Valve haters, vs Valve fanboys. DRM and Why do some people hate Valve and steam?

[Shadow-Phoenix]

-Snip-

Even though I use Steam and partially built my own rig I still don't see myself ever going for a Steam Machine let alone the OS, possibly the controller but that's a mighty small chance.

Sure some console owners might want to buy into the Steam Machines but I wouldn't bet on every console owner doing the same, no matter what the spec the machine is because it's not about superior anything, it's meant to be about how it appeals to the consumer not a single given compiled fact/suggestion.

Even though I haven't bought any of the new current consoles I'd still plan on getting myself a Wii U and Ps4 down the road since I'm not deterred by subjective opinions from others (which I see a hell of a lot going on here on this thread).

I'd also like to point out that "masturbation over top of the line" quote kinda makes me cringe since that's not how humans are supposed to act over a mere piece of hardware.

 

[Laughing Man]

Ok so I was thinking about this:
There are lots of Valve fanboys out there, myself included to be perfectly honest, and it is clear *why* we respect valve so much. They have revolutionized gaming on PC, they provide games at better prices in a very convenient manner. Steam is simply more convenient than any other option.

3 points

1). No they didn't they got in on a system that Stardock started 3 years before Steam even appeared. The only reason that Steam got the head start it need is because Valve FORCED anyone wanting to play HL2 to also install Steam, you can call it a revolution but by that logic Origin would be revolutionary in that it also entered a market already established by someone else and forced people wanting to play a big name title to install it if they wanted to play said game, (i.e BF3)

2). Steam games are rarely cheaper than retail prices in fact in most cases GMG is cheaper than Steam, even during their last much vaunted Steam sale I was still buying games from GMG because they were cheaper than the Steam sale games. The rest of the time I can buy games off Amazon that are the same price as they are on Steam.

3). Convenient, well that's a matter of opinion, I can one click a game order from Amazon in five seconds and have it delivered to my door. Navigating Steam especially during the sales is a guessing game on weather anything will load or work. Sure Steam can have a game on my system in under an hour but unless I super need the game right now 9 / 10 I'll order a physical copy of the game.

my respect for them is their support of MacOSX and Linux gaming.

Shame that no one else respects them, for a company that seems to have such clout in the DD industry the fact that their support for Mac OSX and Linux has resulted in a huge meh! from just about every other major publisher, even ones who use Steam as a 'distribution service' for their Windows games, well, it's just funny really.

Also, STEAM SALES, seriously.

Seriously? Lets give props to Steam for making the game developer more money. Lol I love how Steam gets props for having a sale. What happens when a product stops selling? You reduce the price to help make it shift. In retail you do this because old stock takes up space and costs you money the longer it sits idle, this isn't an issue with DD games. Ever notice that the games that get the biggest reductions are the ones that have less chance of selling at the full normal price. If anything the question should be why are older games sold at full or near to full price for the vast majority of the year with them getting a one off cut for 2 or 3 weeks out of the year?

I don't have an issue with the sales themselves but being forced to wait until the Christmas, Autumn or Summer sale and then having to fight my way through the over loaded servers to buy a game at a price that it should have already been at, well it doesn't deserve praise.

and yet there are others that seemingly hate valve with a passion. Is this because of the fact that Steam includes DRM? or because of other reasons?

I don't hate Valve, I do question a lot of their decisions and I do question the praise that Steam gets,

I wonder why after nearly ten years Steam is a bloated, slow, ugly mess full of junk that I have no interest in and if this is the so called market leader why is just about every other DD service quicker to use?

I wonder at what point Valve lost sight of actual game development to pursue this pseduo-for the gamer attitude and so far seems to be full of WTF statements and a whole load of meh! (basically everything to do with Steambox.)

I wonder if Steam will ever work 100% correctly or if Valve have just given up on developing it now that it is basically a free cash printing service.

 

[Nicholas Chandler-Yates]

Ok so I was thinking about this:
There are lots of Valve fanboys out there, myself included to be perfectly honest, and it is clear *why* we respect valve so much. They have revolutionized gaming on PC, they provide games at better prices in a very convenient manner. Steam is simply more convenient than any other option.

3 points

1). No they didn't they got in on a system that Stardock started 3 years before Steam even appeared. The only reason that Steam got the head start it need is because Valve FORCED anyone wanting to play HL2 to also install Steam, you can call it a revolution but by that logic Origin would be revolutionary in that it also entered a market already established by someone else and forced people wanting to play a big name title to install it if they wanted to play said game, (i.e BF3)

2). Steam games are rarely cheaper than retail prices in fact in most cases GMG is cheaper than Steam, even during their last much vaunted Steam sale I was still buying games from GMG because they were cheaper than the Steam sale games. The rest of the time I can buy games off Amazon that are the same price as they are on Steam.

