This is my blog. It's about gaming. Online.
Is a steamID as required as a copy of windows for gaming in the future?
Published on June 14, 2010 By coreimpulse In PC Gaming

(Im posting this in the forums since I can't post it like an article in the blog section.)

I remember the old days of gaming.  That long gone era called 2008.  Back when games were provided with their own custom installers, and were self-contained products that installed themselves separatedly on the computer you instaleld them.  I like to call this era the "Installshield Era" of gaming.  Back when game media only contained asset and binaries, and a registration window, when dialog box wizards ruled the gaming land, and when there weren't any remote validation hooks attached to executables.  That is why, with increasing concern, I am watching nowadays the way our most amazing form of entertainment is rearranging itself, how market forces and anti-consumer tendencies are beggining to shape the new landscape of gaming, at the expense of the average gamer.

  Big game releases nowadays are abandoning these old, anticuated components such as autorun main menus, install wizards, or dedicated servers, and have moved to the all encapsulating remote delivery methods of popular DRM schemes, such as Steam.  By itself, Steam is convenient, fast if you have good internet connection, and easy to deploy.  Many games were released in normal "retail" form, and were offered in Steam's store shortly after.  Those instances however, are nowadays mostly the case with PC only releases from eastern european studios it seems.  Steam's "next step" in gaming convenience is anything but that, and could mark the beggining of a new mandatory requirement for gaming in the future.  More and more games are now announcing their complete deployment based around Valve's new Steamworks framework, touted as the "least intrusive" DRM scheme, "convenient" to gaemers and publishers alike, which takes care of formerly manual tasks like patching.  They claim it isn't intrusive when compared to the likes of Securom or Tages.  But I would like to point out that it is more than that. It's not only indeed intrusive, it's THE most intrusive DRM scheme to come along yet. The game is not at all installed or even located completely in your computer when you realize it.  At least Securom installed itself after it let the installer copy YOUR game to YOUR hard drive. Steamworks' remote always-on cloud network remotely controls one of ITS game's installation, patching, running.  When you start the game, you send a signal to the autenticathion servers situatied remotely from your location, and the order is sent back before you are able to game.  You are asked for an authorization each time to play the games you paid a hefty premium  to be allowed some few hours of playimte. It's the arcade coin-up model.  We've gone back full circle, to the arcade machins of old times. It may as well place a coin slot in your computer.  It's like trying the games you paid for thru a remote terminal.  A service that, much like an arcade place, can close up in after hours, or at the discretion of their owners.  The access to the games you are allowed to try remotely can be switched off at any moment without any explanation from the providers, and you are effectively out.  Cloud based gaming, and software as a service don't look like a good idea afterall under these terms.

"Blah blah, who cares, I don't have to deal with DVDs anymore!"  Maybe this is really making mountains out of molehills.  Steam does have it's merits, which mostly come from giving smaller indie developers a storefront to showcase their creations without needing a traditional expensive distribution contract. Companies like Tripwire and 2d boy have been the most vocal about their praise for steam, with Tripwire saying they wouldn't be around without Steam.  This piece is not an anti-steam call to arms, it's just an informational soundbyte, just to express concern about the trend Steamworks is creating, which isn't 100% in reality as advertised in the package.  A steamworks game instantly becomes a steam exclusive game. That situation could become the beggining of a monopoly.  Maybe this is a good time for competitors to shine.

 


Comments (Page 8)
32 PagesFirst 6 7 8 9 10  Last
on Jul 19, 2010

Nesrie

Quoting DeCypher00, reply 103

This isn't some fantasy world where there are people who use D2D and have never heard of Steam. If D2D doesn't offer Steam games, all the more reason not to ever check D2D. There is no "win" situation for them in the long term. They either take short term profits, or no profits at all.

You have some stats to back up your claim there buddy? You think that every person who uses D2D, Gamersgate, Impulse and all the other digi stores not only know about Steam but also want to be a Steam customer? I sent three people this last year to Steam, who never heard of steam by the way, because of their sales. If the other stores had large sales, I could have easily sent them to Impulse or D2D or any other store. Steam is big in the digital world but they are no Microsoft or Apple. People, gamers included, still exist who have not heard of them.

