I'm going to have to agree with the majority and say steam is a necessity for new and major game releases. That being said, I've been using Steam from around the time they launched and I have basically no complaints.
It impacts game play very little and when I built a new computer, it automatically re-installed all my games without having me worry about what I purchased. Also, the deals will save you $$$ in the long run. I got the entire Serious Sam series w/ expansions for under $15. I also got the the Crysis pack (1,2 + expansions) for amazingly cheap as well. Come to think of it, I've only bought maybe 2 or 3 new games at full price because of the deals they have. I have quite a backlog... I need more time.
Steam is certainly not the only option, though. I think everyone else has stated viable alternatives, albeit slim pickings.
Steam and modern PC hardware slowing down have spoiled PC gamers. Eight years ago, I would buy a game at retail, come home, install it, usually had to update DirectX manually, then I typically would have some issue with my GPU or have to overclock my CPU that I would have to figure out or the game would run for a few minutes then crash and Id have to figure that out, then I could start playing it.
Now, I buy a game on Steam, click on it to install, come back in an amount of time, double click on the game, it double checks my DirectX install, then I am in the game with minimal issues. Sometimes I have to trouble shoot something or update a config, but it is nothing like it use to be. Heck when Borderlands 1 came out, I bought it retail, I had to go into the ini to change a setting to stop it from crashing when we jumped the gulch, Borderlands 2 ran for about 50 hours before I had any issue whatsoever.
I was talking with a coworker who is a PC gamer about this last week and he said he cant remember the last time he had to open an INI file to fix an error. Granted he only plays games that have been out for two years so there are no real incompatibilities or anything.
Apparently instead of simply letting Company of Heroes multiplayer die in the wake of the sequel's release and being sold to Sega by the collapsing THQ, Relic is working with previous CoH devs to move everything over to Steamworks, and players will only need their original CD keys to have access to the game. The company is also researching a way to port over the game's current stats based on the 7 or so years that the game has been running.
How is that preferable to running your own server the old fashioned way? I shouldn't need to rely on third parties for multiplayer gaming.
We are prepared to live in the plain and die in the plain!
Apparently instead of simply letting Company of Heroes multiplayer die in the wake of the sequel's release and being sold to Sega by the collapsing THQ, Relic is working with previous CoH devs to move everything over to Steamworks, and players will only need their original CD keys to have access to the game. The company is also researching a way to port over the game's current stats based on the 7 or so years that the game has been running.
How is that preferable to running your own server the old fashioned way? I shouldn't need to rely on third parties for multiplayer gaming.
So does your server have the ability to track a decade's worth of stats associated with my CoH key? Because if so, then we'll talk.
Apparently instead of simply letting Company of Heroes multiplayer die in the wake of the sequel's release and being sold to Sega by the collapsing THQ, Relic is working with previous CoH devs to move everything over to Steamworks, and players will only need their original CD keys to have access to the game. The company is also researching a way to port over the game's current stats based on the 7 or so years that the game has been running.
How is that preferable to running your own server the old fashioned way? I shouldn't need to rely on third parties for multiplayer gaming.
I believe this is a live or die situation, since wasnt Company of Heroes based on Relics server?
IIRC they had LAN play in CoH. There's no reason they couldn't use that code to make a dedicated server. Tracking gameplay stats is a nice feature, but not worth being locked to a single third party for multiplayer. If companies want to add social features (matchmaking, achievements, stats, whatever), that's great. But there's no reason we should ever lose features in order to get that.
We are prepared to live in the plain and die in the plain!
The whole Steam thing is why I find myself still wanting to play a lot of multi-platform titles on console, where I never need to go online and sign into a service to play a game if I don't want to.
Everyone likes to say it's not as bad as other DRMs. So what? It's still DRM. It is what is, no matter how you sugar coat it. It really just comes down to principles. Either you support DRM or you don't. PERIOD. And I can understand why some people don't
Personally, I think it sucks that so many companies ignore GOG. But that's the industry, everyone just does what everyone else does. Every company puts out their games on Steam for PC, and every console game has to have a multi-player mode. Just two examples of how sickeningly homogenized the gaming industry is becoming.
I have games on Steam, but the overwhelming majority of my PC purchases have been through GOG. I just like what they stand for. And if the choice were always available, I would buy all my games through GOG. I haven't actually purchased anything on Steam, or even used Steam in the past two months. Whatever PC gaming I've been doing has been with stuff I got off GOG, like the Sam & Max games, or indie stuff purchased direct from the makers of the game
RyaNtheSlayA wrote:
Seriously. Screw you Shao Kahn I'm gonna play Animal Crossing.
