Oh, only it seems that slimy devs have been pushing out garbage for...well, ever since I started buying games they were already there. That was a while ago. Early Access did not start it.
Yes there have been some early access games that aren't shite, but it begs the question, why use early access? If you aren't running a scam, desperately trying to make up funding shortages, or duping your community into beta testing for you, there is zero reason to put out an unfinished product for full price on the grounds that it might someday possibly be finished. I actually don't trust devs that use ea even if I like the look of their game. For example War for the Overworld looks quite good, but the simple fact is that I assume its going to awful or that the devs are untrustworthy because they are using ea when there is no reason to.
I'll tell you a secret: Early Access by Steam...was not created by Steam. It did not start it's life at Steam. It merely took official place at Steam. The "Early Access" model has been around for a long time it was just never official, thus not used as much.
It used to be rare, now its ubiquitous. I blame steam for giving it a home and Minecraft for setting the precedent.
YES, WE ALL CAN. HERE IS HOW: DON'T BUY EARLY ACCESS GAMES
I mean, at least I am capable of controlling my actions and not buying everything that says "Early Access". I suggest you check yourself up if you're not capable of this.
I have exactly one early access game right now, and I regret that purchase immensely, as its becoming quite clear the devs are assclowns with big egos and ambition that outstrips their ability. Just because I don't use the system doesn't mean I can't see problems it has.
As is this.
What's this fascination with taking such a big issue with optional features that you don't even need to care about?
I would love to not care, but steam really really wants me to care about stupid trading cards, and people more interesting in trading than playing is one of several big reasons I quit TF2.
That's your "objective proof" that Steam is better than Origin? That it supports Linux? A OS that is sub-ideal for gaming? Origin probably doesn't support Linux because none of the games sold there do.
Not really sure how you got there. You outright conceded on 8/11 of my original points, and on the three you argued you never actually gave reasons those things were good, just told me to ignore them. Because ignoring problems is known as a good way to make them go away. And the only point you have presented for Steam in return is "runs on Linux". So you accuse me of claiming Origin is better because it "fits me" but apparently all it takes for Steam to be better is to support an OS that you and a minority of others use?
YES, WE ALL CAN. HERE IS HOW: DON'T BUY EARLY ACCESS GAMES
I mean, at least I am capable of controlling my actions and not buying everything that says "Early Access". I suggest you check yourself up if you're not capable of this.
I have exactly one early access game right now, and I regret that purchase immensely, as its becoming quite clear the devs are assclowns with big egos and ambition that outstrips their ability. Just because I don't use the system doesn't mean I can't see problems it has.
I have exactly zero Early Access games, myself. I never regretted a single Early Access purchase, too. And it's not because I inherently distrust them, it's just because I have other stuff to play in the meantime. Occasionally an Early Access game gets released then gets a big discount and I might get it, but unless I'm going to play it, I won't buy it. The only Early Access game I did buy was Lichdom and I did buy it because just about the time I felt like playing it, they decided they were going to release it, so I went "Well, it's being released in a day, and I wanted to play it right now anyway and they offered a discount, so why not".
major_chaos said:
As is this.
What's this fascination with taking such a big issue with optional features that you don't even need to care about?
I would love to not care, but steam really really wants me to care about stupid trading cards, and people more interesting in trading than playing is one of several big reasons I quit TF2.
For you. It doesn't make it better for you, if they don't fit you. However, it is better for people who benefit from the options. And the very fact they are options means they are inherently better than not having, as you can ignore them if they don't concern you or take advantage if they do.
major_chaos said:
Your argument for one platform and against another that apparently everybody should heed and agree with, is that it fits you yourself better.
Your comparison list included a lot of things that only concern you and they don't need to. That's how. And you were baffled, baffled when I dared disagree with you. You were completely taken aback by the fact that I even suggested something that didn't fit your view and that drove you to the point of making complete random nonsense up to justify why I could have been disagreeing with you.
major_chaos said:
You outright conceded on 8/11 of my original points, and on the three you argued you never actually gave reasons those things were good, just told me to ignore them. Because ignoring problems is known as a good way to make them go away.
Because they literally aren't problems if you ignore them. And they can be ignored as they are F-U-C-K-I-N-G O-P-T-I-O-N-A-L. They literally not affect you if you ignore them.
major_chaos said:
And the only point you have presented for Steam in return is "runs on Linux". So you accuse me of claiming Origin is better because it "fits me" but apparently all it takes for Steam to be better is to support an OS that you and a minority of others use?
Never had to use customer support. You had. I don't care about support as I don't foresee needing to use it. But I give you that, if support is better, that's better for everybody. However, not used any, I can't really say. Let's go with 1 for Origin.
Literally never needed a refund for a game. I don't care. Again, another one I give you, however - a return policy is better than not having it. Options. I like them. 2 for Origin.
major_chaos said:
Origin doesn't sell retro games that wont run on any system made after 2005 and then refuse to give refunds. Steam does.
Never had a game not work. Even then, system requirements should be something you check. And even then there are likely to be be workarounds to get the game to play.
And even then I'd say "not having retro games" is a point against Origin in the first place. Again, more options.
I've not benchmarked them, nor do I care. Unless the startup takes more than a minute (and Steam doesn't), I'm not usually fussed as it's a negligible overhead - it's once per power cycle.
Unless the difference is in at least an order of magnitude, I don't think it's really a point in favour of Origin. Slightly better, I guess, but not really close to a full point.
major_chaos said:
Origin has a storefront that isn't a open sewage pipe of nonfunctional garbage from ten years ago.
See, I never actually bought anything on Origin because they don't have anything I'm interested in. I've had an Origin account ever since they announced Origin, too, I've not been avoiding it. It's not "nonfuctional garbage" but pretty much no appealing games. Well, maybe with the exception of Mass Effect 3, but that's a dance I don't care to repeat, because people were unable to English when met with my incredibly hard to grasp concept of the words "I don't really care".
As for Steam's "nonfuctional garbage"...I don't see how that's so bad. It's not new, nor unique, I mean. I'd certainly classify over 90% of the games in pretty much the same category of "I won't be playing them". This was true before Steam, this was true for Steam itself a few year back and now, too. It's certainly true for Origin. The pool of "games I won't play" tends to be consistent
major_chaos said:
Origin storefront has never become inaccessible because the servers couldn't handle the tragic. (gratz on that not happening for the first time ever last Christmas valve. Finally took some money out of the hookers and blow fund for non-hamster powered servers?)
Probably linked to Origin never really having a large enough event to draw people in. But even Origin did have problems, I wouldn't hold it against them, as Steam has...what, a couple of hours of downtime a year? Meh, whatever - it's not like it's VITAL to use the store for the time, anyway.
