Could you guys at Stardock make a non-Steam version of this game? I'm still not clear on all the details (I'm still searching for them), but having a copy of the game that does not require Steam at all (during any stage of installation and there after) is a big deal for me.I'm quite willing to negotiate on details. The game doesn't have to be Steam free during development, but I would like it to be Steam free at release. I'm even willing to accept some time after release. Just please make it available without the need for Steam in some form (that is worth getting).You would have my many thanks if you can make this happen.
If that is the case, then it's fine with me. It's the "having to run the client even though it isn't necessary for the game to work"-part I have a problem with.
Same here for me, I'll use Steam to install and update my games but not to run it or have it running in the background. You would think that with all these online security/privacy issues going on lately people would learn to have everything under their control instead of some third-party.
Again, it depends on what one considers "necessary to work". People's definition of what's necessary differs.
-HM
Steam can be quite annoying for me.
The reason is I have multiple in-home family members that game, and to switch profiles on installed machines gets annoying.. Also I sometimes game with my kids, and if I have to purchase different copies for each one of them it gets expensive, and is something I rarely do. If I do, I wait for deep discounts, and then make the purchases. But I won't buy 3 copies of a $40 game, that's for sure.
I know most licenses factor a single user, but this is impractical for most families. So I GREATLY appreciate a non-steam version of products.
In the Elemental forums, we have one regular poster that has recently reported having driver/crashing issues since the latest Steam update. He thought that this might be Nvidia driver related (btw, GFireflyE is still using XP), but the Steam drivers are one of the suspected culprits for his issues.
Thread here:
https://forums.elementalgame.com/448895/page/2/#3407991
I share this because it may be relevant to this discussion. More 'moving parts' means more places where errors can occur, which is why I'm not a huge fan of Steam installs. Some games I HAVE to use Steam to get, but given the choice I'd prefer an 'untethered' install that isn't phoning home all the time.
I've also had some other Stardock installs go 'wonky' since I've been using Steam for updates. For example, even though I haven't updated GalCivII:TOA in a while, my shortcut stopped working recently. I was able to work around it by following the shortcut to the install folder and selecting the TOA execute directly, but the point is that the original shortcut was working before and simply stopped working.
Same for Political Machine 2008. Game stopped working with the shortcut, but when I delved into the install folder and changed the shortcut to point directly at the exe, it started working again. Again, I suspect Steam for causing the issues.
Once a game is installed, if it worked intially, it should work essentially forever, barring hard drive corruption or some other catastrophic event. But now that I've had at least two Stardock products do this, well this makes the Stardock product 'look bad' and causes people to pull their hair out trying to figure out what just went wrong, when it seems to be the 'intermediary' client that broke, not the actual game install.
It wasn't that long ago that Brad and the guys at Stardock were championing DRM free, and Steam does not feel DRM free to me.
So, again, I'll ask for both a Steam Version and a GOG version. If you want to bind multiplayer to Steam, that's fine, but for those of us that mistrust Steam, for whatever reason, we should have another option. I do realize that the GOG version of GalCivIII might not have 'real time' AI updates, but some people are simply content to wait for the next patch, and don't need 'real time' updates.
Food for thought.
Not to mention easier control over finishing your game first before moving on to the next patch which will break your save.
You don't have to auto update with Steam, you can set the option as you want it.
Thanks for the tip, charon2112! Either way, I've shied away from Steam except to play the occasional FE:LH.
Note to be clear the 'do not automatically update' feature only disables updates in the background. Aka if you happen to leave the staem client running and it's idle, it occasinally checks for game updates and installs them.
When you run the game, the system ALWAYS checks for the latest version and installs it at that time.
The only way to fully and totally disable updates is to go into Steam Offline mode.
However Steam now has better options to have a 'beta' channel available to users. In 'theory' you could use this to have an older version available after a patch is sent out. I've only ever seen tomb raider do this however.
I felt I should be a little more clear r.e. my previous post. When I said 'the shortcuts simply stopped working' that doesn't clearly express what was going on.
Essentially, I would click on the shortcut, which after a small number of seconds would generate some sort of launch error message, i.e. the intermediary would attempt to launch and fail. But by bypassing the intermediary and going to the game.exe directly, I solved my problem. so, as I stated the intermediary/launcher was what was failing. The shortcut icon didn't simply stop working/started pointing to oblivion or whatever.
