Agreed!I will not rest until the objective horribleness of Steam is universally recognized.
Minor conveniences aside, It is awkward, cumbersome, opaque and flawed on its basic level. Down with that nonsense.
Agreed!I will not rest until the objective horribleness of Steam is universally recognized.
Minor conveniences aside, It is awkward, cumbersome, opaque and flawed on its basic level. Down with that nonsense.
Never!
I will not rest until the objective horribleness of Steam is universally recognized.
Minor conveniences aside, It is awkward, cumbersome, opaque and flawed on its basic level. Down with that nonsense.
Gamesgate versions were completely separate from Steam with CK2, and I don't expect anything different here.
Good point.. For future games I expect this more likely to happen.
True, but if 95% of the customers are on Steam then well..
dun dun duunnn
Wasnt GG mentioned as 7% of market share recently?
They're not "games" they're "subscriptions" and you do not own any of them Valve just provides you with access to them.Funny, because I have no problem what so ever with Steam's service. I find it easy to use and a very nice way to keep all my games in one spot. It's the fact that they're nearing monopoly status that worries me. It's not enough to make me stop using steam, but I support non-steam versions of things based on principle.
They're not "games" they're "subscriptions" and you do not own any of them Valve just provides you with access to them.
And yet they are on your computer, and don't require it running to play, so even if they decided to rescind your "subscriptions" they would have no way of doing it.
Except that the next time you went online on Steam they would block them all.
And yet they are on your computer, and don't require it running to play, so even if they decided to rescind your "subscriptions" they would have no way of doing it.
Strategy Informer: We touched briefly on how the new engine has affected things, but a lot of other things have changed in the last seven years as well, non the least Paradox Connect... will EU4 be taking advantage of that? Has that opened up any new possibilities for you in terms of DLC or whatever?
Johan Andersson: It won’t be attached to Paradox Connect per say... if people still love DLC when EU4 is released, we'll do content the way CK2 does it: with steam packages or through GamersGate’s in-game store. Paradox Connect is kind of dead as far as I know...
I mean, between CK2 and now all their releases as a publisher have been steam only. Sure you can buy stuff on gamersgate, but it's just a serial key to enter into steam. And it sounded like making the separate CK2 version was a huge pain in the ass at the time, and from Johan's comments on that it sounded like it would be the only game released like that.
Is it really that hard to see where I am coming from with this question or are you all acting stupid just because?.
People are acting "stupid" because you're wrong. I bought the CK2 off Gamersgate, I don't have Steam and at no time was I forced to get Steam, I downloaded the entire game from Gamersgate.
Did you see he said publisher? And between CK2 and now? Everything Paradox Interactive(publisher) has released since CK2 has been Steam only, is what he said rephrased.
Hmm I haven't bought any of the none Paradox developed titles since CK2, the DLC (Sword of Islam) is still free from any requirement for Steam. Not that I mind Steam too much but for some reason I prefer Gamersgate for Paradox games.
I'm pretty sure there haven't been any paradox developed titles since CK2, just Paradox published.
See?ck2 was the latest game we made.