long as its not required.

Unless steam will magically start to install the games "Normally" and not in a "/program files/Steam/xxx/xxx/xxx/xxx/1234567/" folder then this would be hell, and it would lower my opinion on bethesda softworks. However. since i trust that Bethesda Softworks and Game Studios are not purely stupid. i am 100% sure that skyrim will not require a [censored] program like steam. possibly something less [censored] tho.

I mod Oblivion just fine with my Steam version. I have a physical copy that I can't play anymore because the disk is scratched to hell, but I've seen no difference between the Steam version and a physical disk when it comes to quality. If anything, Steam runs just a bit faster because it doesn't need to read data off of a physical disk. I also find it a bit convenient to have all of my games in one place separate from every other program I install, which is hundreds. Just make a library for it and put your steamapps folder in the library for quickest access.

But I think you should reconsider your opinion about gamesas and BGS. well, gamesas at least, since BGS has no say in the method their game will actually reach consumers. gamesas used Steam for Fallout New Vegas and they plan to continue doing so for Skyrim and possibly every game from then on. Brink, another gamesas title, is coming out with Steamworks too.

But I'd just like to clarify my stance too. People assume that because I argue in favor of the integrity of Steam itself that I demand Skyrim to be released Steam-only. While I plan on getting a physical collector's edition and authenticating it through Steam, I think people should still have freedom of choice when it comes to physical copies. I'm sure Bethesda sees a lot of value with Steamworks or else they would not have picked it in the first place, but there are a lot of people who are against it. It'd be nice to have alternatives. I doubt there will be considering the benefits of Steamworks for developers as a DRM tool, patching device, and community network. I wouldn't lose any sleep if they only used Steamworks, but people do care and it'd be nice if everyone won in the end.

[Cathrine Jack]

. . . I wouldn't lose any sleep if they only used Steamworks, but people do care and it'd be nice if everyone won in the end.

This is the point right here. Some of us care and as the responses to the poll indicate, are likely to not buy it. Call us liars, call us delusional, tout the benefits and progressiveness of Steam till the cows come home; it doesn't change the simple fact that 35 to 40% of the respondents to this survey (similar to the previous polls run on TES forums) say they will not buy it.

I cannot tell you how many of those guys actually will buy it. What I can tell you is: I still have not bought FONV because it requires Steam. In fact, I'm past caring about FONV and feel no temptation to buy it at all. This despite the fact, I loved the preceding Fallout, and would eagerly buy and be playing FONV if iI could get a non-Steam legal version, the way I did with my non-Steam legal version of Warband. The same thing goes for a number of other Steam required games that I've passed on. Instead, I went back and bought a golden oldie, Take Comand Second Manassas for $5 from Gamersgate.

Based on results of the survey, as well as other guys telling similar tales of passing on Steam only games, it sounds like there really is a chunk of us prospective buyers who are foregoing purchases. That may be hard for some of you to believe, maybe even hard for Bethesda's marketing folks to believe. But this survey suggests it is true and that Beth should be examining the matter closely. Assuming that a 35 to 40% loss of prospective buyers is an accurate projection based on these data (which it may not be for various reasons that have been pointed out), the fiscal benefits of going Steam only versus swinging a non-Steam option had better be pretty strong to compensate for the lost sales.

[Claire Jackson]

I can understand how some people find it annoying that they need an internet connection just to play a singleplayer game. If you have internet though i don't really see what the problem is unless you have some grudge against steam .

Personally i love steam, no need to store all those game boxes in my room anymore, most of which i'll never play again anyway. Steam makes it easy for me to buy games and to store them, keeps things tidy.

Another bonus for steam is that it has an awesome anti cheat system. Ofcourse this isn't a bonus for Skyrim as it's singeplayer, but for example: When i first bought Crysis 1 it was a lot of fun playing it on the internet, but without steam it was one giant haxfest of people flying miles in the air shooting tactical nukes at the objective ending the game in a minute. With steam Crysis 2 will finally have some proper internet games.

