Hicks_09

Pretty much sums it up. If there was an announcement of a later drm free release then that would quieten things down. That way the people that don't mind being shackled to a drm client can be so while people that would rather not have consumer rights trampled over can also do so. Blindly supporting a company just for the shiny though... not a chance. I'm a customer first and foremost, not a "gamer" or to put it more frankly - someone with an open wallet and little self control.

If we can get word on a complete (patched up to date) steamworks and other drm free release at a later date that'll be me happy. Would be happy to buy a product that I'd like, just on mine the customers terms.

It will depend on which country you are in. I can only speak from a UK perspective. I've found Amazon and at time Play to be cheaper than steam. Gog also. Any mug can hold a sale, it's the off sale prices that I'll look at to see what type of pricing strategy an outlet uses. For older titles that aren't shackled to drm or use a cd key then ebay can be a good one. Gog again gets a mention with older titles as well. Not to mention the included bonus content for free. Oh yes... and the drm free aspect.

You're mixing up an optional store to purchase from (steam) with a mandatory requirement (steamworks). Lets say they make a change to the subscriber agreement, much like they did with the waiver of class action suits recently. If you don't agree to the new conditions you loose access to what you bought when you agreed to existing licensing terms until you bend over for the new terms - that's because you aren't buying the game and accepting a one off license to use it. You're just renting access to a client to play them through which has license terms that can change as and when. Arguments of "Oh but class actions don't benefit the average consumer" do not matter when you look at the point that Valve are closing avenues of complaint regardless of their nature. No matter the "ease of use" of a piece of software. If it isn't needed then it ought not be forced. Particularly when it's a glorified rental service. If the games industry has such a problem with second hand sales and rentals then it ought to be disposing with drm clients as well that act as such. Oh wait... it's just when the rental or sale isn't controllable by them. I've got Uplay, Origin and Steam all installed for various titles that are shackled to each drm client. If I could I'd just run the games off their own executables. I don't need or want a third party drm client. If I buy something then that's all I want. The product that I bought. Not the superfluous crap that's tagged onto it.

You do realise that you can sell a title through steam without tying it to steamworks?

There's a huge amount of apathy unfortunately within the games purchasing public however. As long as they get the shiny they tend to be happy. Unless as I mentioned before they are pushed too far. Look at Ubisoft for that example.

If they are having difficulty securing distributors then there's nothing to stop them from releasing via steam, there's still no reason to shackle it to steam works drm. Also, unless Valve are now making BIS's game for them then how exactly is tying it to steamworks going to get the game made any faster? Unless this is all geared around multiplayer net code and implementation - in which case there is then a framework that can be applied. That I can understand. The assets and testing that will go into that portion of the game will still need to be made, tested, adjusted and tested etc. Tying a game to steamworks, uplay or origin isn't going to get those assets made any faster. This then draws it back to the ability to have singleplayer and multiplayer separate as was done with Dark Messiah - and they even used Valve's engine to make the title. Unless this is all a big hoo-haah over those pesky achievements... :rolleyes: Something just doesn't smell right about this at all.

How many people here would accept the idea of a sreamworks free release down the line, once the patching is taken cared of? That way it is a complete distributable that doesn't need subsequent patching. Fair enough it would require some patience but I would hope that we can have enough patience to wait for something that would be a more complete product without restrictions. Something that we have bought and enjoyed previously with earlier entries in the Op Flash/Arma series. There's always going to be this push and pull over drm. The customers that are buying these products have for some reason a tendency to put up with restrictions as long as they get to play. Until they say No - this will continue. Just look at the main three. Valve launched steam, they still haven't sorted offline mode after nine years - shows you how much of a priority that is... They've essentially been the primary vector for online drm. EA jumped on the bandwagon with Origin which when it was EA Downloader was a nuisance but at least not bloated unnecessarily as it is now. Ubisoft is the most interesting case. They pushed peoples tolerance the hardest and got the most vociferous reaction which has caused them to back-pedal. Now it'll likely just be a case of them mollifying customers before they try to push the boundaries again. Ubisoft do it by scaling back drm and acting apologetic - bringing back beloved series', Valve do it with sales and relying on curried favour and EA... well they just blindly stumble into one pr screw up after another. Gog have gone for the drm free approach but even their pr stunt when coming out of beta status earnt them a slapped wrist. If these clients acted purely as stores to buy from then the issues that are raised from the drm side wouldn't keep on raising their ugly heads. It's all the more puzzling when BIS have removed the drm subsequently. Now they've clambered on the drm choo choo and gone "full steam ahead"... If you make a good product, support it and treat the customers fairly then they will buy it, encourage others to purchase also and likely continue to support the company. The people that will pirate because that's what they do... they're going to do that regardless. Drm clients are only going to hurt legitimate customers, some might be totally unaffected, some might have a torrid time - GFWL anyone? Why add those issues when they can be avoided?