Which? Also Origin still misses other basic features, too. Why did you not mention that? Oh, I know - it's because you don't care. But the features you do care about, ho-ho, you make up all the fuss be about them, now ain't you.
major_chaos said:
Origin. Is. Not. Spyware. If you are one of the people still spouting that worthless tinfoil hat nonsense then the only response I can bother giving is a simple "laughharder.avi"
It's actually a bullshit reason. I mean, do you really claim "does not actually harm you" is a point in favour of...any application? It's not, it's an implicit requirement, actually.
major_chaos said:
Origin (As far as I know) doesn't have all the metagame horseshit that Steam has.
List of games I have received absolutely FREE from Steam as giveaways (public giveaways, not private gifts or add-in promos for owning certain games):
-Sniper Elite 2
-Portal
-Arma: Cold War Assault
-Tropico 3
-Red Orchestra 2
EA doing good is like Hitler getting the trains to run on time. Sure I can get to my destination without delay, but oh yeah, the destination is full of dead Jews. EA has a LOT of fixing to do before even approaching my good books again personally.
Can't be a true internet discussion without Godwin's Law, thanks for being an agent of such!
OT: Well, EA has done some stupid shady things, the new Dungeon Keeper debacle is a great example of how out of touch they can be at times. I also believe that EA does in a very odd sort of way listen to their customer base... for the most part. Battlefield 4 was/is? a huge issue too, but I've not been a BF fan for a long long time so I can't comment on it save what I've heard was stupid. Not commenting on the SimCity release, wasn't there for that either but I played it recently on the free trial and enjoyed the hell out of it.
I still give EA the benefit of the doubt, might be some residual loyalty from working there at one point in life speaking due to how well I was treated and how fun the office generally was. They still get some good shots in here and there, the free Sims 2, the fact that they aren't charging for things in Sims 4 that weren't implemented on release (yes they should have been there but that time has passed), Origin becoming a better platform in some respects than Steam (two things that stand out to me are the free games and the download speeds... seriously my download speeds are consistently better on Origin than on Steam and its nothing to do with locale).
*shrug* I have a duality when it comes to EA I guess. Having been a customer for many years, most of my life in fact, I am not one to abandon a company just because they're having management issues. Either they'll survive and trim a lot of the fat that needs to go or they'll die out and something will buy up the pieces and the issue will be settled.
I don't hate EA, but yes I am sometimes disappointed with them. Sometimes I love them and sometimes I'm just lukewarm. I do believe they didn't deserve the "worst company" title for 2 years in a row. A game company that aside from stupid business decisions that affect their customers didn't commit any world scale blunders or made poor choices that supported human rights violations... no they were far far far from deserving that title. Entitled fucking gamers...
Origin is a smooth, well-managed sales front-end with tolerable download speeds and good sales/giveaways.
EA Sports lost to the NCAA so their game empire is no longer stealing billions from college kids. So that's good even if it's not their intention.
I think EA is still a worse publisher than they were ten years ago. And they've run Maxis into the ground. OTOH, their console releases are pretty solid, and their PC games EVENTUALLY are, even if there's a wait. I have no insight into their corporate culture, but it's been a while since anyone declared them the "worst place in America to work."
So still not great, but no longer the worst. Ubisoft is definitely the worst now.
You opened yourself for a basic 'dad joke' riposte right there.
I hope you learned some better defenses through the years, otherwise... ouch.
I really hope EA has got their act together though.
Not just with Origin, but behind the scenes in the development pits or however it is they store their programmers these days.
When I think of EA development I still imagine cubicles sunk into a pit of smouldering brimstone while team leads stalk up and down the rows of pits with pitchfork in one hand and whip in the other.
"CODE!" They cry, "CODE!" as the whip lashes back and forth.
I have exactly zero Early Access games, myself. I never regretted a single Early Access purchase, too. And it's not because I inherently distrust them, it's just because I have other stuff to play in the meantime. Occasionally an Early Access game gets released then gets a big discount and I might get it, but unless I'm going to play it, I won't buy it. The only Early Access game I did buy was Lichdom and I did buy it because just about the time I felt like playing it, they decided they were going to release it, so I went "Well, it's being released in a day, and I wanted to play it right now anyway and they offered a discount, so why not".
When did I say that was a bad thing? good on em, but compatibility is only half the reason that Linux is sub optimal for gaming. The other half is that its about as user friendly as a rabid starving pitbull and most people don't want to deal with that just to play games.
I don't get it, and according to you this is a good thing? Probably - it's more options for other people, right - you don't want that.
For you. It doesn't make it better for you, if they don't fit you. However, it is better for people who benefit from the options. And the very fact they are options means they are inherently better than not having, as you can ignore them if they don't concern you or take advantage if they do.
You know what I don't even feel like arguing about the metagame crap, its a constant but mild annoyance, but ea is a destructive practice and I'm not going to just ignore it.
Your comparison list included a lot of things that only concern you and they don't need to. That's how. And you were baffled, baffled when I dared disagree with you. You were completely taken aback by the fact that I even suggested something that didn't fit your view and that drove you to the point of making complete random nonsense up to justify why I could have been disagreeing with you.
Deep breaths man, your jimmies are sounding rustled. You were the one who made the initial disagreement, did you seriously think you could quote a post and just go "lolnope u so wrong" and have me just go "well he is clearly correct because reasons, I will reconsider my wicked ways."?
Accept ea does effect me because it feeds the awful "perpetual development/games as services" mentality, enables slimeballs to make easy money, and contributes heavily to the torrent of sludge that makes the storefront useless. But you say its good because...?
Again - complete and utter bullshit I'd appreciate you stop this up.
Never had a game not work. Even then, system requirements should be something you check. And even then there are likely to be be workarounds to get the game to play.
No. Just flat no. Selling a product you know wont function without third party workarounds is greasy as hell, I can't believe you actually support that as a business practice. If any other retailer sold me defective electronics, they would give a refund, not go "well if you bust it open and solder a few things it'll be totally fine"
And even then I'd say "not having retro games" is a point against Origin in the first place.
I agree, I think its silly that EA hasn't dug into its retro catalouge more. Thing is my issue isn't steam selling retro games, god knows I love GoG and I bought that 3D Realms bundle the second I heard about it, its that they sell retro games without bothering to fix them up and make sure they run on modern systems, unlike the aforementioned.
As for Steam's "nonfuctional garbage"...I don't see how that's so bad. It's not new, nor unique, I mean. I'd certainly classify over 90% of the games in pretty much the same category of "I won't be playing them". This was true before Steam, this was true for Steam itself a few year back and now, too. It's certainly true for Origin. The pool of "games I won't play" tends to be consistent
I take it you weren't a fan when people like Jim and TB started arguing that steam needs quality control? Yes bad games have existed before, but the output has been so much worse recently. We didn't used to have publishers dumping 10+ pieces of shovleware from 2003 on the store in a single day.
Probably linked to Origin never really having a large enough event to draw people in. But even Origin did have problems, I wouldn't hold it against them, as Steam has...what, a couple of hours of downtime a year? Meh, whatever - it's not like it's VITAL to use the store for the time, anyway.
