revisit: make Steam version not require Steam to be running - confirmed possible

[Alexjh]

As I don't really have the slightest issue with Steam as DRM, is the issue that the client is running or the fact it's connected to the net that is the sticking point here? If the latter, you could just go into offline mode surely?

[Tagaziel]

Steam's offline mode is notoriously unreliable. 

[Sacred_Path]

Steam's offline mode is notoriously unreliable.

which is of course another reason why one should buy this through Steam

[TMZuk]

... Just get it from GOG?

 

I avoid spyware like Steam and Origin like the plague anyway.

[Aleenik]

... Just get it from GOG?

 

I avoid spyware like Steam and Origin like the plague anyway.

Sigh... Why do some people like to misuse the word spyware? Learn what spyware actually is before throwing it around. You're just making yourself look incredibly stupid.

Edited February 16, 2013 by Aleenik

[TMZuk]

 

... Just get it from GOG?

 

I avoid spyware like Steam and Origin like the plague anyway.

Sigh... Why do some people like to misuse the word spyware? Learn what spyware actually is before throwing it around. You're just making yourself look incredibly stupid.

I do?

 

Well, in my opinion, it is you who sound "incredibly stupid".

 

I am well aware that Steam and Origin do not technically fall under the category "spyware". But before you start spewing insults, then perhaps you should ask yourself a question or two. Steam is not needed for Fallout: New Vegas or Skyrim to function. Yet it is demanded that it is activated for you to play those games. Origin is not needed for Mass Effect 3 to function. Yet it ~has~ to run for you to play.

 

So what does it do? It monitors how you play the game, how many games you play and what type of games you play. Even when you play offline, you still have to go online to receive updates, and while you download, the information is uploaded.

 

Furthermore, it adds nothing to the game, whatsoever. It just insists that it ~has~ to sit there. It is making it a hassle to actually play legal games, and thereby encouraging piracy.

 

 

In short: It spies on you! So learn how to read between the lines. But if it'll make you happy, you can also call programs like that bloatware!

Edited February 16, 2013 by TMZuk

[Aoyagi]

 It is making it a hassle to actually play legal games, and thereby encouraging piracy.

 

Is that why it taught me (and many many other people I know) to actually buy games instead of pirating them? For many people, Steam (and even Origin) has some added value. The fact that you don't see it doesn't mean it's nonexistent. Obsidian went the ideal way - they offer both Steam and non-Steam versions, therefore OP's post is pointless and the discussion should have stopped long ago before it turns into general Steam/Origin/Uplay/GFWL bashing. 

 

We sure can do that! But let's move over to Computer and Console.

Edited February 16, 2013 by Aoyagi

[Rosveen]

 

 It is making it a hassle to actually play legal games, and thereby encouraging piracy.

 

Is that why it taught me (and many many other people I know) to actually buy games instead of pirating them? For many people, Steam (and even Origin) has some added value. The fact that you don't see it doesn't mean it's nonexistent. Obsidian went the ideal way - they offer both Steam and non-Steam versions, therefore OP's post is pointless and the discussion should have stopped long ago before it turns into general Steam/Origin/Uplay/GFWL bashing. 

 

We sure can do that! But let's move over to Computer and Console.

I'm afraid you don't understand what the OP is talking about.

 

There are two types of games on Steam: those that use Steamworks DRM and those that don't. Both types can make use of the rest of Steam features, like achievements, game hub, Steam overlay and what not. The difference is that you can play DRM-free games without ever launching Steam. It's an option for people who like to keep their games in one place, but don't have a reliable internet or simply don't want another application running in the background while they play.

 

You can still launch the DRM-free games through Steam if you want. You're not locked out of anything, you don't lose any "added value" you were talking about. You simply have one more option. More options is good, isn't it?

 

There is aboslutely no logical reason not to release Project Eternity as a DRM-free Steam game in addition to the DRM-free GOG version.

Edited February 16, 2013 by Rosveen

[Sannom]

There is aboslutely no logical reason not to release Project Eternity as a DRM-free Steam game in addition to the DRM-free GOG version.

Is there a link to directly launch Steam and then the game for a DRM-free Steam game? If not, then the game shouldn't be DRM-free on Steam, since because the GOG version exists, all Steam clients should be people who likes the service it proposes, and they shouldn't have to go through the hassle of going through an interface to launch their game. One click is better than two or three.

