I bought the game from EB Games, not through Steam. But I still need Steam running in order to play it. Meanwhile Steam eats most of my system recources just sitting in the background doing nothing of value. I sure hope the next Elder Scrolls game isn't like this!

If steam is eating most of your system recources then either:

- you have very little system recources
- steam is in need of a reinstall
- you don't know how much system recources are actually consumed by steam

in my case if I have steam running in the background the process steam uses about 7 to 9 mb. If I open the window of steam (so I can start a game) it uses about 10 to 15 mb on my computer.

When I first needed steam to play a game I also thought it really svcked. Now I don't care anymore, steam does what it is supposed to do and I believe it does so quite good.

I vote for "you don't know how much system resources are actualyl consumed by steam" check if you have other programs that consume even more memory than steam and try and disable them.

Bingo.

And what exactly does it "do"?
Is it like a game back-up?
Is it an online middleman between the game distributors and the end-user? I can't put my finger on its value, except it seems to have highjacked my expensive game.
Can you play it offline?
What is Steam's value to me?

So far, it is annoying and just another parasite intruding in my privacy.

I'd guess you get annoyed easily, I agree it's intrusive, but it's not going away, and it is currently the best support for pc gamers, best thing is to take advantage of what it has to offer, because no matter how much we scream and shout about it, it's here to stay.

- allows you to buy and download games, keep games up to date, see all steam games installed in one view...and many other things
- could be used as that
- could be viewed as that
- yes if you ever considered 'playing' Steam, that way me and my brother can play fallout new vegas at the same time
- depends on you I guess

I must admit that it really doesn't add much to a game (correct me if wrong).
Auto updating is nice but game makers can create their own tool for this too.
Perhaps it is used to stop pirated copies (not sure how effective Steam is)

Like RunningBare says it is not going away and so far Steam has done little harm to me. But ofcourse that's just me....

It monitors your playing habits that it can taylor and queue its adverti$ement$, then force said ads upon you when you play. In short, nothing useful for those with hard copies.

Steam has absolutely zero value for a single player game. It does not serve as any sort of DRM either. The games STILL get pirated. The whole Games for Windows Live. with fallout 3 was a nightmare, steam isn't quite as bad as that was, but, I still see it as packaging some third party software, which I do not want, with the game, which I DO want.

Actually, Steam provides several benefits for the player directly, and indirectly because it offers benefits for the publisher. it does provide some DRM and therefore thwarts most casual pirating—nothing prevents dedicated and commercial pirates.

Steam provides the publisher a distribution pathway for original purchase and distribution. It provides automatic patching and slip-streaming and, most importantly DLC (whether purchased or free.)

I know it was mentioned above, but if you have not had experience with Microsoft and Windows Live!, Then you have nothing with witch to compare and appreciate Steam. Windows Live! is one of the few programs that fails to function if installed as directed. Even though it is used on Microsoft's own OS it has user rights issues that make it unusable on most NTFS file syatems.

Beyond that its registration, user accounts and play money purchasing scheme are enough to make Gandhi take to the Texas Tower with a sniper rifle.

Understand that this is the future of gaming and that Steam is one of the better of a bad bunch.

Steam would be fine if:

Some of us were not still on dial-up because nothing else is available to us.

We were assured that if Steam ever went under, we would receive a patch to play our games.

The updates were available as actual downloads we could install if our system crashed without having to take days to update them again on dial-up.

Did they actually look at Impulse?

Can you actually connect to Steam? It takes forever.

To the Steam fan-boys, not all of us like this sort of gaming.


So, what ever happened to the good old days when you could buy a game, install it, and actually play it? Now they are just buggy and difficult to even play because of all the junk attached to them. DRM of the harsh kind does nothing against pirates, it hurts us. This game and all the others with DRM are out there for download right now. I buy my games and have to suffer. Bethesda used to be different but not anymore. Good-by and my thumb down to you, Bethesda. You have lost customers over this, me included. Go back to the ways of the Elder Scrolls and Fallout 3 and we may come back, otherwise.....so long.

Love it or not it's the future and isn't going away. Consoles will be also doing this in time because putting a game disk in a box, on a retail shelf, costs more money than distributing it via the internet.

The operation's a success! Unfortunately the patient died.

This somehow reminds me some friends' brand new machine with 4 GB RAM and a x64 OS that was so riddled with bloatware that more than half their resources were consumed while the machine was standing still, all over unnecessary "services". I mean, what's the point of having more RAM but to 'spend' it frivolously duplicating Windows features, right? Upon removing all the factory installed junk, the rig was a monster. By the same token, Fallout New Vegas has something entirely unnecessary attached to it at the hip. Albeit, some really like Steam/GFWL/Achievements/forced advertisemants, I am not one of them. Maybe, post registration, Steam could be optional? Then those who really do like it can have it, but the rest of us could easily uninstall Steam and still play.

