Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Valve Releases Steamworks

Valve announces the release of Steamworks free of charge, offering developers and publishers the game publishing tools used for Half-Life 2 and The Orange Box. Steamworks allows for copy protection, stats tracking, auto-updates, voice communication, and more:

January 29, 2008 - Valve, creators of best-selling game franchises (such as Half-Life and Counter-Strike) and leading technologies (such as Steam and Source), today announce Steamworks, a complete suite of publishing and development tools - ranging from copy protection to social networking services to server browsing - is now available free of charge to developers and publishers worldwide.

Steamworks, the same suite of tools used in best-selling PC titles Half-Life 2 and The Orange Box, is available for all PC games distributed via retail and leading online platforms such as Steam. The services included in Steamworks may be used a la carte or in any combination.

Specifically, Steamworks offers:

    · Real-time stats on sales, gameplay, and product activation: Know exactly how well your title is selling before the charts are released. Find out how much of your game is being played. Login into your Steamworks account pages and view up to the hour information regarding worldwide product activations and player data.

    · State of the art encryption system: Stop paying to have your game pirated before it's released. Steamworks takes anti-piracy to a new level with strong encryption that keeps your game locked until the moment it is released.

    · Territory/version control: The key-based authentication provided in Steamworks also provides territory/version controls to help curb gray market importing and deliver territory-specific content to any given country or region.

    · Auto updating: Insures all customers are playing the latest and greatest version of your games.

    · Voice chat: Available for use both in and out of game.

    · Multiplayer matchmaking: Steamworks offers you all the multiplayer backend and matchmaking services that have been created to support Counter-Strike and Team Fortress 2, the most played action games in the world.

    · Social networking services: With support for achievements, leaderboards, and avatars, Steamworks allows you to give your gamers as many rewards as you would like, plus support for tracking the world's best professional and amateur players of your game.

    · Development tools: Steamworks allows you to administer private betas which can be updated multiple times each day. Also includes data collection tools for QA, play testing, and usability studies.

    "Developers and publishers are spending more and more time and money cobbling together all the tools and backend systems needed to build and launch a successful title in today's market," said Gabe Newell, president of Valve. "Steamworks puts all those tools and systems together in one free package, liberating publishers and developers to concentrate on the game instead of the plumbing."

    "As more developers and publishers have embraced Steam as a leading digital distribution channel, we've heard a growing number of inquiries regarding the availability of the platform's services and tools," said Jason Holtman, director business development at Valve. "Offering Steamworks is part of our ongoing efforts to support the needs of game developers and our publishing partners."

    Steam is a leading platform for the delivery and management of PC games and digital content. With over 13 million active accounts and more than 250 games, plus hundreds of movie files and game demos available, Steam has become a frequent destination for millions of gamers around the world.

For more information regarding Steamworks, please visit www.steamgames.com/steamworks. To find out about more about Steamworks contact jasonh@valvesoftware.com

View
131 Replies. 7 pages. Viewing page 2.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Older >

111. ... Jan 31, 2008, 09:27 theyarecomingforyou
 
I'm going to have to say I agree with a lot of the points that "U" guy mentions. I'm not sure why people need to personally attack others simply because they don't like their views - just don't read what he has to say - if you don't care then simply also don't post replies for.
I'm happy to listen when Riley makes a valid point but for every one of those there are 20 comments about how Valve is destroying PC gaming, how Steam is flawed and the rest are baseless, trolling statements. There are plenty of things with Steam I'd like to see improved but I get fed up of Riley spreading shit.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Founder of the "I Hate Smiley Fitz" society

Remember: Riley has autism. He has trouble communicating, and in an overstimulating
environment, he can get frightened and run away, leaving his parents frantic. - Auburn
 
Avatar 22891
 
SteamID: theyarecomingforyou
Star Citizen: Blue's News
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
110. Re: ... Jan 31, 2008, 08:02 Ecthelion
 
Personally I have not been burned by Steam simply because I refuse to purchase any games which require it.
Could you clarify this statement, in relation to the following statement?
I periodically checkout Steam whenever Valve makes some supposedly significant update to it.

