Shadowrun Returns

[Sensuki]

They could have gone with steam but not require steam to run any of the installed content ..

[Serrano]

They could have gone with steam but not require steam to run any of the installed content ..

 

I'm not sure they could have actually, I thought that was one of the stipulations of using Steam as a distributer.

Edited April 11, 2013 by Serrano

[Purkake]

 

They could have gone with steam but not require steam to run any of the installed content ..

 

I'm not sure they could have actually, I thought that was one of the stipulations of using Steam as a distributer.

There's tons of games that that use a different system inside of steam for DLC etc. For example Bioshock 2 uses GFWL for DLC, all the Trackmania games use its own crappy frontend for all addon stuff.

Edited April 11, 2013 by Purkake

[Keyrock]

 

 

They could have gone with steam but not require steam to run any of the installed content ..

 

I'm not sure they could have actually, I thought that was one of the stipulations of using Steam as a distributer.

There's tons of games that that use a different system inside of steam for DLC etc. For example Bioshock 2 uses GFWL for DLC, all the Trackmania games use its own crappy frontend for all addon stuff.

/shudders at the mention of <horrific Microsoft "service" that shall not be named>

 

Don't speak its name, it can sense when you do that!

 

//hides under table

///covers self with blanket

[Hurlshort]

 

 

They could have gone with steam but not require steam to run any of the installed content ..

 

I'm not sure they could have actually, I thought that was one of the stipulations of using Steam as a distributer.

There's tons of games that that use a different system inside of steam for DLC etc. For example Bioshock 2 uses GFWL for DLC, all the Trackmania games use its own crappy frontend for all addon stuff.

 

Yes, but that would require having a different system set up.  As is they only need to set up a system for the initial release and then the one expansion, minimizing their need for an infrastructure.  

 

I get that people have spotty internet connections, I spent years living in the sticks and Steam was usually a pain in the rear.  But this is a small time developer looking for the most efficient system, and this is what they've chosen.

[ShadySands]

GOG did DLC for Omerta: City of Gangsters

[babaganoosh13]

GOG did DLC for Omerta: City of Gangsters

Yes, but immediately after, they had that survey. I wonder if the results shown that an overwhelming or solid majority objected to it.

 

EDIT: I could see that effecting decisions.

Edited April 11, 2013 by babaganoosh13

[melkathi]

What survey?

[babaganoosh13]

What survey?

http://www.gog.com/news/new_gaming_options_on_gog_we_want_to_hear_from_you

 

i remembered them e-mailing this to us shortly after the Omerta DLC became available. I was fine with it, largely because I figured it might effect some of the indie games on there.

 

Not like this though with Shadowrun. Depending on how this goes, I might change my logo there to a little silver poo trophy.

 

I still hate Ticketmaster more.

[alanschu]

What exactly was the hubbub over the Omerta DLC?  Were people mad that it seemed out of spirit with what GOG delivers?

[babaganoosh13]

What exactly was the hubbub over the Omerta DLC?  Were people mad that it seemed out of spirit with what GOG delivers?

I think so. People I guess are accustomed to getting entire games on there. In the case of Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri, when GOG got the rights to the expansion, people whom already purchased the base game got it for free (as do anyone else whom purchases the game henceforth.) There is also that constituency that objects to the new games being on there, thinking it should only be for old games.

 

Personally, I don't see the problem. They don't stop selling Zork, so that way they can sell you Witcher 2. That's my opinion though. I came for Fallout Tactics, I stayed for everything else.

[Serrano]

 

 

They could have gone with steam but not require steam to run any of the installed content ..

 

I'm not sure they could have actually, I thought that was one of the stipulations of using Steam as a distributer.

There's tons of games that that use a different system inside of steam for DLC etc. For example Bioshock 2 uses GFWL for DLC, all the Trackmania games use its own crappy frontend for all addon stuff.

 

That's true but even then I'd argue that since you still need to use Steam to run the game to play the DLC that isn't tied to your steam account it's more practical and convenient to use Steam to distribute the DLC as well. I get why people are upset but if they are going with it as a mandatory requirement for patches then they may as well go all in rather that use an extra layer of annoyance like LIVE or Bioware Social.

Edited April 11, 2013 by Serrano

[Hurlshort]

I'd like some more clarification on the patches though, they might still be made available via non-steam outlets.  They only clearly state that fan content and DLC will require Steam in the future.  A patch is a fairly easy thing to make available, you don't need to worry about transactions, and unlike fan content there should not be that many patches.  

 

Using Steam for the DLC is a no brainer, really.  It's a marketplace.  

[melkathi]

 

What survey?

http://www.gog.com/news/new_gaming_options_on_gog_we_want_to_hear_from_you

 

i remembered them e-mailing this to us shortly after the Omerta DLC became available. I was fine with it, largely because I figured it might effect some of the indie games on there.

 

Not like this though with Shadowrun. Depending on how this goes, I might change my logo there to a little silver poo trophy.

 

I still hate Ticketmaster more.

 

Meh. I never got that email :/

[Nordicus]

I hope they do something to clear up this situation. Sure, nowhere did they promise that the content past Berlin would be included (or whether that content would be DRM-free) but they did themselves a major disservice by not making their post-launch intentions clear sooner.

 

Nevertheless, I might get the game at some point of it scores above 6/10. My wee bit of Metacritic research indicates that's my limit as far as genuine enjoyment goes

 

/shudders at the mention of <horrific Microsoft "service" that shall not be named>

Don't speak its name, it can sense when you do that!