The ability to chose where to install games would be the big one. F2P game support didn't happen till 2011, setting downloads to not auto-pause when I start another game is a fairly recent addition. That's just off the top of my head.
Also Origin still misses other basic features, too
It's actually a bullshit reason. I mean, do you really claim "does not actually harm you" is a point in favour of...any application? It's not, it's an implicit requirement, actually.
It wasn't so much a point in favor of origin as a point dismissing you if you were one of the people still parroting "origin is SPAHIN ON MEH!!" silliness.
So...about 2 of your 11 reasons were actually in favour. Maybe 3, if you do some benchmark tests with rather surprising results.
Origin is a steaming turd, and EA's customer service department is a joke. I had a Sims 3 issue, so they dumped me into the French Dragon Age queue, the agent that replied then transferred me to the German Battlefield 3 queue, who disconnected on me. An hour later, I finally get someone in English for the Sims, and he told me to reinstall everything and disconnected.
When I asked yet another agent why the games I had just bought were being refunded without my request, he wouldn't tell me, just kept asking 'Is there anything else I can help you with?' and disconnected when I asked again.
They need to do more than fix a few bug-launched games and reverse moronic DLC removals before I'll consider them anything but the Comcast of the video game industry. Steam is a million times better than EA and Origin.
That's your "objective proof" that Steam is better than Origin? That it supports Linux? A OS that is sub-ideal for gaming? Origin probably doesn't support Linux because none of the games sold there do.
There is no such thing as objectively better, unless we are going to be talking about these clients in terms of systems of discrete algorithms, but even then we don't know because we don't have the algorithms.
Please don't start a platform war here.
I use Linux primarily, in order to play EA games i've got to run them through WINE. I don't mind the inconvenience, but Origin straight will not run. While Origin is only part of the foible, it's a legitimate thing to point out. EA has billed Origin as more or less a competitive service with Steam, yet the only EA published games I can actually run are those that are either a) listed on steam or b) do not require the Origin client (such as Dawngate).
This leaves me in a situation where I have a very limited catalog of EA games that I can really engage with without skirting into the morally grey area of breaking the game's DRM and dealing with the limited functionality. That's a drawback, and it does factor in to my assessment of EA.
Come on guys, we need to treat each other's opinions with a little more open mindedness. We can engage with people we disagree with without having to circle the wagons or anything. These are just distribution platforms, they both do good and bad things. Valve isn't a saint, but they are trying to push for multiplatform. EA's got an image problem and they seem to be trying to fix it.
You opened yourself for a basic 'dad joke' riposte right there.
I hope you learned some better defenses through the years, otherwise... ouch.
I really hope EA has got their act together though.
Not just with Origin, but behind the scenes in the development pits or however it is they store their programmers these days.
When I think of EA development I still imagine cubicles sunk into a pit of smouldering brimstone while team leads stalk up and down the rows of pits with pitchfork in one hand and whip in the other.
"CODE!" They cry, "CODE!" as the whip lashes back and forth.
One of the major reasons I'm wanting to reassess my stance on EA is I have heard they have made efforts to make their corporate culture more conducive and easier on their developers from a few of my friends in and around EA. Which is nice, but honestly I personally am more concerned with consumer rights (though developer treatment will prompt me to boycott a studio or publisher as well. I'm looking at you Bethesda.)
I have exactly zero Early Access games, myself. I never regretted a single Early Access purchase, too. And it's not because I inherently distrust them, it's just because I have other stuff to play in the meantime. Occasionally an Early Access game gets released then gets a big discount and I might get it, but unless I'm going to play it, I won't buy it. The only Early Access game I did buy was Lichdom and I did buy it because just about the time I felt like playing it, they decided they were going to release it, so I went "Well, it's being released in a day, and I wanted to play it right now anyway and they offered a discount, so why not".
It gives developers the opportunity to make a game, they otherwise might not be able to. Real life costs money, and while development is, essentially, free, it costs time. And time is linked to money. If you have neither, you can't really make a game.
It also promotes interactions, customer collaboration and responding to change. In short, it promotes agile development and I do not see this as a bad thing. After all, a lot of games have been burned because they had to follow a rigid process. Seems that more freedom for developers is preferable to tighter deadlines, especially when talking about indie developers.
It's optional. If you don't want to participate, you don't. It's not enforced.
major_chaos said:
Interestingly, I manage to not care just fine. I think this is just you.
Personal lack of feelings. Small but important distinction. From the people I know IRL who use Steam, only, like, two do anything with cards or items or so on. The rest manage to not care at all just fine. In fact, last summer sale my housemate finally noticed the cards in Steam, or at least noticed them enough to ask what they were. And I told him. He hasn't cared since then.
So again, it seems to just be you.
major_chaos said:
Look, I know you love making stuff up, but I'd appreciate it if you stopped.
The quoted part. I did not say "Steam is better than Origin because this one reason", if you cared enough to not make bullshit up, you would notice I never said that, instead, I refuted your point of "Origin is absolutely 100% always and ever better than Steam in every and all possible way [small]except sales[/small]".
Your bullshit generator seems to be working in black and white only, you may need to callibrate it - can I at least once not be accused of bringing a complete 100% reverse point when I disagree with you on something? Maybe next time try something way out in the field, like "Well, that clearly shows you advocate for giant alien amalgamations of squid and machine". You know, not just the exact opposite of what you're saying.
major_chaos said:
Which is something Valve have taken a steps to remedy. And that's...bad? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
When did I say that was a bad thing? good on em, but compatibility is only half the reason that Linux is sub optimal for gaming. The other half is that its about as user friendly as a rabid starving pitbull and most people don't want to deal with that just to play games.
For you. It doesn't make it better for you, if they don't fit you. However, it is better for people who benefit from the options. And the very fact they are options means they are inherently better than not having, as you can ignore them if they don't concern you or take advantage if they do.
You know what I don't even feel like arguing about the metagame crap, its a constant but mild annoyance, but ea is a destructive practice and I'm not going to just ignore it.
You need to show me irrefutable proof that isn't "I don't like it". I mean, we have evidence that it works and produces good games. We also have evidence that some assholes use it. Would you mind explaining how only one of these is true, the other isn't?
major_chaos said:
Never had a game not work. Even then, system requirements should be something you check. And even then there are likely to be be workarounds to get the game to play.
