Poll regarding Steam users

[Mick]

I just wanted to BUY CoD, I was even ready to have to be connected once and ONLY once, to activate the sim upon install, and then use MY game whenever I want WITHOUT having that Steam thingie somewhere in my PC ...

I did BUY IL2 way back in 2001, and then everything published by Oleg ... but I WON'T BUY Cod with that totally USELESS Steam thingie ...

[sallee]

I never particularly wanted Steam, I had to have it for some of the Total War series, but now I've got it it's just fine. it's never been a bother to me.

[palker4]

Originally Posted by Mick

I just wanted to BUY CoD, I was even ready to have to be connected once and ONLY once, to activate the sim upon install, and then use MY game whenever I want WITHOUT having that Steam thingie somewhere in my PC ...

I did BUY IL2 way back in 2001, and then everything published by Oleg ... but I WON'T BUY Cod with that totally USELESS Steam thingie ...

I guess you do not buy new games very often cause if you did you would have steam installed for quite some time

[ElAurens]

Originally Posted by palker4

I guess you do not buy new games very often cause if you did you would have steam installed for quite some time

False premise.

I buy new games often, and I don't buy them on Steam.

Have any other baseless arguments you care to try?

[Mick]

Originally Posted by palker4

I guess you do not buy new games very often cause if you did you would have steam installed for quite some time

... you guess right, IL2/FB is the ONLY game that I have, simply because I am only interested in warbirds games and IL2/FB is the very best of them all (which doesn't mean it is perfect...)

As for CoD I would like to simply BUY it, I mean the game not any other piece of software that is TOTALLY USELESS to play the game and has NOTHING TO DO with it in the first place ...

If this is possible then I'll BUY it, and it will become MINE, and I'll use it WITHOUT Steam authorization or whatever, otherwise it will remain on the shelves, and I will go on flying FB, I have enough campaigns to play it for years ...

I do NOT NEED Steam, it's as simple as that ... and I am ready to PAY a little bit more for a SteamLESS version of the DVD ...

[Revvin]

I've not really seen any good reason not to have Steam. Those against it will cite problems they had years ago with the service or some mysterious unnamed friend who installed Steam which then took over their PC and turned it into a devil worshipping silicon monster that ate their hamster.

Steam has evolved, its improved as most systems do. As someone who has used it since it first came into being because you had to install it for Half-Life 2 I've seen the many changes. It has been sometimes a little annoying. I recall buying a game a few years ago on CD that required Steam but instead of installing from disc it downloaded the whole game from the Steam server - not much fun waiting. Its improved though, recent games including one I installed today - Total War: Shogun 2 installed from the disc into Steam and it was flawless.

PC's are complicated things and you could try to devise the most foolproof system in history but you will never engineer out the rank stupidity of some portions of the human race. People have issues with Windows year on year with each new version and yet here we are still using it. You could argue its forced on us. Some people will have problems just installing IL-2:CoD in the first place but that’s not to say its a bad product. Steam gets some bad press for decisions made by the publishers and developers themselves. I recall someone making a point about ARMA II (may have been another game) having to download huge patches and not incremental ones yet most games on Steam do download small incremental patches, Steam distributes whatever the publishers or developers give to them to distribute so to me that an unfair criticism.

From the naysayers I see lots of angry bold type and caps-lock rants about having the right to this, that and the other. Read most EULA's and you'll see you only own the media the software is presented on with a non exclusive license for the software that may be revoked at any time. Steam does not ban or removed access to the system for no good reason. If it did it would not have the support of the biggest publishers in the gaming business and certainly would not have grown into the main digital distribution network it is with millions upon millions of satisfied customers.

People assume that the posters here saying they will not buy the game is already money lost to 1C. They will try to demonstrate this with maths based on figures pulled out of thin air. The reality is that Steam will draw new customers in too, perhaps even replacing the naysayers and more. Again some assume that those who say they won't buy will stick to that though even the most ardent boycotts have broken down with groups against Call of Duty and Left 4 Dead 2 saw many of its members playing those games on or after the day of release.

The benefit is quite clear. An online community under one roof. A system where you don't need to rely on support and updates to a a number of third party clients like Hyperlobby or XFire for example. Groups are already forming in the Steam community groups section to support this new game and I can see where people are playing if I want to join them. If I want privacy I simply sign out of the friends system or choose not to have it log me in when I start up Steam.

There is far too much name calling, people trotting out the tired old fanboy insult or suggesting those who like using Steam and are trying to put forward their happy experience with the system as being 'shills' and somehow being invested in the Steam service. Insults like that and calling Steam a virus really don't help give a balanced view.

[zauii]

Originally Posted by Revvin

I've not really seen any good reason not to have Steam. Those against it will cite problems they had years ago with the service or some mysterious unnamed friend who installed Steam which then took over their PC and turned it into a devil worshipping silicon monster that ate their hamster.