3). Convenient, well that's a matter of opinion, I can one click a game order from Amazon in five seconds and have it delivered to my door. Navigating Steam especially during the sales is a guessing game on weather anything will load or work. Sure Steam can have a game on my system in under an hour but unless I super need the game right now 9 / 10 I'll order a physical copy of the game.

my respect for them is their support of MacOSX and Linux gaming.

Shame that no one else respects them, for a company that seems to have such clout in the DD industry the fact that their support for Mac OSX and Linux has resulted in a huge meh! from just about every other major publisher, even ones who use Steam as a 'distribution service' for their Windows games, well, it's just funny really.

Also, STEAM SALES, seriously.

Seriously? Lets give props to Steam for making the game developer more money. Lol I love how Steam gets props for having a sale. What happens when a product stops selling? You reduce the price to help make it shift. In retail you do this because old stock takes up space and costs you money the longer it sits idle, this isn't an issue with DD games. Ever notice that the games that get the biggest reductions are the ones that have less chance of selling at the full normal price. If anything the question should be why are older games sold at full or near to full price for the vast majority of the year with them getting a one off cut for 2 or 3 weeks out of the year?

I don't have an issue with the sales themselves but being forced to wait until the Christmas, Autumn or Summer sale and then having to fight my way through the over loaded servers to buy a game at a price that it should have already been at, well it doesn't deserve praise.

and yet there are others that seemingly hate valve with a passion. Is this because of the fact that Steam includes DRM? or because of other reasons?

I don't hate Valve, I do question a lot of their decisions and I do question the praise that Steam gets,

I wonder why after nearly ten years Steam is a bloated, slow, ugly mess full of junk that I have no interest in and if this is the so called market leader why is just about every other DD service quicker to use?

I wonder at what point Valve lost sight of actual game development to pursue this pseduo-for the gamer attitude and so far seems to be full of WTF statements and a whole load of meh! (basically everything to do with Steambox.)

I wonder if Steam will ever work 100% correctly or if Valve have just given up on developing it now that it is basically a free cash printing service.

I won't attempt to change your mind, as we clearly have very opposing opinions, however your point #1 is clearly false. They *have* revolutionized PC gaming, while others might have dabbled in DD before, valve was the first to get a bunch of major third party developers in on the deal (and yes they got a lot of flak for it with HL2, I remember hating on them when it came out because internet for a single player game wtf?) Still, id rather be where we are today with the convenience of steam (I find having all my games redownloadable and in one place very convenient), than where we were before.

Saying that Valve never revolutionized PC gaming is like saying that Windows never revolutionized home computing, after all "apple did it first". (thats not-the-point, windows did it *better*, and got more people on board.)

As for steam sales, other publishers would rather be greedy and keep their titles at full price for forever. (they might even make less money doing it this way, which is kinda stupid) Valve figured out how to make more money, while giving the consumer a better deal. (agreed that legacy games would be really cheap 24/7, but many of them are under $10 anyway, however the non sale prices of games aren't set by valve, they are set by the Devs/publisher.)

 

[KungFuJazzHands]

I use Steam because I have to if I want to play a lot of games that appeal to me -- Steamworks and Steam exclusivity are becoming more and more common as time passes, and it's getting harder to find games that bypass Steam or offer a DRM-free alternative. I'd love to avoid it completely, but that's not a reality if you're a hardcore PC gaming hobbyist like myself.

I could make a novel-sized list of things about Valve/Steam that really chafe my hide, but I'll stick with the bigger ones here:

*Valve's fanboys- while I detest the fanboy mentality in general, Valve's crusading fans are the worst of the worst. Steam is a DRM client at its heart, you mouthbreathing tools, and nothing you say will ever change that fact.

*The Steam EULA- with each major update the Steam EULA gets, it becomes increasingly anti-consumer. I hate the fact that Valve will prevent me from accessing my current library of Steam games if I ever choose to decline their exploitative rule set.

*Valve's lazy, lazy approach to client fixes- Valve can literally take years to fix minor issues in the Steam client. They choose instead to concentrate on adding redundant features that do nothing but contribute bloat. I really wish Valve offered a slim client.

*Valve's lack of primary quality control- they have no dedicated QA department. They don't test any of the third-party games they accept into the Store. They designed Greenlight, in part, as a way to avoid any middle-man responsibility in featuring unfinished games. They use shady tactics like Trusted Publisher Status to justify selling shoddy releases from companies that should know better. I've lost count of how many games Valve could have vetted from their release list had they spent five easy minutes just testing for Day One bugs.

Man, I'd hate to be a PC gamer living in a world that had Steam as the only choice when it came to PC gaming. Thank Dog for competition, as paltry as that competition may be.

 

[t850terminator]

Valve is awesome, let's just leave it at that...
Nice consistence quality...
And its a nice thing.
And I love their science experiment approach to make a game...

 

[Vigormortis]

Mind providing a link of them saying that Episode 3 has been cancelled?
Closest thing I could find was "We went through the episodes phase, and now we're going towards shorter and even shorter cycles." but if they'd cancelled Episode 3 they wouldn't continue to say things like 'we have nothing to tell you at this time' when asked about it.

