PDA

View Full Version : Steam? Sorry no go



Seluhir
19th Dec 2013, 12:37
I got an e-mail about this and was quite intrigued by it, seemed like a cool idea for a game. Then I saw the Steam logo and read the FAQ and found out you had to have Steam.

Square... I want to support you, but you keep making these poor decisions. Your lack of customer service regarding FFXIV, your online store being through digitalriver, and now making this steam exclusive... why are you making it so hard for me to support you?

I want to support YOU not Valve. Well anyways, if you ever reconsider the [redacted] decision to have your game be steam exclusive, I'll be back, but if not then I can only wish you the best.


PS: And just before anyone explodes I'm not saying to not have it listed on Steam, just to not make it require it.

Parkesto
19th Dec 2013, 14:00
What the hell do you want them to use? Steam is quite possibly the most well known/used/accepted/hassle free system there is. How are you not supporting Square if the game uses Steam? Do you even know what Steam is?

hirukaru
19th Dec 2013, 15:18
What the hell do you want them to use? Steam is quite possibly the most well known/used/accepted/hassle free system there is. How are you not supporting Square if the game uses Steam? Do you even know what Steam is?

Steam from a steam engine right? :scratch:

But ok I heard more people complain about steam, I want to know why people think steam is a program that should not be used?
I only see these points:
1. Cheap games
2. your games are available everywhere
3. You never lose a CD or DVD ever again
4. You can uninstall en reinstall when ever you want.
5. It does not slow your computer down (As long as you dont say start on startup)

RainaAudron
19th Dec 2013, 15:29
Most pc games nowadays require Steam and as such, it is the best platform for mp games. I do not understand what your point is. Or you would rather use third parties like Gamespy? Also, please phrase your complaints more carefully next time.

Oroibahazopi
19th Dec 2013, 16:08
Honestly I'm with the OP. Even if it is "the best" it's clunky as hell and I hate centralisation as everyone these days should. But this is a f2p game and the steam client isn't too resource heavy. So there's no danger of having your library explode because you got banned or somesuch.

And to everyone else, uh you do know that a hell of a lot of games use their own mp interface without resorting to 3rd party support right?

Lomonop
19th Dec 2013, 16:30
1. Cheap games
2. your games are available everywhere
3. You never lose a CD or DVD ever again
4. You can uninstall en reinstall when ever you want.
5. It does not slow your computer down (As long as you dont say start on startup)
6. When Valve goes broke, no game you bought through Steam will work anymore.

However:
- I don't deem it likely for Valve to go broke (and if it does it will probably be taken over)
- Since Nosgoth is a multiplayer game you always have this problem

RainaAudron
19th Dec 2013, 16:40
"6. When Valve goes broke, no game you bought through Steam will work anymore."

Not true, they said numerous times they will release a patch which will enable to launch your games without steam.
Also, I love how I have all my games in one place and don´t need to use discs. I only buy games from Steam and GOG now.

Vallass
19th Dec 2013, 21:10
Not true, they said numerous times they will release a patch which will enable to launch your games without steam.
Also, I love how I have all my games in one place and don´t need to use discs. I only buy games from Steam and GOG now.

At the same time, this is kind of like the difference between having a book downloaded or having it in hardback. I don't want to have to rely on a net connection for every game I own if I had to delete them or wipe my computer. The weather could knock out my connection, net could be down due to maintenance, etc.

I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but I don't like having to rely on a connection to get my games back. Plus, no matter how good your connection, downloading EVERY game I own again is gonna take a long damn time. Obviously for a multi-player game like this a connection is a must, but it's almost always faster to download from a disc than online. I do agree, even though I have a steam account, that I shouldn't be required to download a program in order to download another program. It's redundant and a bit of a hassle to people who don't already have it.

JanusDominus
19th Dec 2013, 21:23
Steam has Valve anti-cheat system, Steamplay and achievement system, plus players who are going to be banned will be banned based on their Steam accounts and Steam account is something people value more the more games they have. So it makes perfect sense for them to have it Steam-based.

Paradoks_db
22nd Dec 2013, 09:47
"6. When Valve goes broke, no game you bought through Steam will work anymore."

Not true, they said numerous times they will release a patch which will enable to launch your games without steam.
Also, I love how I have all my games in one place and don´t need to use discs. I only buy games from Steam and GOG now.
Nobody seems to be able to give any real evidence for this. Just "Gabe said it at some point" with no quote.
Valve isn't going anywhere right now, but when (if) they do, Steam removal will be a universal disaster, not just releasing a patch.

RainaAudron
22nd Dec 2013, 15:57
I do not think it is of any real concern, you can just switch to offline mode anyway.

Paradoks_db
22nd Dec 2013, 16:41
you can just switch to offline mode anyway.
Which still doesn't work for many people and works for a limited time for others. It was designed to work without time constraints but Valve still hasn't managed to make it work as it should. That's why I'm dreading the day Steam goes down.

RainaAudron
22nd Dec 2013, 17:05
Yeah, I am aware of it, however, I say it is super unlikely anything like that would occur.

Vdeorsumproles
22nd Dec 2013, 18:51
This game is a f2p, for me there is no problem that it's on steam

TheIrtar
23rd Dec 2013, 18:02
There are arguments against Steam, but I don't see them at all for something like this. I'll address some of the ones mentioned in this thread.