No. Just flat no. Selling a product you know wont function without third party workarounds is greasy as hell, I can't believe you actually support that as a business practice. If any other retailer sold me defective electronics, they would give a refund, not go "well if you bust it open and solder a few things it'll be totally fine"
They are not selling products that won't work without third party workarounds. They are selling a product that works if used as described. The requirements are the description. Your analogy is flawed - the electronics store is selling you something that won't work for you specifically, unless you modify it. And they do in reality - I've bought working equipment which is sold with wrong sort of power plug (EU two pin as opposed to UK standard, for example) or a different connector to what I have (a monitor that didn't have HDMI). And I just use an adaptor or a separate cable and they work. In fact, I'll expand away from electronics - a lot of times when buying furniture I need to have my own tools to assemble it. Actually, when I bought a desk about a month back, it was, I think, the first time a piece of furniture came with its own tools (a screwdriver) so it literally had everything needed included. Well, the screwdriver sucked a bit, but it was possible to assemble it without anything needed outside of it.
major_chaos said:
As for Steam's "nonfuctional garbage"...I don't see how that's so bad. It's not new, nor unique, I mean. I'd certainly classify over 90% of the games in pretty much the same category of "I won't be playing them". This was true before Steam, this was true for Steam itself a few year back and now, too. It's certainly true for Origin. The pool of "games I won't play" tends to be consistent
Yes bad games have existed before, but the output has been so much worse recently. We didn't used to have publishers dumping 10+ pieces of shovleware from 2003 on the store in a single day.
And Valve have heard your plight and provided the meta data mining suggestions, customisation of frontpage products to show, and curators. There were recommendations and ratings from before, too, now refined and improved to be more useful.
Steam is moving towards a decentralised platform, which I believe to be an improvement. True, not during the entire transition, but it's moving towards the right direction
I mean, with all of EA's quality control, there is nothing I really want to buy from them.
major_chaos said:
Probably linked to Origin never really having a large enough event to draw people in. But even Origin did have problems, I wouldn't hold it against them, as Steam has...what, a couple of hours of downtime a year? Meh, whatever - it's not like it's VITAL to use the store for the time, anyway.
Is it VITAL to access the steam store when it's down? Remember, it's not down for the entire sale, more like, the first half an hour (maybe). And that's a couple of times a year. And you don't lose on anything, since all deals last for more than what the downtime is. The answer seems to be "no". Why is it an issue again?
major_chaos said:
Bullshit reason. It's not inherently evil and it's not a detractor. It's an optional feature that you can ignore.
Regardless: you can ignore it. You also need to provide evidence it is only ever used for evil and nothing good has or ever will come out of it. Waiting.
major_chaos said:
Also Origin still misses other basic features, too
- Bigger selection.
- Better selection.
- Works on Windows, OS X, and Linux.
- Easier to buy all DLC in a single place.
- Finally decided to get rid of the AJAX page fetching shit for search results (Origin's counterpart is the infinite scrolling shit).
- Strives to be decentralised.
- Early Access is not the spawn of the Unholy (unless you have irrefutable evidence?) but can be useful and good.
- The "metagame horseshit" can literally give you free money and/or games. Or you can just ignore it.
- The Community is a nice option, even if I don't really use it.
Not directly Steam related tangentially through Valve:
- Shown to be ready and willing to expand to other platforms like Mac and Linux
- Actively support Linux in order for it to grow as a gaming platform.
- Want to expand gaming with streaming.
And a point against Origin: Some prices seem to be really out of place. Saints Row The Third, the base game for £20 when the full package on Steam and GameFly is £17[footnote]oddly Green Man Gaming has the same prices as Origin but they sell Steam keys[/footnote] or Ultima 1 - 3 for £4 each when GOG has them for £3.70 in total. Heck, of these two, one is a non-EA title, the other is just old (and retro seems to be weird with them), but there is Spore - an EA game, sold on both Origin and Steam. It's £20 on Origin and £15 on Steam for the base game, for some completely bizarre reason. One of the two DLC is £5 on Origin, as opposed to £10 on Steam, but it's the stupid one. For a service that wants to compete with Steam, this pricing is just bizarre.
Unless you can completely refute each and every single point here, I believe I have sufficiently proven that your initial statement was false.
It gives developers the opportunity to make a game, they otherwise might not be able to. Real life costs money, and while development is, essentially, free, it costs time. And time is linked to money. If you have neither, you can't really make a game.
So your telling me I should prefer a system that forces me to dismiss popups for a feature I don't care about, over one that just doesn't have the feature?
The quoted part. I did not say "Steam is better than Origin because this one reason", if you cared enough to not make bullshit up, you would notice I never said that, instead, I refuted your point of "Origin is absolutely 100% always and ever better than Steam in every and all possible way [small]except sales[/small]".
You know what? You are right, I used hyperbole in my first two posts, sales are not literally the only thing origin does better than steam. Its still a better platform (and I have a feeling that what GoG is working on will be better than both of them).
Also, I take it you have no experience with Linux, so I think it's safe to ignore what you're saying about it.
You need to show me irrefutable proof that isn't "I don't like it". I mean, we have evidence that it works and produces good games. We also have evidence that some assholes use it. Would you mind explaining how only one of these is true, the other isn't?
If assholes can, with little difficulty, abuse a system, then it needs to be fixed, because its a broken system. If that system provides nothing to people who aren't assholes then simply getting rid of it would be the faster option, although fixing is still on the table. Not that either of those will ever happen, Valve is making money hand over fist, they couldn't care less if some people get screwed along the way.
They are not selling products that won't work without third party workarounds. They are selling a product that works if used as described. The requirements are the description. Your analogy is flawed - the electronics store is selling you something that won't work for you specifically, unless you modify it. And they do in reality - I've bought working equipment which is sold with wrong sort of power plug (EU two pin as opposed to UK standard, for example) or a different connector to what I have (a monitor that didn't have HDMI). And I just use an adaptor or a separate cable and they work.
So, yes you are supporting Valve's "right" to sell unaltered games without so much as a big red "THIS WON'T RUN" warning on the store page because you would actually bother to modify a product instead of returning it for one that works without modification. Its like I'm arguing with a computer libertarian.
As a side note: Jim and TB are two of the very few voices worth listening to in games media, you should give it a spin.
And Valve have heard your plight and provided the meta data mining suggestions, customisation of frontpage products to show, and curators. There were recommendations and ratings from before, too, now refined and improved to be more useful.
But still not actually useful. I would rather go back to a usable storefront that I can browse myself, instead of having a deeply flawed algorithm guess (incorrectly) what I am interested in.
Steam is moving towards a decentralised platform, which I believe to be an improvement. True, not during the entire transition, but it's moving towards the right direction
Care to elaborate on both how steam is becoming "a decentralised platform" and how that's a good thing?
Because as its presented here it sounds like you want steam to basically become the unregulated street market of digital distribution.
I mean, with all of EA's quality control, there is nothing I really want to buy from them.
That comes down to taste. Will all their reputation there is nothing I want to buy from Valve, but that's not a statement for or against steam, I just don't like their games. You not liking EA games is not a point for or against either platform.
Regardless: you can ignore it. You also need to provide evidence it is only ever used for evil and nothing good has or ever will come out of it. Waiting.
And where is all this good it has done? where are all the games that couldn't have existed without ea? If a dev isn't pulling something why do they need ea?
