Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

No longer the official forum...(perhaps OT, maybe not)

Recommended Posts

And, as I have previosly stated, I absolutely refuse to go over to SimHQ for my own reasons which I'll not go into here. However, I do still read over there, and let me say how glad I am that there's no one posting over here about how freakin' great Steam is. Still, I do feel it's worthy of mention, just that I don't deem SimHQ worthy of my time whatsoever...


I hope to God WOFF does not rely soley on anything like Steam - ever - and that's not because I'm "old and refuse to accept changing technology". It's because I have some d@mn sense, and I recognize the difference between change that exists to serve the user for the better, and change that exists basically because it can, as a means to generate more money off your computer and your use of it (which should all be completely and privately your own business).


Since some people insist on being offensive about folks' age as it relates to changing technology, let me say this: Younger people more and more readily accept all these invasive practices into what *we* (the old people) enjoyed as PERSONAL computing are allowing greed to saturate the industry, and if left unchecked on present course, your computer will no longer be anything that is even close to PERSONAL. You'll basically have a 'dumb terminal' that allows you to connect to your own so-called "library" of software (none of which you can claim ownership of, nor do you possess media for)...and then you can enjoy whatever media THEY say you can, WHEN they say you can, on WHATEVER machine they say you can (and ONLY that machine, BTW).


Of course, during this 'experience', you'll need to watch ads you'd rather not sit through (but they're for your good, dont'cha know?)...and suffer progressively poorer performance from your computer and internet connection (as the marketing types all pull whatever stunts they can legitimize to cram their pitch in your space)...more than likely experience numerous conflicts, many impossible to resolve, due to all these marketing types doing what they want the way they want (nevermind following standards or best practices designed to MINIMIZE problems).


But it's a small price to pay, right? I mean, for all the GOOD something like Steam can do...right?


*Pfft* I think not. Steam as it is is invasive, and that's something no amount of 'features' should warrant ignoring. As it (and others like it) continues to evolve, it absolutely *will* be akin to 'big brother' - not that this isn't already getting bad enough as is. A few weeks ago there was a post here about browsers 'back' button and how these tracking ads are constantly watching where you go, what you look at...all in the name of marketing. Don't be fooled into believing this is somehow in your best interest, because whatever the benefit might be, it pales to the problems this has created (and will yet).


If you don't believe this is all about marketing, answer a simple question: How much of this would exist if the respective advertisers/marketers didn't put their money into it? How much of it would exist if there was nothing to sell you? Assume, just for debate, that everyone stops buying anything based on this 'targeted' advertising. That there is no money paid, and none to be made, by watching and tracking everything you do online. Exactly where do you think all these online "services" and "features" would be then?


Yes, I realize Steam isn't just about marketing...it (claims to be) a "distribution system" (whatever the hell that means). Here's a question: How'd we all manage to get by just fine, all those great years we've enjoyed PC gaming, without it?


Because, it's not necessary in the first place, that's how.


FWIW, and if by chance the fine folks that brought us OFF to date read this: Please, never give in to this Steam type nonsense. The benefits are NOT worth the cost.

Edited by Tamper

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said that man... I must admit I love the fact that most of the games I have I own them in boxes and they sit there silent testimony to my spending the few games I own on steam I have been reluctant to purchase especially when I purchased Fallout New Vegas and found that I had to download the game I couldn't just install from the CD that annoyed me greatly... I understand protecting your market but there is a limit which is also why I do not play online... I want my time on my machine as mine no-one elses... The idea behind Steam is great but the implementation is akin to the accountants being let loose on figuring out how to make the most money from the user... Thankfully my gaming is very select and I am happy for that... as the few games I own that are also on Steam I have not placed in the library as I prefer to mod my games to my specifications... imagine trying to do that with flight simulators??? your downloads would be immense for example my setup for FSX is currently running at nearly 120gigabytes...

Edited by Slartibartfast

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

What, did Steam run over your puppy ?


This, kids, is why you should stay off drugs (or on them if prescribed by a doctor).


Kidding aside, let's make it quick...