This comment was edited on Jan 31, 08:04.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
109. Re: Whew. Jan 31, 2008, 07:21 Brin
 
Your loyalty and admiration of Valve is misguided...

Why?

it is far more likely that a Steam user will permanently lose access to his Steam games because Valve unilaterally decided to terminate his account.

Far more likely? Hm... how much more likely? Be specific now, because I'm curious as to why I should be so afraid of this (because, I'll be honest, I'm not the least bit worried that my account is about to be terminated without cause). In fact, if you have any way to really get at the numbers, or even conduct a minor thought experiment, about how many people out of the millions that use Steam have had this happen to them?

I'd also like to note that an event that has a 0.0001% chance of occurring (unlikely) is 100x more likely then an event that has a 0.000001% chance of occurring (really unlikely). I'd still agree that 0.0001% is still a far more likely occurring thing then 0.000001% - But it's still no where near 50% or heck, even 10%. I'd bet that the users of Steam have a far greater chance of dying on the roads tomorrow while they drive to work, then they do losing their accounts unfairly. (I'm assuming of course that they aren't breaking the rules)

No consumers really don't have a choice beyond simply not patronizing Steam and buying other games.

You mean I don't have a choice outside of buying a game, or NOT buying a game? Gee, what a shocker... oh wait - NO it's not. This is sort of the standard way of things - Do I buy the Snickers bar, or not? I GUESS I could steal it, but I usually try to avoid that way of thinking. Unless of course you're implying that I should be able to STEAL the game?


However when every commercial game uses Steam or something similar, consumers will literally have no choice because all games will be similarly restricted. That also does nothing to compensate those who have already lost their purchases on Steam because they can't simply "not buy" what they already bought since Valve doesn't give refunds on released games.

There is that darned "slippery slope" again (for the love of whatever you believe in, please GOOGLE THIS). I happen to think it is unlikely that ALL commercial games will go the way of Steam (really, I do...), BUT in the event that other similar products pop up, if Steam's "way" is deemed a non-issue, then and only then will it be similar as you describe, otherwise you should be jumping for joy at the first sign of competition so that the product has a chance to improve (that is, if people actually see your point).
As I wrote plainly below, this is about fairness and respect for the customer. If enough consumers wake up and demand more, they'll get it.

Wake up and demand more? See, the problem with that is a lot of us are extremely pleased with deals like the Orange Box which is something that I (personally) have never seen before from any other company - I got 3 games, for the price of 1! I have never had an issue with Steam before, and so I have NO REASON to "wake up and demand more," sir, I am satisfied - please, give me a better reason as to why you feel I shouldn't be satisfied.


Game companies stopped using Starforce because enough consumers refused to continue to tolerate it.

Why? (I have never heard of StarForce, so please excuse my ignorance, but I am assuming it's similar to Steam)

The music publishers are now abandoning DRM because enough consumers complained and refused to continue to buy it.

I believe that carried its own set of problems though, unique to music and music players. Am I wrong?

If enough PC game consumers grow a spine and refuse to tolerate Steam's restrictive DRM and terms of service, Valve too will have to relent. But so long as customers like you think you don't deserve better, not only will you not get better, you'll get even worse DRM and more restrictions piled on your games.

Like I said, I need a better reason I suppose, because yeah, I am satisfied with what I have been given.

I'd like to ask you a question - Are there any companies that you wish Valve was more like? Or rather, is there a standard out there that you are happy with?

This comment was edited on Jan 31, 07:25.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
108. Re: ... Jan 31, 2008, 06:38 Bhruic
 
For clarity, the point of my last paragraph is, rather than coming on Blues News and ranting on the forums, which accomplishes little, why not do something more about it? You don't like a product? Make your own or support a competitor, start a boycott. Don't like the laws? Get involved in politics and try to change them.

Ok, that's certainly a more reasonable position. However, I'd question your assumption that posting on forums accomplishes little. It was nothing more than posting on forums that ended up effectively shutting down Starforce.

