238 replies to this topic

[Deathz Jester]

Lokust, on 06 July 2012 - 01:13 PM, said:

How do Steam's download servers suck? I have 18 megabit/sec internet which is by no means the best, but a lot better than the national average broadband speed of about 6 MB/sec. Any time I download from steam I get about 2.1 megabytes per second, which seems to be dead on for maxing out my connection when you figure megabytes x 8 = megabits, and TCP/IP overhead is about 15% of your overall bandwidth.

I love the overlay functionality and have never had a crash and run everything from new games to very old games

I've had no problems with Steam Wallet and love that I can trade in old console games to gamestop and purchase steam wallet credit with them. It's great for impulse buys of the many excellent indie games, particularly with their impressive sales they run.

I get that the "can't play with an update pending" issue can be annoying, but if you have a fast enough connection to complain that Steam's servers are not fast enough for you, I can't fathom how this can possibly be an issue for you. Also if you have to wait on a game update you can always play or do something else in the meantime. Many of those updates would be required for online play anyway so it would be a moot point in those cases since you'd have to download it to play regardless.

I've never had those sort of issues with the update system.

I've never heard of anyone I know in person or on any forum I frequent getting wrongfully banned by VAC. The very existence of an anti cheat measure encourages me.

I've never had a game that I couldn't play in offline mode.

If you think Steam is more bloated than Origin you haven't logged into each recently....

My only complaint with Steam right now is that Mass Effect 3 wasn't on it, but that's just because EA decided to be tools and make it Origin only, and Origin has been unstable crap for me compared to Steam. So I had to install something like Steam, but worse, just for the 3rd game of a trilogy of which I have the other two on Steam.

So because YOU haven't had any problems, and all of YOUR "friends" haven't had any problems and all of the forums YOU have been on haven't had any issues, we should all love & adore steam, and pray that they gain a monopoly on every game out there just like EA?



If you didn't like the response, why did you ask for reasons why steam sucks?

Edited by Iron Harlequin, 06 July 2012 - 01:43 PM.

[Teirdome]

Adm Awesome, on 06 July 2012 - 01:24 PM, said:

that would only make sense if PGI COULD do it for less cost. Then again, since most of the people on this Forum are Veteran, hardcore MechWarrior fans, I don't think they've been doing the best job with it, where Steam would guarentee many people will see the games through their frontpage of the store and the steam store updates that always pop up after you close a game.

Considering they're already getting coverage on IGN/Shacknews and popular podcasts like Weekend Confirmed, they're doing a fine job. There will also be a large boost when the game is reviewed. If they aren't getting enough eyeballs after the release coverage, then they can always integrate steam at some future point like so many other F2Ps have done.

Gallowglas, on 06 July 2012 - 01:25 PM, said:

If it were truly that simple, why would you ever see the big dog game developers (Bethesda, Bioware, etc.) putting their games on Steam? Large companies with dedicated marketing budgets and built-in audiences of rabid fans STILL use Steam because it's profitable.

Mind you, I do agree that the profitability calculation math changes when the game itself is FTP, but it's not as black-and-white as some here seem to want to make it.

30% is likely worth it for Bethesda to not have to set up their own software distribution network. EA/Bioware had also been supplementing their PC revenues by directly selling DLC to their customers using their distribution network through the game client. That is until Valve got pissy and threw them off.

While I agree that there's more to PGI's current choice than a simple revenue stream examination, the comment my brief analysis was in response to was saying that nobody had provided a counter-argument to why it works for indies and wouldn't work for PGI.

[IceSerpent]

BulletChief, on 06 July 2012 - 05:32 AM, said:

hopefully none... steam sucks.

^This.

[Lokust]

Iron Harlequin, on 06 July 2012 - 01:42 PM, said:

So because YOU haven't had any problems, and all of YOUR "friends" haven't had any problems and all of the forums YOU have been on haven't had any issues, we should all love & adore steam, and pray that they gain a monopoly on every game out there just like EA?



If you didn't like the response, why did you ask for reasons why steam sucks?

So to quote The Dude, your response is, "That's just like, your opinion man"?