Wasn't "cancelled", per se. It was transitioned into Half-Life 3.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/04/23/gabe-on-ricochet-2-delay-but-he-doesnt-mean-ricochet/
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/technology/half-life-3-confirmed-valve-security-2334759
http://www.destructoid.com/valve-database-lists-left-4-dead-3-half-life-3-teams-262855.phtml

And publishers don't dictate how much it costs in stores? So, what, they are just giving stores copies and just asking for a cut of what they make? No, they charge stores for however many copies they want and then stores add a little so they get a bit of profit. So say for game X they have to pay $90 per copy, the store isn't going to sell it at $60, they'll probably go to ~$100(or more).

I never said they didn't. In fact, that was my point.

Steam, on average, takes a cut of between 15 and 30 percent of the final price of the game. As such, the publishers, knowing what the cut is, then dictate what the sale price is to be on Steam. The publishers also choose the number of unique serial keys to be made available over the service. Something that has caused a few headaches over the years.

As for taxes, we've actually got more taxes involved with physical copies rather than digital. The digital costs here go back to a thing called the "Australia Tax" which has no real basis beyond "they can afford it".

I somewhat knew of this and I still say it's incredibly lame.

I've tried everything for it and nothing changes it. Doesn't matter if the download region is for my state or another country, the same thing happens.

Do you use any anti-malware programs?

I knew a few people that were so avid in their hatred for Steam they actually blocked Steam through their anti-viral security programs. They would then incessantly complain about how slow, unreliable, and inconsistent Steams network/server connections were. The irony was painful.

But, barring something at a local machine level, you may just be in an unfortunate location that has limited or restricted access to the Steam servers. Which, I'll admit, would prove very aggravating. And, I know that that's been an issue lately in some areas of Australia.

Out of curiosity: do you use a wireless or wired connection to your router/modem? At times, Steam defaults to a lower bandwidth when using a wireless connection.

Try giving this a go: http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/speed-up-steam-get-games-now/

It's a pretty basic series of steps, but it may help. If not, let me know.

Of course, part of the reason they were hired was for their potential on future projects. But for now, they were hired to bring their project to Source and to get Valve put on it.

But that isn't what happened in most of those cases, as stated above they were working on their games well before Valve stepped in.

Those new hires were simply applying the ideas they'd already started working on to a new project of their own choosing. It had nothing to do with the rest of Valve forcing them to make a game so they could slap "Valve" on the box.

Not sure why you seem intent on differentiating these designers from Valve. They are one in the same. Having the "Valve" logo on the splash screen is giving credit to the teams behind the games. They aren't some separate entity.

Besides, those people are still credited with the games production. Their names are in the credits. Their company profiles list them as the key design leads for each given project.

As I'd said before, in some cases they actually gain more notoriety after the project is released under the banner of Valve. I mentioned Robin Walker before, but also consider people like Kim Swift. She's every bit the face and brains behind Portal, in the public eye, as anyone else at Valve is. Even more so, in fact.

I still fail to see how these original mod/indie teams are somehow having their ideas and properties "taken" away from them. They still have full control over them. They still have full credit for them. So....I don't get it.

Take Turtle Rock Studios with Left 4 Dead for example, Valve only came into it less than a year from it's release. So that's hardly, freshly hired devs deciding to work on a project.

Valve merged with Turtle Rock Studios a year before the games release. Up until that point both companies were working so closely together, on several projects, that the merger was only a matter of time. Even during the design process before the merger Valve assisted Turtle Rock with development of Left 4 Dead.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

I hate Valve for making decent foundations for games and then seeming to purposely add features to completely ruin them. It happens almost without fail, at least in my opinion.

Anyway Steam needing an internet connection is basically what had this entire website condemning the Xbox One and claiming Microsoft as the worst company ever. With steam its a 'necessary evil'? Yeah, no.

Beyond that, again Microsoft was condemned for not being able to lend games and only selling a 'license' to the games bought. Steam is guilty of this ten times over and being banned can and often does cost people hundreds of dollars worth of games with no compensation.
For valves legendary kindness and being in touch with its consumers this is draconian by any companies measuring stick.

I don't think they are the worst company or anything, but they are the most overrated and simply held up by popular opinion.

 

[Nicholas Chandler-Yates]

I hate Valve for making decent foundations for games and then seeming to purposely add features to completely ruin them. It happens almost without fail, at least in my opinion.

Anyway Steam needing an internet connection is basically what had this entire website condemning the Xbox One and claiming Microsoft as the worst company ever. With steam its a 'necessary evil'? Yeah, no.

Beyond that, again Microsoft was condemned for not being able to lend games and only selling a 'license' to the games bought. Steam is guilty of this ten times over and being banned can and often does cost people hundreds of dollars worth of games with no compensation.
For valves legendary kindness and being in touch with its consumers this is draconian by any companies measuring stick.