This has happened with GalCivII, Political Machine2008, and I think at least one Elemental install, which is why I suspect the Steam updating client and not just three different Stardock games.
My concern with this is if the intermediary/launcher client becomes 'integral', this workaround becomes meaningless. The fact that I even need to do a workaround in the first place is not a good thing in of itself.
And yes, I turn off autoupdate in the background for all of my Steam games, but the steam client/game in question does still require you to log in/phone home occasionally, at which point the STEAM client will sometimes autoupdate itself. THIS is where I suspect the problems are creeping in, but I'll leave that to the programmers to figure out.
In the meantime, I'll state again. GOG awesome. Steam bothersome.
Of course, I could have quoted many posts.
As far as having as physical version, look at Sid Meier's Civilization V. I got mine in a box. When I installed it it installed Steam and hooked it all up together, so getting a physical version does not seem to be a big deal.
Brad, I too would like to have a boxed copy (no, I did not say version) of GC3 when it ships. I see nothing wrong with forcing Steam to be installed along with GC3. Has there been any discussion about including this form of delivery? I would think that as far as marketing is concerned boxed sets of the game sold through both retail and online stores is required to ensure market penetration.
This is unlikely
Being tied to retail means they need a distributor and thus tied to a dead fast release date as well.
Given the immense success of Sins of a Solar Empire Rebellion with ZERO retail distribution (100k copies and growing) I don't think Brad is going to go through the hassle of being shackled to a retail release schedule.
https://www.stardock.com/about/newsitem.asp?id=2738
Stardock has had immense success without retail distribution. They are unlikely to create a boxed version when it makes little financial sense and doesn't give any benefits to the community.
Note as a side anecdote. I didn't pre-order Civ5. On launch day I went to FIVE Gamestops in my area. NONE of them had it at launch. NONE. (I was going to Gamestop because I had a bunch of gift cards to burn and this was pre-steam wallet). I bought it on Steam because I couldn't find it in retail! (and yes I live in a major metropolitan area)
Steam is mostly viable during the insane summer sales.
Then my family can 'partake' in Steam locked games. The major problem with Steam is the inability for other family members to enjoy the same game, either at the same time, or a different time. This is why I prefer DRM free games, as I can play it, and toss my son (in the room next to me) a copy. Don't think of it as lost revenue, as I would never purchase more than one copy anyway.
I like Antivirus product licensing.. For example F-Secure can be installed on 'maximum' of 3 PC's in a home. If you go over, it won't work, and since you can only register 3 computers (hardware sigs), you cannot bypass it. This is a family friendly method.
I purchased Dragon Commander on GamersGate, got a DRM free version AND a Steam Key. I tossed the steam key to my son, and installed the DRM free for myself. Problem solved, incredible customer service, and family friendly. Games have a long way to go to be family friendly, that's for sure.
Not to mention that they make a lot more money per copy sold digitally than at retail. This is true for everyone in the industry (except retail, of course). They actually come out ahead by selling 100k digitally instead of 125k at retail. Making and shipping boxes is expensive, and shelf space isn't free.
Gamestop always does that. They're a pawn shop first and a new game retailer second. I've been told flat out that you need to pre-order a game if you expect to buy it there. I just walk across the street to Future Shop instead, which somehow manages to stock games despite not being a dedicated game store.
You're not supposed to (technically) toss your son a copy of a game. That's breaking copyright law. Don't hate on steam because you can't give away copies of your games to other people
That's actually false. No where in US copyright law does it state that I am not allowed to hand my copy of a game to a family member or friend as long as it doesn't involve creating a duplicate of the game. Only if I started making duplicates does it start violating copyright. Granted US Copyright Law is horribly outdated in this digital age.
Not being able to share your own personal copy is an issue. It means that I am not allowed to use the copy that I am suppose to own as I please within certain guidelines of again duplication and public distribution. When you buy from Steam, you don't actually own the game rather you're a given a indefinitely long license. Maybe you don't mind it, but for some people that rubs them in the wrong way.
This is going way off topic. The answer was given by Frogboy and the matter is essentially closed. If you want to talk about pirating software, perhaps a new thread would be best.