The other angle I'd take on it, is the fact that a site like this is full of gamers. In fact, the audience is almost completely gamers. So if you're going to try and rally support for a position, would this not be a logical place to start?

I don't think that Riley is going about it in an effective way, but that's a different issue. If you're going to seriously attempt to change people's minds, you aren't going to do it by coming across as a fringe fanatic.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
107. Re: ... Jan 31, 2008, 06:29 Bhruic
 
That was your restriction, not mine or DedEye's. I called you on it and now you are changing the rules to fit your argument because you cannot name a service that does what Steam does or as well as it does.

No, that was your interpretation. By "in the same category", I was referring to publishers in general. Apologies if that wasn't clear.

However, your suggestion that I needed to change the rules in order to name a service is, of course, completely in error since I did in fact do so.

So I'd say that's a big fail at getting me interested in using their service.

Well, I wasn't trying to interest you in using their service. I was simply doing what you asked - pointing out what I consider a "better" online publisher. Unless you want to be the one to change the rules?


This comment was edited on Jan 31, 06:40.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
106. Re: Whew. Jan 31, 2008, 06:22 >U
 
The fact that I think Valve Software is a good company...So please, Riley (Mr >U) spare me your ad hominem attacks about my mouth, and Valve's figurative "cock."
Your loyalty and admiration of Valve is misguided, but you needn't worry about my reply in that regard. I save such gems only for the repeat offenders like Dagok who deserve it for their repeated failed attempts to insult me.

Your mistrust is misplaced I think, because you make the very unlikely argument that "You shouldn't buy this game, because Valve Software could close down and you could lose your game!"
Actually that is not my main argument because it is not the most common case where Steam customers lose permanent access to the games they purchased. While Valve could certainly undergo a corporate merger or stop offering some or all games on Steam for other reasons, it is far more likely that a Steam user will permanently lose access to his Steam games because Valve unilaterally decided to terminate his account. Valve has a self-described "zero tolerance" policy regarding the termination of a customer's steam account, and it won't even contact the customer to inform him that it has been terminated nor is there any form of redress or compensation for such termination. Even if the customer spent hundreds or thousands of dollars on games, he still loses it all, and some of the reasons for account termination are quite arbitrary and seemingly innocuous. See http://support.steampowered.com/cgi-bin/steampowered.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=368 and http://www.steampowered.com/v/index.php?area=online_conduct for some of the details. So, just because all Steam users don't lose access to their games, doesn't mean that YOU won't.

specifically the point that you really DO HAVE A CHOICE.
No consumers really don't have a choice beyond simply not patronizing Steam and buying other games. However when every commercial game uses Steam or something similar, consumers will literally have no choice because all games will be similarly restricted. That also does nothing to compensate those who have already lost their purchases on Steam because they can't simply "not buy" what they already bought since Valve doesn't give refunds on released games.

just because you want to play a game, doesn't mean Valve Software has to give wrap their contract around what you desire so that you can feel secure.
As I wrote plainly below, this is about game companies showing fairness towards, respect for, and (dare I say) trust of the customer. If enough consumers wake up and demand more, they'll get it. Game companies stopped using Starforce because enough consumers refused to continue to tolerate it. The music publishers are now abandoning DRM because enough consumers complained and refused to continue to buy it. If enough PC game consumers grow a spine and refuse to tolerate Steam's restrictive DRM and terms of service, Valve too will have to relent. But so long as customers like you think you don't deserve better, not only will you not get better, you'll get even worse DRM and more restrictions piled on your games.

While, this doesn't PROVE that Valve will be around in another 10 years, what it does do is demonstrate that...Valve Software has offered good service to CS 1 players for the past X amount of years, thus it is not unreasonable to expect another X amount of years of good service.
No, what it demonstrates is that Valve will exploit its most loyal customers regardless of how old the game is. First Valve shoved Steam down its users throats even when the majority of them didn't want it (and wouldn't migrate to it when it was optional) by bundling Steam in updates to its previously released games like Counterstrike and requiring Steam to continue to play those games online. Then Valve shoved in-game advertising and tracking down those same Counterstrike users throats by using Steam to force those ad-embedded updates upon them if they wanted to continue to play the game. In contrast Quake I, II, and III owners can still play those similarly old games online, and neither id nor Activision has forced them to run bloated and restrictive game distribution software like Steam or to endure in-game advertising and tracking to be able to continue to play those games as Valve has done with its older titles.