[Aoyagi]

I'm afraid you don't understand what the OP is talking about.

 

There are two types of games on Steam: those that use Steamworks DRM and those that don't. Both types can make use of the rest of Steam features, like achievements, game hub, Steam overlay and what not. The difference is that you can play DRM-free games without ever launching Steam. It's an option for people who like to keep their games in one place, but don't have a reliable internet or simply don't want another application running in the background while they play.

 

You can still launch the DRM-free games through Steam if you want. You're not locked out of anything, you don't lose any "added value" you were talking about. You simply have one more option. More options is good, isn't it?

 

There is aboslutely no logical reason not to release Project Eternity as a DRM-free Steam game in addition to the DRM-free GOG version.

 

Steamworks is hardly only a DRM solution. People who like to have games in one place and the place is Steam don't mind Steam running, else they wouldn't choose Steam as the one place to have their games in. Same with people who don't like an application running in the background and people with internet so unstable, that they can't even log in to Steam.

 

The added value of Steamworks is mainly for the developer, but there are some for players as well. Namely statistics, achievements, cloud saves and maybe more. 

 

So again, the fact that you don't see a reason doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

This whole discussion is pointless. If Obsidian doesn't want Steamworks API to be included in PE (and a dev input on this would be nice), the game will most likely be launchable independently on Steam client. If they do want Steamworks (which I fully understand), it will be launching through Steam client.

 

Reminder: GOG.com

[Elerond]

Steam version of PE will need Steam at least for installation, where GOG version comes with service independent installer. So steam version will always have some sort digital rights management as you need confirm you rights to game before you can install it.

 

And what comes to running Steam version of PE with out steam client running in background. That is possible if game don't need any services from the steam, but I am not sure if it's most brilliant idea not to use steams services like chat, achievements and mod loader (and steam's copy protection). But if game will not use any of this services, then it some what automatically comes such that it is possible to run it without steam client.

 

Game's physical copies of course or at least probably will come with installer that is not locked in steam, even if they come with steam key.

[nikolokolus]

If Obsidian weren't providing a DRM-free alternative then I'd be all for the OP's suggestion.  As it stands there will be a DRM free solution for people that demand such things and for those that don't care much about Steam being on and like its features already, then Steam seems like a good way to go, particularly if they like the cloud based saves, achievements and what not.

 

I suppose with more than a year to go before release people have to have something to argue and talk about, so this thread makes perfect sense.

[LadyCrimson]

Steam's offline mode is notoriously unreliable. 

Could you expand on that? I use offline mode all the time and find it not unreliable at all, since I don't care about "Steam achievements."

Do you mean the auto-patching when you do decide to go online for something? That's a pain at times. Or something else? (edit- oh wait, I seem to remember someone elsewhere, in the past few months, saying Steam kept asking to go online to confirm they wanted to go offline, even when already in offline mode, or something odd like that. Maybe that's what you're referring to. I've never had that issue and hadn't heard of it before then)

 

...that all said, I'll be choosing the GoG version of PE. I don't mind using Steam when I have to, if it's a game I really want, or for using it to try out the very cheap sale games or indie games, but when I have a choice, I'll purchase a non-Steam version of a game.

[JFSOCC]

You must live in some alternate universe LadyCrimson, because I too find Steam's offline mode strikingly unreliable. Eventually I've just given up trying to do things in offline mode.

[LadyCrimson]

I don't have Steam installed in "Progam Files" directory, since Win7 ... don't know if that changes anything re: that. But once I'm in offline mode, it stays that way/never asks to go online. I do get the "Go online (or) Start offline" initial box when I start up Steam...I say offline and it's fine. Works even if the 'net cable is unplugged. (there's the box that claims it's connecting to Steam while starting but it's not..).

[ravenshrike]

So what's the problem? 

 

This is the reason why Obsidian is putting a true DRM-free version on GOG. There's no need to go to extra lengths for the Steam side of things with such an option, especially because the reason why Obsidian prefers Steam to be running is for any achievements if they design into that route. 

 

Don't want Steam running? Do the GOG version. 

Alternatively just use the phoenix unpacker program on PE, find a hacked .exe and run it. Pretty sure Obsidian doesn't care, as long as you buy the actual game, HOW you run it.