I don't think they are the worst company or anything, but they are the most overrated and simply held up by popular opinion.

Well steam being an online service? is it necessary...? well its a DIGITAL distribution service, where you DOWNLOAD your games.... WTF do you expect? After downloading a game you are free to go offline with steam and stay that way if you like.

Yes steam sells a game license, but again it is a purely digital distribution service, how do you lend a digital copy of a game? How can you sell a used copy of a digital copy of a game?

I agree when there is a physical copy of a game that requires steam activation.

Microsoft caught all that flak for used game policies because console users were used to a different standard. PC gamers accepted a 'license' model years ago, as they use software almost exclusively. Whereas console users are used to a put in the disk and play approach, where it is easier to think of the game disk being 'your' copy of the game (it still technically isn't, read the EULA). Console gamers were used to being able to use used game sales and game sharing as a positive point in their favor over PC gaming is what it is really.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

I hate Valve for making decent foundations for games and then seeming to purposely add features to completely ruin them. It happens almost without fail, at least in my opinion.

Anyway Steam needing an internet connection is basically what had this entire website condemning the Xbox One and claiming Microsoft as the worst company ever. With steam its a 'necessary evil'? Yeah, no.

Beyond that, again Microsoft was condemned for not being able to lend games and only selling a 'license' to the games bought. Steam is guilty of this ten times over and being banned can and often does cost people hundreds of dollars worth of games with no compensation.
For valves legendary kindness and being in touch with its consumers this is draconian by any companies measuring stick.

I don't think they are the worst company or anything, but they are the most overrated and simply held up by popular opinion.

Well steam being an online service? is it necessary...? well its a DIGITAL distribution service, where you DOWNLOAD your games.... WTF do you expect? After downloading a game you are free to go offline with steam and stay that way if you like.

Yes steam sells a game license, but again it is a purely digital distribution service, how do you lend a digital copy of a game? How can you sell a used copy of a digital copy of a game?

I agree when there is a physical copy of a game that requires steam activation.

Microsoft caught all that flak for used game policies because console users were used to a different standard. PC gamers accepted a 'license' model years ago, as they use software almost exclusively. Whereas console users are used to a put in the disk and play approach, where it is easier to think of the game disk being 'your' copy of the game (it still technically isn't, read the EULA). Console gamers were used to being able to use used game sales and game sharing as a positive point in their favor over PC gaming is what it is really.

I wasn't trying to say steam was bad for needing an internet connection, I'm saying people (You being one) defend it to the death while they condemn Microsoft for the exact same reason. You were free to go offline with the Xbox as well after the original download as well. Bit of a double standard there.
Valve has already proposed their idea for lending games on Steam, but it hasn't happened. Its easily possible, they just don't want to.

And here we go. You are defending valves 'license' policy because... PC gamers are used to it? I could get used to someone mugging me on my way to work everyday. Doesn't make it right. Again this point was just to point out that people defend valve for the exact same reasons they hate other companies, but only in this case Valve does it a million times worse because they can easily take away hundreds of dollars worth of games rather than just stop players lending games to each other.

It annoys me that Valve can be so draconian in their policies and still be praised as the only company that doesn't screw over its consumers. It seems to me that they screw them over just as much, if not more.

 

[Nicholas Chandler-Yates]

Snipity snip

I wasn't trying to say steam was bad for needing an internet connection, I'm saying people (You being one) defend it to the death while they condemn Microsoft for the exact same reason. You were free to go offline with the Xbox as well after the original download as well. Bit of a double standard there.
Valve has already proposed their idea for lending games on Steam, but it hasn't happened. Its easily possible, they just don't want to.

And here we go. You are defending valves 'license' policy because... PC gamers are used to it? I could get used to someone mugging me on my way to work everyday. Doesn't make it right. Again this point was just to point out that people defend valve for the exact same reasons they hate other companies, but only in this case Valve does it a million times worse because they can easily take away hundreds of dollars worth of games rather than just stop players lending games to each other.

It annoys me that Valve can be so draconian in their policies and still be praised as the only company that doesn't screw over its consumers. It seems to me that they screw them over just as much, if not more.

Good points, I was defending valve's license policy based on the fact that it gives me a hell of a lot of convenience, especially regarding redownloading games anytime (most PC gamers got used to this 'tradeoff' not used to a 'ripoff', although some would disagree). With microsoft's new used game policy (that they did a 180 on) it would have been tied to your account AND if the disk got damaged you would be fucked. Worst of both worlds.

However, valve should and could have a (limited) game lending policy, i.e. friends that you've had for ages on steam, time limited game lending, and family sharing (this is apparently being implemented with steam machines). "Lend a game forever" game sharing would be great for consumers, but would very much breakdown into digital 'used game sales' via message boards, so yeah, that ain't gonna happen.