[Steve Bates]

I can understand how some people find it annoying that they need an internet connection just to play a singleplayer game. If you have internet though i don't really see what the problem is unless you have some grudge against steam .

Just because I have internet while sitting in a train, driving across the country at 300 km/h once again, doesn't mean it's fast, reliable or (in case of bigger downloads) cheap. And these are the times where I like to play single-player games on my laptop ...

[Jack Bryan]

I can understand how some people find it annoying that they need an internet connection just to play a singleplayer game. If you have internet though i don't really see what the problem is unless you have some grudge against steam .

But you don't NEED an Internet connection to play a single player Steam game XD You just need to update and then put Steam in offline mode and you are set.

It's a lot better than other DRM asking you to validate online your game copy and then preventing you from installing the game because you've used up your 3 allowed installs already Sure once installed you could play 100% offline but ... And let's not talk about patching your game only to find they patched an updated version of the DRM that doesn't work with your CD/DVD player anymore.

[Judy Lynch]

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/0228/technology-gabe-newell-videogames-valve-online-mayhem.html.

Quoting Ochocinco, "child, please!..." an online snippet doesn't tell you what the actual books say. See Enron, PsiNET (who I actually worked for and was fooled until the proverbial "beginning of the end"), MCI, etc etc etc etc... The numbers written in the article are given by the company, it is not Forbes' accountants going through the ledger. Just to pick on one, you do realize statements like having 30 million customers are misleading, right? How many people have multiple Steam accounts? You do know many people create at least 2 accounts, one for "gifting", one they use to play the games, to circumvent issues with overdrafts and account lockouts, right ? How many people do a "one and done"? Or how about the number of people like you who only download the cheap and free stuff vs the number who pays full retail?

Microsoft wants Steam, because it's easier to eat your competition than to let them go out of business. That's why AT&T ate T-Mobile in the US, so it could take its resources before they were run into the ground. The point is, if Microsoft took Steam, it'd still be there. Your Steam licenses would simply be converted into GFWL licenses, but you don't lose your games. That would be horrendous amounts of bad press for Microsoft.

... and I am sure you have another article from some other online site saying MS wants Steam... an a side note, it is not MS' modus operandi to buy the competition, but to put out their own version of stuff, even if it fails miserably: HD-DVD, Bing, Fuze, etc etc etc...

You are completely mistaken about the reason why AT&T bought T-Mobile. The TelCo mergers had nothing to do with acquiring assets, but customer base. I happen to be a "veteran" of Nextel, a company whose stock rose tremendously after 9/11, then was bought by Sprint (and my lil' world came crashing down, but I digress) and dismantled what was the best TelCo out there. I can also tell you from that experience, customer base transitions are hardly smooth. What happens in these cases is that the customer base is moved from the acquired company's network into the buyer's network. As it was the case with Nextel, service degraded substantially for Nextel customers as they were moved from the iDEN network to CDMA ( it didn't help the U.S Gov't took Nextel's spectrum either, but anyway...) iDEN was far superior to CDMA.

Blockbuster never had movies before the theaters did. Neither does Netflix. But Netflix has movies when Blockbuster does. But you're right, I guess all of those reports of how Netflix is killing Blockbuster are wrong, and Blockbuster isn't closing down stores because it's not earning money - it's just trying to trick people into thinking it's doing poorly.

I never said Blockbuster is not losing business. They filed for Chapter 11, so they obviously are not doing well. I am sure Netflix hurt them, but I am also sure Netflix is not the only reason why they filed for Chapter 11. The Blockbuster comment was more of a side comment, and I guess I dated myself in the process. Back when Blockbuster first opened in the mid 80's, the outcry from the movie theater owners was very loud. Anyway...

It can go away, just as AOL has done. But you never stop owning the games you bought from it. Nor does that mean it will never be used by anyone the moment something comes along that is more popular. Internet Explorer doesn't control over 50% of the browser market share. It controls the majority chunk, but more people don't use Internet explorer than do. That doesn't stop them from releasing Internet Explorer 9, because competition is the best environment for innovation. AOL didn't adapt to the times, and because of that, it died. Steam itself is adaptation to the times, because it's taking over an emerging market that's slowly crushing a different market.