I've seen various maths on this but given that most digital stores take 30% margins (only the Humble Store, from what I've read, takes a much much smaller cut, so if you want to support devs, use thier Humble Store if possible). With the 30% margins, that more or less wipes out the 'savings' you get from not using physical distribution. Basically the 30% margin from digital stores is pretty much close to the margins required for physical distribution. If it's better, its maybe 5% better than retail. It's not the gigantic windfall difference most people think.
Of course say we look beyond margins themselves. Whether that's just at a digital store normally, or say you put a 75% off fire sale, unlimited inventory means everyone, everywhere can take advantage of that pricing. And you don't have (aside from when steam inexplicably runs out of cd-keys) an inventory issue to deal with. Where as in physical retail you could never stock 1000 copies of a game to fire sale at 75% off. Also it's easier to take advantage of the long tail. Magicka could never have sold 1 million copies at retail. The reality is that the 'majority' of the PC gaming market is on steam, not in retail. If you want to reach your target market Staem is the way to go (whether this is 'good' or 'bad' is open to interpreteation)
For consoles that's an entirely different problem of course.
If Steam is taking a 30% cut, Stardock gets a 70% cut of the sale price. That 30% is also paying for the distribution costs, which are essentially nothing. On a $40 sale, Stardock gets $28 and doesn't have to think about how distribution happens (Steam pays for it).
If you're selling retail, lets be generous and assume that Stardock is still getting 70% of the retail price (which I strongly doubt given all the people in the middle that want a cut). In addition, they have to pay to make boxes, make discs, put discs in boxes, ship them, and buy shelf space at Gamestop. IIRC Brad said that they made something like $16 per boxed copy of a game, which is a bit over half what they'd make by selling digitally through Steam instead. The numbers aren't even close.
There's a reason why the indie game renaissance happened at the same time as digital distribution really took off: the cost of distribution is far lower and the profit margin per copy is far higher, allowing companies to be successful without having to sell hundreds of thousands of copies at $40+. People are making money on games digitally that would never have a chance of making money at retail because of all the overhead.
Note that I was simply comparing the 30% margins of digital distribution, vs the 'theoretical' savings of removing the physical distribution part.Mostly in respect to the thought the digital distribution would 'reduce' the cost of games by removing the physical distribution costs. the reality is that those savings are almost entirely negated by the 30% margins of digital stores.
Note the $16 per boxed game is likely the cut between the publisher and developer of that 60-70% left over. Again all those numbers are incredibly complicated mess of accoutancy black magic. If you self-publish then you get all of that pie, but that may or may not be possible for some devs, depending on how you negotiated your contract with a publisher (if you have one). Certainly digital distirbution can negate the need for a publisher, which means a dev can get more money than physical publishing. But only if you were savvy enough to negotiate that as part of your publishing deal.
Absolutely. Digital distribution gives devs much bigger power to reach a broader audience with little cost to them as setting up a website and putting up a Humble store is basically brain dead easy and costs peanuts (relatively). And the 'long tail' model that physical retailers cannot and do not want to take advantage of (inventory costs money!!) is possible in the digital realm. The successes of titles like Magicka and even GalCiv2 itself (which Stardock says still accounts for 10% of their revenue, wow) definitely show the power of digital distribution
Yeah the Humble Store is a fantastic deal for developers. They take an incredibly small cut and have a lot of good exposure.
Also if you want an example of 'digital distribution done horribly wrong'. Ubisoft sells some games digitally via DigitalRiver (not Uplay). They have a WONDERFUL policy of allowing you unlimited downloads. For 30 DAYS. After that you had to PAY for additional 'download insurance' after 30 days!?
WHAT
THE
HELL
Yup. That kind of stupidity is why I can't play Distant Worlds anymore -- my computer died, and it turned out that the backup disks I made of the installers have vanished.
huh? I own all of the DW up to Shadows, and I have no limitations. If you have valid keys contact Matric Games for a new download link.
Even by Stardock's fairly benign license agreements, you're not supposed to have two copies of a game running at the same time. If you and your son want to play a game at the same time, it would require 2 licenses of the game.
Obviously we don't go around worrying about whether everyone adheres to our software licenses. But it's not, to us, a plus point, for making a Steamworks free version.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