Especially since they seem to only be getting better, and better.
No, Valve is getting worse and worse. Soon all of Valve's games will probably have embedded advertising and tracking in them like Counterstrike does now or even worse. If Steamworks turns out to be free and popular, Steam may become a cesspool of advertising, marketing, and user tracking to pay for it.

This comment was edited on Jan 31, 06:57.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
105. Re: ... Jan 31, 2008, 05:38 >U
 
LMAO! Oh Riley - you are so cute when your stupid. Which is always.
Given your stupidity I'm not offended because that's not the first time you've been wrong, and it certainly won't be the last.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
104. Whew. Jan 31, 2008, 05:38 Brin
 
Wow, this rarely happens but I have managed to have been dragged out of my slumber in order to make a few points in defense of, what I perceive to be a good company.

The fact that I think Valve Software is a good company is completely subjective, thus, completely relative to me (I have my own reasons for evaluating game companies, and I won't go in to it here since it isn't relevant). So please, Riley (Mr >U) spare me your ad hominem attacks about my mouth, and Valve's figurative "cock." They have no bearing on our conversation.

However, your "hating" Valve software, while also subjective to you, is quite important to the criticizing of your slippery slope logic. After taking a quick gander at your previous posts (I haven't been thorough because it is getting late), I noticed that your biggest issue with Steam is that your buying of games is seemingly more like a "subscription" service, versus that of actual ownership. Your mistrust is misplaced I think, because you make the very unlikely argument that "You shouldn't buy this game, because Valve Software could close down and you could lose your game!" You then continue to reinforce your mistrust with more arguments that never seem to satisfy me - specifically the point that you really DO HAVE A CHOICE. Just because you are poor, doesn't mean you have to rob a bank, and just because you want to play a game, doesn't mean Valve Software has to give wrap their contract around what you desire so that you can feel secure. In a situation like this, only one "person" (corporations are recognized as persons legally) is going to really feel "secure," and guess what? - unless all of a sudden everyone started to mysteriously agree with your slippery slope fallacious ways, it is unlikely Valve is going to change any time soon. So, either find a new argument, or realize your erring ways.

You said in post 103:
You're certainly not the typical Steam user then judging from all of those Counterstrike 1 players still online.
In response to
I don't tend to play 10 year old multiplayer games so if Steam goes down in the future, I doubt I'll care.

While, this doesn't PROVE that Valve will be around in another 10 years, what it does do is demonstrate that Valve IS a reliable source of entertainment. We can thus induce that Valve will probably be around in the future. This is similar logic as to "My house has stood for the past 10 years, I think it's safe to assume that it will stand for another 10."

"Valve Software has offered good service to CS 1 players for the past X amount of years, thus it is not unreasonable to expect another X amount of years of good service."

Especially since they seem to only be getting better, and better.

Also, please, Google the following logical fallacies: "Ad Hominem Attacks," "The Slippery Slope," "The Red Herring," "Appeal to Ignorance," and "Missing the Point." You only have to Google them if you want to improve your ability to express yourself in a rational manner, otherwise you can ignore the advice.
-Brin


This comment was edited on Jan 31, 05:38.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
103. Re: ... Jan 31, 2008, 04:39 >U
 
I don't tend to play 10 year old multiplayer games so if Steam goes down in the future, I doubt I'll care.
You're certainly not the typical Steam user then judging from all of those Counterstrike 1 players still online.

If you foresee yourself doing this, don't buy / support steam games, which doesn't leave you a great deal of options for gaming
That's exactly the problem, and exactly why I complain about it. Steam is limiting my gaming choices, and it will only get worse if it gets more popular and Valve doesn't fundamentally change it to correct its many egregious flaws and restrictions from the consumers' standpoint. I don't want to have to pay more for games and end up with something that is nothing but a subscription service that can be taken away or be fundamentally changed after purchase.