If these apparent issues were widespread I think it's likely we'd see a lot more in the gaming media about them.

I honestly don't get any comparisons to EA. They sell more of other people's stuff than their own and have helped a lot of developers reach wider audiences. Yes, they take a cut. So do the retail stores that sell boxed games.

If you would care to clarify and or refute specific points, I'm game. Why do you think their download servers suck? What are your speed expectations? Is it possible there is a bandwidth bottleneck between Steam and you that isn't the fault of Steam? What games cause overlay crashes for you? How is it more bloated than Origin? etc...

I'm not telling anyone what to like. I was discussing my point of view and you're free to do the same.

Edited by Lokust, 06 July 2012 - 01:59 PM.

[SpecTRe X]

Ya, I'm not a fan of steam either. I just picked up on blacklight retribution, they went on steam and now there are almost no servers to be had because of overcrowding. Beyond that steam sucks, its intrusive and forces things on you, data-mines you so they can sell you more stuff and is a general annoyance since its yet another 'manager' client required to play games just like origin.

I'd rather see a small player base of decent people than a massive one that adds just as many tweeny-bopping, chat spamming, whining, snot nosed, tantrum-throwing babies as it does decent players. In short I don't like the downside of the steam community and want a player base that likes quality over quantity.

my.02$

[RedHellion]

Y'know, this doesn't even have to be available through Steam at all.

Don't get me wrong, I like Steam. I get awesome download speeds right up to the max bandwidth available from my ISP, it's handy for auto-updating games, and it provides a platform for my friends and I to game as a community.

However, there is this handy button in the Library window that says "Add A Game To Steam", and one of the options is "Add A Non-Steam Game". Thus you can add your game (MWO in this case) to Steam, have it in your Library, your friends can see when you're playing it, and the Steam in-game overlay should work (it does in most of the ones I've added). And best of all, that way those of you who don't like Steam for whatever reason can use it without, and those who do can have it in your Library to keep things nice and organized.

Now can people please stop turning up the heat on their forum-flamers?

Iron Harlequin, on 06 July 2012 - 11:59 AM, said:

• Steam Download Servers suck, even with high internet speeds.
  
• Overlay functionality is glitchy, flawed, especially when using it with non-steam games it can even cause a ctd
  
• Steam-Wallet is flawed, times purchases haven't gone through, or have been charged double, or download doesn't start at all
  
• Any steam game is only able to be played after it has been updated
  
• Updating system is flawed, sometimes updates dont even download or are slow to download
  
• Valve's anti-cheat system periodically bans people who aren't cheating and their client/or game have glitched
  
• Some games cant even be played in "offline" mode
  
• Its an overbloated version of Origins

Never had any of the problems you list there, friend. Most I can say is that some games can't be played in Offline mode because they're multi-only and thus require online. As for your fourth point, why would you want to play an outdated version of a game if there's an update available?
Also FYI, Steam was out and popular long before Origin. And Steam is less bloated too, if you look at 'bloat' as unnecessary restrictions.
Origin Criticisms: https://en.wikipedia...ry%29#Criticism
Steam Criticisms: https://en.wikipedia...re%29#Criticism
Notice the difference in the sizes of those sections?

Edited by RedHellion, 06 July 2012 - 02:13 PM.

[Deathz Jester]

I'm well aware of the "add non steam game to steam" option, since it exists why are people suggesting that IGP have their game plugged through steam? Just add the game to steam and use it that way, I've got plenty of games that I've purchased that aren't steam games and I use the steam overlay to do screenshots, let my friends know what i'm playing, and cut down on desktop shortcut clutter.

Its nice, and I do like steam, however I dont think it would be a good investment at this point in time for IGP and their game. Since every digital distribution/community system has its flaws. Hell I remember when steam hardly had any functionality and the Friends list always said "Coming Soon" on it.


It would take money from PGI, which at this point in time would hinder them more than help them.


After the game is well established, then yes by all means allow it to be advertised/sold on steam, but currently I dont think that it'd be a good idea.

