Steam - opinions and experiences survey

[esco7800 10]

I voted yes, whether me or other people like it or not, Steam is the future of PC gaming, in that is a fact. So BI should not be the last one to the party.

[xeno 234]

As long as it takes me a few days to download a product like CO and again days to download a patch there is only one possible answer, no to Steam only!

Maybe in 10 - 20 years everybody has 25, 50 or 100 MBit connections but not today and not in the near future. There are even people who do not have internet access at home at all.

Xeno

[Grizzle 0]

I've used Steam since they came into being. I've been a avid supporter of their service because it's easy and convenient. But something happened recently to change my attitude a bit.

When I tried to logon the other night I was notified my account had been disabled. I checked my email to see if they sent me anything that might explain this. Nothing. So I followed the directions on their site to submit a support ticket (there is NO WAY to contact them via phone for immediate support.)

While I waited for some response I searched for posts that might indicate what the issue was or what to expect from support. Turns out the average wait time for a response from support is 3 to 7 days!!! Unacceptable!

To make a long story short, I can no longer recommend Steam based solely upon their HORRIBLE support. I did get the issue resolved after three days, but during that time I could not play any steam purchased games. Their response was that my account might have been hacked, but what bothered me MOST was that they never bothered to notify me and left it up to me to initiate the support fix. It's bothersome because they took the initiative to suspend my account - ostensibly to protect me from fraud - but didn't find it necessary to contact me when they did it.

Steam is great for convenience but if you ever have a problem that requires support they fail miserably.

If and when they can increase their level of support by providing a call center and longer support hours and commit themselves to quick turn around times, I might consider recommending them again. But as it stands now I cannot.

Lastly, I originally purchased A2 and OA on Steam but ended up buying hard copies from the local store to avoid some of the issues these particular games had with Steam. I should note most other Steam games don't suffer from the same sorts of issues that A2/OA do/did.

Edited March 5, 2011 by Grizzle

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Only 263 votes? Most discouraging.

[jmc 0]

You want to jump in the game and play a little or experiment with editing.

But no, steam FORCES you to download a load of stuff you don't need or

want at that time. NO choice!!

So maybe in 30 minutes or an hour later steam may allow you to

play the game

(if you stll want to)

jmc

[wormeaten 0]

I don't like steam and only reason I got it installed is I had to because Empire Total War.

Otherwise I don't like them because they are more expensive than regular DVD release which I prefers and they are discriminating European citizens.

Reason is 80% of the games have same price for example 30 but in NA it is 30$ but in EU is 30€ what is actually about 45$. Why? Cost of the game for them are the same no additional cost for explaining this issue.

I don't like to be robed what this is actually even it is legal.

I more like Sprocket this download works like DVD not messing with their software and never have problems with them and they fairly calculating different currencies and even refund local taxes because the game is exported in other country.

[mr burns 132]

If you want to kill your ArmA sales just publish the source code, absolutely no need to drive your customers away with a "steam only" solution.

Voted "no".

[Sneaker-78- 0]

I voted no , because there is no way to combine the recent addons with my hard copy of arma ? so i downloaded trough sprocket. but if they fix that i vote yes

I personal like steam , because its the future and you don`t have problems anymore with discs that are unreadable.

[DrSnow 0]

I voted no.

I voted no to steam because that ton of c** that comes with it, but i'm not against DLC. I would much rather see shortest way possible between gamer and BIS.

Just like i like to buy my music straight from the band from their site even it's a hardcopy or mp3. Atleast then i have a feeling that my money went to the right people.

Hardcopys are expensive for BIS, agreed, but does it have to be?

My opinion is that the engineer that invented this supersized, always broken when bought dvd casing, should be hanged to a tree from his balls and whipped to death.

I personally don't need 100 pages of leaflets, maps and stuff, it's easily downloaded or read from a website. It's enough if i have the data on cd or dvd if i want.

(I have atleast 20 cd's or dvd's packed in simple cardboard envelope and they have worked just fine for years now...)

Br

Snow

OFP, OFP Res, Arma, QG, ArmaII and OA as hardcopys, BAF and PMC via sprocket.

Edited March 6, 2011 by DrSnow

[Darky88 0]

No Steam only. I like Steam and it's most of the time all I use for PC and my ArmA on it is too. Steamworks can't help that much, who needs Matchmaking for ArmA. Or who needs Achievements in ArmA? It's already bad enough with some people in ArmA just because some servers show Stats and they compete for best stats while playing reckless.