So you do agree if it does disappear, you'll still be able to play games from Steam?
With such cracks there are never any guarantees that they will still work and be available when the time comes. You shouldn't let Valve off the hook by still patronizing Steam because you might be able to crack it. If you're going to rely on a crack, there's no point in paying Valve for Steam games because you're just feeding the problem that makes you need the crack in the first place.

This comment was edited on Jan 31, 11:19.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
102. Re: No subject Jan 31, 2008, 04:26 >U
 
With post #98 you pretty much entirely sum up your ignorance.
You just proved it is YOU who is actually ignorant with your reply to it. Next time read the whole post before you respond.

Steam has sales, pre-order specials all the time...just like any retail outlet.
No, NOT, like any retail outlet because Steam's "sales" pale in comparison to the discounts in both size and frequency of those offered by retailers. Valve does a better job than it used to with sales, but they still pare in comparsion to retailers. The proof of that could be easily seen last Christmas shopping season when several major retailers in the U.S. like Best Buy had the Orange box for $25 while Steam charged the full $50. Other games offered on Steam were similarly discounted at retail such as Quake Wars for $19.99 while the Steam version was $39.95.

It also has special bundles and games you can't get in stores.
Any of Steam's bundles can be beaten in price by gathering the same selection of games from retail and online sources. The titles that Steam bundles together are older games that typically sell on eBay for a few dollars each or can be found in retailers' and online stores' bargain sections. You may not be able to get them in one box or all at the same place, but you can still get them for less than on Steam. For example you can routinely find two full games in a jewel case package for only $10 at discount retailers like Wal-Mart whereas the same games on Steam are $10 or $20 each.

It's not up to Valve to set the price and specials for each game. I've told you this before.
That is absolutely a moot point here. It doesn't matter WHO sets the price when comparing Steam's prices versus retailers. The fact is that Steam's prices are regularly beaten by retailers of all types and that includes Steam's sale prices. It doesn't matter who is setting those prices. They are still higher compared to what is offered for retail copies of the games. In addition that completely overlooks the fact that even if the prices were the same as Steam's prices, you are comparing apples and oranges because the products are not the same. Retail copies of games that don't require Steam are superior because they are real, fully functional products and not restricted like Steam's games which are nothing but a tenuous service that can't be resold and that Valve can take away after purchase at will.

This comment was edited on Jan 31, 07:27.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
101. Re: ... Jan 31, 2008, 02:11 Prez
 
If you think that post is even reasonable let alone the best, that only demonstrates just how irrefutable my points on the subject are and how moronic you are.

LMAO! Oh Riley - you are so cute when your stupid. Which is always.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
100. Re: ... Jan 31, 2008, 01:46 Ibbz
 
I wouldn't. Over its history Gamespy's network has been more reliable than Steam. In addition unlike Steam Gamespy's system is "fail open" by design which means when Gamespy's network fails, games which use it for authentication will still run. So if Gamespy were to disappear, games which rely on it for authentication are still useable and can even still allow online play so long as players can find the game servers. In addition Gamespy's authentication servers are separate from its master list servers which means that if the authentication servers are offline but the master servers are up (which has happened), clients can still join game servers. That's the beauty of fail open versus fail closed like Steam. The game is still useful and playable in the event of network failure.

I've never had a problem with Steam Multiplayer, where as the problems I usually have with multiplayer are to do with Gamespy. This is completely anecdotal so I don't really care if Gamespy has had 95% uptime compared to Steam's 94%.

I don't tend to play 10 year old multiplayer games so if Steam goes down in the future, I doubt I'll care. If you foresee yourself doing this, don't buy / support steam games, which doesn't leave you a great deal of options for gaming I know but you could always play console games.