If we could get word on the possibility of a drm free release post launch that would be a start. Don't need steam and certainly don't want it. The faff on with getting Human Revolution to behave itself... All the problems I had with that were due to steam. If I hadn't needed to use a steamworks shackled executable there wouldn't have been the faff on. And what did steamworks provide? Oh yeah... achievements. There's no reason that Arma 3 couldn't be sold on Steam. Well... as long as it doesn't fall foul of their censorship. It doesn't need to have the drm component that steamworks is to be sold via steam. The TOS are fluid anyway. If you don't like a change to the service agreement you'll find yourself locked out of what you already bought until to bend over for the new agreement conditions. They've had what? A decade and they still can't get offline mode working reliably. Then again why would they?

Would you be interested in a drm and by that I mean steamworks free version of Arma 3 at a later date though? If there was a plan for this to be sold then I'd be interested. If as they seem to be going round in circles hinting at the issue is updating then surely after a certain amount of time has passed and the game is in a solid patched state then selling that "complete" version drm free would be a winner. A bit concerning that the industry is in a place where saying "drm free" is a selling point - I guess that's where customer apathy gets you though. That way it's not going to need the nursing that it did in the immediacy post release. It doesn't make for a good precedent though. "Wait til the game is stable to then be able to buy it without jumping through drm hoops." If patching is the primary concern that led to steamworks dependence - is it the case that your are expecting that there are going to be a lot of issues that need rectifying? To those that seem to feel that the game has to be steamworks to be able to sell through steam. Look at Arma 2. It's not tied to the drm. It is however sold through steam as a store. It is good that the developer is engaging with us and our concerns. Just please speak plainly. Is there going to be a steamworks drm free release at some point? If there isn't then we have a clear answer and can move to other titles. You've got people that have bought your previous releases and will want to buy subsequent ones. Just not if they have to jump through hoops that they don't need or want.

This is what gets me. Steamworks is not a magic wand that will make maps, code ai or create art assets to hit a release window. It won't do QA either. If this is an issue of Multiplayer matchmaking requiring a client - with the issues surrounding gamespy coming to an end then I can understand them wanting a Multiplayer service. If it's about piracy then they're going to maybe stem release date piracy. After that however they're barking up the wrong tree with Steamworks, drm just doesn't work and can actually incite people to try and crack it for the challenge. Dark Messiah managed to have its multiplayer handled by steam while managing to keep its singleplayer independent of requiring a client. So it can be done. If this is an exclusivity deal then BIS need to come clean and take the spanking they're due. If it is concerns related to financial pressures on releasing Arma 3 as soon as possible then yes distributing via Steam will get them a wide audience. If it's audience saturation they want then why not sell across Origin, Uplay, Gamersgate, Sprocket, Gog and who knows how many other services - reach as many customers as possible. How exactly does shackling a game to a third party drm get it made any faster?

Pretty much what was done with Dark Messiah Might and Magic. A game that used Valve's source engine yet had single player steam free but required it for multiplayer.

That's why I suggest it as a down the line release, a year or so after initial release. They've stated they have concerns about pre-release piracy. By having a drm free release a year after release it becomes a non-issue. Multiplayer support could be an issue. Perhaps there would be a way optionally connecting the title to steam, either that or just having an offline release. I don't know what the percentage of players are that don't play Arma games online is, all I do know is that I am one of them. There are other options besides as you put "OMFG!Ragequit" or just get over it there is the option to make it clear that the choices made resulted in you deciding that it's not worth the hassle and that you'll be deciding to support other products. If however the existing model were to be adhered to and a drm free release were to be made available at a later date then you would be interested in purchasing. You however would not be willing to pay good money to jump through drm hoops at this time.

Good news would be a drm free release down the line via sprocket, retail or gog.

So give them a spanking. Resale, access, regional locking and pricing, access being dependent on internet access when a product can function without, fluid license agreements - requirement of which determines access and running to and of purchases, monopolies and competition, drm schemes on top of client drm. More hoops for the customer to have to pay to jump through. All the while the pirates are laughing at us shmucks. There's a few to start you on. Why should I need to use a third party drm client at all?