I Have Seen The Future, And it is Annoying

Recommended Videos

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
I saw this coming as soon as people started screaming about "going digital" and how wonderful it was. The end result is of course that unless there is a really cheap deal going on, or I'm dealing with an indie/less distributed title, I don't go digital. I'm also becoming increasingly wary of supporting any game that requires the Internet to run and I've been reasearching that more intensely than is probably healthy recently due to some problems with games that I got which required internet connectivity rather than just a disc in drive.

I am increasingly beginning to agree that consoles seem to be like the de-facto way of the future simply because the people running the PC gaming side of things manage to hit a level of stupidity that is both rare and disturbing. To be honest it's very sad because I prefer to game on my PC given the chance.

In the end the bottom line is that the PC game companies are going to keep pushing digital because of the massive profits to be made, and really don't care about the consumers. It's all about gouging us, and with their eyes on the potential flow of cash they figure no matter what the inconveinence we'll keep coming like a group of junkies. Sadly, that's probably true when dealing with a disturbing number of people.

The Escapist just had an article where the head of the 1C company was talking about on a $20 title they were taking in $4 per unit through conventional sales which was enough to make it profitable (since they were in business). With digital distribution this jumped to $14 per unit giving them roughly 250% returns from what they were getting before (more or less). No consideration even being given to lowering the prices to consumers, as was the original "point" of digital distribution when the possibility was first appearing years ago. The only ones who seem to be lowering their prices are STEAM and they only do it periodically.

That right there is why the industry is saying "Digital Distribution IS coming" there is too much money to be made to not do it, no matter what it subjects the consumer to, and what we lose in the process. They are basically relying on the fact that gamers are going to whine (and loudly) but will never actually stop supporting their product. Too many impotent whine rallies and internet petitions have basically made the consumers a non-factor with the industry that caters to them.
 

MGlBlaze

New member
Oct 28, 2009
1,079
0
0
shotgunbob said:
Steam is ok and you can get some great deals off it but it randomly disconnects way to much for me
That's odd, I've never had any problems with Steam...

That said, though, Steam seems to be the only Digital Distribution package that is actually working... sort of. WHY are they STILL including DRM and SecuROM and other bullshit like that on Steam? It has anti-piracy methods built right in! And Valve's anti-piracy methods don't have some ridiculous installation limit or other intrusive features!
 

Zamn

New member
Apr 18, 2009
259
0
0
CD-R said:
This is the exact reason why I won't get Dawn of War II. It requires both Steam and Games for Windows Live. People seem to really like Steam and I don't see why. It's just a glorified DRM. I paid for the game I shouldn't be forced to connect to the internet to play it.
You aren't forced to connect to the internet to play it, it doesn't sound like you've actually used Steam much if at all. You're forced to be connected to the internet to buy or download a game because, you know, that's how digital distribution works, you need an internet connection.
 

Gort23

New member
Jan 23, 2010
1
0
0
londelen said:
Solution to the problem of PC gaming: make a keyboard & mouse peripheral for the consoles.
The PS3 already supports keyboard and mouse. Unfortunately, the games have to use that support, and currently Unreal Tournament is the only game that did.
 

Whispering Death

New member
May 24, 2009
197
0
0
How timely!

I just installed GTA IV today that was gifted to me as a Christmas gift over Steam.

Knowing what I know now I know I never would have bought this game. Rockstar social club now autostarts in the background and I have to sign up for a Windows Live account. Awesome.

I've already started to just buy all my games off Steam to get my games free of excess DRM nonsense and other crap.

For games I'm on the bubble about buying, extra "hangers on" are DEFINATELY deal breakers.
 

carpathic

New member
Oct 5, 2009
1,287
0
0
I would say that the things listed here, along with the exhorbitant cost of keeping a computer at a level commensurate to really enjoy new games are the reason for the death of PC gaming.
 

the1ultimate

New member
Apr 7, 2009
769
0
0
Even Steam isn't perfect, with it's enforced update when installing a game regardless of your internet speed, and the fact that the offline mode may not necessarily be obvious to a first-time user.

Personally, I like to keep things simple and "pure". I've always held that the game should be the app. Of course I also hold that the game should be a regular application which can be run on any computer without a disc and without any hidden security, and I'm sure that wouldn't go down well with game companies.

