I own Ostfront and will pay another 25.00 for a version of Ostfront sans Steam

[baff]

I for one am not playing RO.
If it wasn't for Steam I might be.

There are other online distributers than Steam. Fileplanets Direct2Drive is wholly superior and I'm sure they would have been willing to distribute it. I don't think finding a distributor for such an obviously saleable product as this was ever going to be a serious problem.

NB Destineer also distributes this game. If you removed Steam from the equation, this game would still be distributed.

There have been thousands and thousands of successfully distributed games that do not use Steam. It is hardly the only solution available to developers today.

My preferred method of anti-cheating is Punkbuster. (Although since I primarily play on a LAN I don't have any particular use for one).
It's one hundred percent controlled by the server administrator and does not depend on a complete stranger to manage it for me. In my time I have banned enough "cheaters" mistakenly to realise that it could happen to me also. I do not require Steam (or anybody else) to make those decisions for me.
The only person with the right to stop me using my software on my equipment is me.
If I connect to your equipment it would be useful if you had the tools to prevent me readily to hand also.
Why does Steam enter this equation at all? I don't play games with anyone from Steam.

To my mind Steam retain the ability to disconnect your game, not because server admins can't do it for themsleves but to protect their "licence agreements". Licence agreements that do not exist anywhere but in their own minds, at the direct expense of their customers; with the sole purpose of increasing their revenues.
More sharp practise.


EA may still use unfriendly DRM's. Ubisoft, having been taken to court, has notably stopped. I hope that this current trend continues.

 

[Heinz]

Hyperion,
The problem is not with the fact that some contractual protections are sometimes required in the EULAs and the like, under the current scenario where copyright is the primary method of ensuring renumeration to authors, but with the egregious over-reach on the part of the distrubutors, publishers and makers of entertainment which they commited in pursuit of profit and control over their consumers.
The idea is to convert all of the software marketplace to "rental" or "micropayment" or "pay-per-use" models, whereby the consumer ends up owning and controling nothing, and the "rights holder" controlling everything.
This hopelessly lopsided lanscape is developing in many areas of the marketplace, slowly converting citizens from private property owners to mere tenants of someone's property, "intellectual" or otherwise.
The gap between the median income population and the richest people is increasing rapidly, the corporate power skyrocketing and many other trends are under way, all inter-related, and all rooted in the all-encompassing assault on our rights as citizens by those who would seek to control us for their profit.
Steam is a tiny, but very, very sympthomatic, piece in this grand scheme of things.

is it just me, or does this guy seem completely out of his tree? jeebus, what a conspiracy nut.

(Austin Powers voice): "it's a bit nut-ty"

 

[Maxey]

This thread stinks of pure paranoia.

Guys, Steam is fine, you're just hearing too much into your own fears and assumptions. God, it's not like Valve is going to spy your life just to know the color of your underwear or what your favorite food is. Jeez...

But seriously, you guys are too paranoid about a simple piece of software. And all that talk about rights and crap it's just that: crap. Stop being ridiculous and just get the damn game!

 

[/linuX/gitano]

Hi,

I own Ostfront and will pay another 25.00 for a version of Ostfront sans Steam. If Tripwire releases a version that runs without Steam will you buy it?

Definately. I'd pay even more with the native Mac/ Linux binaries delivered.

greetz,
gitano

 

[Six_Ten]

Steamed

Steamed

The argument that "if not for Steam, then RO wouldn't be distributed" is so far off that its not even wrong. I bought ZBrush2 online -- paid $500, downloaded, typed in my key, and ran the software. Simple. As for games, Steam is not required to distribute America's Army - www.americasarmy.com - same Unreal engine as RO, about 800 MB, free (courtesy of the U.S. Department of Defense and my fellow American taxpayers) and it is so easy to do that there are 6,910,558 registered players, over 2 million rounds played last 30 days. Its okay if you like Steam but don't try to argue that its the only way for an independant to get games published.

 

[[tR]Mad Mac]

I just registered for the sole purpose of letting you guys know this: ...