[Risky]

Iron Harlequin, on 06 July 2012 - 02:20 PM, said:

I'm well aware of the "add non steam game to steam" option, since it exists why are people suggesting that IGP have their game plugged through steam? Just add the game to steam and use it that way, I've got plenty of games that I've purchased that aren't steam games and I use the steam overlay to do screenshots, let my friends know what i'm playing, and cut down on desktop shortcut clutter.

My issue with this is the Steam Overlay can actually conflict with games. Such as Sins of a Solar Empire before it ended up on Steam.

[Deathz Jester]

Risky, on 06 July 2012 - 02:22 PM, said:

My issue with this is the Steam Overlay can actually conflict with games. Such as Sins of a Solar Empire before it ended up on Steam.

I've been having issues with Bloodline Origins and Blacklight Retribution lately, *edit* I have pre-steam installations.

Edited by Iron Harlequin, 06 July 2012 - 02:24 PM.

[Skyefox]

So. It appears that people are willing to concede that Steam should be optional but not required, so those who like Steam can utilize it as normal and those who don't aren't penalized for not having it.

[Brose]

You, yourself can add any game to Steam.

[Lokust]

Right, but without actual support as a game on the Steam platform you can't expect features like the overlay to work 100%.

[Aeryk Corsaer]

I have no problem with Steam being used.

[KaOTiK911]

SpecTRe X, on 06 July 2012 - 02:06 PM, said:

Ya, I'm not a fan of steam either. I just picked up on blacklight retribution, they went on steam and now there are almost no servers to be had because of overcrowding. Beyond that steam sucks, its intrusive and forces things on you, data-mines you so they can sell you more stuff and is a general annoyance since its yet another 'manager' client required to play games just like origin.

I'd rather see a small player base of decent people than a massive one that adds just as many tweeny-bopping, chat spamming, whining, snot nosed, tantrum-throwing babies as it does decent players. In short I don't like the downside of the steam community and want a player base that likes quality over quantity.

my.02$

Not meaning to single you out, as others might have stated the same thing (I just happened to see it in this post) so no offense, but Steam does not data mine and sell your info. Steam will have a pop up come up asking you if you wish to take part in their hardware/software survey. First it is totally random who gets selected by this (can happen more then once) and second, it is totally optional, you can say no and nothing is given to Valve. They also do not sell the data they do collect but use it for their own benefit (such as basic hardware/software requirements for a game for example)

The rest of the post I wont touch(some I agree with some I don't) as it is a matter of opinion

[Dhimmi]

Kay Wolf, on 06 July 2012 - 01:01 PM, said:

Do you understand what you said here? "less invasive"?! It shouldn't be invasive at all!!! There is not a video game company or third-party software subscription service on the planet that has ANY RIGHT to my information at all! If I GIVE them information so I can play, that's one thing; if they force software onto my system, sans my knowledge, that is on there for ANY reason than what is absolutely minimally necessary to run the service on my system, then they are in violation of certain anti-trust laws, in the first place, and they are curtailing my privacy. What I do on my computer, what games I have, are NONE of their business.

I understand wanting to keep people from copying your stuff and giving it away, but what's going on is violation of privacy for the sake of finding people who are, typically, smart enough to NOT be found, in the first place, to the detriment of the consumer.

Are you willing to accept this invasion of privacy to play these games? (shakes head and walks away)

I'm done here.

im no fan of DRM of any kind, but the fact of the matter is that DRM does exist (and will be for the forseeable future) And yes cDRMs like steam always are an invasion of privacy to an extent. and lets face it there are bigger threats to your privacy than steam (facebook, and recently google to name 2 big players in the i dont care a **** about your privacy) . so yes in an ideal world DRM wouldnt be an invasion of privacy, it shouldnt even have to exist. but alas this is not the perfect world... So yes steam is still one of the "less invasive" systems around. i dont know if you read the Origin ToS? well that was ( when i read it) a serious breach of privacy of their users... far worse than valves ToS and privacy policy

[Kampfer]

Russ has talked about this, he said--- Maybe. Steam will cut into their profits but bring in a lot more potential players, it's a balancing act. I suspect (non expert opinion incoming) if they can maintain a healthy player base and a decent revenue stream then there will be no steam.