You do not own the games. Read your EULA.
If you have to re-install Windows and Valve is not there to authenticate your DVD install or for you to download the game, can you still play your game?

And in reference to IE, I didn't say browsER. I said browsING. I guess I am dating myself, yet again... After Windows 95 was released, a lawsuit was brought in front of the US Dept of Justice against MS claiming that the integration of IE into the OS will result in MS being able to dictate the content the user browses. Look it up, pretty funny read nowadays (it was funny back then as well for those of us into Unix)

Steam is an adaptation to the times, right... what do you think AOL was when it started? Do you know how AOL started? Steve Case went around giving out floppies asking people to join his BBS , when 99% of the country didn't know what BBS stood for. AOL was itself an adaptation of its time. And AOL's downfall wasn't that they didn't adapt to the times, it was the bad business decisions made by its leaders, and these decisions had nothing to do with technology, or adapting to the times, as it was the case, for example, in the purchasing of Time Warner.. nothing to do with technology, but resulted in something like a $100 billion loss in 4-5 years...

[Amy Masters]

I would prefer that it require steam. I love steam. The thought of steam makes me happy in the pants.

Since I buy all my games on Steam anymore, Skyrim requiring it could only be a plus for me.

[Christine Pane]

I cant own a digital copy im buying the right to use it. I get a CD/DVD etc. Then im buying a copy of it that even if the company is merged into another company or dies I still have my copy. Steam has a backup function yes. But that does me little good if my hard drive crashes or a virus etc etc. I can't use that function if its no longer there. At least with a hard copy of my game I can install/uninstall my games whenever I feel like even if I dont have a internet connecttion. Just because I have internet now does not mean I will have it 5 years from now. So if I end up wanting to play a game that requires steam to have a connection and I can't put it into offline mod then I can't play it. If my HD crashes during this time I can't play any games I get off steam because steam no longer exists. Unless they have a plan for that too.or even if I somehow lose my accout in some way. Id have to buy it all over again. and they can deactivate the game from me. I have had friends that had that happen to them. so im against steam.

If you complain about getting a scratch on your CD then you need to take better care of your CD and put it back in the case when you are done and handle the disc in a better way. I have not sufferd that kind of problem in years. But then again I record my games onto a CDR/DVDR and put my original in its case and dont bring it back out untill I need to use it again to make a new copy. That way if it gets damaged its a "oh well" moment as it only cost me like 10-25 cents per CDR/DVDR. But I can only do this if it allows me to record it. I dont need it to be able to install just load the game. But if I have to use the original then I always put my first finger through the center hole and my thumb is on the outside edge if I use my thumb. Most of the time I dont need to use my thumb because its redundant. The computer never moves while a CD is in it. and I always put it back in its box when im done I never have a cd out on a desk or anything. If I do have it there then its there because im cleaning the computer or getting a box out and I never put it shiny side down always shiny side up that way the label gets scrayched. I also use windex or other window cleaner to clean the disc and a very soft towel. Its the same kind of care you would use for a car or old family photos a computer or if you have them weapons such as swords, guns and knifes. They last a very long time if you take care of them. I can still play my copy of Tottal Annihilation (precurser to Supreme Commander) and its expansions and those are 14 years old.

[jessica breen]

At least with a hard copy of my game I can install/uninstall my games whenever I feel like even if I dont have a internet connecttion. Just because I have internet now does not mean I will have it 5 years from now.

Offline mode.

[Kayla Oatney]

Offline mode.

... is a myth. You are still required to "check in" to the Steam Servers at random intervals as well as have updates pushed out (even if you turn off the auto-updater). It is pretty obvious that everyone who recommends "Offline Mode" has never used it.

[Connor Wing]

Offline mode.

Not all games allow you to use this function.. Also you skiped the rest of what I was saying If I have no internet how do I install my digitall copy if my hard drive failed?