Having to install a game before playing it puts you behind the console users. Having to install a game client and a game before playing sets you further back.

Really, I do prefer to play games on PC, but if you have to install three game clients, download all the updates, and hope that my computer still has to resources left to actually run the game, it would be quicker to play the game on a console, pirate it or even learn how to disable the programs and still run the game by hacking the binary code yourself.
 

soulbro42

New member
Jan 23, 2010
2
0
0
Zamn said:
You aren't forced to connect to the internet to play it,
Except when you are.

I visited my mom in the hospital not long ago, after she'd had some pretty invasive surgery. I brought my laptop with me, and figured I'd play some Torchlight while she was asleep. The hospital had the kind of annoying wireless network you find in hotels, where they make you log into a local web page before you get actual internet access.

Steam apparently doesn't like that kind of network. It couldn't connect to whatever server it was trying to connect to. And it was desperate to update itself for some reason. Like, falling all over itself. And it wouldn't let me go into offline mode because of it.

So, yes. Hooray Steam. Not that I regret visiting my poor ol' Ma in the hospital, mind you. But I've no love for the company that prevented me from playing the single-player game I paid $20 for (that's right, FULL PRICE, not $5 like some of you bums paid during a sale).

Fortunately, thanks to BitTorrent, I won't have to worry about that anymore.
 

Fearzone

Boyz! Boyz! Boyz!
Dec 3, 2008
1,241
0
0
If I can, I buy a product off of Impulse. If I can't do that, I buy the DVD. Then, depending, I might get it off D2D. Lastly, if there is no other way, I get it off Steam. That's just me. The complaints mentioned in this article are non-existent with Impulse downloads, and readily obvious during those occasional moments I have Steam installed.

(Okay with King Arthur the Role-Playing Wargame, I bought it from Impulse but couldn't do multiplayer without Steam installed, which given the balance problems wasn't a big deal.)

The only problem with impulse is that it caters more to the quirky strategy games than the mainstream game market, which suits me fine... though I understand it might not work for everybody.
 

Black Rabt

New member
Jan 22, 2010
58
0
0
"Look upon my works ye mighty, and despair." It can only get worse from here. At least the programs can run simultaneously for now.
 

SimuLord

Whom Gods Annoy
Aug 20, 2008
10,077
0
0
Y'know, it is for this reason that I go with one content provider and one content provider only (with the sole exception of GamersGate for Paradox games, but that's my ONE special case, and it's there as much for fanboy and forum reasons as anything).

Even with Steam, if a game publisher doesn't think Steam's own authentication and (very reasonable) DRM requirements are good enough, that game gets taken off my list of games I want to purchase.

All this overcommercialization ruins everything it touches. I mean, fercrissakes, the bastards managed to ruin Christmas. CHRISTMAS! The best, most wonderful day of the year even if you're not a "hooray for Jesus" type, peace on earth, goodwill to everyone Samuel L. Jackson's ever called "************", and the marketing assholes managed to ruin it. And now they're doing to digital distribution what they did to Christmas.

Shakespeare was a little off. We get the lawyers second. The marketing people, THEM we kill first.
 

WhiteTigerShiro

New member
Sep 26, 2008
2,366
0
0
The companies just need to learn, and accept, that Valve beat them to the punch before digital distribution was even "hot". I can just see it now, within a couple years we'll have to connect to a Microsoft network, a Sony network, and a Nintendo network at the same time just to play one game, not to mention any other forms of DRM they decide to sneak in there.
 

Kollega

New member
Jun 5, 2009
5,161
0
0
[HEADING=1]Oh, fucking hell YES![/HEADING]

Really. I'm sick of this situation as much as you are. I sure can tolerate Steam - it's not only DRM, but also a good storefront, community, auto-updater, all in one more-or-less-working package. But now, when if i buy a legitimate copy, i have to also run GFWL (which is broken), a couple of stupid DRM systems, and god knows what else...

Then i'll rather pirate games to avoid tearing through layer upon layer of obstructive idiocy.

As for the whole "digital distribution" debacle, i'd still like to have large games on physical disks. My Internet connection does not allow me to easily and quickly download 10GB of data via Steam.
 

Redingold

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Mar 28, 2009
1,641
0
0
I've never had any problems with Steam crashing or lagging, you can play games when not connected to the Internet, and the automatic updates are useful.
 