So, as much as I like Steam, I don't think I'd want ArmA / Bohemia Games to go exclusive on it. In fact one of the nice things that surprised me to find out was that I can run ArmA without having to start up Steam too, that's pretty cool and I'd like to keep that ability too :)

PS: I actually prefer Digital, but the price has to be lower than retail. Retail can justify high game prices with it's extras (although I still wouldn't want just a DVD Case compared to my OFP Carton), for Digital there is no such excuse.

Edited March 6, 2011 by Darky88

[Bomber_c 0]

I bought A2 on steam, but after getting screwed around with the patches (both companies blame each other) I bought a DVD copy.

[Wilbry 10]

I have voted maybe.

I supported Steam in the early days but in the last year I have found their delivery of their system to be intrusive (must be online to play a game even single player) and poorly executed for non-valve games (2G update for a 240MB patch).

But if it means the difference between BIS getting more money and being more successful, then I would support your move to a Steam only system - I would hate it, but I would hope you would continue to deliver YOUR style of game - because that is what we love.

I would rather BIS grow and prosper in the glory of mainstream profitability than eek out a living in nichedom.

If you guy need to, go for it - Steam isn't unusable.

[-CHLUCKi 10]

No steam,

because Autoupdate funktion:

-crashed some other modded games of me (delete mods I installed to games)

-can delete savegames

for "working" in ArmA like missions editor you have to sit in front of a internet connection (steam says it isn't so, but mostly I'm not at internet steam will recheck logindatas)

[mcpxxl 2]

STEAM comes --> Many People leave ...

Voted NO

[Joe98 91]

If STEAM only I will not buy any game.

I like to control my own destiny. Happy to aply patches and add ons myself.

I don't want to be connected to the internet to play a game.

-

[Hicks_09 10]

If it is a good way for you as a company to make money then please do sell it via Steam as a distribution platform or any method that works for you be it carrier pigeons, donkey carts or telepathic links.

However, if Steam becomes a mandatory requirement via Steamworks then I've got to be honest and say that there's little chance I'd continue to buy and follow the titles you produce. I've had too much hassle trying to get things to run through it and for a title such as ArmA 2 I'd rather save the money and avoid the hassle instead purchasing titles that I'll not have the irritation that Steam causes.

Steamworks provides absolutely nothing that I have any interest or use for, all I get is a headache from it. It would take some major changes to the setup for me to warm to it as a service. In particular optional update before first run, running the title from its own executable, not having to log in to the client to play or rely on the iffy offline mode, no regional restrictions, choice of installation directory. Essentially if Steam functioned as the release date check for Opperation Arrowhead did I'd be happy. As it stands that's anything but the case.

Sell through GOG.com and you're likely to get a lot of fans. Sure digital distribution will increase, no reason why it has to be only in the shape of Steam though.

[noubernou 77]

Love Steam, I really don't understand how people can have technical problems with it at all. Most likely it is a PEBKAC issue and they shouldn't be playing games in the first place (probably studying would be a better use of their time).

Physical media pisses me off for games, I lose the CD key, the CD gets scratched, etc. With Steam I don't have to reinstall after a Windows reinstall or on a new computer, it just works. I love it.

I am not sure what Steamworks could really add to the game, but whatever.

Steam all the way.

[telejunky 0]

I just like to have a copy at home and stare on the images for a while :) Like in the old times as a kid^^

Otherwise I use steam with the source games and its mods which are very entertaining and are also connected through steam friends regarding joining servers and chatting the same time.

But steam only does not give a chance to users who want to sell their games if it is not their kind of game (not an uncommon thing with ARMA2 series) - you would have to create different accounts for each game to sell them if you want. Otherwise you spent much money and if you don't like it you are ending up losing money.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

they shouldn't be playing games in the first place

Just... wow... :mad: I spent 6 hours yesterday fighting Steam at my dads. You know, the kind of old guy who gets their machine reinstalled once serviced for minor problem, consequently agreeing to default new email addresses messing up everything. Every time I tried to do something with his account I got some "Sorry, Steam is unable to handle your request at this time. Try again later" message.

So, the computer noob of the worst kind who simply cannot be taught this tech stuff anymore. It used to be "Buy, install, play" which anyone could do. No technical background needed whatsoever. What's next? Bachelor in gaming and networking to play a game (if you give that trend some time)?