Mainly I'll defend valve against someone like yourself who says and I quote:

It seems to me that they screw them over just as much, if not more.

this simply ain't true. their policies are NOT as bad as many other publishers or distributors. People like yourself say things like "valve is just as bad as microsoft" when in reality valve is a company like any other, and they need to make money, but they treat their gamers with respect. Microsoft on the other hand treats gamers like walking wallets.

I agree that places like Gog.com and humble have better DRM policies but valve would never get all the publishers to get on board with this idea.

Case in point, remember when Microsoft game studios abandoned making games for PCs so that they could create a closed system for gamers on their console? I never got to play the rest of the Halo or Gears of War franchise because they didn't care about me despite me being a loyal customer for years. What has valve done with the announcement of their console? no steamOS exclusive games... PERIOD.

If i did buy Gears of War for PC do i get to play it on Xbox too? nope, Microsoft says, "thanks for being a loyal customer, but if you want to play it on our other MICROSOFT platform won't you please buy it again?"
What about HL2? Regardless of where i bought it I can play it on macOSX, linux, windows, hell I can even play it on PS3, and the only reason I can't play it on an Xbox360 is because Microsoft wouldn't let them introduce steamplay.
Microsoft is treating me like an ATM, valve realizes that I am a person, and that I BOUGHT THEIR GAME, therefore I should be able to play it wherever I want.

So yeah, valve isn't perfect, never claimed they were, if you read my previous comments I definitely have some criticism for them. However, Valve has treated me better than microsoft ever did, and continue to do so. So in that matchup, I will support Valve ever time.

 

[insertcleverphrase]

So yeah, valve isn't perfect, never claimed they were, if you read my previous comments I definitely have some criticism for them. However, Valve has treated me better than microsoft ever did, and continue to do so. So in that matchup, I will support Valve ever time.

pretty much this, as a PC gamer microsoft pissed me off so much. Demanding Windows Vista for Halo 2? You had the gall to release a OS that sucks for gamers (well for everyone), then purposefully engineer a popular game you made so it wouldn't run on XP? (hackers ripped it apart later and made it work on XP so there was no real excuse)

Shit like this is what pissed me off at microsoft. Blatant anti-consumer BS simply so they can grab a bit more cash.

Think about it, why did microsoft move away from PC gaming? well piracy was one reason, but the other rreason was that they couldn't take a cut from each game sold (windows was too open and pro-competition). bacK then Steam didn't exist, so instead of embracing PC gaming, and doing what valve eventually did, microsoft decided to make a giant fuck-you to PC gamers instead. Instead of making a gaming console that is open that would have made gaming thrive they made a closed environment that they could control with an iron fist.

Valve on the other hand is making a console that is open. Hell if you want you can buy a steam machine and then NEVER BUY A STEAM GAME ON IT EVER. Machine is hackable etc. OS is open source and modifiable. And guess what, they are gonna keep releasing their in house games for all other platforms, including competing consoles (probably, the quote is a little grey here perhaps).

Yeah valve put an anti-class action clause in thier EULA, to be honest i dont blame them with as Sue-happy as america has gotten.
Although the whole "agree to the EULA or else we delete your library" thing is definitely wrong, it should just stop you from downloading new games and other steam services unless you agree.

EDIT: to be clear I do not suggest that everyone use valve. Healthy competition is HIGHLY valuable, after all 'power corrupts' and absolute power corrupts absolutely. They deserve credit where credit is due however.

Best thing about PC gaming? Piracy keeps people like valve honest. A company employs intrusive DRM? Piracy goes up for that game. Essentially Buying PC games is optional, (not legally speaking but in practice)So Steam has to be at least as convenient as piracy, if not more so to compete.

 

[DoPo]

Steam is a DRM client at its heart

So? Why do I see people use that word as if it means anything by itself. If it does - I don't know what it is, and people seem to refuse to share. So tell me - what is it you mean.

you mouthbreathing tools

Keep the class up.

*The Steam EULA- with each major update the Steam EULA gets, it becomes increasingly anti-consumer. I hate the fact that Valve will prevent me from accessing my current library of Steam games if I ever choose to decline their exploitative rule set.

Yes, only...you won't. I can't believe people still say that even though it's not true. If you decline they EULA, your account gets disabled. You still get access to your current library of games, but you can't get new ones - that's what disabling an account does.

 

[insertcleverphrase]

Steam is a DRM client at its heart

So? Why do I see people use that word as if it means anything by itself. If it does - I don't know what it is, and people seem to refuse to share. So tell me - what is it you mean.

you mouthbreathing tools

Keep the class up.

*The Steam EULA- with each major update the Steam EULA gets, it becomes increasingly anti-consumer. I hate the fact that Valve will prevent me from accessing my current library of Steam games if I ever choose to decline their exploitative rule set.

