24 replies to this topic

[Erbun]

I'm sure this has been mentioned in the past, but I think with MWO at the stage that it is in now, being free to play, partnering with Valve to put MWO on steam would be a shot in the arm for this game.

THoughts?

[skalapunk]

100% yes

[Zomboyd]

^^^^Agree^^^^^

[TowerDiver]

Someone else brought up a good point that PGI should do this, but wait for the game to be more acceptiable to new players. Just imagine id PGI release the game durning the pcc meta.

[Colonel Jaime Wolf]

YES. Steam is awesome. Origin is the suck

join the winning team PGI

[Emetivore]

Steam is the #1 gaming community on the internet and failing to launch on Steam would be a terrible mistake. The numerous "Steam sucks don't do it" threads have failed to provide any reasonable arguments for why it's a bad idea (except that they don't personally use it).

[Farix]

Emetivore, on 05 August 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:

Steam is the #1 gaming community on the internet and failing to launch on Steam would be a terrible mistake. The numerous "Steam sucks don't do it" threads have failed to provide any reasonable arguments for why it's a bad idea (except that they don't personally use it).

It's been mentioned numerous times that the financial benefit may not actually be there. There is a lot of expense that goes into getting a F2P game on Steam, and then Valve gets a sizable cut of PGI's profits. On top of that, Steam rarely allows beta software to be distributed over their networks unless there is a hefty premium to be had. And finally, it is rumored that Valve exerts a lot of influence on a F2P game's development and content.

[Colonel Jaime Wolf]

I suppose it would also mean that we'd also be having Mech-related costumes for TF2 if ever :-)

[Rabcor]

not the first time this has been brought up.

I agree 100%, most of the games i play i found on steam. I only found out about this game through a friend who i played league of legends with.

Edited by Rabcor, 05 September 2013 - 09:36 AM.

[Hellcat420]

this game is nowhere near ready for steam. it would be warz steam launch all over again. putting 40% finished games on steam is never a good idea, especially when promised features(the most important ones for the game) are either a year late or have been thrown out all together.

[Johnny Z]

Last current known steam build disables all steam games, offline games and online games after 2 weeks of not connecting to steam servers.

Edited by Johnny Z, 05 September 2013 - 10:53 AM.

[Johnny Z]

Btw the offline steam games sold in stores say that they require a one time online activation only, but they require a connection to steam servers every 2 weeks or they are disabled.

The offline mode in steam requires a connection to steam and login or it is also disabled in around 2 weeks.

If this is no longer the way it is, please correct me.

[S3dition]

Farix, on 05 August 2013 - 12:05 PM, said:

It's been mentioned numerous times that the financial benefit may not actually be there. There is a lot of expense that goes into getting a F2P game on Steam, and then Valve gets a sizable cut of PGI's profits. On top of that, Steam rarely allows beta software to be distributed over their networks unless there is a hefty premium to be had. And finally, it is rumored that Valve exerts a lot of influence on a F2P game's development and content.

This is all completely false. It does not cost anything more than some extra development time to integrate with the steam APIs and a $100 account creation fee.

Valve allows pre-alpha games (try looking up Early Access on Steam).

You have no clue how much they take. Why? Because this information is not disclosed and is tightly guarded. Though yes, they do take a percentage of each sale. How much exactly is negotiated between Valve and the developer/publisher. But what is worth more, 1000 purchases at $20 each, or 100,000 purchases at $10 each?

I wouldn't put any stock in those rumors. valve does front a lot of bandwidth, but there are also a lot of low/no budget games on Steam who could not afford any kind of premium. Also, there is no publisher in the world that would hand over development to Valve. Not even a small portion of it.

Johnny Z, on 05 September 2013 - 10:52 AM, said:

Last current known steam build disables all steam games, offline games and online games after 2 weeks of not connecting to steam servers.

Johnny Z, on 05 September 2013 - 05:51 PM, said:

Btw the offline steam games sold in stores say that they require a one time online activation only, but they require a connection to steam servers every 2 weeks or they are disabled.

The offline mode in steam requires a connection to steam and login or it is also disabled in around 2 weeks.

If this is no longer the way it is, please correct me.

Let me correct you. How exactly do you think Valve will shut down the MWO servers if you are away for 2 weeks?

They can't?

Funny that, you can just get the normal MWO client and everything works fine. The idea that Valve could somehow lock you out of MWO any time they want has been a vicious and laughably unfounded rumor that has been circling for the better part of a year.

[Johnny Z]

S3dition, on 06 September 2013 - 01:18 AM, said:

Let me correct you. How exactly do you think Valve will shut down the MWO servers if you are away for 2 weeks?

They can't?

Funny that, you can just get the normal MWO client and everything works fine. The idea that Valve could somehow lock you out of MWO any time they want has been a vicious and laughably unfounded rumor that has been circling for the better part of a year.

Your saying that if a legitimate none steam client/exe. is used, MWO will still run even if steam servers are down or the ability to log into steam is interrupted or user has lost connection(not relevant for mwo). Your point?

Also some(at least one) steam games include a none steam exe. in their purchase which is something to take into consideration.

[Syllogy]

2 glaring problems exist:

#1: PGI would be responsible for full integration of their game into Steam's social architexture.
#2: Steam takes a hefty amount of ALL profits generated by Steam Users.

No.

[lowe0]

Another vote for Steam. Steam plus a decent NAS makes it so much easier to manage a collection of games. I'd prefer single sign-on as well, but it's a bit late for that.

[KharnZor]

Imagine the scrubs new players we'd get from steam......the horror.

[Gaan Cathal]

KharnZor, on 19 September 2013 - 08:49 PM, said:

Imagine the scrubs new players we'd get from steam......the horror.

You're right, we definitely need to constrict the playerbase more right now.

[Deathlike]

All I can say is... it's only profitable if it doesn't eat too much of PGI's bottom line.

[Gaan Cathal]

Deathlike, on 19 September 2013 - 10:20 PM, said:

All I can say is... it's only profitable if it doesn't eat too much of PGI's bottom line.

I doubt it'd be profitable simply because of the massive publicity spike the game would get for being on Steam. People are generally far less likely to stick it out with a game when there's a wealth of derogatory information about it, and the game as is would not garner a positive response.