Loss of ownership : Guess what, buster, even in the time of floppies and reams of paper with BASIC code printed on them, you never had such thing, only a licence to it.


Targeted advertising : Where, how, when ?


Online tracking : Steam tracks nothing beyond hardware configuration and gaming stats, I care about that as much as I care for the fact my pharmacist knows about my health, my librarian about my reading habits and topics of interests etc... IF Steam did track something not related to the function it serves, then I would share your outrage, however in this matter it's completely irrational as it ignores the real world precedents, or do you really think that knowing your hardware (any website can acquire that without your knowledge) or knowing what you play and when you play it has any value beyond the statistical ?


Steam deciding what you can run : Errr, nope, it even accepts to sell me games they know I CAN'T play on my hardware, the only restrictions are those put by publishers restricting digital sales in some territories, but if you are allowed to buy it, you can run it.


Steam deciding how you can run it : Once again, nope, you can mod it to your heart content, update with a non-Steam installer, use no-cd hacks... unless disallowed by the game's DRM itself, it will work, Steam doesn't prevent you to do so, once again, it's the publisher's fault if you can't.


Steam deciding when you can run it : Nope, usually when Steam servers are out, you can still run your games, unless the publisher decided not to let you, likewise, if the publisher decided to add DRM so that you can't play with an internet connection, this has nothing to do with Steam.


Steam deciding on which computer you can run it : Once again, partially wrong, you can only run your games on one registered computer at a time, however you can easily register more computers. More restrictions DO exist, on a per-game basis, depending on the game's specific DRM scheme, once again, it's due to the publisher's policy and not Steam.

Also, Steam restrictions are somewhat reasonable as the licence for most games is for personal use on ONE computer at a time, however they do impose unnecessary restrictions on software not having such limited licencing terms, however that is bound to change in a few month with Steam going into software beyond games.


Making the most money : You know what, Steam constant offers makes it so that I spend less money on more games than before Steam... I spend LESS on things I would have bought full price anyway AND that allows me to spend money on indie games and STILL, I'm spending less than by buying through traditional channels... yeah, those damn greedy corporations after my money, how dare they make me spend less money and help finance independent game developers (as a matter of record, I usually buy indie games both through Steam, as a matter of convenience, and directly from the developer where available) !



Your concerns are valid and I don't like the way first-to-second-tier gaming is going either, but mistaking the source of the problem and laying the blame on one of the best player, one pushing indie developers hard (even though they'd be happier with less sales or a larger cut), one constantly pushing for more user-friendly DRMs and equalizing force in the field (well, Impulse was interesting until bought by GameStop) is utterly stupid.


The enemy is EA/Ubisoft, not Steam.



And don't start on it being a generation thing, it's about being rational and clearly identifying the source of the problem.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can personally see both sides of the issue here, however, what it actually boils down to, is control ie, we as consumers are slowly losing our control over software. For example, I myself, dislike Steam, Starforce, and any other so called anti piracy bulls**t, not because I am a software pirate, but because of the havoc these so called "safeguards" cause, I try and avoid anything that has steam or starforce, or anything of this ilk when purchasing a new game or sim.

I think the concept, that Tamper is attempting to ge across, is the fact that we are constantly , and ever increasingly, targeted by marketing, behavioural control, etc etc etc. I am fully aware that this sounds like I am a conspiracy theorist, however, it is certainly true, that we are monitored, herded, and tricked , on a daily basis.

I am sorry, bnut when I purchase a game, I want that damn game, on the CD/DVD that I have purchased, I dont wish to spend goodness knows how long downloading the sodding game ( after having paid for it, and then installing all the bloatware, and spyware, from the damn CD/DVD that I have just purchased.

In summary, what right have the likes of Steam, and any other companies like them, have to dictate to me, or to any other consumer ? I think that is the nub of the problem, we as human being do NOT like to be controlled, at least the intelligent ones dont !!! And that is the whole insidious scheme, we will all slowly be sucked in................CAVEAT EMPTOR !!!! take note Mr Gunrunner, you are in the trap already mate. Sounds to me like you are toeing the party line...............Question EVERYTHING, believe half of what you see, and nothing of what you hear, especially when it comes to Corporations ( ie Steam ) and politicians, They are one and the same breed, and everybody is out there trying to sell you crap, especially the crap you DON'T need or even want....PPI ?!!!!