Yes, only...you won't. I can't believe people still say that even though it's not true. If you decline they EULA, your account gets disabled. You still get access to your current library of games, but you can't get new ones - that's what disabling an account does.

my understanding was that you got locked out... are you sure, can you find a quote for this?
edit i read a thing over on Rock, paper, shotgun that implied the opposite (sorry no time to quote it now).

found an image

unless they changed what 'disabling' means, this is pretty clear.

Honestly, in a country (USA) where a company may be sued for things I do to myself (Dousing my penis in hot coffee, tripping over my own kids, becoming fat..) I honestly support the company in their TOS agreement.

It's retarded, but so are we...as a people. I'd want protection against stupid too.

However if it's bad enough to really warrant suing, it's up to the judge, not the ToS.

 

[antigodoflife]

I just don't like Valve as a company because I don't think their games are very good, I'm sure this is a perfectly just reason in and of itself. This of course excludes Portal because Portal is a damn good game.

Although, if I must go into further detail, I also don't like Valve fanboys and also Linux fanboys and by proxy the company, especially Gabe and his PC-Elitist mannerisms, it all just leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. I also don't see eye to eye with Gabe Newell when it comes to game design, a good example being the first hour or so of Half-Life, which I consider to be some of the most agonizing moments in video gaming history. I also despise his ideas for hardware and may threaten the concept of console gaming, not by how terrible the steambox is or it's horrendous controller but by consumer reaction, "if it's made by valve, it's going to be brilliant" is the the usual blind consensus.

They should stick to software, like Steam which is pretty solid and the Source engine. They have a strong community that love their software and in that they are improving gaming, (eg: Greenlight and the aforementioned Steam) but are in turn crushing it by their own ego KNOWING they can release and do anything and not only get away with it but profit from it (Terrible hardware).

 

[black_knight1337]

Wasn't "cancelled", per se. It was transitioned into Half-Life 3.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/04/23/gabe-on-ricochet-2-delay-but-he-doesnt-mean-ricochet/
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/technology/half-life-3-confirmed-valve-security-2334759
http://www.destructoid.com/valve-database-lists-left-4-dead-3-half-life-3-teams-262855.phtml

Eh, the first one doesn't really say all that much. Just 'we change our minds during development', 'we want to be transparent' and 'the team hasn't changed projects'. As for the other two, they're based off of a leak which you can't really take as a confirmation for anything.

I never said they didn't. In fact, that was my point.

Steam, on average, takes a cut of between 15 and 30 percent of the final price of the game. As such, the publishers, knowing what the cut is, then dictate what the sale price is to be on Steam. The publishers also choose the number of unique serial keys to be made available over the service. Something that has caused a few headaches over the years.

And that's my point. Steam's cut is at best equal to retail or at worst much higher. Not really worth it at all when it's like that and I don't have to go out of my way to go to a store. Plus digital goods should be cheaper in the first place but I know that part's all up to the pubs.

Do you use any anti-malware programs?

I knew a few people that were so avid in their hatred for Steam they actually blocked Steam through their anti-viral security programs. They would then incessantly complain about how slow, unreliable, and inconsistent Steams network/server connections were. The irony was painful.

I don't need to do stuff to make Steam worse, it provides that stuff by default . But yeah, back when I was actually trying to get it fixed I even went as far as to temporarily remove all my security programs to see if they did anything to it. There was no change at all.

But, barring something at a local machine level, you may just be in an unfortunate location that has limited or restricted access to the Steam servers. Which, I'll admit, would prove very aggravating. And, I know that that's been an issue lately in some areas of Australia.

Steam says there's a few in my state, not sure whereabouts though. I presume they'd have one somewhere around the capital city though which isn't that far away from me. It'd help if they actually specified locations but all that's there is state and the ISP.

Out of curiosity: do you use a wireless or wired connection to your router/modem? At times, Steam defaults to a lower bandwidth when using a wireless connection.

Try giving this a go: http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/speed-up-steam-get-games-now/

It's a pretty basic series of steps, but it may help. If not, let me know.

I've had it on wired, wireless and mobile broadband, those don't seem to be a factor at all. And I got a new connection about a week ago now which is fine. Not going to use the old connection just to try it out but I've done the former, haven't done the latter though. The only thing I can think of for it is that Valve has the timeout times set to low, so slower connections don't get a chance. That's what it seems like anyway.

Valve merged with Turtle Rock Studios a year before the games release. Up until that point both companies were working so closely together, on several projects, that the merger was only a matter of time. Even during the design process before the merger Valve assisted Turtle Rock with development of Left 4 Dead.

Actually no, Valve "acquired" Turtle Rock Studios ie. they bought them. Then several months later they shut them down, making their employees go from "working for Turtle Rock who works for Valve" to "working for Valve". Then, about 6 months later Valve confirmed that "Valve South"(Turtle Rock) had been disbanded and that Turtle Rock Studios had been reformed.

So how are they not losing credit there? A vast majority of the game was made by Turtle Rock with Valve only being involved around it's release. From that they lost the instant recognition they would have had which was gained by Valve.

