I bought Supreme Commander Gold through Impulse, before GameStop purchased Impulse. At that time, Supreme Commander Gold didn't require Steam, but I only ended up installing SupCom, because Forged Alliance was rather large download, and I didn't know if I would like it. Today, I finally got around to installing Forged Alliance, and I learned that Supreme Commander and Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War are now the Steam version. Now I don't know what I am going to do.
Darn I'm happy that I got my SC Gold Edition out of the Target bargain shelf. That hard copy is a wonderful thing. (Now if I could find my CD key to make sure I also had it on steam that would be great.)
Anyway I mainly dislike Steam because of the internet requirements. In 2005 I obtained a copy of Empire Total War, 2 years later I got a reasonable internet connection and could play the game (which also had to download a days worth of patches ). For a Total War Game there isn't much importance to mp and the need to have the game patched (because it refused to function in offline mode) greatly irked me.
But maybe this cloud thing does have vestiges of being a wave of the future (though once again endless agreements to this and that and the other outside the product you purchased, meh). And on the bright side at least Steam helps keep Indie game developers alive, I think the statistics are somewhere and Steam illustrates its value to those developers survival.
But I guess at the end of the day the situation is that Steam is encompassing more games new and old and in turn it becomes an integral part of those game's system. Box editions of SC and AOE probably represent the last good strategy games that have a good community and do not have Steam as integral parts of them.
Steam is a great service, don't get me wrong, but if I wanted to use Steam, I would have bought a Steam version of the game, yet now I don't have a choice thanks to THQ.
The problem those who are critical of Steam have is that the EULA is so one sided, that one doesn't own the copy of the game they payed for, and are completely tied to the application in order to play the game. The offline mode is rather gimmicked. The multiplayer, the achievements, and the social aspects of Steam don't make up for the one sided EULA, because, to me, multiplayer and achievements are an optional aspect of games that are nice to have, but aren't a requirement in order to enjoy a game.
Pretty much every EULA I saw in past 15+ years is just as one sided.
While I will not argue that, I will say that it's very difficult for them to know what I do with my copy of Homeworld 2 because I have the disc version and it doesn't require online activation. Even if I did something supposedly illegal (not counting anything obvious like selling copies online), they would have a hard time knowing.
Point is that the medium alone provides a certain freedom.
Oh you mean how like Borders in a final ditch attempt to make some money before going out of business, The sold all their members personal information to fucking Barnes n Nobles. Which might I add was in their user agreement of something they would not do?
I could give two shits about multiplayer games really. Just like how I argued with a friend of mine, added multiplayer would ruin skyrim because its true beauty comes from the mods people create for it and all other tes series. Giving tes series multiplayer would mean having to take away all moding ability for many simple reasons really.
1. there are people would wouldnt not want to have to download a mod just to join a game and visa versa.
2. the could make it so it auto installs a mod yes, but that would just make it easier for people to make and pass out a virus.
3. Elder scrolls world is suppose to be about you... your story, your characters life.. not you and hey xx random people i don't know from online.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