 

//hides under table

///covers self with blanket

It's funny, I tried to re-install Super Street Fighter 4 on my computer recently, and the first thing to appear after I launched the game was an error specifically caused by this absolute disservice

 

I had to reinstall both "that thing" and SSF4 for my game to finally work

Edited April 11, 2013 by Nordicus

[Zoraptor]

I never got an email about it, but saw the survey at their forums. The response was a perfect storm of a not particularly well received game, people who think GOG == Good Old Games and a pretty underwhelming dlc for the cost of a standard GOG game. I don't have any problems with it personally, doesn't effect me and it isn't being imposed by fiat on anyone. In any case it's a world away from collecting money from people on the understanding of a game being DRM free then springing surprise! DRM on them if they want a functional game at the end.

Using Steam for the DLC is a no brainer, really.  It's a marketplace.

...

Origin and Uplay are marketplaces too, so's GOG etc etc. Steam being a marketplace is irrelevant.

 

Yes, but that would require having a different system set up.  As is they only need to set up a system for the initial release and then the one expansion, minimizing their need for an infrastructure.

90% of the costs of such a system are associated with setting it up, which they already have. If you have the DB already it's- literally- adding lines to the records to say which dlc is purchased, and if you have a preorder system that already generates records then you have something that can generate dlc records as well. This is basic DB functionality, the sort of thing every online business has to do- and you know what? Even getting it outsourced is cheaper than Valve's 30% cut is. Claiming it cannot be done without help from Uncle Gabe is rubbish, plain and simple. Shonky reasoning made shonkier by their 'pound of flesh' lawyerism; and sadly there's unlikely to be a 'haha, no blood stipulated- sucka!' moment in this story.

 

Frankly, they give the impression of having burned through their money and being in a bit of a panic about it. God knows what their state would be if they'd only scraped over their target.

[alanschu]

 

Claiming it cannot be done without help from Uncle Gabe is rubbish, plain and simple. Shonky reasoning made shonkier by their 'pound of flesh' lawyerism; and sadly there's unlikely to be a 'haha, no blood stipulated- sucka!' moment in this story.

 

Do you think Valve paid for the access?  As you suggest, outsourcing it would probably be cheaper, so what do you think motivates HBS to do something like this?

[Zoraptor]

"Frankly, they give the impression of having burned through their money and being in a bit of a panic about it" sums it up, pretty much. The most charitable take on it is that they bit off more than they can chew and are now trying to offload as much work and responsibility on others as possible and do everything with absolute minimum effort and cost. I'd tend to think that their save game statements also illustrate this, making save games is hard!!!- who would have guessed? As such having a system which is basically "Looks like you want to do dlc? We can help with that! Looks like you want to patch? We can help with that! :)" is something they would leap at. Nevertheless, they went into the KS promising DRM free and got a lot more than they asked for too, as such I have no sympathy for them whatsoever.

 

I can speculate on Valve's own approach to things and provide evidence for why I think that way if you wish, but that would probably be better in the Steam Sux/Roxxor! thread.

[alanschu]

Ah fair point, I didn't really fully think through the "burned through the money" aspect.

 

I do agree that it's being done because there a significant enough financial reason for doing so, beyond the obvious benefits of having a storefront for DLC on a common platform like Steam.

 

 

That they are releasing the game with Berlin as post release content would also support this perspective.

Edited April 12, 2013 by alanschu

[ShadySands]

I guess that's that then

 

DRM free version getting mod and patch support but no DLC because Microsoft said no

[Mamoulian War]

No answer in FAQ about non-backer ability to buy non-DRM version :/

[Hurlshort]

I guess that's that then

 

DRM free version getting mod and patch support but no DLC because Microsoft said no

 

Well...that kind of makes all the pitchforks and lynch mobs headed to HBC seem a bit premature.

[Hurlshort]

No answer in FAQ about non-backer ability to buy non-DRM version :/

 

Actually the update makes it pretty clear that only backers will receive non-DRM copies, as Microsoft seems to be making an exception for them.

 

edit:  They also say all preorders get the Steam version, not the DRM free one.

Edited April 13, 2013 by Hurlshot

[Purkake]

 

 

 

They could have gone with steam but not require steam to run any of the installed content ..

 

I'm not sure they could have actually, I thought that was one of the stipulations of using Steam as a distributer.

There's tons of games that that use a different system inside of steam for DLC etc. For example Bioshock 2 uses GFWL for DLC, all the Trackmania games use its own crappy frontend for all addon stuff.

 

That's true but even then I'd argue that since you still need to use Steam to run the game to play the DLC that isn't tied to your steam account it's more practical and convenient to use Steam to distribute the DLC as well. I get why people are upset but if they are going with it as a mandatory requirement for patches then they may as well go all in rather that use an extra layer of annoyance like LIVE or Bioware Social.

Obviously, I was just pointing out that there is not contractual obligation to use Steam for the DLC.

 

Also nice to get the explenation. Sucks about the licencing stuff, but I guess they were lucky enough to get a license for a kickstarter game in the first place.

 

 

 

[Mamoulian War]

 

No answer in FAQ about non-backer ability to buy non-DRM version :/

 

Actually the update makes it pretty clear that only backers will receive non-DRM copies, as Microsoft seems to be making an exception for them.

 

edit:  They also say all preorders get the Steam version, not the DRM free one.

 

If that is the case, unfortunately no sale for HBS :/

 

I am ****ing dissapointed...

Edited April 13, 2013 by Mamoulian War