Explain verbosely, because I just checked to make sure I wasn't remembering wrong and Origin lets you pause/play/cancel Downloads, as well as letting you push what you want to the top of the que, so whats the issue?
Not a positive. Quality > quantity. Would rather shop at a small grocery store with high quality merchandise than a huge grocery store that mostly sells bags of human excrement.
How so? you click on the title of a game in your origin library and scroll down and its all right there. I would say they are both about equal in this regard.
- Finally decided to get rid of the AJAX page fetching shit for search results (Origin's counterpart is the infinite scrolling shit).
I'm going for a degree in computer forensics, not Java so I'm not 100% sure what you mean by this, but scrolling down, clicking next, and waiting for the page to load is far slower than just scrolling through a list, and Origin allows you to click "quick view" to get info on the game with losing your spot, while with steam it was back to page 1 every time until the recent UI update.
"free money" here meaning about 1 USD every month. And something being ignorable doesn't make it good. I can ignore a clunking sound my car is making, doesn't make it a feature. Also a big popup going "YOU HAVE NEW ITEMS!!!!" is intentionaly difficult to ignore.
- The Community is a nice option, even if I don't really use it.
I'm getting different results than you because I'm in the US (spore is $20 on both, GoG is $6 for the ultima pack wihile Origin is $5 each) So im going to chalk that up to international prices on digtial games being, to use the scientific term "totally wack yo" which is in no way a good thing, but is also not a sin exclusive to origin.
Unless you can completely refute each and every single point here, I believe I have sufficiently proven that your initial statement was false.
It was. I worded my initial statement poorly and thus it did not get the point I was trying to convey across correctly.
So far I guess we both gave each other 2 points, so that's something.
It gives developers the opportunity to make a game, they otherwise might not be able to. Real life costs money, and while development is, essentially, free, it costs time. And time is linked to money. If you have neither, you can't really make a game.
So your telling me I should prefer a system that forces me to dismiss popups for a feature I don't care about, over one that just doesn't have the feature?
The quoted part. I did not say "Steam is better than Origin because this one reason", if you cared enough to not make bullshit up, you would notice I never said that, instead, I refuted your point of "Origin is absolutely 100% always and ever better than Steam in every and all possible way [small]except sales[/small]".
You know what? You are right, I used hyperbole in my first two posts, sales are not literally the only thing origin does better than steam. Its still a better platform (and I have a feeling that what GoG is working on will be better than both of them).
Then you can explain exactly how, and I quote, "as user friendly as a rabid starving pitbull". And how with all of that experience you claim to have, you were clueless, I repeat clueless of aptitude. I mean, I get not coming across it before, but surely if you do have as much experience to make a claim such as the quoted, you should be able to...identify what you were seeing.
But I'd let you get back to me with an essay of user-friendliness and Linux.
major_chaos said:
If that system provides nothing to people who aren't assholes
The specs ARE THERE ON THE STORE PAGE. On all of the pages.
major_chaos said:
And Valve have heard your plight and provided the meta data mining suggestions, customisation of frontpage products to show, and curators. There were recommendations and ratings from before, too, now refined and improved to be more useful.
But still not actually useful. I would rather go back to a usable storefront that I can browse myself, instead of having a deeply flawed algorithm guess (incorrectly) what I am interested in.
Then untick "show stuff for me" and don't click on the queue. If it's any help, I don't really like the recommendations either, as I said, but I've been able to survive by not using them. Every day is a struggle, every visit to Steam leaves me in constant emotional, physical, and mental pain[footnote]well, at least I assume is that, although it could be my digestion[/footnote] of simply not bothering with them, but I manage to get by...somehow...with no real issues.
major_chaos said:
Steam is moving towards a decentralised platform, which I believe to be an improvement. True, not during the entire transition, but it's moving towards the right direction
The community has more power about what's in the store - it's easier for games to get on there, and users have more of a say about it. Instead of one entity lording over everything, more freedom is given to the users. It helps with bringing variety and selection in terms of catalogue, and useful feedback and a measure of control for users. Even GOG have shown how people appreciate that. And there is the really smart business decision of having people invested in your platform.
major_chaos said:
I mean, with all of EA's quality control, there is nothing I really want to buy from them.
That comes down to taste. Will all their reputation there is nothing I want to buy from Valve, but that's not a statement for or against steam, I just don't like their games. You not liking EA games is not a point for or against either platform.
Keyword emphasised. Why EA games? Why don't they have more? Well, they do, but a really tiny selection. And here is exactly what I am talking about, by acting as a gatekeeper, they are keeping me, as well as other players, out by virtue of not letting enough games in.
major_chaos said:
Regardless: you can ignore it. You also need to provide evidence it is only ever used for evil and nothing good has or ever will come out of it. Waiting.
And where is all this good it has done? where are all the games that couldn't have existed without ea? If a dev isn't pulling something why do they need ea?
Explain verbosely, because I just checked to make sure I wasn't remembering wrong and Origin lets you pause/play/cancel Downloads, as well as letting you push what you want to the top of the que, so whats the issue?
Speed limit and scheduled control of downloads are lacking, last time I checked. I don't know if they've been added since then but I think they haven't - you certainly didn't mention them.
Since I live in a house with other people and our download speed is limited (due to being shafted by BT), having a software hog all of the bandwith for a long time (and games are more than a gig, so it is going to take a while) while other people also want to use the connection to play, or even work, is undesirable. A speed limit enables me to both download a game and play it the same day, instead of waiting for at least a day. But for downloads, at least I'm in control if they start or not, however, if an updates comes along, I don't want it to automatically take over the bandwith, thus a limit is really useful.
Sure, there are traffic shapers, but I shouldn't need to resort to a third party application for this feature.
As for scheduling - I may want to let downloads proceed overnight or to forbid them in the hours when everybody is home. This is even harder to pull off with a third party application than bandwith limits. I suppose aside from a remote PC control but the setup would be a *****.
Not a positive. Quality > quantity. Would rather shop at a small grocery store with high quality merchandise than a huge grocery store that mostly sells bags of human excrement.
You're assuming the "small grocery store" has anything for you. Again, Origin doesn't have anything for me. Steam has Enclave (among other titles). Your analogy is flawed.
How so? you click on the title of a game in your origin library and scroll down and its all right there. I would say they are both about equal in this regard.
Unless I'm missing something, I don't see any DLC on this page [https://www.origin.com/en-gb/store/buy/mass-effect-3/pc-download/base-game/standard-edition].
major_chaos said:
- Finally decided to get rid of the AJAX page fetching shit for search results (Origin's counterpart is the infinite scrolling shit).
I'm going for a degree in computer forensics, not Java so I'm not 100% sure what you mean by this, but scrolling down, clicking next, and waiting for the page to load is far slower than just scrolling through a list, and Origin allows you to click "quick view" to get info on the game with losing your spot, while with steam it was back to page 1 every time until the recent UI update.