Steam has evolved, its improved as most systems do. As someone who has used it since it first came into being because you had to install it for Half-Life 2 I've seen the many changes. It has been sometimes a little annoying. I recall buying a game a few years ago on CD that required Steam but instead of installing from disc it downloaded the whole game from the Steam server - not much fun waiting. Its improved though, recent games including one I installed today - Total War: Shogun 2 installed from the disc into Steam and it was flawless.

PC's are complicated things and you could try to devise the most foolproof system in history but you will never engineer out the rank stupidity of some portions of the human race. People have issues with Windows year on year with each new version and yet here we are still using it. You could argue its forced on us. Some people will have problems just installing IL-2:CoD in the first place but that’s not to say its a bad product. Steam gets some bad press for decisions made by the publishers and developers themselves. I recall someone making a point about ARMA II (may have been another game) having to download huge patches and not incremental ones yet most games on Steam do download small incremental patches, Steam distributes whatever the publishers or developers give to them to distribute so to me that an unfair criticism.

From the naysayers I see lots of angry bold type and caps-lock rants about having the right to this, that and the other. Read most EULA's and you'll see you only own the media the software is presented on with a non exclusive license for the software that may be revoked at any time. Steam does not ban or removed access to the system for no good reason. If it did it would not have the support of the biggest publishers in the gaming business and certainly would not have grown into the main digital distribution network it is with millions upon millions of satisfied customers.

People assume that the posters here saying they will not buy the game is already money lost to 1C. They will try to demonstrate this with maths based on figures pulled out of thin air. The reality is that Steam will draw new customers in too, perhaps even replacing the naysayers and more. Again some assume that those who say they won't buy will stick to that though even the most ardent boycotts have broken down with groups against Call of Duty and Left 4 Dead 2 saw many of its members playing those games on or after the day of release.

The benefit is quite clear. An online community under one roof. A system where you don't need to rely on support and updates to a a number of third party clients like Hyperlobby or XFire for example. Groups are already forming in the Steam community groups section to support this new game and I can see where people are playing if I want to join them. If I want privacy I simply sign out of the friends system or choose not to have it log me in when I start up Steam.

There is far too much name calling, people trotting out the tired old fanboy insult or suggesting those who like using Steam and are trying to put forward their happy experience with the system as being 'shills' and somehow being invested in the Steam service. Insults like that and calling Steam a virus really don't help give a balanced view.

Agree, well said.

[I/ZG52_HaDeS]

Originally Posted by Revvin

People assume that the posters here saying they will not buy the game is already money lost to 1C.

In this WWII Combat Simulator marked it IS loss. CoD is NOT Arma.

And this is entertaining of yours. First you write:

Originally Posted by Revvin

They will try to demonstrate this with maths based on figures pulled out of thin air.

And then:

Originally Posted by Revvin

The reality is that Steam will draw new customers in too, perhaps even replacing the naysayers and more.

I assume yours are based in "careful, scientific calculation", LoL

Originally Posted by Revvin

Again some assume that those who say they won't buy will stick to that though even the most ardent boycotts have broken down with groups against Call of Duty and Left 4 Dead 2 saw many of its members playing those games on or after the day of release.

Again, don't confuse CoD/IL2 with Call of Duty or Left 4 Dead 2. They are completely different markets with completely different characteristics like players age.

And this is the most entertaining of yours:

Originally Posted by Revvin

A system where you don't need to rely on support and updates to a a number of third party clients like Hyperlobby or XFire for example.

STEAM IS a Third-Party Software having nothing to do with the Game itself. Perhaps you should check your dictionary as you sound pretty ignorant to say the least.

Originally Posted by Revvin

Insults like that and calling Steam a virus really don't help give a balanced view.

Agreed on that. STEAM IS Much More than a VIRUS.

P.S.
And to quote a friend of mine:

Sometimes people lose their freedoms quickly (Blitzkrieg)
More often, people lose their freedoms like a Cancer death. It happens bit by bit and they don't even realize what's going on until it's too late.

Informative links, worth to read:

"Trusted Computing"
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.html

Anti-DRM:
http://www.defectivebydesign.org/

Free Software Society:
http://shop.fsf.org/product/free-sof...ree-society-2/

Electronic Frontier:
http://www.eff.org/about

The Sony-BMG Rootkit Fiasco:
http://www.eff.org/cases/sony-bmg-litigation-info

Public Knowledge:
http://www.publicknowledge.org/

[kimosabi]

Multi quote King!

[Vevster]

Originally Posted by I/ZG52_HaDeS

In this WWII Combat Simulator marked it IS loss. CoD is NOT Arma.

Not necessarily, I know someone on this forum who most probably voted that he would not order the game in this poll, and seems to have ordered 2 copies (at least one for sure, since he did not cancel the order I placed for him )