So those three people who have never heard of Steam were D2D customers?

PC gamers who only buy stuff in retail and have never considered digital distribution? Fine, that's understandable. But are you seriously, seriously suggesting there are loyal D2D customers who have never heard of Steam? That have never heard of Counter Strike, or Half Life 2, or TF2?

"People, gamers included, still exist who have not heard of them."
That's fine. Those very same gamers would probably have never heard of D2D. Hence the whole crux of my argument: There are no D2D customers, who have not heard of Steam. Thus, they are not "introducing" anyone to Steam.

on Jul 19, 2010

coreimpulse

Quoting DeCypher00, reply 103


Quoting coreimpulse,
reply 102


Isn't that precisely taking a very short term profit for big long term losses like having the newly installed Steam client offering the D2D customer 15 sales a day, most of them being better than those from D2D?


This isn't some fantasy world where there are people who use D2D and have never heard of Steam. If D2D doesn't offer Steam games, all the more reason not to ever check D2D. There is no "win" situation for them in the long term. They either take short term profits, or no profits at all.
Yes, but whether they know about steam or not doesnt
It's more like short term profits now and no profits later.  The point isn't about Steamworks games offered elsewhere, and D2D trying to make some money from them.  Steam sells many games, not only Steamworks ones. Many of those games are sold on D2D too.  Those steamworks games customers buy will install Steam, and Steam will offer them sales for non-steamworks games that are also on D2D.  After many weekend sales and Awesome Steam Promotions(tm), people will say, why don't I just have one client for my game purchases, it's such a chore to keep two or more? Buy one now, lose 100 later.  

The point is that if they didn't sell MW2, they would simply bypass D2D and D2D would get 0 sales. D2D is not "introducing" anyone to Steam. By not carrying a game, it gives people more of a reason to just use Steam and never even bother checking D2D, because D2D wouldn't be carrying any worthwhile titles anyway.

"why don't I just have one client for my game purchases"
They'll say that as soon as they see D2D's store is missing all the latest AAA titles. It's either short term profit now and no profit later, or no profit now and no profit later. Not that hard of a concept to understand.

on Jul 19, 2010

DeCypher00



Quoting Nesrie,
reply 104

Quoting DeCypher00, reply 103

This isn't some fantasy world where there are people who use D2D and have never heard of Steam. If D2D doesn't offer Steam games, all the more reason not to ever check D2D. There is no "win" situation for them in the long term. They either take short term profits, or no profits at all.

You have some stats to back up your claim there buddy? You think that every person who uses D2D, Gamersgate, Impulse and all the other digi stores not only know about Steam but also want to be a Steam customer? I sent three people this last year to Steam, who never heard of steam by the way, because of their sales. If the other stores had large sales, I could have easily sent them to Impulse or D2D or any other store. Steam is big in the digital world but they are no Microsoft or Apple. People, gamers included, still exist who have not heard of them.


So those three people who have never heard of Steam were D2D customers?

PC gamers who only buy stuff in retail and have never considered digital distribution? Fine, that's understandable. But are you seriously, seriously suggesting there are loyal D2D customers who have never heard of Steam? That have never heard of Counter Strike, or Half Life 2, or TF2?

"People, gamers included, still exist who have not heard of them."
That's fine. Those very same gamers would probably have never heard of D2D. Hence the whole crux of my argument: There are no D2D customers, who have not heard of Steam. Thus, they are not "introducing" anyone to Steam.

 

The point is not about people being aware or not about steam, it's about lost future revenue to sheer convenience and plain idleness on the average consumer.

on Jul 19, 2010

Guest83



Quoting ZehDon,
reply 98
How long before Steam is pre-installed on new machines, much like Windows is?


On some PCs it already is: http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/61378




That really sucks.  Soon Steam will be an essential windows component and will be enabled on new computers.

 

on Jul 19, 2010

coreimpulse

The point is not about people being aware or not about steam, it's about lost future revenue to sheer convenience and plain idleness on the average consumer.