In the end, I had to give up. Not sure when I will be able to get there the next time. In the meantime, there is a game not being played...

[celery 8]

I still don't get why some Steam fans want everyone else to buy their games on Steam whether they like it or not. The lack of empathy and perspective is frankly astounding.

Edited March 8, 2011 by Celery

[DaveP 66]

I bought Arma 2 on Steam, but have a sprocket edition of OA. Installing patches often throws up odd errors and incomplete installs according to the .exe, but on the whole it works fine. I can't imagine I'd want to be one of the unfortunate people who bought OA on steam and have to deal with the hash of a solution to get combined ops working

[Antigoon 10]

I voted no, not because I myself have bad experiences with steam, I don't use it (I only buy dvd's or from gamersgate) but because most guys I play with, that use steam, have a lot of problems with it. So admittedly, I guess it's hearsay, but I'd rather stay away from it anyways...

[1in1class 0]

Voted no also, you dont have as many good options as you do with an CD/DVD. On steam you always have to have the lates patch as it auto updates. There is a lot of down sides to steam then there is in just owning the game on CD/DVD. I know you can turn auto update off but if you have to reinstall the game your stuck with the first patch or the new one, just limits your options for the game itself.

[dale0404 5]

I have only read the post by Maruk and that was on purpose because I wanted to answer without having any influence from others.

My answer: I said no because:-

1. I don't believe Steam is the correct platform for Arma.

2. When using mods etc (from what I have read) it would be a nightmare.

3. How would implementing Betas work?

4. It can be a system hog and for this game people need all the resources then can get away with.

5. Could your friends list and a MP lobby be "joined" together?

6. Surely patches would need to be sent to Steam to be validated therefore delaying the process.

7. Would this mean that new Arma standalones / addons only being available through Steam, even at the start of the launch?

8. Why only Steam?

[noubernou 77]

Just... wow... :mad: I spent 6 hours yesterday fighting Steam at my dads. You know, the kind of old guy who gets their machine reinstalled once serviced for minor problem, consequently agreeing to default new email addresses messing up everything. Every time I tried to do something with his account I got some "Sorry, Steam is unable to handle your request at this time. Try again later" message.

So, the computer noob of the worst kind who simply cannot be taught this tech stuff anymore. It used to be "Buy, install, play" which anyone could do. No technical background needed whatsoever. What's next? Bachelor in gaming and networking to play a game (if you give that trend some time)?

In the end, I had to give up. Not sure when I will be able to get there the next time. In the meantime, there is a game not being played...

Speaking from developing a fairly complex installation system for ACRE I can tell you that Steam IS AN ISSUE but only because it makes it so easy to install stuff that people are confused by a normal installer.

To be honest I am surprised most gamers know how to open their CD/DVD-ROM drive anymore let alone run the installer if autoplay is turned off (as it is in XP by default now).

If Steam is a technical challenge then you are doing it wrong, it is literally too easy.

---------- Post added at 02:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:33 PM ----------

I have only read the post by Maruk and that was on purpose because I wanted to answer without having any influence from others.

My answer: I said no because:-

1. I don't believe Steam is the correct platform for Arma.

How is it not? ArmA2 is just like any other game from an installation standpoint, minus some of the trickery in getting CO to work.

2. When using mods etc (from what I have read) it would be a nightmare.

It is not, you just make a shortcut to the game like any other game and modify the shortcut. If you want to use a launcher they all work exactly the same.

3. How would implementing Betas work?

The same exact way they do it now, just like a sprocket or dvd install.

4. It can be a system hog and for this game people need all the resources then can get away with.

Steam is taking 75mb of RAM right now and I don't think I've ever seen it go much higher than that, if you cant spare 75mb of ram then you probably can't run ArmA2 decently either, so thats a moot point.

5. Could your friends list and a MP lobby be "joined" together?

Thats a question, not a point.

6. Surely patches would need to be sent to Steam to be validated therefore delaying the process.

You do realize that there already is a Steam version of ArmA2 and OA and BAF and PMC right?

7. Would this mean that new Arma standalones / addons only being available through Steam, even at the start of the launch?

... yes? Thats the question posed in this thread...

8. Why only Steam?

Because they want to consolidate their distribution methods and make it much cheaper to distribute their product. Right now they have physical media and multiple direct download methods, including Steam. That is a logistical problem that eats into funds that could be better spent elsewhere like advertising or other things related to selling.