Hacked Steam clients already exist and can do this. However that is certainly no legitimate excuse for Valve to make Steam so damn restrictive. If you're going to use a hacked Steam client, you might as well go "whole hog" and simply get your Steam games for free as well. There's no sense in rewarding Valve if it's going to treat you like a criminal regardless.
So you do agree if it does disappear, you'll still be able to play games from Steam? That was the only point of my comment, not that the Steam authentication method is fair but I still much prefer it to any sort of CD Authentication.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
99. Re: No subject Jan 31, 2008, 01:30 Krovven
 
With post #98 you pretty much entirely sum up your ignorance. But this quote wraps it in a nutshell.

Consumers are never going to see the savings from Steam

Steam has sales, pre-order specials all the time...just like any retail outlet. It also has special bundles and games you can't get in stores.

I'm sorry they didn't have the same special Gogamer had on the same weekend....NOBODY ever does, whether it's retail or online. It's not up to Valve to set the price and specials for each game. I've told you this before. I've shown an example that was stated specifically by Valve that each games publisher sets their own prices. Yet another thing you can't get through your thick narrow minded head.

----------------------------------------------------
Currently fragging in The Witcher, Burnout Paradise, COmpany of Heroes, Team Fortress 2

Join the "Blues News" Steam Community Group. http://steamcommunity.com/groups/bluesnews/
This comment was edited on Jan 31, 01:33.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
98. Re: No subject Jan 31, 2008, 00:35 >U
 
To me I'm paying the same price, for a game with no box no dvd, and possible not able to play unless i have a network even though there is a non-network portion of game.
Many times with Steam it's not even the same price. Steam users can pay more for a game. Gogamer regularly has specials and closeouts that are a fraction of what the same game sells for on Steam. Even traditional brick-and-mortar retailers regularly beat Steam prices as well. Just last week Best Buy had Enemy Territory: Quake Wars for $19.99 while the version on Steam was $39.95 (and still is).

Consumers are never going to see the savings from Steam that they can get from robust competition amongst retailers due to inventory pressures and the need to generate traffic. However, if Steam expands in popularity and retail distribution disappears or significantly recedes, consumers will have to pay more for their games because that competition and those inventory pressures will be gone.

This comment was edited on Jan 31, 01:01.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
97. No subject Jan 31, 2008, 00:16 coder
 
I'm going to have to say I agree with a lot of the points that "U" guy mentions. I'm not sure why people need to personally attack others simply because they don't like their views - just don't read what he has to say - if you don't care then simply also don't post replies for.

Anyways - overall I think steam is great for developers but less so for consumers. Many things remains to be seen how steam and other digital distribution channels affect the market - my concern on seeing trends is that consumers will be paying more for less.

I'm fairly new to using steam but really I haven't seen much of a value over getting my games from gamestop/circuit city/or best buys.. very little. To me I'm paying the same price, for a game with no box no dvd, and possible not able to play unless i have a network even though there is a non-network portion of game.

So some people will mention they can get their game without having to get out in the cold to pick it up from a store - but if you're an American - isn't there many studies that point at how overweight and unfit we are as a nation? I'm not saying driving down to the game store and picking up a game will make you fit - but it's the overall spirit of not wanting to do anything physical - you know being lazy! So can you say something that promotes a less active lifestyle that's a benefit to the end consumer? Perhaps not. Oh and please don't mention the thing about being busy - you can find time to play a game - i think you can find a way to go pick it up. It's not like you are walking in the cold 5 miles up hill there and back each time you do it... unless it's the real life version of something like portals you're playing hahhaa.

Either way if Steam means paying less for games as consumer then yes i think that's the true value. I've heard and read many things about people saying how digital distribution will reduce production and distribution cost which translate to savings to the consumer but I've yet to experience that for the AAA titles.

Supposedly for the developer steam is value in many ways - not only reduction in getting the product into the users hands but also from the fact that there is less prone to piracy since pirated games should not be working if they are on steam (right?) - so that means for the same games they should recover more valid users because that's the only way people can play it. So less piracy should lead to more real dollars from sales which should lead to increased profit from a game right? So why can't the developer pass some of this down to the consumer. Again i haven't seen it happen - who knows maybe because it's inflation? maybe it's because games really cost more to make now and i'm just judging over my games experience dating as far back as the early 80s to now so all i see is price increasing?