[Delicieuxz]

OP, you're missing a basic piece of logic, so I'll spell it out for you.

 

There will already 2/3 forms of the game without DRM.

 

People who use Steam already don't care about DRM. Because if they did care and did hate it, they would not be using Steam at all.

 

Ergo, there is no purpose to putting PE on Steam at all unless it takes advantage of meta-account features not available on the other two DRM-less forms, which Obsidian did say they wanted to do for the Steam version.

 

"Limited and worse product"? You're desperately grasping at straws here; you've given absolutely no good reason why someone who doesn't like DRM should not download the GOG version instead. 

Your post did not display logic, and the straws were grasped by your own fingertips. Here's the logic that you're missing: It's irrelevant how many other versions there are without DRM. If DRM isn't needed somewhere, then that's called "good news." Here's another bit of logic which slipped by you: you don't speak for people who use Steam, and to say that people who use Steam don't care about DRM is, honestly, idiocy, and complete arrogance.

[nikolokolus]

I'll speak for myself.  I use Steam and I don't really care about its particular implentation of DRM.  I also buy games from GOG.com, but as long as a company isn't implementing something crappy like limited activations, or system crippling malware (starforce was pretty nasty back in the day) then I'm happy to use something like Steam with its very limited DRM footprint.

[Dream]

Valve isn't out to get you bro; they aren't going to steal your soul and/or financial information and sell it to shady Russian ultranationalists.

[Sannom]

Could you expand on that? I use offline mode all the time and find it not unreliable at all, since I don't care about "Steam achievements."

Maybe it's because you use it all the time, I know that Steam has the habit of asking for me to check my account online before playing offline if I hasn't used the service in a long time.

[Ieo]

 

OP, you're missing a basic piece of logic, so I'll spell it out for you.

 

There will already 2/3 forms of the game without DRM.

 

People who use Steam already don't care about DRM. Because if they did care and did hate it, they would not be using Steam at all.

 

Ergo, there is no purpose to putting PE on Steam at all unless it takes advantage of meta-account features not available on the other two DRM-less forms, which Obsidian did say they wanted to do for the Steam version.

 

"Limited and worse product"? You're desperately grasping at straws here; you've given absolutely no good reason why someone who doesn't like DRM should not download the GOG version instead. 

Your post did not display logic, and the straws were grasped by your own fingertips. Here's the logic that you're missing: It's irrelevant how many other versions there are without DRM. If DRM isn't needed somewhere, then that's called "good news." Here's another bit of logic which slipped by you: you don't speak for people who use Steam, and to say that people who use Steam don't care about DRM is, honestly, idiocy, and complete arrogance.

And yet you managed to cower from my actual point and didn't even attempt to address it. Good job.

 

Here's another point you won't be able to address since you haven't been around since the beginning nor paid attention:

 

It was a big deal when Obsidian ended up in union with GOG because many users on this forum and on KS begged Obsidian to do so. Originally they were only going to do Steam (and the backer discs). GOG carries only DRM-free games. I'll put the two logic points together for you so you'll understand: People specifically asked for a GOG version equating that with DRM-free.

 

When Obsidian and GOG finally made the announcement, it was all over Twitter and mentioned in a number of articles. It wouldn't make sense to offer two types on Steam and another on GOG when DRM is part of the reputed business model for both; actually adding a DRM-free version or whatever on Steam would potentially dilute business from GOG and that would be bad for their agreement with Obsidian, and frankly insulting to the entire effort to get the DRM-free GOG version in the first place. 

 

So again, why shouldn't someone against DRM NOT get the GOG version? 

[some guy]

 

 

OP, you're missing a basic piece of logic, so I'll spell it out for you.

 

There will already 2/3 forms of the game without DRM.

 

People who use Steam already don't care about DRM. Because if they did care and did hate it, they would not be using Steam at all.

 

Ergo, there is no purpose to putting PE on Steam at all unless it takes advantage of meta-account features not available on the other two DRM-less forms, which Obsidian did say they wanted to do for the Steam version.

 

"Limited and worse product"? You're desperately grasping at straws here; you've given absolutely no good reason why someone who doesn't like DRM should not download the GOG version instead. 