 

[INF1NIT3 D00M]

I'll admit that I was a bit hesitant to get into Steam at first, but they hooked me. Way back when I first discovered Half-Life 2, I'd picked up a boxed copy from Sam's Club or Costco or whatever. Back then, my computer could barely handle the game properly, I don't think I got past the first two levels with the terrible FPS I was getting. I believe I beat the game for the first time on the Xbox 360, and it was first on my list when I got my gaming PC. From there, it was pretty much just a matter of having a few games already credited to my account, and being the most visible and accessible storefront. They had all the games I wanted, for super cheap prices. Everything from Star Wars: Republic Commando to GRID to Planetary Annihilation. I had a job by then, so I just spent my extra cash in the Steam sales. I could afford way more games on PC than I could on the Xbox 360, thanks to Valve. A few games had retail boxed copies that were essentially just install discs for Steam with an activation code for the digital download, so eventually it became more of a hassle to buy from anyone else.

I don't care why people hate Steam or Valve, and I don't really care if they get their games from Steam. I get my games from Steam because I've already got a library of 300+ games. I've been able to afford over 10x the games on Steam compared to what I could afford when I bought games from GameStop. I've been able to play more games in the last two years that I've had my gaming PC than I could during the entire lifespan of the Xbox 360. At this point, there's no reason to take my business elsewhere, and there's no way I'm ditching this catalog of games. It's not perfect, and I won't defend it. I'm just saying that from where I'm standing, Valve's the only company I know of that isn't actively trying to F*ck me.

Oh, and I don't buy all my games from Steam. That would be stupid. Sometimes I buy them from Amazon or Humble Bundle, and activate them on Steam. In a few cases, Steam doesn't have the game in it's catalog. Steam and GoG aren't exactly incompatible. Much of GoG's catalog can't be found on Steam, and vice versa. Not to mention, there's a whole robust indie gaming scene that generally uses independent downloads or filesharing sites to propagate themselves, rather than a storefront.

 

[babinro]

Note: I don't actually hate Valve or Steam.

Why people might hate Steam

In my experience with Steam I'd say they appear to do the absolute minimum for the consumer that they can legally get away with. The company takes no responsibility to try and inform the buyer if their game will work on their PC. Once a game is posted there is no effort to on top of it.

Does Mass Effect 1 work on Windows 8? Steam will never tell me. Nor will they encourage me to check the game forums during my purchase to become informed about any potential compatibility issues. They just want your money. They 'might' deal with your problems afterwards 'if' you bring it to their attention. Why be proactive when the PR backlash isn't severe enough to warrant such action?

I've at least two instances where I had major problems getting a game to work on my 64 bit Windows 7 machine. In both cases I requested support from Steam support. For one of the games I simply never got a response, even after following up on my inquiry....great. For the other I got a response that included doing the same thing I already told them I tried. Giving the support the benefit of the doubt I followed those steps again and surprise...no luck. The companies customer service in my experience is awful. Easily the worst experience I've had with a company's support. I was eventually able to get both those games to work after a few hours of scouring online forums but I'm not entirely comfortable doing that since random online people can't exactly be trusted to do the right thing.

So yeah. What makes Steam great is strictly the pricing. That's it. They are the Walmart of gaming digital distribution to put an extreme analogy into play. You might hate their practices but frankly you couldn't afford to go someplace else without making sacrifices.

Why people might hate Valve
Half-Life 2 and their treatment of the fanbase that supports them. You have an insanely popular game and make the promise to tell an episodic story. This story is given out in VERY long stretches from one another and then stopped without completion and not for financial reasons. People's whose PC rig could run Half-Life 2 and the episodes at the time clearly won't be able to run the continuation of that story if it ever see's the light of day. The message being sent to the fans is that Valve doesn't care about you. They'll do what they want regardless of fan demand because they know they can get away with it.

Note 2: Again, I don't personally hate Valve. This post is a reflection of my exaggerated feelings towards their company's actions that might represent some legitimate hate for the company by other people. I could understand why they'd hate Valve or Steam because of these kinds of actions.

 

[insertcleverphrase]

Note: I don't actually hate Valve or Steam.

Why people might hate Steam

In my experience with Steam I'd say they appear to do the absolute minimum for the consumer that they can legally get away with. The company takes no responsibility to try and inform the buyer if their game will work on their PC. Once a game is posted there is no effort to on top of it.

Does Mass Effect 1 work on Windows 8? Steam will never tell me. Nor will they encourage me to check the game forums during my purchase to become informed about any potential compatibility issues. They just want your money. They 'might' deal with your problems afterwards 'if' you bring it to their attention. Why be proactive when the PR backlash isn't severe enough to warrant such action?