And the cost savings are not visible to the consumer. They are absorbed by the publisher as additional revenue. Whether or not it's less expensive for the consumer depends on how much the consumer spends on delivery, i.e. bandwidth and hardware v. gas and transportation. (If you live in a decent urban or suburban area, there's a time cost as well. It probably takes less time to buy a physical product than it does to wait for a 4GB+ game to download.) Without net neutrality (or similar trade regulations), ISPs will charge on both ends--the consumer to access content and the producer to provide fast delivery--and the producer will pass those additional costs onto the consumer. So, it's ultimately a loss for the consumer, regardless.

Great comments, all of you.

Those who like Steam think it holds your hand and provides some comfort or convenience value.

Those who hate it want more ownership of what they purchase, rather than sharing it so Steam can make money at their expense.

This is not the future of gaming. It is the present. The future of gaming has not yet arrived, but I guarantee you that it will not involve Steam, unless Steam evolves too.

Now I'm wondering who pushed the release of Beta New Vegas, and how much Steam receives per patch push.

Yeah, I'm cynical when something like this happens---when the bad guys who sold us this unfinished game also play the good guys who we should all praise for delivering a remedy. Either way, they don't get my praise for this bungling. And this is the future of gaming? LMAO.

I'm curious, after so many people seem to have started on Steam specifically for New Vegas, how people will react when the annual Christmas Steam Sale hits?

I've seen this plenty of times and it's more to do with how you use the system, a lot of bloatware is the result of surfing for freebies, paying visits to shall we say not so reputable sites and not cleaning up, it just takes a little experience to keep those things away from the front door, I have two pieces of bloatware, steam and windows 7 B)

I didn't sign up for Steam or ask for it. I bought FNV off the shelf and was forced to use it. I don't buy many old games, sale or not, and if I do, I can always find a better price on Amazon.

That said, I have downloaded games off other sites, but never "joined" a site and invited it to share my PC and gaming experience. I didn't ask for Steam--it forced itself on me. Why should I support such a model by giving it my money and buying stuff?

And BTW, yes, Windows Live was much worse.

As one of of the handicapped (dial-up connection) Steam is like adding steps to a building, Sure a wheelchair-bound person may be able to get in, but it wouldn't be a pretty sight.

as another who was forced to install Steam I will not buy directly from them. Steam is best as an option & not a requirement especially for a Single-player game that can be bought in Disc form.

I hope the GOTY will be more considerate of the whole fanbase & not just those with a fast connection.

Hey

you wanna know why I love Steam?

First you cannot play Fallout New Vegas with being offline

Second the moment you tell Steam not to update Fallout New Vegas, and you start the game, it first downloads the update

Thrid once the update 1.2 is installed the game cannot start a new or load an excisting saved game.


And forth ultimately I never be able to play a single player game when I am traveling and not online.


I must say Steam adds a lot of service to me.


To be honest in any other industry people would get fired for such an incompetence.

Why do I need Steam, a multiplayer solution.platform for a single player game???

Every point you made is a negative to me. I don't want to partner with a third party to regulate how and when and where I play the game I paid A LOT for on DVD. Never again. Horrific and a blatant invasion of privacy, not to mention a lack of full disclosure. If it was in the fine print, shame on them.

I've played plenty of MMRPG and others, but this is not one of them. I want to experience Fallout alone, without Steam lurking over my shoulder. I can't tell you how much I hate this.

I do not dislike Steam - it can be a fine system if you are ok with it.
Steam is like iTunes.


I did not see the steam print since it was not part of the system requirement box when I bought it.

Nor as a single player game did I even consider it being required to have Steam.


Intended to play Fallout when on the road on trips.


Now I was told you can play Fallout offline.

But guess what when you install it and while that turn of internet you cannot start Fallout because
steam wants to update it and it says it is not ready to play yet.

Once you say do not update, go online, steam installs the update.


Now you can play Fallout offline and it gently always CTD when starting a new game.


PERFECT !!!

The problem is with the game, not Steam.

Steam is an awesome game platform and has extremely fast and responsive SUPPORT, WHICH OBVIOUSLY THE DEVELOPPERS OF THIS GAME DOESNT HAVE.
No seriously Steam is nice, always ready to help and usually under 24 hours, I've posted 4 *tickets* which were all answered and resolved withing 24-48 hours. I have sent an EMAIL to Besthesda support over 12 days ago and still no answers.

Not that I need the email answered anymore since the community ( not the mods or the actual support ) fixed my game.

Please blame Bethesda Softworks for everything wrong with the game...

Aaaand this turned into a general rant thread, which is not particularly productive or useful to anyone.