I haven't even begun to mention about the other values to the developer such as ability to track sales, monitor usage stats, reduce marketing expenses, etc - really all of that stuff stated on the steamworks promo site. All of this should spell savings to development and therefore should also spell less for the end consumer.

Anyways putting on the developer hat - i love steam - putting on the consumer hat - i'm eyeing it cautiously and take the position of buying buying the steam version only if it's the only version and i really really must have it - otherwise i'm boxed and from gamestop/bestbuy etc... I'm 34 married and with children but i still love my trips to gamestop - seeing all those game boxes on the shelves and bargain bin - totally spirital experience... so i really don't understand the people who prefer to only download games. I mean youre a gamer.. doesn't walking into a store full of game exite you? I guess i'm just old school.

This comment was edited on Jan 31, 00:21.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
96. Re: ... Jan 30, 2008, 23:37 >U
 
I was kind enough to provide an example; please extend the same courtesy.
Okay, here are two from your second post in this thread:

I get the impression from your posts that you seem
Hell, there are two assumptions in that phrase alone.

That you feel it is unnecessary is personal opinion without the benefit of walking a mile in someone else's shoes.
There's another assumption. You don't actually know my personal or professional history, so you don't really know if I have direct experience with this issue or not. If you want to refute something I stated, then address it directly. Dismissing it because you assume it's an unsubstantiated opinion doesn't do that.

How does sharing my opinion make me a hypocrite?
Telling others not to post on this forum because it "accomplishes little," while still posting yourself is hypocritical. If you were really as interested in sharing ideas as you say, then you would see the posts as worthy of being made. In a public forum you never know who may be reading, and it's foolish to dismiss the impact of someone's words just because you don't agree with them or think they aren't significant. Even if all someone ends up doing is blowing steam and doesn't change the world, who are you to tell them not to do it here?

I never said it was right or wrong, I said that's the way it is.
Accepting it "as the way it is" justifies it and allows it to continue. Just as with downfall of Starforce, if enough consumers stop accepting such DRM "as the way it is," game companies will have to stop using it or make it less restrictive.

I hear a lot of positive things about valve and steam these days, not an uproar about how crappy it is.
You don't listen in the right places then. Even the official Steam support forums are regularly filled with users who can't play their games especially due to problems with their accounts (at least they are until Valve deletes them). In addition most if not all of those people praising Steam simply have never read the Steam Subscriber Agreement, Valve's Privacy Policy, Steam's terms of use, or the other restrictions that Steam places on their purchased games, so they simply don't know how tenuous Steam is. I can understand how the ignorant might like Steam if they didn't know that Valve could bite them in the ass and take away their games at any time with no compensation.

Well, I don't think I've called you any names....yet, but for posting my opinion I'm an apologist and a lackey
First, that reply you quoted was not directed at you. The long reply post beneath it was to you. This forum is threaded for a reason. Second, simply posting an opinion doesn't make you an apologost. However, posting the opinion you did does make you one. You're trying to defend the indefensible. Ask yourself this: If Valve were a music publisher instead of a game company, and Steam were a music delivery and DRM system instead of for games, would you still defend Steam's restrictions and its subscriber agreement? Would you still defend Valve's supposed right to ignore customers complaints and terminate their accounts at will because they own the IP? My point is that like so many on this forum, your love of Valve's games taints your perspective, and you tolerate shit from it like Steam's terms and restrictions that would have you boycotting or railing against a company in any other segment of the entertainment industry. So, yes, if you tolerate those things from Valve, even if you haven't personally experienced them yet, you are an apologist.

This comment was edited on Jan 31, 00:02.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
95. Re: ... Jan 30, 2008, 22:58 >U
 
Well the additional users would theoretically bring more sales.
That would be a case of Valve paying for those expenses from its cut of the sales of unrelated games. I can't imagine that third-party developers and publishers would be happy with the fact that some of the money they are paying Valve is being used to prop up games which are paying Valve nothing for the use of Steam. From the third-parties' perspective they could reduce Valve's cut of their sales if Valve didn't have to pay for the freeloaders.