Please take off your tin foil hat. Steam is just a service, what it has to do with rights/infringed liberties and oppressive governments is beyond me. As stated earlier in this thread, it is up to the user to decide how much personal information steam has, what functions the software will do automatically for them, etc. The consumer also has the choice not to use it.

Most of the complaints I have seen about Steam involve issues concerning piracy. People try to mask their distaste on the grounds of principle (ie- "I dont like steam because they dont trust me not to pirate their game."). In reality, most of these issues just stem from the fact that some people just dont like having to pay for software, but try to mask it as something else.

 

[The_Countess]

You are so wrong, it must hurt yourself. Don't you think before you write?

First, the developers have their own contracts with Valve, and Valve certainly has their own backdoors in those contracts as well. And if not, why would the Developers even sue? What Valve does with Steam is none of their business. They can at best chancel distribution with Valve.

And if Valve was to do something like asking 5 bucks a month for Steam, do you think it would matter even ONE inch if Tripwire agrees or not? They can't provide a "no-steam" patch either because the Steam Encoding works all trough Valve, and they also have a legal contract with Valve that likely denys them the right to release a "Steam-Less" version of the game content.

Some of you guys are not up-to-date how Publisher/Developer Relationships work, it seems. Generally speaking, the Publisher has the cash. The Dev Teams have no rights other than to find another publisher. That's about it.

no its YOU who isnt up to date with how publisher /developer relations CHANGED with steam.
one of the reasons tripwire picked steam in the first place is because THEY, tripwire, will still own the content and NOT the publisher.
actualy, because of that, steam isnt even a real publisher, just a distributer, nothing more nothing less.
and if that distributer suddenly wants money where it didnt befor tripwire can just go up and over and leave.
they can do that, again, because they still own the game, not steam/valve.

thats also the reason why all your other arguments in the post i quoted from arent valid either.
had i realised sooner you actualy didnt know this i would have made a point of mentioning it, as its basicly what all my arguments where based on, no wonder you thought i was wrong.

 

[baff]

Most of the complaints I have seen about Steam involve issues concerning piracy. People try to mask their distaste on the grounds of principle (ie- "I dont like steam because they dont trust me not to pirate their game."). In reality, most of these issues just stem from the fact that some people just dont like having to pay for software, but try to mask it as something else.

Steam has been totally hacked by pirates just like every other Anti Piracy method out there.
If I wanted to play online for free, I am perfectly able to.

Steams DRM isn't preventing me from playing without buying, it's preventing me from buying and playing.
It doesn't matter how free something is if I don't want it.

Piracy is not a carte blanche to exploit everyone. Companies would be better served pleasing those who do pay than wasting time on those who do not.

 

[MadMax]

Steam has some advantages for sure, but these are advantages for game developers only. For users it is only a annoying feature, which can cause problems and spams the user with unwanted advertisement. That is my opinion of steam.

-What is good is that game developers can distribute the game without having a publisher.

-The release of updates is pretty easy for Devs. For user I don't see any advantage updating over steam. It's equally easy to download patches elsewhere, like for other non steam games.

-The anticheat software is maybe a advantage. But as I heard in case of other steam games it is also possible to circumvent it.

-Copyprotection. Well steam programs can be illegal downloaded like every other software, too.

-Increased loading times of steam programs due to the compression system of steam is pretty annoying for me.

-If steam has heavy load then login to steam can be much delayed. Waste of user time.

-Advertisement is very annoying.

-Luckily steam works fine for me at the moment. But there are a lot RO customers who suffer from steam related problems and I had also problems in the past, too.

 

[Helmut_AUT]

The best thing about Steam, IMHO, is that the Developers of the came stays in control, its TW that decides when there are going to be a patch, not like with CoD2 (a non steam game) where Microsoft delayed the patch because there where contracts specifying that patches was to be made for PC and X-box simultaniously, but there where no means of updating the 360.
If you worry bout publishers, better worry bout EA. Because they controll every thing from their developers.
All Steam does is provide a method of distribution AND a method of anti cheating.