Considering you're the same guy who thought D2D was now an affiliate of Steam, I'm not sure how much longer I should try explaining this simple concept to you:

"Oh, D2D doesn't have any good titles, but Steam does. I'll simply shop with Steam exclusively from now on because D2D only carries old and crappy games and will never bother looking at them again."

That's the only thing that would happen if D2D "boycotts" Steam. And that's exactly what happened, and why D2D gave in. Impulse still has a leg to stand on because of exclusives. D2D has nothing.

on Jul 19, 2010

Neither one of you gets the point so here it is. The point is people who are introduced to D2D first will also be introduced to Steam for the first time. This is not a good thing for D2D. Their move is short-sighted and counter productive to their own service. You cannot forget that the majority of gamers do not use digital services of any kind, still. There are still many, many gamers being introduced to these services for the first time each day.

on Jul 19, 2010

Nesrie
Neither one of you gets the point so here it is. The point is people who are introduced to D2D first will also be introduced to Steam for the first time. This is not a good thing for D2D. Their move is short-sighted and counter productive to their own service. You cannot forget that the majority of gamers do not use digital services of any kind, still. There are still many, many gamers being introduced to these services for the first time each day.

I understand your point, but it just goes full circle back to mine: who is being introduced to D2D without having heard of Steam? Steam is bundled in with retail copies of games (DoW2, MW2, Civ 5, Fallout New Vegas). Steam carries some of the most famous exclusives of the past years: HL2, TF2, Counterstrike. Steam has sales that are 10X better than those of D2D. And for a while, Steam had AAA titles that D2D did not carry. Why would anyone even want to use D2D? Who could honestly recommend D2D, when Steam has titles D2D doesn't, and has better prices?

Just do some simple research. Google some neutral websites (site:reddit.com Steam, site:reddit.com direct2drive) and see how many hits you get for each. Do the same search on sites like joystiq.com, gamespot forums, etc. If you have never heard of digital distribution, which one are you going to stumble across first? If you are buying retail only, Steam is bundled, D2D is not. There simply just isn't any situation in which someone is introduced to D2D without having heard of Steam first.

D2D KNOWS this. That's why they gave up on their boycott. They probably paid some analyst $100,000 to come to the same conclusion.

on Jul 19, 2010

Nesrie
Neither one of you gets the point so here it is. The point is people who are introduced to D2D first will also be introduced to Steam for the first time. This is not a good thing for D2D. Their move is short-sighted and counter productive to their own service. You cannot forget that the majority of gamers do not use digital services of any kind, still. There are still many, many gamers being introduced to these services for the first time each day.

 

Exactly. Most people dont know there are other web browsers besides what's pre-installed on the computers they buy, much less know about Steam. To them is much simpler to just have one DD service and only one.

on Jul 19, 2010

DeCypher00


I understand your point, but it just goes full circle back to mine: who is being introduced to D2D without having heard of Steam? Steam is bundled in with retail copies of games (DoW2, MW2, Civ 5, Fallout New Vegas). Steam carries some of the most famous exclusives of the past years: HL2, TF2, Counterstrike. Steam has sales that are 10X better than those of D2D. And for a while, Steam had AAA titles that D2D did not carry. Why would anyone even want to use D2D? Who could honestly recommend D2D, when Steam has titles D2D doesn't, and has better prices?

Just do some simple research. Google some neutral websites (site:reddit.com Steam, site:reddit.com direct2drive) and see how many hits you get for each. Do the same search on sites like joystiq.com, gamespot forums, etc. If you have never heard of digital distribution, which one are you going to stumble across first? If you are buying retail only, Steam is bundled, D2D is not. There simply just isn't any situation in which someone is introduced to D2D without having heard of Steam first.

D2D KNOWS this. That's why they gave up on their boycott. They probably paid some analyst $100,000 to come to the same conclusion.