Shutting my cakehole now, gonna go back to my good honest profession as a Soldier of Her Majesty

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, good to see the majority still have their senses, anyway...


BTW, Gunrunner...eh, "Buster", (Among the reasons I refuse to tolerate SimHQ is this sort of name-calling and automatic ridicule; "This is why you should stay off drugs...) But thanks, though, for proving my point. Moving on:


I never once said I *did* own the older software you mention. I know full well how the licensing works, thank you. But you omitted an important distinction: "...nor do you possess media for...". It's OK, the others here get what I'm talking about. I wouldn't really expect someone as obviously blinded as you are to admit they get it.


It's really foolish to think there's no harm in this Steam nonsense, and it's not because I'm clinging to outdated notions that I say that. I suppose your theory is that everyone who opposes it like I do is also a lunatic, on drugs, or "off their meds"?


Balderdash. Just a group of perfectly sensible people who are tired of the invasive lengths some of these outfits will go to, for their own interests. It's over the line; they've exceeded reasonable limits. And all you who go along for the sake of convenience...well, you're just helping them along.


I believe it was Ben Franklin who said "Those would give up their liberties for security shall have neither". This, albeit in different clothing, is essentially the same argument. You see, back in Ben's day, they stated things more indirectly than we do today. Ole' Ben was referring to giving up something you rightfully have (and shouldn't readily trade off) for the promise of something that isn't really what it's being sold to be.


You've traded off the precious good you had, and it's long gone before you realize that what you got in return wasn't really what it was made to appear as. By golly, I'm given to wonder if Ben didn't already know about Steam back then!


Now, you obviously didn't read what I wrote:


If you don't believe this is all about marketing, answer a simple question: How much of this would exist if the respective advertisers/marketers didn't put their money into it? How much of it would exist if there was nothing to sell you?


Assume, just for debate, that everyone stops buying anything based on this 'targeted' advertising. That there is no money paid, and none to be made, by watching and tracking everything you do online. Exactly where do you think all these online "services" and "features" would be then?


Yes, I realize Steam isn't just about marketing...it (claims to be) a "distribution system" (whatever the hell that means). Here's a question: How'd we all manage to get by just fine, all those great years we've enjoyed PC gaming, without it?


Because, it's not necessary in the first place, that's how.


You wrote a lot, bud - the usual pro-Steam drivel, Im afraid. Losing my games? I've never lost one. (And, BTW, those archaic licensing agreements you refer to allowed the right to make an archival copy, which cannot be denied, regardless. Ever hear of 'off-site backups'?)


But I don't find an answer to the questions I asked. Typical of the types who act as if Steam is the greatest thing since sliced bread.


And all those things you say I'm wrong about? By your own admition, I'm not wrong ("partially wrong" means [at least] "partially right"), and while you're busy assuming it won't become any more agressive, I can assure you it will. How do I know that? Because history is a great teacher, that's why.


But you go right ahead...you and my teenage sons (and all their friends, who don't see anything wrong with Steam, either...), well...what the hell can we old people tell you, anyway?

Edited by Tamper

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
In summary, what right have the likes of Steam, and any other companies like them, have to dictate to me, or to any other consumer ?


As long as you consume the product, companies have some say in how it is consumed because they created it. Pretty sure a drill company isn't going to cover your expenses because you used their product as a rectal thermometer.


You pays your money and you takes your chances. You do not have to buy the product. Period.


How'd we all manage to get by just fine, all those great years we've enjoyed PC gaming, without it?


Because piracy was difficult back then...not now. Also, games cost MUCH more to develop, but have actually gotten cheaper over time.


Don't believe me?


First, read this...all of it. This is still the best article I have read about the subject...in depth, researched, referenced, and balanced.




And an overview of how game development costs have increased over time:




Note that for instance, GTA IV is estimated to have cost $100 MILLION dollars to develop. Yet, new, it's original price was $45 USD in 2008.


