If you guys became steam only, I wouldn't purchase anything from you anymore. Does that matter to you?
Nothing wrong with Wikipedia. Only fools dislike the effort that is Wikipedia
Some academic institutions, at least within the continental United Slaves of America, have banned the use of Wikipedia for research purposes...due to wiki's open-input-policy. At least this was the case for my Alma Mater (ie the nourushing goddess; giver of knowledge) years back.
I forbid wikipedia citations in papers/thesis/seminar works that my students hand in. Simply for the fact that students are idiots, and don't know what they're doing with it. Wikipedia is a nice encyclopedia that sometimes deceptively looks like a scholary article to students. I also strongly discourage any encyclopedia citations, no matter the source.
If you're at a university, you're expected to use scientific sources. Wikipedia is not one of them. And they don't pretend to be.
For PI: What person in gaming history do you look up to the most, and why?
...strongly discourage any encyclopedia citations...
If you're at a university, you're expected to use scientific sources. Wikipedia is not one of them. And they don't pretend to be.
Lol! Well, eat more protein (especially if you're going to the gym regularly...)
...strongly discourage any encyclopedia citations...
If you're at a university, you're expected to use scientific sources. Wikipedia is not one of them. And they don't pretend to be.
in all fairness I'm not sure why random scientific papers should be regarded as more likely to be true than random posting online that is guaranteed to be reviewed by many people. Anyone can publish stuff right and if only your professor checks it thats a lot less checking than hundreds of people in the field fixing the wikipedia page.
Steam is many things. But, undoubtedly, DRM is one of them.
...There is 0% difference between a Sengoku installed through Steam and one installed through Gamersgate or Direct2Drive or retail-box.
Question(s):
1) If Steam decides that I cheat/hack/pirate/misbehave/whatever, can they legally forbid me from downloading the game in the future?
2) If the games are like GG, then I assume they need not steam to launch. Does this not negate the Day 1 patch distribution to all benefit?
Yes. And so can GG.
Sorry I actually meant Day 1 delivery of future patches post-release. So Patch #2,3,4,5...etc. Basically, if you never need Steam to run a game, that effectively means people won't (may not) use Steam at all post-install, meaning that they still won't get the patches until they check for updates themselves and then go reinstall/rerun steam with the particular goal of getting the patch. So essentially, you lose the auto-patch benefit if you allow non-steam execution to occur.No, because you have to use Steam to download it, and it will download the patch immidiately. You can then launch it outside of Steam.
Q3) Has paradox given thought/made plans to make future games on Steam make expansions/patch levels optional? So that if I buy EU+NA+IN+HttT+DW, I can play with whichever form of the game I desire? With whatever patch I choose? So in the future, is paradox planning to make it possible for me to install only up to HttT 4.1, even though lets say a 4.2 is out, as well as DW 5.1? The reason I ask is because this very directly affects mod-friendliness. An example would be the general inability (or atleast difficulty) in playing MMtM for Steam DW purchasers.
*sigh* So many misconceptions on the internet.
Steam is NOT a DRM. Steam is a distribution platform with dozens of features that makes it a preferred solution for many developers that do not have blizzard-sized budgets.
When using Steam for your game-distribution you have the possibility to enable a DRM on the game.
Without enabling DRM, having a game installed through steam is no different that any non-DRM game installed by GG.
There is 0% difference between a Sengoku installed through Steam and one installed through Gamersgate or Direct2Drive or retail-box.