1) It's clunky

Not really. It uses less memory and processing power than Explorer in Windows. If you want it compared to similar platforms, it uses less memory than Sony's Launchpad, and uses a full third less resources than Origin. Of the different online launch platforms I have experience with, Steam now is the most efficient. Perhaps even more efficient than anything Square could make in house.

2) If the internet goes down, I can't play my games

For single player games, you have a point. Same point as the SimCity on Origin debate. There are some games that most play single player, and you can spend your whole time with the game without touching the internet.

This is a Multiplayer Arena game. Internet goes down, you aren't playing it either way.

3) I want to actually own the game

This game will never be released on a physical media (or at least as of present has no plans for a physical media that I know of). It will be distributed digitally, and all the assets will be stored on a server. You will never 'own' this game. You could spend a $1000 on this game, but one day years from now (hopefully decades) they WILL bring the servers down. Ask the people who spent hundreds of dollars on a sub to Galaxies or Earth and Beyond or any other MMO that has been brought down over the years, and all they got was a 'Thank-you for your patronage'.

You will never, NEVER, own anything in a game like this. At least in the conventional line of thinking.

4) Physical media is faster

More of an 'anti-online distro' standpoint than 'anti-Steam', but one I see often enough. With some games, again, very valid. There are some games that are released as a complete experience (or near enough) and will only patch a few things until bugs are worked out.

Games like Nosgoth? They will keep growing over the years, and a physical media of the game will quickly be obsolete. Every new skin, map, or mechanic change will add more and more. Games like this are supposed to change on a regular interval. So, you'll quickly find your physical media will just patch all the game files. Or worse, you will need to download multiple iterations of patches and spend more time downloading than if you just downloaded the game client fresh. (That depends on how they manage version iteration)

5) I don't want to support Valve

To just download and install the game? That will provide Valve no financial support. But if Square runs their transaction system through Steam? Well, then you have a point. We don't know how exactly they will monetize the game.

Perhaps they will sell exclusively through Steam, then a portion of every purchase will go to Valve. But it means we at least have an existing secured transaction service.

But, they may also go like Gaijin (creators of War Thunder and Star Conflict), and though the client is hosted on Steam, you could make purchases through either Steam or their own website.

They could even go the SOE route and host their clients on Steam, as a way to attract more attention to the game, but host all transactions on their own servers entirely divorced from Steam.

So, this is the point I could concede. After all, it is your right to choose what companies you do and do not want to support. Free market and all that. BUT all we know as of right now is that the game client will be hosted on Steam, not yet how they will manage the finances.

RainaAudron
23rd Dec 2013, 18:25
Very well said Irtar.

Vampmaster
23rd Dec 2013, 19:44
I think its unlikely that the assets will be downloaded from the server every time you play. Most steam games I've seen require you download the assets the first time and then from then on, you just use steam to connect to a match and send any data about what's currently happening in it.

blincoln
4th Jan 2014, 19:43
I used to be very anti-Steam, mostly because of the if-it-ever-goes-away-I-won't-be-able-to-play-my-games part. Seluhir, if it helps convince you, I was so strongly opposed to it that I actually wrote a letter to Bethesda telling them I'd never install the deluxe copy of Fallout: New Vegas that I bought or buy another one of their games because they'd made Steam a requirement.

I'm sure for the single-player games, even if Valve fail to keep their promise (which I think they are very unlikely to keep except for Valve-developed games), someone will come up with a way to make them work.

I can't remember which game finally convinced me to install Steam, but it's actually a pretty decent system. I've never had trouble playing single-player games that use it, which is a lot more than I can say for Blizzard's always-online DRM that kicks you out of your single-player game without saving if you lose your connection or their servers go down.

The one gripe I still have is that because of the anti-cheating system, it also means you can't hack/mod single-player games unless the developer explicitly includes modding functionality. I am 100% against people being able to cheat in multiplayer games (unless it's in a special arena where everyone is explicitly allowed to cheat, because that would be pretty cool :)), but if I have a single-player game, I think I should be able to play it in whatever way I want, as long as I don't do things like give it away to people who haven't paid for it. A *lot* of games I've only finished because I was able to cheat - I just didn't have the time or patience to build up the massive skills necessary to get very far in e.g. the original Devil May Cry. On newer games where cheating is impossible (e.g. Ninja Gaiden on the PS3), I gave up about halfway through and will never see how they end.

Anyway, I suggest giving it a try. It's actually pretty decent. For a game like Nosgoth that's online-only, as TheIrtar said, it makes way more sense than physical media. You may even find out about some interesting games that you wouldn't have seen otherwise - I only played The Swapper because it was available on Steam, and that was a really fun Metroid-esque experience. I'm also looking forward to Routine, which will be Steam-only as well.

Kougeru
5th Jan 2014, 18:33
Honestly I'm with the OP. Even if it is "the best" it's clunky as hell and I hate centralisation as everyone these days should. But this is a f2p game and the steam client isn't too resource heavy. So there's no danger of having your library explode because you got banned or somesuch.

And to everyone else, uh you do know that a hell of a lot of games use their own mp interface without resorting to 3rd party support right?


Clunky as hell? You kidding me? There's nothing clunky about it at all. It also hasnt been a resource hog since like 2007 when people started getting decent computers. It literally uses like 1% or less power of the average gaming PC. There's absolutely no reason to hate steam for this game. It's an online-only game so that argument is invalid. Yes, a lot of games use their own MP but more often than not they're terrible and Steam does a much better job. An example of Sins of a Solar Empire. It wasnt terrible MP, but it was irritating until they moved to Steam.