So if you want to have lots and lots of friends to play with I recommend everyone inviting a friend or 3 to boost the player base

[DraigUK]

They will release it on Steam if it makes financial sense for them to do so.

I think Steam is great personally, but if the devs decide they can do without it, I'm not too bothered either way, so long as I get to play MWO.

I would say choice is the key to gamers hearts though, I don't much like being forced to use any system I don't like, so putting it out there as an option to be used instead of forced to be used sits fine with me. Given the option, I'd probably use it.

[corrvan]

Just make sure it works if I "add it to steam" So I can shift tab and talk to my friends while playing =)

[Freyar]

SpecTRe X, on 06 July 2012 - 02:06 PM, said:

Ya, I'm not a fan of steam either. I just picked up on blacklight retribution, they went on steam and now there are almost no servers to be had because of overcrowding. Beyond that steam sucks, its intrusive and forces things on you, data-mines you so they can sell you more stuff and is a general annoyance since its yet another 'manager' client required to play games just like origin.

I'd rather see a small player base of decent people than a massive one that adds just as many tweeny-bopping, chat spamming, whining, snot nosed, tantrum-throwing babies as it does decent players. In short I don't like the downside of the steam community and want a player base that likes quality over quantity.

Blacklight: Retribution has a problem, and that is that Perfect World Entertainment and Zombie Studios wasn't prepared for the influx. It is important to note that this is not Steam's fault, but that of PWE/Zombie for failure to plan for such an increase.

Data Mining doesn't exist beyond what you explicitly allow such as the hardware survey. (Again, this is optional and it is anonymous.) MWO being on Steam wouldn't require Steam for distribution to begin with. It's an option, an avenue to get more exposure and more players. I frankly believe that Steam would be a significant benefit when it comes to establishing a strong playerbase.

The negative behaviors of players incoming is very common in any multiplayer game getting a large influx of players.Blaming the "Steam Community" is petty, trying to label a particular entity as the cause "of all the problems" when in reality it's the public at large that is an issue.

Risky, on 06 July 2012 - 02:22 PM, said:

My issue with this is the Steam Overlay can actually conflict with games. Such as Sins of a Solar Empire before it ended up on Steam.

Should work fine if MWO is distributed.

[TLBFestus]

Adm Awesome, on 06 July 2012 - 06:52 AM, said:

I don't see what's wrong with the 30%. First of all, I wouldn't for the life of me be able to understand how you got that number, Valve NEVER released sales figures or marketing information, I even tried to look up what percent of the digital market they own and couldn't find that, only someone who estimated it at 70%. Even so, ok, say it's 30%. Well that's 70% of profits that they wouldn't get if it wasn't on steam anyway. You don't have to let steam own your soul, they'll still keep everyone here right now if they were on steam, they would just add a significant amount of others, which is just more money in the companies profit, even if it's only 70% of what it normally would be.

Who said it's 30% of PROFITS? I highly doubt that, as STEAM would be waiting til you "declared" your profits. What they probably do is take 30% off the top, off whatever you collect because that's much simple and easier to manage.

As a business owner myself, that means that STEAM is taking 30% of your GROSS billings. That means, unless your business is running at lower than 70% overhead you are losing money after STEAM takes its cut. Sure there are lots of businesses that run at a lower over head, but still...

Lets say tht PGIs overhead to provide this game is 50% (which is probably low, at least for the foreseeable future), So that means for every $100 they collect, they use $50 to pay costs, and they keep $50 in profit. Throw STEAM in the mix and suddenly instead of collecting 50% profit they are paying another 30% to STEAM, thus only collecting 20% profit.

That is a 60% DECREASE in income. That is HUGE. That HURTS.

That's why in my business, when a customer asks for a 10% "discount", I have to explain to them that a 10% discount before overhead, is really a 33-50% discount on my take home pay, and even that is BEFORE taxes.

I love STEAM. Used to hate it when it first came out, but now it's a very good digital distribution system. For a starting FTP game though, I would doubt it's worth the cost.