Allow for a non-steam version after release.

[Warior135 1]

With ArmA 3's requirement for steam, I am not going to buy it as I despise steam and all of its buggy gimmicky features. I would rather just be-able to take a disk out of my ArmA 3 box, put it in my drive, punch in a code I found in the back an old PHYSICAL (Cant imagine it.) manual- click install, wait and when it is done, press play and there I go- I am walking around in Stratis. I can then go to the ArmA 3 website, go to downloads and download all the latest patches. And if I uninstall it, I just go into my directory files, press uninstall and there, completely uninstalled for when-ever I want to install it again with unlimited activations. But if I get the steam version...

Steam version: I get my disk, put it in the drive, wait for steam to restart after crashing for the 5th time in 20 minutes, then wait another 20 minutes for the install prompt to appear, then punch in a code which is now useless, as is the disk I payed an extra £10 for after I install it, then I wait for it to actually wake up to start installing, then it rejects my disk as-if I am a pirate and starts installing from the internet- taking up my download capacity. When it is done it wants to do an extra 2.6 GBs worth of downloads in hot-fixes the devs had to pay for instead of just uploading them to their own servers almost free of charge. And if I want to uninstall it steam has a hissy fit and only uninstalls half of the game and might try to re-install it without me even knowing.

Please allow us to buy a non-steam, even if it is a year or so later.

What do YOU think?

[dmarkwick 261]

I agree that a Steam-free hard copy would be a good alternative. I don't know why Sprocket was dropped either. I've not had too much trouble with the current method however if I want to have two machines with two installs of ArmA I would need two Steam accounts, which seems silly to me. I imagine (but don't know) that I would need another email address to make another Steam account yes? I've always only ever had one.

[Warior135 1]

I agree that a Steam-free hard copy would be a good alternative. I don't know why Sprocket was dropped either. I've not had too much trouble with the current method however if I want to have two machines with two installs of ArmA I would need two Steam accounts, which seems silly to me. I imagine (but don't know) that I would need another email address to make another Steam account yes? I've always only ever had one.

Exactly, It is un-needed guff. (And I admit I did like Sprocket for online versions of ArmA 2)

I will personally say I will pay a good £70 - £80 for a non-steam version of ArmA 3, quote me on that too.

Edited March 18, 2013 by Warior135

[Insanatrix 0]

I agree that a Steam-free hard copy would be a good alternative. I don't know why Sprocket was dropped either. I've not had too much trouble with the current method however if I want to have two machines with two installs of ArmA I would need two Steam accounts, which seems silly to me. I imagine (but don't know) that I would need another email address to make another Steam account yes? I've always only ever had one.

You wouldn't have to, unless you want to run both machines at the same time. You can log into your steam account and access your games from any computer you authorize. If you want something like a server/client setup, then yes you would need a second steam account and a second e-mail account. Both of those are very easy to create, they are free, and they don't require funds or time by the developers.

Also the amount of misdirected Steam hatred in the OP is laughable.

[nicolasroger 11]

You can install arma 3 on 2 machines. You simply log with your steam account on the second machine and download the game there (or install it from a backup copy).

But you can't start steam on 2 diffenrentes computer at the same time (in online mode)

[Insanatrix 0]

Exactly, It is un-needed guff. (And I admit I did like Sprocket for online versions of ArmA 2)

I will personally say I will pay a good £70 - £80 for a non-steam version of ArmA 3, quote me on that too.

You might, but how many others would? Would it justify the cost for BI to have boxes printed up and made, Disc's made and then a publisher or just BI themselves ship it all out to retail stores who then take as much of a cut, if not more than steam. Steam actually takes the least amount of a cut than most actual retailers.

[Guest]

I like steam, but only for "normal" games. I disnlike it for simulations, like Arma, flight sims, racing sims, because I dislike the lack of freedom having everything managed by steam. I just don't like having to keep going through steam every time I launch Arma.

Saying that, I have had no issues so far, so won't complain.

[Warior135 1]

Also the amount of misdirected Steam hatred in the OP is laughable.

"Misdirected" in your opinion.

I am sick and tired of having to use it and its buggy nature for almost all of the games I want to play now.

[Insanatrix 0]

I like steam, but only for "normal" games. I disnlike it for simulations, like Arma, flight sims, racing sims, because I dislike the lack of freedom having everything managed by steam. I just don't like having to keep going through steam every time I launch Arma.

Saying that, I have had no issues so far, so won't complain.

I'm curious what you don't like about it or what limited or lack of freedom you have with Steam? Also what do you mean you don't like going through Steam, every time you launch ArmA? You can create a shortcut and just use that which eliminates 95% of any interaction with Steam.

Honestly I'm genuinely curious because I see so many things said against it that I either find a very easy alternative or fix/solution for, or it's just mindless anger at a system that someone has a personal bias.

[Placebo 29]

If there are plans for a non-steam version at any point in the future it will be announced, threads requesting such are unnecessary.