[Kevin Jay]

Steam is the only direct download company, where you actually own the game. Before I started using Steam I download a game off of Direct 2 Drive. After I had to reformat my computer, I went to the site to redownload my game, and discovered that with Direct 2 Drive you don't own the game. You just own one digital copy of it. If that one copy gets deleted, corrupted, or made incompatible you can never replace it. You have to buy a whole new copy. With Steam you can download your games unlimited times and on as many computers as you want. You actually own the game, it doesn't belong to Steam.

Right now, Gog.com has the distinction of being the best direct download company. No DRM whatsoever. You can download the game as much as you like, burn it to disk, and never have to authenticate it online no matter how many machines you install it on. Steam won't allow this.

The only reason you would want no DRM is so that you can make illegal copies of a game and give it to all your friends. I get very weary of people who don't like DRM.

I personally don't know anyone who "likes" DRM or having their access to a purchased product limited after sale. Anyhow, I wouldn't imagine that there are many pirates who come to forums like this to gripe about DRM. I would guess that the typical pirate could care less about DRM, since they don't have to bother with it. Instead, it is the honest customer who is affected by it.

[Davorah Katz]

if it was just some FPS or RTS or just RPG, heavens who cares, most games... i'd buy on steam

Skyrim... HELL NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it makes modding a pure pain in the ass. however 'tis ok if they release it on steam, i'll just not buy it there, as long as its not required.

Why would it be a pain to mod the game?

I think you're confusing Steam with D2D. They actually encrypt the game files which makes it extremely difficult, or impossible to mod the game. Steam doesn't do that, they only mod the main executable (exe file).

Steam doesn't affect modders at all unless they plan on modding the exe file which is in a legally grey area anyway.

[Dean Brown]

Right now, Gog.com has the distinction of being the best direct download company. No DRM whatsoever. You can download the game as much as you like, burn it to disk, and never have to authenticate it online no matter how many machines you install it on. Steam won't allow this.


I personally don't know anyone who "likes" DRM or having their access to a purchased product limited after sale. Anyhow, I wouldn't imagine that there are many pirates who come to forums like this to gripe about DRM. I would guess that the typical pirate could care less about DRM, since they don't have to bother with it. Instead, it is the honest customer who is affected by it.

I ended up buying a digital copy of the Dragon Age Origins strategy guide... I only get to install it 3 times so it I end up using all 3 installs I have to spend the 20+ dollars to get it for another 3 intstalls. I was pissed when I read this. after the purchase was made it told me this I was pissed. Also I had to have a connection to install one game even thoug I own the CD... I wanted a connection so it could "verify" my copy before installing... Im very against steam on my games when I own the CD.

[Becky Cox]

It's all about choosing the lesser evil here

Steam is pretty awesome compared to the stuff Ubisoft forces its customers to use. It's obvious that the game has to have some form of DRM, and Steam is one of the least intrusive methods.

[Pete Schmitzer]

It's all about choosing the lesser evil here

Steam is pretty awesome compared to the stuff Ubisoft forces its customers to use. It's obvious that the game has to have some form of DRM, and Steam is one of the least intrusive methods.

How many copies of Morrowind were pirated? Or Oblivion? Or Fallout 3?
We cannot state that a publisher has to use DRM as we do not have the closely-guarded facts about piracy.

"Piracy" when used as a reason for DRM is about as ethereal as an argument can be. We are given no real information other than a promise that the evil boogey man is being thwarted. This argument only holds sway if we assume that it is accurate. We know that pirates are not thwarted as evidenced by the fact that every form of DRM ever created has been cracked (usually within days) and we aren't even positive that pirates are the evil boogey men since we are never provided with any hard data that shows that what pirates do actually hurts us (they obviously hurt the publisher, no argument there).


EDIT: After re-reading my post I figured I should clarify that I am in no way defending piracy. It is an illegal practice that prevents people from being compensated for their work. However, my point still remains, we (the consumers) have not been shown that preventing piracy benefits us enough to warrant the inconveniences that we are forced to suffer (that pirates can easily avoid).

[Guinevere Wood]

How many copies of Morrowind were pirated? Or Oblivion? Or Fallout 3?
We cannot state that a publisher has to use DRM as we do not have the closely-guarded facts about piracy.