1. Java has nothing to do with AJAX, so I'm not sure why you bring it up. For a computer scientist...heck, anybody who knows both terms, on more than superficial level, in fact, I'd expect there to be a difference between JavaScript and Java.
2. AJAX is asynchronous fetching of information. Really, that's about 90% of it - you get some data without reloading the page.
3. AJAX is a good thing...as long as you don't use horrible practices with it. Case in point, Steam until the recent update. How their UI worked is, if you go to another page in the results (for example, going from page 1 to page 2), a call is fired which fetches you the items on that page - the current items are removed and the new ones shown. But HTTP is stateless[footnote]you'll probably be examined on that, so giving you a head start[/footnote], so unless you save the state of the page, and Steam didn't, it lives only as long as the page lives.
In short, if you go to page 2 and hit refresh, you are back to page 1. That's why it's horrible. That's why it's good they got rid of what they did before.
Origin works in the same way as Steam did, but only they fetch the "next page" when you scroll down, as opposed to going to another page, and they append the results instead of replacing them. And actually I just noticed they do save the state of the page in the hash. Which is certainly better than what Steam did, I don't think they did it before, though.
major_chaos said:
- The "metagame horseshit" can literally give you free money and/or games. Or you can just ignore it.
"free money" here meaning about 1 USD every month. And something being ignorable doesn't make it good. I can ignore a clunking sound my car is making, doesn't make it a feature. Also a big popup going "YOU HAVE NEW ITEMS!!!!" is intentionaly difficult to ignore.
So for dividing the total by the month (I took the first sale as the start), I am coming up with numbers that are higher than $1 per month
For 16 months that's ~1.81 GBP per month. Not something to live with, but it's literally for free. Also, that's only counting sales on the marketplace, I also have Alan Wake (plus American Nightmare), Cities in Motion, and Anomaly Warzone Earth, again, literally for free. And I guess some Dota 2 items as well as Steam cards, if anybody cares to count those but I don't.
major_chaos said:
And a point against Origin: Some prices seem to be really out of place.
I'm getting different results than you because I'm in the US (spore is $20 on both, GoG is $6 for the ultima pack wihile Origin is $5 each) So im going to chalk that up to international prices on digtial games being, to use the scientific term "totally wack yo" which is in no way a good thing, but is also not a sin exclusive to origin.
I actually wanted to make a comparison between prices in other currencies - USD and EUR, in particular (the first most popular currencies) but I don't know how to do it in Origin. Aside from perhaps going through a proxy, which is too much work for something I wanted to get a fast comparison of.
major_chaos said:
Unless you can completely refute each and every single point here, I believe I have sufficiently proven that your initial statement was false.
It was. I worded my initial statement poorly and thus it did not get the point I was trying to convey across correctly.
So far I guess we both gave each other 2 points, so that's something.
They aren't "the only" people using the system, but there is nothing stopping them from being there. Like I said, ea is a broken system, I would prefer it to go away, but if it was fixed with more rules and greater oversight I would be less critical of it.
Since you don't seem to be paying attention: no. As I said before. Also, as I said in the post you decided to not show: agile development.
To me "interactions and customer collaboration" means "the users point out bugs/development failures and you fix them" i.e beta testing. Maybe you meant something different. Also how is paid open beta releasing required for agile development?
I... don't know what to tell you, I have no idea how you fail to notice "NEW ITEMS IN YOUR INVENTORY!!!" every time you close a game for the first time but I envy your specific blindness.
So-o-o, you're saying what I said was correct? Dunno why you waited for so long.
And he is humble too... I sometimes use hyperbolic statements I know aren't true when trying to emphasize a point, its a bad habit I have had since I was a kid and I try not to, but sometimes I do it without noticing. The correct wording of my first post would be "Origin is a better platform than steam"
Then you can explain exactly how, and I quote, "as user friendly as a rabid starving pitbull".
The file structure is more confusing than windows, drive/partition naming is a pain to memorize, many things need to be done via command line and thus take longer and require more memorization,limited compatibility with common applications, the desktop GUI is eye searing, most files don't have extensions, its far easier to break, and for all that offers very little of use to the general user. And I know some tech guys like to forget this, but the general users are morons when it comes to computers. I just got a B+ on my midterm, I'm learning the system just fine even if I do find it a bear to work with, but I have been around computers since I could walk, and I imagine the kind of people who pay me to fix banal issues in Windows(i.e common users) would have serious trouble. To be fair this is all based on Fedora+GNOME, I haven't played around with other distros so maybe Red Hat or UBUNTU are as easy to use as Windows.
And how with all of that experience you claim to have, you were clueless, I repeat clueless of aptitude. I mean, I get not coming across it before, but surely if you do have as much experience to make a claim such as the quoted, you should be able to...identify what you were seeing.
First of all I claimed experience, not expertise, second, to answer your question I have never had any reason to use, nor have ever been told about aptitude, and I don't have Linux on my home PC so I couldn't just go
Code:
man aptitude
and figure it out.
The specs ARE THERE ON THE STORE PAGE. On all of the pages.
Minimum system requirements =/= compatibility warning. I'm not asking for huge effort here, I'm asking for "WARNING NOT COMPATIBLE WITH 64bit OS" at the top of the page, that's all.
Then untick "show stuff for me" and don't click on the queue. If it's any help, I don't really like the recommendations either, as I said, but I've been able to survive by not using them. Every day is a struggle, every visit to Steam leaves me in constant emotional, physical, and mental pain of simply not bothering with them, but I manage to get by...somehow...with no real issues.
Your desire to insult me seems to have caused you to vastly overestimate how much any of this bothers me. I don't like Steam. I'm not dying inside because of it. Or for that matter, thinking about it a whole lot when I'm not having this discussion with you. I "cope" with the storefront being bad... not browsing the storefront. I just buy games that I know about from outside sources so I can go directly to the page instead of wading through muck. The big losers here are indie devs who get swept out of notice by the flood of crap, not me. A flaw in a service doesn't have to literally ruin my life to be a flaw.
That isn't a good thing. Do you really want a mobile appstore "attack of the clones" situation on what is the single largest PC DD platform by a long mile? Do you not see how this is toxic to both users and indies?
What power do you think the users have? It wasn't the users asking for desert gunner, it wasn't the users asking for Freddie fish, it was the publishers dumping their garbage for profit. It wasn't the users asking for Air Control, it wasn't to users asking for revelation 2012, it was Steam allowing any game that used the Source engine on sight unseen, without so much as bothering to make sure the assets weren't stolen. The only user input on steam's catalog is Greenlight, and even valve admits that system is deeply flawed. And the thing about GoG, is that the users make suggestions, not actual final decisions, which is fine by me.
Keyword emphasised. Why EA games? Why don't they have more? Well, they do, but a really tiny selection. And here is exactly what I am talking about, by acting as a gatekeeper, they are keeping me, as well as other players, out by virtue of not letting enough games in.