Typical development for an A list game now is 30-40 MILLION dollars.


20 years ago, a PC sim highly regarded, with many purchases (for the size of the market) for its time, F-19 Stealth Fighter, was the exact same price back then. Inflation means that PC games should be worth $80 USD if sold today.


Also, that means that PC games back then should have cost 15-20 MILLION USD in 1988 dollars to develop...pretty sure they didn't cost that much back then to make.


But they aren't, yet are far more capable then the games of yesteryear.


So, can I sum this up for ya? Games cost far more to develop because they are so much more capable, yet the inflation adjusted price has dropped by almost half. Piracy of any sort of scale back then required banks of copying machines (either floppy disk or CD-ROM copy 'racks') and a distribution network...now only requires a high speed internet connection.


Get it yet? More money to create, less money made per copy, and easier to get illegal copies. Any wonder why companies keep coming with new ways to try to protect their investment, help pay for development and put off the eventual losses each title will sustain once it is pirated?



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

So. lemme see if I "get it yet"...


You're saying that everything that Steam does is absolutely necessary to prevent piracy, and that there is positively no way to prevent piracy, except for crap the likes of Steam?


Is that it? Do I "get it"?


(Hint: Careful...you might not know everything you think you do).


That article you cite is simply one other person's opinion. And there are *tons* of people who disagree, and still think Steam is a load of crap. That one author's opinion isn't necessarily any more accurate or "right" than anyone else's.


We all know piracy is a problem but, dude, you're not dealing with The Scene here, mmm-kay? You're dealing with a reasonably large number of typical PC gaming people, all entitled to make up their own minds, and all saying "Steam is BS" (and not because any of them are pirates, either).


And, while we're on the subject, can you state factually that Steam is 100% successful at preventing piracy? Now it may work better than anything else...but even if it does, it does so by seriously overstepping reasonable boundaries. And let's face it, a lot of what they do is not directed at piracy. In fact, they don't even like to be referred to strictly as DRM....no, they want to be called a "Distribution System". Why do you suppose that is? I'll tell you: A. Much of what they do is not directly related to, nor necessary for, digital rights management; B. They don't want to be associated with the negative connotations that are typically associated with DRM.


Or, are you just the kind to sit back, look at all these people who say it's BS, and say "You're all wrong, and I'm right?"


The fact is, it's not the only way (or even the best way) to stop piracy. The fact is, they (Steam) overstep in the name of preventing piracy (yes, I also know damn well that I have to agree to it if I want to play the game...and what better way to foist something off on those short on judgment, looking only for [whatever it is they want at the moment]) Like my kids, installing every piece of shovelware bullcrap they run across on the internet, just so they can see the "free" video, or get the "free" game. Again, see Ben Franklin. All the convenience, functionality and so on you see in Steam...there's a price paid. If nothing else, it's down there, running in the system tray all the time. I don't even care for AV programs that run all the time, but finally submitted that they are practically necessary.


Is Steam necessary? Nope. But - mark my words - if they get their way, it will be.


Rue the day.

Edited by Tamper

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit I am of the older set as well, and I hate steam for what it represents, a control over the future of what games I maybe able to play. You will never know when activation will stop or no longer be available.


Unfortunately this is always an emotional subject for all concerned, me included. I used to spend about $1000.00 on games per year. I now only spend $200.00 at most. Mainly through GoG.com. I expect my license to use the game to be up to me not an external body.


One thing I hate obout stem is when something goes wrong you loose your whole account. One of our friends had a school child who was caught cheating online so the account was suspended. Unforunately the whole family had the same account so all lost thier acount and games. Last I heard after months it was not sorted, not possible no real support. For me I will never buy another game that need any sort of online activation. Stick with gog.com from now on and Matrix Games.


The claim that they are a service is rubbish it is all about copy protection. If it was a service it would be like gog.com.

Matrix Games just used serials and from what I have heard it is very good for copy protection. With a blacklisted serial you can never get patches and all their games needs lots of them.


I must appologise for my post here as it is far too strong against steam, but unfortunately I have my reasons and will stick with them. If for some reason the next version of OFF needed activation I would not get it either. Hopefully that will never happen.