Scrythe

Premium Gasoline
Jun 23, 2009
2,367
0
0
I was pissed that I had to go through this with Fallout 3, so you can imagine how distraught I was when I picked up my copy of Dawn of War 2 to realize that it also had to go through GFWL.

That is until I realized you can hotfix the game so I can run without GFWL. Besides, I wasn't going to play DoW2 on multiplayer and FO3 doesn't even have multiplayer.

Not to mention that every expansion on FO3 is a small file you can download off the internet after a quick google search. Fuck you, Microsoft. I'm not playing $40 for points I'll only need once with leftovers I'll never use. At least PSN uses actual money.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
PCs aren't consoles (if not we'd play on them, wouldn't we?) so stop trying to make them like that. The worst example is GFW Live - I don't know how many people even wanted a PC Live in the first place, but making a total piece of shit that complicates any problems you might be having is not the way to go.

Any PC gamer worth their salt has Steam - that's as close as we're going to get to a community like that of Live or PSN. You know why?

Because its tailored to PC gamers - GFW Live is like a shitty console-PC port. Its far too labour-intensive, a chore to get running, and an all-round waste of time.

The worst examples are games like Dirt 2 (I think that's the one) where you can DL from Steam, but then have to have GFW Live to play as well.

Why devs think its a good system to implement is beyond me.
 

erbkaiser

Romanorum Imperator
Jun 20, 2009
1,137
0
0
You know what "stores" do it right? Gamersgate and GoG. Their only purposes are to allow you a place to download the game, there's no resident programs running afterwards, no annoying login (caveat: a few Gamersgate games require a one-time online activation), no "social" club.
The rest could learn from these two.
 

Chakanus

New member
Sep 8, 2009
18
0
0
Therumancer said:
I saw this coming as soon as people started screaming about "going digital" and how wonderful it was. The end result is of course that unless there is a really cheap deal going on, or I'm dealing with an indie/less distributed title, I don't go digital. I'm also becoming increasingly wary of supporting any game that requires the Internet to run and I've been reasearching that more intensely than is probably healthy recently due to some problems with games that I got which required internet connectivity rather than just a disc in drive.

I am increasingly beginning to agree that consoles seem to be like the de-facto way of the future simply because the people running the PC gaming side of things manage to hit a level of stupidity that is both rare and disturbing. To be honest it's very sad because I prefer to game on my PC given the chance.

In the end the bottom line is that the PC game companies are going to keep pushing digital because of the massive profits to be made, and really don't care about the consumers. It's all about gouging us, and with their eyes on the potential flow of cash they figure no matter what the inconveinence we'll keep coming like a group of junkies. Sadly, that's probably true when dealing with a disturbing number of people.

The Escapist just had an article where the head of the 1C company was talking about on a $20 title they were taking in $4 per unit through conventional sales which was enough to make it profitable (since they were in business). With digital distribution this jumped to $14 per unit giving them roughly 250% returns from what they were getting before (more or less). No consideration even being given to lowering the prices to consumers, as was the original "point" of digital distribution when the possibility was first appearing years ago. The only ones who seem to be lowering their prices are STEAM and they only do it periodically.

That right there is why the industry is saying "Digital Distribution IS coming" there is too much money to be made to not do it, no matter what it subjects the consumer to, and what we lose in the process. They are basically relying on the fact that gamers are going to whine (and loudly) but will never actually stop supporting their product. Too many impotent whine rallies and internet petitions have basically made the consumers a non-factor with the industry that caters to them.
I can't even begin to say how much I agree with this post. Digital distribution is all fine and dandy when they hold a very yummy carrot (like The Witcher at 10 euros, which I bought), but the increase in profit without there ever being a steady decline in prices shall become the norm if "they" have it their way.

Hopefully the nice face of economic liberalism will eventually show itself, when a company whose games are only selling so-so, decreases by 5 euros their digital distributed games, in order to get an edge - this will hopefully be considered a good move, because the profits are already large enough to compensate. That's how things should work, right? Different companies with similar products, in an epic fight to overthrow one another, will make their products more appealing, creating new products, better products and better pricing.... *sighs* Just so you know, that (almost) never happens in Portugal. Liberalism ends with every company cartelizing the prices.... Here's to hoping it'll be different with this entertainment medium.