Thing is, Steam used to (more or less) act as gatekeepers as well. problem is that they just... kinda stopped, presumable because they knew that they could make more money by opening the floodgates and wouldn't get flack for it because "GLORIUS GABE-EN" makes them sacrosanct in the eyes of a lot of people. But up until that point I was fine with their storefront. Bad games existed, but they were the minority, not the overwhelming majority.
Speed limit and scheduled control of downloads are lacking, last time I checked. I don't know if they've been added since then but I think they haven't - you certainly didn't mention them.
I agree those would be nice features, but I didn't think steam had them either.
You're assuming the "small grocery store" has anything for you. Again, Origin doesn't have anything for me. Steam has Enclave (among other titles). Your analogy is flawed.
You bought a retro game on steam where there is zero promise it will work and a support policy consisting of a piece of paper with a middle finger drawn on it, when you could go on GoG and get the same game + goodies+excellent customer support+ a money back guarantee that the game will work? Did someone from valve come personally get your cat out of a tree or something?
That aside, taste still isn't a point in favor of either platform. Funny thing is we wouldn't be having this part of the argument if it was 2011, back when a game being on steam meant something. Now being on steam is meaningless, wile being on some other DD platforms garuenties a certain level of quality.
Unless I'm missing something, I don't see any DLC on this page [https://www.origin.com/en-gb/store/buy/mass-effect-3/pc-download/base-game/standard-edition].
That's the store page. The page with easy access to all the DLC shows up when you click on the title of a game in your library.
In short, if you go to page 2 and hit refresh, you are back to page 1. That's why it's horrible. That's why it's good they got rid of what they did before.
That's what I assumed you were talking about, just wanted to be clear. And I agree about the change being a good thing, IMO it was the best part of the recent UI update.
And I was actually not sure how much money I had made, but I got curious nowHere is the breakdown [...]
Interesting, are those all trading card sales? If so I would say its a bit easier to make money wherever you are, because you are making quite a bit more per sale than I normally do. getting more than $0.10 USD is super rare, most things go for less than five cents. There is big money in the TF2 trading scene, but I like to hold on to some semblance of sanity.
Which only further proves that the whole " is completely and utterly better than " is bullshit.
They aren't "the only" people using the system, but there is nothing stopping them from being there. Like I said, ea is a broken system, I would prefer it to go away, but if it was fixed with more rules and greater oversight I would be less critical of it.
Then why are you not more critical of the "current system", then? I mean, we have definite proof it doesn't stop bad stuff. Since we're talking Origin, Battlefield 4 is relevant. Among other titles. There is also the big list of really, really bad games from over the years - E.T., Superman 64, Ultima 9 (hello again EA), and so on and so forth. All systems are flawed. Why single out only one?
major_chaos said:
Since you don't seem to be paying attention: no. As I said before. Also, as I said in the post you decided to not show: agile development.
To me "interactions and customer collaboration" means "the users point out bugs/development failures and you fix them" i.e beta testing. Maybe you meant something different. Also how is paid open beta releasing required for agile development?
The file structure is more confusing than windows, drive/partition naming is a pain to memorize, many things need to be done via command line and thus take longer and require more memorization
There are several flaws here:
1. That's not really something a normal user would be too concerned about. I mean, how different is having everything on C: to having a root partition of /, at the end of the day? Which normal user cares that much about partitions? What the fuck do they care about partitions? Next time I talk to my parents, I'll ask my mom what her favourite parititioning would be and I bet she would not answer. Also, normal users don't need to change as many things in the OS - certainly if there is something they need to fix with the command line, they probably aren't a normal user
2. You're assuming advanced familiarity with Windows and only Windows there. Sure, for a Windows admin, going into Linux would be confusing and probably frustrating, since all their knowledge doesn't help them. But normal users don't have that knowledge. They won't know telnet from NTFS, so they wouldn't care about what the advanced user cares about.
So you're saying it's not user friendly to advanced Windows users. Yeah, I can see an argument there, but that's not really normal users, is it?
This is also flawed. Yes, you can't run Pain or Notepad (by default) but you can't run them on OS X (to my knowledge), either. You have other equivalent tools instead. Thunderbird and Chrome work flawlessly, though, as do video and music players (side note: Amarok is the best music player I've used), there are a bunch of text editors, graphics editors, too. So pretty much all the bases are covered for normal users.
Flawed. Seriously, the desktop GUI? The one? Not Unity, Cinnamon, MATE, KDE, Xfce, LMDE, and so on (along with their theme variations, different configurations and plugins)? I can't understand how anybody who claimed I was wrong to dismiss their knowledge of Linux can make a statement which is so hilariously off. That's up there with claiming your computers "Windows Vista", after what shows up on the screen when you boor it, or perhaps "Samsung", for that's the label on the monitor.
As opposed to extensions being hidden by default? You know, how normal users would see them, usually, unless somebody goes and unticks that option for them. And by "most files", I assume you mean "files equivalent to the ones in C:\Windows\ or C:\Program Files" - you know, all the ones normal users do not actually spend every day doing stuff with. Or pretty much at all. (Unless they start deleting them or something).
Depends on what you're doing with it. If you're breaking it all the time, I'd hazard a guess, you're not a normal user. Also, having been fixing other people's computers, I don't think I'll believe your implication that Windows is less easy to break.
major_chaos said:
and for all that offers very little of use to the general user
It allows using your PC. What your general user is also after. What more does Windows offer, then? Aside from application names that may be familiar - assuming some random bloke starts using computers today (let's also assume the random bloke doesn't struggle with how to hold a mouse and other minor things), so with no previous knowledge, why should they choose Windows - what does it offer them?
major_chaos said:
And I know some tech guys like to forget this, but the general users are morons when it comes to computers.
You're basing your assessment on Fedora? Seriously?
First of all, Fedora tends to be a sys admin-y distribution, if you're not a full time sys admin. I've no clue why some places want to call it "general use oriented" when it's usually used for showcasing how to administer Linux boxes. Probably because it's slightly a ***** to work with while still being on the nicer UI side.
Second, and as partly a continuation - the UI doesn't help there as it's the bloody Gnome 3 with Unity one. You know, the one that caused a lot of people to go "fuck that". Some do find it useful, but a lo-o-ot of users migrated after Ubuntu adopted Unity - the migration was split between migrating from the desktop environment and the distro itself. That's how bad it was received. Oh, I've had the "pleasure" of using a Fedora box back at Uni (also at one of the admin-y modules) and that interface is by far the worst user experience I've had with an OS. At the beginning of this year I installed Ubuntu at work and finally got to see its version of Unity (I had stopped using Ubuntu before Gnome 3's release) and while it was slightly better to an extent, it was still a constant annoyance until I finally purged it later on.
Just for comparison this is how Cinnamon looks
Cinnamon is also Gnome 3, only people who hated Unity got rid of it and dubbed it Cinnamon. And there was big backlash against it, too, purely based on the fact it was running Gnome 3. People splintered off and continued supporting Gnome 2 (dubbed MATE) just on this basis. Even if Cinnamon is actually good.