I know that this might be hard for you to believe, but pointing out a bunch of games in one genre of the past years, FPS, does not expose all PC gamers to these games. It's one genre, and not everyone plays in it. I already answered your first question, so I see no point in mentioning it again if you didn't read it the first time.

coreimpulse


Exactly. Most people dont know there are other web browsers besides what's pre-installed on the computers they buy, much less know about Steam. To them is much simpler to just have one DD service and only one.


There are people who use D2D exclusively, and those who first start digi stores at D2D could easily go awhile without ever encountering Steam, at least before they started pimping Steam in their store that was.

on Jul 19, 2010

Do you think that is was significant enough not to make money from steam games?

on Jul 19, 2010

Aractain
Do you think that is was significant enough not to make money from steam games?

You don't see Wal-mart selling Target, K-mart, and Best Buy brands simply because they could make money do you? It's pimping the competition, and that's a stupid move.

on Jul 20, 2010

Nesrie

Quoting Aractain, reply 115Do you think that is was significant enough not to make money from steam games?

You don't see Wal-mart selling Target, K-mart, and Best Buy brands simply because they could make money do you? It's pimping the competition, and that's a stupid move.

Let's be a bit more realistic and say Steam is Walmart and D2D is Target.

In this case, Walmart essentially has exclusive access to the branding of all shirts, small appliances, and snacks sold in America. So Target could either not sell any of those items, encouraging people to ignore Target and just go straight to Walmart (which now has everything they do and more), or they could sell Walmart branded shirts, small appliances, and snacks.

on Jul 20, 2010

DeCypher00



Quoting Nesrie,
reply 116

Quoting Aractain, reply 115Do you think that is was significant enough not to make money from steam games?

You don't see Wal-mart selling Target, K-mart, and Best Buy brands simply because they could make money do you? It's pimping the competition, and that's a stupid move.


Let's be a bit more realistic and say Steam is Walmart and D2D is Target.

In this case, Walmart essentially has exclusive access to the branding of all shirts, small appliances, and snacks sold in America. So Target could either not sell any of those items, encouraging people to ignore Target and just go straight to Walmart (which now has everything they do and more), or they could sell Walmart branded shirts, small appliances, and snacks.

That's not a proper comparison at all. You're talking about types when I am talking about brands, specifics. D2D sells games, or shirts. They've sold shirts for awhile now. What they didn't do before is sell shirts with Steam written on the front of them. Now they do.

edit: and the fact you felt the need to switch the brands around, tells me you are not getting the real concept. The concept here has nothing to do with size at all after all.

on Jul 20, 2010

Nesrie

That's not a proper comparison at all. You're talking about types when I am talking about brands, specifics. D2D sells games, or shirts. They've sold shirts for awhile now. What they didn't do before is sell shirts with Steam written on the front of them. Now they do.

edit: and the fact you felt the need to switch the brands around, tells me you are not getting the real concept. The concept here has nothing to do with size at all after all.

I didn't "need" to switch the brands around. If you can't see how it makes the analogy better, then fine. My product analogy might have been bad, but so is yours. Your shirt analogy would work a lot better if there were AAA, highly anticipated shirts being released soon with exclusive branding. Unfortunately, shirts don't work that way.

on Jul 20, 2010

DeCypher00



Quoting Nesrie,
reply 118

That's not a proper comparison at all. You're talking about types when I am talking about brands, specifics. D2D sells games, or shirts. They've sold shirts for awhile now. What they didn't do before is sell shirts with Steam written on the front of them. Now they do.

edit: and the fact you felt the need to switch the brands around, tells me you are not getting the real concept. The concept here has nothing to do with size at all after all.


I didn't "need" to switch the brands around. If you can't see how it makes the analogy better, then fine. My product analogy might have been bad, but so is yours. Your shirt analogy would work a lot better if there were AAA, highly anticipated shirts being released soon with exclusive branding. Unfortunately, shirts don't work that way.

Your still stuck on size. Size doesn't matter. It really doesn't matter if it's BK, Wendy's or Al's Burger Shop, none of them should be selling McDonald's burgers for them. Happy, I big a larger one for you since you're so stuck on the issue. None of them should be selling Big Mac EVEN IF they could turn a profit doing it.

32 PagesFirst 6 7 8 9 10  Last