Steam options Pre-order and Season Pass

[Featauril]

I understand the technical and (short term) economical reasons for your decision. But why do you think that Steam won't abuse its monopoly in the long run? I would be interested why somebody, who is (in contrast to me) familiar with the gaming industry, does not think that a Steam-monopoly is something to worry about.

Whether or not they are worried about the Steam monopoly, they have to think in terms of what makes money for them. Feelings don't come into it.

 

[James The 1st]

Why are you guys so worried about a Steam monopoly? If they raise their prices, another company will just come along to undercut them. Also remember that they are the guys that are pushing Linux, which is the antithesis of a software monopoly.

 

[Najs]

My only concern with Steam is that one day they'll say "Screw you, we're closing shop" and all my games will be gone. That same problem can be found with GG anyway, so...
I'm fine with Steam only, it's not like anything stays above 50% price cuts for more than a month or two there anyway.

 

[Number One]

yes.... No. i dont like the idea of buying games on steam because they can more or less revoke your license at any time (keeping in mind we dont own games we just get licensed them) and i know its rare but consider this theoretical situation: my steam account gets hacked, the hacker then uses a illegitimate credit card on my account (not likely but it talk from bitter experience) so the credit card holder then complains and steam shuts down the account demanding you get the bank to reverse the reversal of charges or fuck off basicly because how do you get some one you dont even know exists to stop disputing the charges. Via this method i lost games even bought whilst the account was not compromised so thats why i dont like steam and wont be buying eu4 i prefer my license to be tangible and not able to be taken away at the discretion of steam and any way.......... *fanatical Rant*

 

[Fishman786]

I wonder whether all these people complaining about Steam monopolising the industry and holding their credit card information still use Google? Compared to them, Steam is harmless.

 

[Phi]

Whether or not they are worried about the Steam monopoly, they have to think in terms of what makes money for them. Feelings don't come into it.

I never questioned that it is a good idea to use Steam if it increases your profit. But perhaps they have additional thoughts why they don't think that Steam will exploit their distribution monopoly. I could think about several good reasons (for examples the two, James The 1st mentioned, also came to mine mind), but I can not value these reasons since I know nothing about games distribution.

 

[Phi]

I wonder whether all these people complaining about Steam monopolising the industry and holding their credit card information still use Google? Compared to them, Steam is harmless.

I totally agree. But this discussion is about Steam, so we talk about Steam's monopoly ...

I already mentioned it, but if this is in any way not clear: I really like a centralized software management like Steam and I am happy to have it. And I would be a very happy camper if Steam would acquire an indisputable game distribution monopoly and would force all publishers to publish their games under Linux (Ok, that won't happen, but I like the idea to get rid of my dual boot system). I am only interested if Steam really has a monopoly and, if it has one, what the consequences are. That is a little bit off topic in this thread, but the discussion came up ...

 

[Will Lucky]

My only concern with Steam is that one day they'll say "Screw you, we're closing shop" and all my games will be gone. That same problem can be found with GG anyway, so...
I'm fine with Steam only, it's not like anything stays above 50% price cuts for more than a month or two there anyway.

They already have a method in place that would let people access their games for a time without the DRM.

 

[Brent15]

I understand that Paradox has a bottom line and some times you have to walk away from a bad deal. I'm a little surprised because most companies I know are looking for ways to grow their sales by 5%, not cut them. The development time to support both platforms being the issue.

That said, I have to walk away from the offer too. I can only hope somewhere down the line it'll change. . .but I won't hold my breath.

 

[James The 1st]

I understand that Paradox has a bottom line and some times you have to walk away from a bad deal. I'm a little surprised because most companies I know are looking for ways to grow their sales by 5%, not cut them. The development time to support both platforms being the issue.

That said, I have to walk away from the offer too. I can only hope somewhere down the line it'll change. . .but I won't hold my breath.

Companies don't go for 5% when it's at a loss.

 

[Brent15]

I acknowledge that and felt it was clearly implied in my post.

 

[Blond_Knight]

Top five potential pre-order incentives...:ninja:

1. 10% off
2. Special forum badge/icon
3. Exclusive DLC (Pony sprites)
4. Free Paradox game (99.8% chance of it being Europa Universalis III)
5. Soundtrack

 

[minispace]

6. Hats!

 

[Featauril]

Just like TF2! I want christmas-themed hats for my janissaries.

 

[Derp]

My only concern with Steam is that one day they'll say "Screw you, we're closing shop" and all my games will be gone. That same problem can be found with GG anyway, so...
I'm fine with Steam only, it's not like anything stays above 50% price cuts for more than a month or two there anyway.

I understand the technical and (short term) economical reasons for your decision. But why do you think that Steam won't abuse its monopoly in the long run? I would be interested why somebody, who is (in contrast to me) familiar with the gaming industry, does not think that a Steam-monopoly is something to worry about.

Why would Valve, a private company that has no need to please short-sighted shareholders, kill their own golden goose? Steam makes them tons of money, and it does so precisely because it is cheap and convenient for its users.

 

[ParadogsGamer]

So how is this license mechanic anyway?
I suppose Steam buys X number of licenses from the developer and then sells them to customers via their platform.
Now is Steam closes shop, wouldn't the customer still have a valid license that they can trace back to the developer?

 

[VI Imre]

I understand the technical and (short term) economical reasons for your decision. But why do you think that Steam won't abuse its monopoly in the long run? I would be interested why somebody, who is (in contrast to me) familiar with the gaming industry, does not think that a Steam-monopoly is something to worry about.

Perhaps you should rephrase your question. Why do you think that Steam will abuse its monopoly in the long run?

 

[Svip]

6) Steam provides a lot of technology that makes it easier to develop games, which makes us able to focus on the quality of the game instead of making our own network api.

Oh thank goodness. Because your network API was horrible. For all the good things about Crusader Kings II, the terrible network API is a real downer.

For that alone I would approve of Steam - nay! - recommend Steam.

 

[Baneslave]

So how is this license mechanic anyway?
I suppose Steam buys X number of licenses from the developer and then sells them to customers via their platform.
Now is Steam closes shop, wouldn't the customer still have a valid license that they can trace back to the developer?

Well, no, as Steam gets the distribution license from the developer, and developer hasn't made distribution contract with the end user.

 

[bitmapmedivh]

And no, there won't be a non-steam version.. We had a huge forum-demand for a non-steam version of CK2, and it had an even less percent of the market than we had expected.

I'm trying very hard not to use curses here but, that's a real bummer. I'd take GamersGate over No-Control Steam any day of the week. Seriously. This. Sucks.