Quoting: Guest

Quoting: NyapMake hl3 a steam-linux exclusive. Boom, problem solved

I got a couple of digs for (jokingly) saying that earlier in the topic.
People seem to take it waaay too seriously.

Well... arguably make hl3 linux only is not make it an exclusive. Since the platform is open and free it doesn't really cut out anybody... both technically and economically.

Good luck explain it to the guys still connected to the Matrix though. ^_^

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Oh God. You gotta read this.

My already low respect for consoletards got even lower. :O

Anyway, a Pearl among this moronic nonsense galore:

QuoteI've said it over and over, we're focused on the best place to play for gamers, not about creating walls.

Phil Spencer

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: MaelraneActually that is the point. You can't start a Steamworks game without Steam. So saying that it's not lock-in, when you can only access it from inside the steam-client is kind of bullshit, don't you think?

Of course you can make it optional, but if you use Steamworks, the client has to be present, up and running ;)

Wut? The whole point of Steamworks is to allow you to leverage the features that are built in the steam client. That's like arguing that buying an orange juice bottle locks you in consuming orange juice. If you don't want it you don't buy it. If you want something different you buy something different or make it yourself.

Quoting: MaelraneReally, you can defend Steam all you want. It was and is DRM.

Steam is not DRM. Steam has DRM. Among many other things. Composition over inheritance.

And the fact that it offers DRM is a very good thing. Before DRM came in PC gaming was on the brink of extinction. Piracy swallowed it completely. DRM ressed it but then, thanks to crappy "money over quality" companies like Ubisoft, PC gaming became a miserable experience because of the deadly combo "always on line requirement" + "always down DRM server".

Software, including games, is not religion. It's not about absolutes but it's about improving the quality of life of people. If it doesn't make your life better it's bad software. It's just that.

Steam is good because it improves the quality of life of gamers. In fact one has only advantages in having a game in the Steam library. Including a well made DRM: they don't call this time "the golden age of gaming" for nothing. The only thing piracy ever brought was the "dark age of the consoles".

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Mountain Man

Quoting: Shmerl

Quoting: s8as8a

QuoteValve is making games exclusive to their "platform", which is Steam, the same way Microsoft is making games exclusive to their Xbox/Windows store

If you're referring to the Source 2 engine, to my knowledge, Valve is not saying that games made using that engine cannot be sold outside of Steam; Valve is simply saying that, the Source 2 engine games must be sold in either Steam alone or Steam in addition to any other store.

I think it was about Steamworks. Steam isn't new to the lock-in game. Developers which use Steamworks and make it mandatory can't distribute their games outside of Steam. It's a nasty tactics to use developer tools for lock-in.

Steamworks is an optional feature. It's up to the developer whether or not they want to use it, so it's hard to argue that as a case of vendor lock in.

Optional or not that's not the point. It's just not a lock in.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Hei hei! What is all this hate for Steam?

Closed source games? Seriously? You think this is Steam fault? Even assuming open source is good and closed source is evil (which is not, they are two different model that make sense for different domains... and gaming is hardly an open source friendly domain), it's a developer choice to take one or the other route.

DRM? Are you trolling? Steam actually solved the whole DRM problem by actually making the damn thing sensible and working as intended. No more always on requirement, no more crappy servers to prevent you play your game on day one (and day X,Y,Z too I'd say). Yes you have to be on line once. But we're talking about an online market place. If Internet is your problem you don't buy on an online store. All right, true. You're not free to pirate a steam game. Is this your concern?

Exclusives? What are we talking about? Steam is the only vendor who actually encourage developers to sell their games on all the platforms and all the markets they want. There are no Steam exclusives and there will never be. Unless Gaben sells the company or make it public that is. This is their philosophy and it's a damn good philosophy. Exclusives are the worst possible thing for consumers, be they halo junkies or game of thrones fanatics. If we had better governments (or smarter voters) this practice would be forbidden by law. But it's not so to have a big player like Steam rejecting them as a core value is actually a wonderful thing.

Then hei! I'm not saying Steam has to become the only marketplace. Monopoly is never good and I'm not a Steam fanboy myself. I'm an opportunist and I actually buy games where they are cheaper, not necessarily on Steam. What I'm saying is that from a ideological point of view there is no moral superiority between markets like Steam and GOG. Being without DRM is not "good". Bad is ruining a game by making it unplayable with crappy DRM.
But then between Steam and GOG, Steam actually adds a lot of value to games with the Valve infrastructure (patching client, friends, community forums, stream, etc). So it re-invests the money you pay to make your games even better (and more importantly, convenient to port on linux). A game in your steam library is actually a better game. Can you say the same of GOG?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: amonobeaxAnyways, I remember myself signing online petitions which asked for Blizzard native Linux ports (I believe it was diablo3 and hearth stone).

Lemme guess. They answered by banning you from d3 for using wine. :D

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Embrace, extend, exterminate. Typical M$, no surprises here. Everyone knew it was going to happen. SteamOs is born just for this day.

I'm optimistic though. I think M$ moves to late and to slow. Valve isn't the only big company with their own marketplace on PC. Just to name the biggest two: Activision Blizzard and RIOT. Which means we could see more linux support.

Now... I wouldn't bet a penny on RIOT, they are not that smart. They aim at overthrowing the superbowl as the event of the year more than at expanding their gaming business (a game publisher with one game with one map and one playing mode? Come on!! :P ).
But for what concerns Blizzard I have this feeling that they have already included linux in their long term plans... at least as an option in case M$ went aggressive with win 10. To be honest I think they jumped on Vulkan only because they now target casual gamers on mobile (who knew 10 years ago Blizzard would disgrace itself like that :'( ). But with it they automatically came closer to linux nevertheless so they took it as a free bonus.
It is already known that they have talented developers and that they have internal linux releases for some games (wow). Maybe this event could prompt the management to walk the last mile, bring battle.net on linux and integrate their launcher with SteamOs.

View this comment - View article - View full comments