I still wonder where that myth comes from, that the developers are "in control". It is possible that Tripwire did not need pre-funding for their project, so that indeed they are in control about what happens - but that has nothing to do with Steam, merely with the fact that they had an engine at basically no cost to them, ready to use.

Normally the publishers finance the development of a game (which may take a year or longer) and then the publisher has the right to control what the Dev Team does, because the Dev Team lifes on the Publisher's coin.

Steam does not change this dynamic one bit. So if Valve really has no control over RO content (which I doupt) then it wouldn't be because of Steam.

 

[Six_Ten]

Steam power in the atomic age

Steam power in the atomic age

-What is good is that game developers can distribute the game without having a publisher.

-The release of updates is pretty easy for Devs. For user I don't see any advantage updating over steam. It's equally easy to download patches elsewhere, like for other non steam games.

The argument that "if not for Steam, then RO wouldn't be distributed" is so far off that its not even wrong. I bought ZBrush2 online -- paid $500, downloaded, typed in my key, and ran the software. Simple. As for games, Steam is not required to distribute America's Army - www.americasarmy.com - same Unreal engine as RO, about 800 MB, free (courtesy of the U.S. Department of Defense and my fellow American taxpayers) and it is so easy to do that there are 6,910,558 registered players, over 2 million rounds played last 30 days.

Again, Its okay if you like Steam but don't try to argue that its the only way for an independant to get games published.

 

[Helmut_AUT]

This thread stinks of pure paranoia.

Guys, Steam is fine, you're just hearing too much into your own fears and assumptions. God, it's not like Valve is going to spy your life just to know the color of your underwear or what your favorite food is. Jeez...

You guys just saying "it's pure paranoia" are getting on my nerves, to be honest. There's nothing unrealistic or far-fetched about a few of the possible situations descriped here - like for example Valve charging for their Steam "Service".

Everyone who has his ears into IT, Software Development and DRM News has heard similar storys happening.

Did you know that many laser printers from many companys worldwide encode their serial number and date of printing into any page printed on them?
Did you know that HP printers were "phoning home" to HP submitting information about number of pages printed etc.
You do know about Sony's rootkit on their Audio CDs, I assume.

So, with all these (and more) storys in mind, there are plenty of reasons to mistrust some companys that market DRM as the next best thing to sliced bread. History shows that where money rules, they will find a way to screw the customer.

But all some of you guys do is come online and say "ah, but it's working just fine for me". Congrats.

 

[Helmut_AUT]

no its YOU who isnt up to date with how publisher /developer relations CHANGED with steam.
one of the reasons tripwire picked steam in the first place is because THEY, tripwire, will still own the content and NOT the publisher.
actualy, because of that, steam isnt even a real publisher, just a distributer, nothing more nothing less.
and if that distributer suddenly wants money where it didnt befor tripwire can just go up and over and leave.
they can do that, again, because they still own the game, not steam/valve.

thats also the reason why all your other arguments in the post i quoted from arent valid either.
had i realised sooner you actualy didnt know this i would have made a point of mentioning it, as its basicly what all my arguments where based on, no wonder you thought i was wrong.

I would like to see more about this.

Like I wrote above, traditionally Dev Teams need to eat while developing a game. So the publisher basically pays them a salary or budget to work with, in exchange for the game to be released by deadline XY and the profits of the game, minus perhabs a cut for the developers.

You're saying that Steam has changed that, but for sure it didn't change the fact that Tripwire Stuff needed financing for the time while they were still building the game.

I can see that, if Tripwire made it work on their own time and money, with their own "free" UE2.5 license, that they would be free of bindings to a publisher and thus would enjoy more freedom to with their game as they please. But then that's not a result of Steam.

 

[Lazi]

Steam used for downloading, patching and paying - OK.

On the other side I really don't like the idea that someone somewhere controls if I can play or not a game I bought.

Steam prevents me from running RO multiplayer game in LAN environment without internet connection. I am not able to force it to offline mode and Valve so far provided no solution. (They say Steam should offer Offline if it cannot connect - but that really happens only sometimes.)