This will also generate interest from developers to look at Steam as a viable distribution source.
No, at best it really won't make a difference. And, at worst it will have the opposite effect because it would remove the main financial incentive to use Steam as a distributor because a developer could now get all of the features and capacity Steam offers for free except for that one. It could then make much more financial sense to go with a traditional publisher and other digital distributors because Steam could still be used to provide the necessary Internet plumbing without being restricted to only using it as a distribution channel.

So this really is a win : win situation for everyone, but you.
No, this will be a huge loss for consumers because they will lose choice. The more games which require Steam the less choice consumers will have to purchase games that still give them real control and flexibility over their use. It will also kill the secondary/used market for games since games which require Steam cannot be resold and are a subscription service not products. The death of the secondary market will increase game prices especially as Steam becomes the sole distributor of a game and as there are no inventory supply pressures to drive down prices.

I'm sure you will continue to find ways to inform us otherwise.
I just did. It's too bad that you are too busy sucking on Valve's cock to notice.

This comment was edited on Jan 30, 23:05.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
94. Re: ... Jan 30, 2008, 22:41 DedEye
 
Your posts are much better examples of such preconceived notions and assumptions.

I was kind enough to provide an example; please extend the same courtesy. I strive to derive from observation.

Written like a true hypocrite. It certainly accomplishes no less than your own posts here. These posts are certainly significant enough for you to reply to them. Any discussion of an issue on a public forum including this one can have an impact. You would obviously be surprised at just who and how many read these forums.

I'm here because I know people who share the same past-time I do come here to share experiences, ideas, and opinions, which is valuable to me. Yes, even yours >U I'm not here however trying to change people's minds or change EULAs, which from your actions it appears you are. How does sharing my opinion make me a hypocrite?

First, just because something is common doesn't make it right. Second, consumers have many more avenues for redress and compensation for other goods than they do with video games and other software, and that needs to be fixed. No or almost no retail stores in the U.S. will even accept opened videdo games or other software for refund so consumers don't even have that option when they are dissatisfied with their purchases. And, it's the same story with most game publishers and developers regarding refunds.

I never said it was right or wrong, I said that's the way it is.

The problem is that you shouldn't let your own satisfactory experience cloud your judgement and overlook the fact that other Steam customers are not so fortunate.

I hear a lot of positive things about valve and steam these days, not an uproar about how crappy it is.

No, it doesn't as I am simply returning the favor.

Well, I don't think I've called you any names....yet, but for posting my opinion I'm an apologist and a lackey


 
Avatar 14820
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
93. Re: ... Jan 30, 2008, 22:35 Krovven
 
but I can't imagine that Valve will cover the expenses for the use of the Steam servers and network without charging someone for it.

Well the additional users would theoretically bring more sales.
This will also generate interest from developers to look at Steam as a viable distribution source. They do not need to distribute through Steam, but if they like the suite of tools, they may well reconsider.

So this really is a win : win situation for everyone, but you.

I'm sure you will continue to find ways to inform us otherwise.

----------------------------------------------------
Currently fragging in The Witcher, Burnout Paradise, COmpany of Heroes, Team Fortress 2

Join the "Blues News" Steam Community Group. http://steamcommunity.com/groups/bluesnews/
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
92. ... Jan 30, 2008, 22:32 theyarecomingforyou
 
I too would like more details because giving away something for free, particularly something as well developed and successful as this, seems very strange. Hopefully we'll get clarification but because it's not aimed at the average person we might not ever hear about whether it costs anything to use the servers.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Founder of the "I Hate Smiley Fitz" society

Remember: Riley has autism. He has trouble communicating, and in an overstimulating
environment, he can get frightened and run away, leaving his parents frantic. - Auburn
 
Avatar 22891
 
SteamID: theyarecomingforyou
Star Citizen: Blue's News
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
131 Replies. 7 pages. Viewing page 2.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo