(Im posting this in the forums since I can't post it like an article in the blog section.)
I remember the old days of gaming. That long gone era called 2008. Back when games were provided with their own custom installers, and were self-contained products that installed themselves separatedly on the computer you instaleld them. I like to call this era the "Installshield Era" of gaming. Back when game media only contained asset and binaries, and a registration window, when dialog box wizards ruled the gaming land, and when there weren't any remote validation hooks attached to executables. That is why, with increasing concern, I am watching nowadays the way our most amazing form of entertainment is rearranging itself, how market forces and anti-consumer tendencies are beggining to shape the new landscape of gaming, at the expense of the average gamer.
Big game releases nowadays are abandoning these old, anticuated components such as autorun main menus, install wizards, or dedicated servers, and have moved to the all encapsulating remote delivery methods of popular DRM schemes, such as Steam. By itself, Steam is convenient, fast if you have good internet connection, and easy to deploy. Many games were released in normal "retail" form, and were offered in Steam's store shortly after. Those instances however, are nowadays mostly the case with PC only releases from eastern european studios it seems. Steam's "next step" in gaming convenience is anything but that, and could mark the beggining of a new mandatory requirement for gaming in the future. More and more games are now announcing their complete deployment based around Valve's new Steamworks framework, touted as the "least intrusive" DRM scheme, "convenient" to gaemers and publishers alike, which takes care of formerly manual tasks like patching. They claim it isn't intrusive when compared to the likes of Securom or Tages. But I would like to point out that it is more than that. It's not only indeed intrusive, it's THE most intrusive DRM scheme to come along yet. The game is not at all installed or even located completely in your computer when you realize it. At least Securom installed itself after it let the installer copy YOUR game to YOUR hard drive. Steamworks' remote always-on cloud network remotely controls one of ITS game's installation, patching, running. When you start the game, you send a signal to the autenticathion servers situatied remotely from your location, and the order is sent back before you are able to game. You are asked for an authorization each time to play the games you paid a hefty premium to be allowed some few hours of playimte. It's the arcade coin-up model. We've gone back full circle, to the arcade machins of old times. It may as well place a coin slot in your computer. It's like trying the games you paid for thru a remote terminal. A service that, much like an arcade place, can close up in after hours, or at the discretion of their owners. The access to the games you are allowed to try remotely can be switched off at any moment without any explanation from the providers, and you are effectively out. Cloud based gaming, and software as a service don't look like a good idea afterall under these terms.
"Blah blah, who cares, I don't have to deal with DVDs anymore!" Maybe this is really making mountains out of molehills. Steam does have it's merits, which mostly come from giving smaller indie developers a storefront to showcase their creations without needing a traditional expensive distribution contract. Companies like Tripwire and 2d boy have been the most vocal about their praise for steam, with Tripwire saying they wouldn't be around without Steam. This piece is not an anti-steam call to arms, it's just an informational soundbyte, just to express concern about the trend Steamworks is creating, which isn't 100% in reality as advertised in the package. A steamworks game instantly becomes a steam exclusive game. That situation could become the beggining of a monopoly. Maybe this is a good time for competitors to shine.
Not if PS3 users are going to Steamworks over PSN.
But even if it does, so what? Sony would like a platform that's at the same level of XBL. If Steamworks gets them closer, why not? If I'm a developer who wants to use Steamworks on the PC, being able to use it on the PS3 as well instead of PSN isn't a negative: it makes the game easier to port. It's normally easier to do PC/360 games instead of PC/PS3 ones, so if this helps them out, I'm sure developers will be on board.
In Valve's case the benefit is obvious: more market for Steamworks means more reason for developers on the PC to use Steamworks, which means more business for Steam.
Even if they could get back into their offices and complete work or start work, as it were, to release the DRM portion of steam, I don't know that they would be allowed to do that for any game Valve didn't make (or even the ones they made since ownership of IP doesn't just poof with BK, someone owns it). I mean EA probably wouldn't be happy with a bunch of SPORE games out there with no DRM attached them, and would say no, kill the games let our customers buy it again.
While I dont like PS3 (so I dont care about it) more money for Valve (or any other good developer) is IMO good
Thanks to Steam and Impulse (mostly Steam, sorry Stardock I like their community features more ATM [I am rooting for you guys though, really]), I have a mountain of PC game boxed that I'll never have to deal with. No more sliding boxes out hoping I don't knock the whole tetris style tower down..
Basically Digital distribution, done right, is a godsend to PC gaming. It's more convenient than pirating on good services like Steam and Impulse, keeps your games up to date, and you never have to worry about the box or install disk or CD keys ever again. I've probably bought Diablo and SC2 3-4 times in the last decade just because of that.
I don't think it's about stopping piracy and protecting their valuable IP, since they know they can't curb piracy. It's about pretty much adopting an anti-consumer position, one example of such being killing the second hand game market for example. We as gamers are slowly getting the short end of the stick.
Publishesr and developers have been trying to destroy the second hand market for years, and not just with software. Unfortunately, the only companies that have gotten away with it, so far, and actually claim its not anti-consumer and against first sale doctrine (claiming their works don't actually apply)is the software industry. All the other physical product related media have not dared try to pull the wool over the eyes of those idiots in law-making decision positions.
"Blah blah, who cares, I don't have to deal with DVDs anymore!" I've never really understood this argument. Seriously - other than the .000001 percent inconvenience of having to treat your possessions with a bit more love and care than a 2 year old, what really is the big deal? I use Impulse, but never for this reason.
I don't use Steam simply because I want to maintain control of my experience. Period. Frankly about as far as I'll go is Windows, since I won't be playing much of anything without Windows. Doesn't mean you have to jump off the cliff head first.
I've always found it ironic that folks are having a cow over Facebook privacy, when majority share stuff they wouldn't have dreamed of before the 'net. Facebook and Steam are data gathering hubs with a middleware veneer and always have been. Face it head on, and take control of your own experience. If that means refusing Steam if a game is Steam - exclusive, so be it.
Now excuse me, I have a black helicopter to catch . Or maybe it's all the Alpha Protocol I've been playing lately.
The number of people having a cow over facebook privacy is a rounding error in the total number of facebook users. Most facebook users don't care a whole lot.
When I get a new computer, it's awfully convenient to hit the "install this" button in Steam/Impulse and get the thing installed with all patches already, rather then go to the basement to hunt down the DVD spindle where that game was, then find the CD key which is hopefully still with the case, then go looking online for patches.
As an added bonus, I get no extra clutter, there's no waste created by a box, and I don't even need to go to the store to get it (which since I don't own a car is pretty large consideration).
That level of convenience is great.
It's even better than that. I have multiple hard drives, and one hard drive dedicated to Steam games. Move the hard drive over to your new computer, delete ClientRegistry.blob and then launch Steam. Everything works and is ready to play.
Third party games will still run their initial install processes (directx, etc) when you launch them, and you might have to reenter CD Keys (found by right clicking on the game, view CD KEY). First party games launch instantly.
Oh nice, I didn't even know that.
I wanted to try SupCom 2's Demo...
You require Steam to DNLD it.
I was saddened.
Happily, you're really not missing anything in SupCom 2
With more and more games coming out that use Steam exclusively, you have to wonder if Valve is pulling some strings here. They can easily convince publishers to require Steam by showing how popular Steam is (popular because people don't know much about the other digital services). I think Valve also may be viewing Impulse as a serious threat, and for good reason: Impulse is a lot better than Steam. It runs better, updates better, and most importantly: it doesn't chain games to itself, meaning you can run the games without running Impulse first.
So yes, I believe the Steam is trying to make itself the Microsoft of digital distribution. Hopefully more people will discover Impulse though.
Yeah, and these Steam sales are hard for people to resist. I have trouble persuading people as to the dangers of a Steam monopoly when Steam has frequent, incredible sales. How can I persuade users to purchase a game on a competing service if Steam has it on sale for 60% cheaper? Most people will follow the money.
There's a lengthy discussion on this in the Steamworks Civ 5 thread... but effectively, no. Steam exclusivity is tied to games using Steamworks, which requires Steam to work.
Developers and publishers like using Steamworks because it gives them a big feature set (matchmaking, achievements, friends list, chat, groups, etc), and it costs the developer $0 to license. For the features it offers, it's the best package in the industry from a developer point of view.
So no, Valve isn't pulling strings to get the exclusives. Valve simply offers the best platform for developers that want to add things like achievements without having to build it themselves. The hope is that when Impulse Reactor is released it'll provide some competition in that space.
There is absolutely no evidence to support this. Valve may or may not be pressuring publishers to use Steamworks. Because such communications are confidential, nothing short of an email leak will prove that Valve isn't actively trying to corner the market through unsavory means.
I'm sorry, but this is the funniest comment I've seen all day long.
"Use Steamworks... OR ELSE."
Or else what? They won't sell it in the Steam store with hundreds of other non-Steamworks games? As it stands, you have Steamworks and GFWL as complete gaming frameworks. Steamworks is better from both a consumer and publisher standpoint. The other solution would be the roll your own, which costs time and money to develop.
But I'm sure Gabe Newell must be holding a knife to the throat of 2kgames's CEO or something.
That's quite an exaggeration.
And you have some evidence that they are, I presume? Other then that we don't like Steam on this forum, therefore they're guilty? (And how would you prove the negative anyway?)
I've presented an explanation for why people are using Steamworks, which makes games defacto Steam exclusives. Developers using it because it's the best platform isn't "pressure", it's the market in action. Better solutions are supposed to win.
So please enlighten us. What pressure is Valve applying, considering that Steam is a fraction of retail sales and developers/publishers have no lack of other options?
Notice that I said that there is no evidence to prove your claim or the opposing claim. It would be foolish to draw conclusions in favor of either argument.
Please don't straw man me.
SteamWorks isn't tied to the Steam shop. VALVe usually offers a standard distribution agreement when giving away the SteamWorks API. SteamWorks is free to use and most developers/publishers also sign on the distribution agreement. So far there is only one exception.
During the development of Supreme Commander 2, GPG had to decide which online multiplayer platform should be used. Their options were basically their old GPGnet client, Games for Windows Live and SteamWorks. They decided to use SteamWorks. There was no pressure from VALVe or anything like that.
Or look at Modern Warfare 2. It's distributed over Steam and uses Steam as DRM. However, it does not use SteamWorks. It uses its own multiplayer solution.
Sure, some like to have a box and I can understand that. But generally I follow the Star Trek principle, where virtually every data is available to you everywhere through LCARS
easy boys....
Either way, STEAM, Impulse, D2D and others are here to stay. Get used to it. Embrace it. Cloud-computing is the way of the future. What is software piracy anyway? In a way it is the predecessor of cloud-computing. I mean it's all out there.....to be had.....except piracy made it all avalilable for free.......so now companies want to call it "cloud-computing" and make it NOT free. Oh well, I'm not complaining.
Again, I will sound like a broken record......but imo......most of the griping against digital "controls" (I would have called it "digital distribution", but let's face it......it is all about CONTROL) comes from the part of humanity that would like to continue having everything at their whim.....and FREE!
Life is all about control. We listen to (or should) our parents, we pay attention to speed-limits (or pay dearly), we turn off our cell-phones on airplanes or in doctor's offices etc. etc. So why do we care when a company wants some control over how we use software? I guess we've come to think that since the computer is in our home (our domain) we should be able to do anything on/with it exactly how/when we wish. These new "control-schemes" by the software industry are challenging that "ideal". I for one, don't have a problem with it.
Cloud-computing, digital-signatures, personal digital-ID's etc. are all signs of technical progression and are NECESSARY in order to keep pushing ahead.
Onwards I say.........faster and farther......here we come brave new world we embrace you!
the Monk
Steamworks is modular, if you will. The DRM is in fact a part of Steamworks. Developers can choose which parts of Steamworks to implement, but from what I've read (and experienced), the attractive middleware features (matchmaking, achievements, etc.) require that developers use the Steamworks DRM component, hence the lock-in concerns.
Steam also have the flaw of downloading the installed game instead of running a setup of compacted files
which is really stupid when trying to install larger games
take "The Witcher" as an example, if you use an iso mount it would be 5 GB i guess,
steam downloads the entire installed game which is larger than 30 GB in order to install it.
Maybe Stardock can break this up a bit with Impulse::Reactor (which is free to use for everyone and also completely independent from Impulse itself).
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