I've at least two instances where I had major problems getting a game to work on my 64 bit Windows 7 machine. In both cases I requested support from Steam support. For one of the games I simply never got a response, even after following up on my inquiry....great. For the other I got a response that included doing the same thing I already told them I tried. Giving the support the benefit of the doubt I followed those steps again and surprise...no luck. The companies customer service in my experience is awful. Easily the worst experience I've had with a company's support. I was eventually able to get both those games to work after a few hours of scouring online forums but I'm not entirely comfortable doing that since random online people can't exactly be trusted to do the right thing.

So yeah. What makes Steam great is strictly the pricing. That's it. They are the Walmart of gaming digital distribution to put an extreme analogy into play. You might hate their practices but frankly you couldn't afford to go someplace else without making sacrifices.

Why people might hate Valve
Half-Life 2 and their treatment of the fanbase that supports them. You have an insanely popular game and make the promise to tell an episodic story. This story is given out in VERY long stretches from one another and then stopped without completion and not for financial reasons. People's whose PC rig could run Half-Life 2 and the episodes at the time clearly won't be able to run the continuation of that story if it ever see's the light of day. The message being sent to the fans is that Valve doesn't care about you. They'll do what they want regardless of fan demand because they know they can get away with it.

Note 2: Again, I don't personally hate Valve. This post is a reflection of my exaggerated feelings towards their company's actions that might represent some legitimate hate for the company by other people. I could understand why they'd hate Valve or Steam because of these kinds of actions.

Your experiences with getting games to work are unfortunate, but PC gamers have ALWAYS had troubles getting games to work it comes from a rediculous variety of hardware setups and the fact that the windows opperating system is basically a patchwork of dll files so you can get conflicts all over the place.
Steam has helped to reduce these problems tenfold through constant updates (yet somehow people manage to complain about the constant updates...)
but to be honest, its not really Valve's responsibility to offer you support fixes when you cant get (for example) assasins creed to launch. They didnt make the game, they know less than jack about how the game is coded, why are you asking them instead of taking the problem to ubisoft?

Snip

Planetary Annihilation is awesome isnt it. Buggy as hell but its a beta after all. It will be great as its going to be a lauch title for steamOS. Good to know we will have at least one amazing RTS on the platform at launch, although blizzard has said they will be releasing games for SteamOS so we will probably get Starcraft too (Starcraft 2? pun.... intended I guess)

 

[KungFuJazzHands]

Steam is a DRM client at its heart

So? Why do I see people use that word as if it means anything by itself. If it does - I don't know what it is, and people seem to refuse to share. So tell me - what is it you mean.

That statement was aimed directly at those who deny that Steam is a DRM service masquerading as a digital storefront, and was designed as such from the start. You'd be amazed at how many times I have to explain that to people.

you mouthbreathing tools

Keep the class up.

What can I say? I despise fanboys and everything they represent. They do nothing but facilitate bad behavior and bad business practices, and they've contributed greatly to the sorry state that the video games industry is currently in.

*The Steam EULA- with each major update the Steam EULA gets, it becomes increasingly anti-consumer. I hate the fact that Valve will prevent me from accessing my current library of Steam games if I ever choose to decline their exploitative rule set.

Yes, only...you won't. I can't believe people still say that even though it's not true. If you decline they EULA, your account gets disabled. You still get access to your current library of games, but you can't get new ones - that's what disabling an account does.

Wrong. Valve reps have publicly confirmed multiple times that you do indeed lose access to your current Steam account if you decline the EULA. This topic has been done to death over at the Steam forums, so you're welcome to go browse them if you don't believe me. Better yet, you can get confirmation simply by reading insertcleverphrase's post.

 

[Nicholas Chandler-Yates]

Steam is a DRM client at its heart

So? Why do I see people use that word as if it means anything by itself. If it does - I don't know what it is, and people seem to refuse to share. So tell me - what is it you mean.

That statement was aimed directly at those who deny that Steam is a DRM service masquerading as a digital storefront, and was designed as such from the start. You'd be amazed at how many times I have to explain that to people.

I'm sorry.. What? DRM service masquerading as a digital storefront? Seriously bro? You can justifiably accuse valve of lots of shit, but this statement doesn't even make sense. Why would Valve care about providing a DRM service? the only reason they even have DRM is because it makes it easier to get publishers to sign onto steam. Everyone knows that Steam DRM is super easy to crack anyway... to say that it is a DRM service pretending to be a digital storefront... ?
WHY just WHY would Valve value a DRM service over a storefront that makes them hundreds of millions of dollars? What POSSIBLE gain could providing DRM for publishers over providing a digital storefront for customers serve Valve...?
No offense meant but I smell farts and it sounds like your ass is doing the talking for you with this statement.

Designed as such from the start...? Well you may have a point here, it is true that Valve made HL2 originally steam exclusive and online to install and play as a DRM measure, this was pretty powerful anti piracy measure back in the day. However, surely they would have known how easily a pirated version would and *did* show up that wasn't linked to steam. It is more likely that Steam was designed from the start primarily as a digital game distribution service, with HL2 taking the brunt of getting the original user base online, and online DRM just being easy to implement along with it.