I dislike Steam very much.

 

[The_Countess]

But then that's not a result of Steam.

maybe not but it sure helps, steam helps reduse the cost of distribution and advertising by A LOT.
the administration of the payments is also done by steam making game release a lot more hassle free, leaving the developer more time to develop his game.

tripwire isnt the only developer who has financed a game on his own.
Malfador Machinations is another developer that use to release his games on his own. now he distributes his by now relativly old space empire IV on steam aswell, althou mainly in preperation for space empire V release i think, to try it out.
so far he's been really postive about it, he makes more profit per game sold, has less overhead himself and his own hosting costs have gone down.
most of the other 3de party games on steam probably have simular storys.

sure Steam isnt going to replace the old developer/publisher models just yet, atleast not for the 'big' multi year developement games.
but what it will do is give small developers access to a big market at relativly small costs, something they have never had access to befor.

it also allows them to make a profit of their hard work, and not just get paid while they were developing the game.
that also means the risk is back with the developer, but as said so are the rewards.

btw if you read the VERRY first news item on the main page you can see this :

"Digital content delivery is the future of gaming, and we are very excited to be a part of that future" said Tripwire Interactive President John Gibson. "Working with Valve to release the game over Steam allows Tripwire to remain independent and keep control of the games content and development.

http://www.redorchestragame.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8 (the whole news artical posted again in the forum)

 

[Helmut_AUT]

Ya know, I never trust offical press releases. Too much marketing involved.

Like I said, if your version is true (and I'm not saying it isn't) then yes, likely Tripwire had an engine, a game in development financed by themself, then came up to Valve and said "hey, let us use Steam as a distribution method and get your cut from the profits".

Okay, in that regard you may be correct that Tripwire is not the traditional dev-team slave laboring under a money-greedy publisher, but it still is not really a result of using Steam. They likely could have found someone else to distribute the game online once they had an usabe and stable game with a clearly viable market.

For all I care, STEAM as a distriubution system isn't the problem either. Steam as a DRM tool is. There's no reason why the two have to be connected.

 

[Druidor]

Well I want to convert my machine to Linux & as RO is the only game I actually play I am pretty buggered atm as there is no version of Steam that works with Linux & ROOST.


Stuck with buggy windows XP Pro for now. & still miffed that the EU release is still in the clouds.

 

[Maxey]

On the early days of Steam, Valve said that if they were going to make a monthly-fee based system for Steam, it would be still optional. The user would have the choice to pay for the games he only wants or a monthly-fee system where he gets all the games, all the time. Like the cybercafe method but for normal users. Until now there's no signal of that method, but you never know if Valve will implement it on the future.

A setting where you could disable steam from running on the background would be cool, but likewise only feasible for SP games or MP games that don't rely on the Steam game server system.

 

[Butters]

Why wouldn't you want to use steam? Any thing that has come out of Vavle has been great, no exceptions.

 

[donkey]

So I can see none of you are lawyers, legally trained or functionally literate.

When I buy digital content, I am buying a license. EULA's have been held both in the USA and the rest of the world to be legally binding.

If you are into liberterian theories of contract, you have two choices, to deal on the terms, or not to deal on the terms.

If you decide to acquire a license, then you take it on the terms provided, subject to any overriding consumer protection legislation. Don't like it, don't buy it.

You don't buy it, you don't have a contract, you don't have rights in relation to the product. It is a hard knock life.

Most of the contractual concerns are purely a matter of the terms of the contract.

If Steam ever does overstep the mark, there are plenty of consumer protection agencies who would carve chunks out of them until it started to hurt.

A lot of the tin-foul hat steam hating seems to be ill founded. In any event, you have perfect freedom not to treat. No one is forcing you as you keep saying.

If you are so concerned about the invasion of your privacy by providing your email address to valve and or your credit card details, and enough consumers share your concerns then the market will correct it.

That is the essence of the free economy. To suggest somehow you have rights when you don't, to say those rights are inalienable when they don't exist and to believe your marekt place morality is superior, that is the nanny state right there.