"Piracy" when used as a reason for DRM is about as ethereal as an argument can be. We are given no real information other than a promise that the evil boogey man is being thwarted. This argument only holds sway if we assume that it is accurate. We know that pirates are not thwarted as evidenced by the fact that every form of DRM ever created has been cracked (usually within days) and we aren't even positive that pirates are the evil boogey men since we are never provided with any hard data that shows that what pirates do actually hurts us (they obviously hurt the publisher, no argument there).

They hurt us by hurting the publisher its a butterfly effect we just dont feel it the same as the publisher does. Economy may feel it and the industry feels it. But we the consumer dont really feel it. The thing is piracy is still a very bad thing and they are doing what they think will keep the piracy effect down or even slow them.

We the consumer are not meant to benefit from these "safeguards" (ill just call them that)

[evelina c]

They hurt us by hurting the publisher its a butterfly effect we just dont feel it the same as the publisher does. Economy may feel it and the industry feels it. But we the consumer dont really feel it. The thing is piracy is still a very bad thing and they are doing what they think will keep the piracy effect down or even slow them.

The butterfly effect only comes into play if a publisher goes out of business or otherwise chooses to not publish a game, however that doesn't actually hurt us because we didn't lose anything other than a specific potential future thing (i.e. It is an unrealized loss).

[Alexx Peace]

How many copies of Morrowind were pirated? Or Oblivion? Or Fallout 3?
We cannot state that a publisher has to use DRM as we do not have the closely-guarded facts about piracy.

"Piracy" when used as a reason for DRM is about as ethereal as an argument can be. We are given no real information other than a promise that the evil boogey man is being thwarted. This argument only holds sway if we assume that it is accurate. We know that pirates are not thwarted as evidenced by the fact that every form of DRM ever created has been cracked (usually within days) and we aren't even positive that pirates are the evil boogey men since we are never provided with any hard data that shows that what pirates do actually hurts us (they obviously hurt the publisher, no argument there).

You hear many arguments about a lot of things.. the first one that usually comes up is piracy... the bottom line is, it is simply a way of having a captive audience to sell them stuff. As a seller, I want to hook you to my product/system, and present my product/system as being all you need, and hope that you the consumer perceive my product/system as satisfaction for all your needs and don't feel the need to go outside my product/system. That is all it is. A way to control the consumer.

[Rachel Tyson]

The butterfly effect only comes into play if a publisher goes out of business or otherwise chooses to not publish a game, however that doesn't actually hurt us because we didn't lose anything other than a specific potential future thing (i.e. It is an unrealized loss).

We feel it in the way of more agreemints ect more laws put in effect and other things. We dont benefit at all but we feel the effects.

My spelling is getting off. I hate preparing for graveyard shifts.

[Latisha Fry]

The only reason you would want no DRM is so that you can make illegal copies of a game and give it to all your friends. I get very weary of people who don't like DRM.

Edit:
I removed a reference to McCarthyism. In retrospect that was such a threat to freedom it wasn't right to bring it up here, even if I acknowledged there's no comparison.

People standing up for their rights is a good thing. People standing up against outrageous DRM allows things like VCRs and now DVRs to exist. It is regular and consistent that industries try to withhold technology from the public that they deem as threats. They didn't want VCRs, they didn't want CD burners, they are trying to outlaw even legitimate peer to peer file distribution. If people don't stand up for their rights all media will be turned into glorified rentals. A year or two ago Amazon removed a book from its customers and refunded it. The mere fact they had the ability to do this is an alarming thing for anyone that believes in freedom. It means if villains gain power, they have the power to order Amazon to erase any inconvenient material from its customers' e-readers. That's just chilling.

People didn't back down and now Apple distributes DRM-free music. People didn't back down and now Securom doesn't fit the definition of malware as well as it used to. People didn't back down and the outrageous multiple activations thing with Mass Effect and some other games was dropped.

I personally like Steam, but people who care about their rights MUST stand up to things that take it so far. I will never buy an Ubisoft game as long as it keeps up with its anti-customer DRM practices.