Third, Red Hat use Fedora for dumping ground testing platform, ahem, let me quote here "focusing on innovation, integrating new technologies early on and working closely with upstream Linux communities" as the description in DistroWatch goes. And by this they mean, it's a dumping ground for testing the platform. OK, it doesn't really merit me being that impolite, but it's not unusual for the the software packages for Fedora to be at least partly unstable and untested because they do come directly from those upstream Linux communities. It's the bleeding edge what you're running, but an edge it is, and you can get cut. The stable/polished packages and features are eventually folded into Red Hat.
It's like trying to explain how Windows is user friendly and everything by pointing at Windows Server 2003 or something. Hey, I'll take no extensions every day over the OS deleting files without asking me or even notifying me .
major_chaos said:
And how with all of that experience you claim to have, you were clueless, I repeat clueless of aptitude. I mean, I get not coming across it before, but surely if you do have as much experience to make a claim such as the quoted, you should be able to...identify what you were seeing.
First of all I claimed experience, not expertise, second, to answer your question I have never had any reason to use, nor have ever been told about aptitude, and I don't have Linux on my home PC so I couldn't just go
That isn't a good thing. Do you really want a mobile appstore "attack of the clones" situation on what is the single largest PC DD platform by a long mile? Do you not see how this is toxic to both users and indies?
I see there being more selection and easier time for indies to add their games. By giving more power to the users, you can mitigate people going in blind. Shit games would always exist. My proof is: they already exist. And EA has historically also been one of those who helped them.
What I see as worse is good games never seeing the light of day because the corporate cerberus chose to support a shit game instead of them. Do you not agree? And if you do agree, how is that not higher on your "What ruins gaming" list?
What power do you think the users have? It wasn't the users asking for desert gunner, it wasn't the users asking for Freddie fish, it was the publishers dumping their garbage for profit. It wasn't the users asking for Air Control, it wasn't to users asking for revelation 2012, it was Steam allowing any game that used the Source engine on sight unseen, without so much as bothering to make sure the assets weren't stolen. The only user input on steam's catalog is Greenlight, and even valve admits that system is deeply flawed. And the thing about GoG, is that the users make suggestions, not actual final decisions, which is fine by me.
I didn't ask Ghost Master to be on Steam. And I regret not coming across it before. I didn't ask for E.Y.E. Divine Cybermancy either, but it got there thanks to the fact it's a Source engine game. By listing negatives, you don't make the positives go away.
As for users - reviews, Greenlight, ratings, tags and curators are all ways of input. None of these are present on Origin - the users have far less freedom there. And Steam has been clearly expanding to give more - see previous list for the evolution of the idea so far. Can it be better? Yes. Is there evidence that it can get better? Yes. How about Origin now, first question: can it be? Umm...maybe? "Not a definite no for now" is the best we can say.
major_chaos said:
Speed limit and scheduled control of downloads are lacking, last time I checked. I don't know if they've been added since then but I think they haven't - you certainly didn't mention them.
And if you notice, I've not listed them as something Steam has over Origin. Well, actually, Steam does have bandwith control but it's horrendous. I've got no clue how they implement it so badly, unless it's something, really localised down to, like, my household, as I've observed on my housemate's PC as well. Here is what happens - you set a download limit (side note: the limits are all powers of two, so noting more precise than 128/256/512 and so on) and this happens
Hard to show the full graph, but this is enough - what you can observe on that graph is exactly what happens all the time: download starts off in the left, picks up speed, then it peaks at the download cap at one point and few seconds afterwards it stops...and repeats the exact same pattern. That speed graph shape keeps repeating and you can see it - just before on the left, and just after on the right when it fetched the last bytes for the download. And that happens ONLY if you limit the download speed, if you don't set the cap, it's fine.
I know software development is not exactly easy but it's also (literally) not rocket science. I've written code for bandwith limit. In PHP. And I've done that for both receiving and sending data. An oft used descriptor in programming is "horrible abomination" and while I'd say my code wasn't that, I won't deny it's at least one of these. Still, I know it can be done, and for somebody with the resources of Steam, Origin, or even GOG, I'd say it's unacceptable to botch it. Oh, and GOG aren't getting off the hook, here, oh no. Well, unless it's fixed (I really should check, I guess) but I first (and last) used their GOG Downloader back in August...see, while Steam's download limit is, like, really bad...at least it works - GOG's Downloader managed to be worse than that by completely ignoring the limit but showing me a false value for "current speed" that looked to be capped. I've got a screenshot, too [https://i.imgur.com/zV1z9By.png]
major_chaos said:
You're assuming the "small grocery store" has anything for you. Again, Origin doesn't have anything for me. Steam has Enclave (among other titles). Your analogy is flawed.
You bought a retro game on steam where there is zero promise it will work and a support policy consisting of a piece of paper with a middle finger drawn on it, when you could go on GoG and get the same game + goodies+excellent customer support+ a money back guarantee that the game will work? Did someone from valve come personally get your cat out of a tree or something?
Regardless, Steam offers a better selection than Origin. Also, not all of the games on Steam are on GOG - Morrowind and Bloodlines come to mind. Well, also the Fallouts, as of (relatively) recently but that sucks.
If it matters, I've got Enclave on GOG. But that doesn't make it not be on Steam and be on Origin, though.
major_chaos said:
Unless I'm missing something, I don't see any DLC on this page [https://www.origin.com/en-gb/store/buy/mass-effect-3/pc-download/base-game/standard-edition].
Then you've proven my point - I can't easily buy the game with the DLC, I've got to buy the game, then buy the DLC. And Origin doesn't even tell me how much is it in quantity or price beforehand. And I even need to buy the DLC from the client. In Steam, I can buy everything directly from the store page without needing the client, thus I can easily shop without having to be home (and I can remote install the games, too, so I get them when I'm back). Heck, what if I am home but currently on Linux? Do I need to buy the game, reboot, go into Windows, launch Origin (if I have it, install it beforehand, otherwise), then use it to buy all the DLC. That's far away from both "easy" and "in one place".
major_chaos said:
And I was actually not sure how much money I had made, but I got curious nowHere is the breakdown [...]
Interesting, are those all trading card sales? If so I would say its a bit easier to make money wherever you are, because you are making quite a bit more per sale than I normally do. getting more than $0.10 USD is super rare, most things go for less than five cents. There is big money in the TF2 trading scene, but I like to hold on to some semblance of sanity.
I think mostly cards, few Dota 2 items and some wallpapers/emoticons but I don't think those are anything significant. Here is a list - you'll have to look them up, as I don't know myself what each is (aside from stuff in columns being emoticons).
Ea are giving away crusader no remorse at the moment free so pick that up and play it while you decide to reassess your opinion of them.. free stuff always helps i find
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