Your post did not display logic, and the straws were grasped by your own fingertips. Here's the logic that you're missing: It's irrelevant how many other versions there are without DRM. If DRM isn't needed somewhere, then that's called "good news." Here's another bit of logic which slipped by you: you don't speak for people who use Steam, and to say that people who use Steam don't care about DRM is, honestly, idiocy, and complete arrogance.

And yet you managed to cower from my actual point and didn't even attempt to address it. Good job.

 

Here's another point you won't be able to address since you haven't been around since the beginning nor paid attention:

 

It was a big deal when Obsidian ended up in union with GOG because many users on this forum and on KS begged Obsidian to do so. Originally they were only going to do Steam (and the backer discs). GOG carries only DRM-free games. I'll put the two logic points together for you so you'll understand: People specifically asked for a GOG version equating that with DRM-free.

 

When Obsidian and GOG finally made the announcement, it was all over Twitter and mentioned in a number of articles. It wouldn't make sense to offer two types on Steam and another on GOG when DRM is part of the reputed business model for both; actually adding a DRM-free version or whatever on Steam would potentially dilute business from GOG and that would be bad for their agreement with Obsidian, and frankly insulting to the entire effort to get the DRM-free GOG version in the first place. 

 

So again, why shouldn't someone against DRM NOT get the GOG version? 

Why would anyone using the steam version not want the game to work without steam running?

[Dream]

Why would anyone using the steam version not want the game to work without steam running?

The better question is how many actually give a ****.

 

Pretty sure I've had steam running non stop for the past half decade.

[Alexjh]

 

 

 

OP, you're missing a basic piece of logic, so I'll spell it out for you.

 

There will already 2/3 forms of the game without DRM.

 

People who use Steam already don't care about DRM. Because if they did care and did hate it, they would not be using Steam at all.

 

Ergo, there is no purpose to putting PE on Steam at all unless it takes advantage of meta-account features not available on the other two DRM-less forms, which Obsidian did say they wanted to do for the Steam version.

 

"Limited and worse product"? You're desperately grasping at straws here; you've given absolutely no good reason why someone who doesn't like DRM should not download the GOG version instead. 

Your post did not display logic, and the straws were grasped by your own fingertips. Here's the logic that you're missing: It's irrelevant how many other versions there are without DRM. If DRM isn't needed somewhere, then that's called "good news." Here's another bit of logic which slipped by you: you don't speak for people who use Steam, and to say that people who use Steam don't care about DRM is, honestly, idiocy, and complete arrogance.

And yet you managed to cower from my actual point and didn't even attempt to address it. Good job.

 

Here's another point you won't be able to address since you haven't been around since the beginning nor paid attention:

 

It was a big deal when Obsidian ended up in union with GOG because many users on this forum and on KS begged Obsidian to do so. Originally they were only going to do Steam (and the backer discs). GOG carries only DRM-free games. I'll put the two logic points together for you so you'll understand: People specifically asked for a GOG version equating that with DRM-free.

 

When Obsidian and GOG finally made the announcement, it was all over Twitter and mentioned in a number of articles. It wouldn't make sense to offer two types on Steam and another on GOG when DRM is part of the reputed business model for both; actually adding a DRM-free version or whatever on Steam would potentially dilute business from GOG and that would be bad for their agreement with Obsidian, and frankly insulting to the entire effort to get the DRM-free GOG version in the first place. 

 

So again, why shouldn't someone against DRM NOT get the GOG version? 

Why would anyone using the steam version not want the game to work without steam running?

 

Issue here is, as an isolated thing that exists in a bubble of its own, I imagine people don't care.  As a thing which takes effort away from other things when there is an alternative that completely negates the problem already in existance, it looks like a waste of time.

[some guy]

 

 

Why would anyone using the steam version not want the game to work without steam running?

 

Issue here is, as an isolated thing that exists in a bubble of its own, I imagine people don't care.  As a thing which takes effort away from other things when there is an alternative that completely negates the problem already in existance, it looks like a waste of time.

I wouldn't argue with that except, I'm not buying the argument that it would actually take time to skip implementing this stuff. I can see them having licensing issues or steam giving a bigger cut if they accept constrains like this, which is all fine by me anyway. But as an time-wasting excuse? Nah...

Edited February 17, 2013 by some guy