I doubt this subject will ever be solved one way or the other. The only thing we can do is vote with our wallet which ever way we feel.


For me I only buy through Matrix Games and Gog.com now.


Anyway cheers for the topic as it gives us oldies a chance to bag steam.


Regards MarkL

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's keep this civil, gentlemen. For some reason, discussion about digital distribution methods often becomes very personal. It's almost like religion or politics!


In my opinion, it would be a good thing for OFF to be available in as many formats and stores as possible. But I can't see OFF becoming available for example in Steam until Combat Flight Simulator 3 does. No CFS3, no OFF.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread seems to have a wrong title? Shouldn't it be called "Discussion about STEAM" rather?


I find it interesting to learn about you guys different views - pro and con - and I hope you can avoid

turning it into a flame-war (cause you'd force the moderators to close it down).

After all we can only offer our opinions, and if we can do that in good style, then that's some of the

best of democracy IMHO.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites




Look, it's one thing to make a personal choice not to use something, it's another entirely to try and justify your not doing so by inventing counter-factual arguments, no-one's going to blame you for not liking it, but by giving idiotic reasons, you will be seen as a complete idiot, which I assume you are not.

My beef with you is not that you don't want to use Steam or whatever, it's that you are claiming to do so based on entirely irrational arguments.

As a matter of fact I did dislike Steam too... a bit of research later, I end up defending them...



What's the point of possessing the media, just for the sake of it ?

And once again, with Steam I just save and burn it if I want... sure I would need the Steam software just to restore it, but with physical media it's the same thing, if I didn't play my card rights, a few years down the right I might not have the right media reader or the OS might not read the installer. There's no functional difference here, you'll always have to jump through hoops for what becomes legacy software.


Trading liberties... Tell me, what liberty is digital distribution taking away from you exactly ? I don't get it...


Marketing... Seriously, you know that Steam was started by a game developer/publisher, they don't use invasive ads like Impulse did (and does), they don't sell marketing data, they only deal in statistical data.

Steam was built first and foremost to help Valve push their own games online without the cost of physical distribution and having to negotiate with retail channels, that's where the value proposition is, this is not Facebook.


I never lost a game, yada, yada... good for you, but people move, physical supports degrade and many people have lost games to these events, sure, had they been more cautious it wouldn't have happened, so what ? You mean that the only point of view and valid experience to appreciate the value of anything is Tamper's ? Are you an egomaniac ?


If you don't find the answer to your questions, then maybe you should ask your questions more clearly and not hide them among so much drivel.


Let's assume for a moment your question are you emphasized quotes (even though they technically are rhetorical questions) :


- Would Steam exist without advertisers putting money into it ?

Yes, as would Impulse, Origin etc... for the simple reason that advertising/marketing doesn't finance these services.

Steam is backed by a game developer/publisher, Valve, it makes money off the cut it takes from sales.

Impulse was backed by a game developer/publisher, Stardock, before being bought by a game retail chain, GameStop, once again, money is made off sales, not advertising.

Origin is backed by a game publisher, Electronic Arts, once again, money is made from sales, not advertising.

Publishers subscribe to these distribution channels because they offer convenience (easier, cheaper distribution; easier, cheaper patch distribution), better additional revenues (by making the sale of extension and DLC a simple procedure).

Consumers subscribe to these services because they offer better prices, the same convenience when it comes to installing, patching and extending; and more importantly... no functional difference with the physical variant as the downsides you decry are NOT a function of the distribution channel, but of the game or their DRM themselves.

Now, is that at last clear for you ?

That argument would be far more at home in a rant about Facebook (don't get me started on that steaming pile, or maybe you should, you'd see we agree and that my current disagreement is mostly on your chosen target, not your values in themselves).


- Would digital distribution exist if there was nothing to sell you ?

Would a bakery with no bread to sell last long ?

Of course if a game retailer had no games to sell, it would not exist, having no reason to exist in the first place... what's supposed to be your goddam point here ?


- How did we manage to be just fine all these years without digital distribution ?

Guess what, gaming has changed, publishers have becoming paranoid about piracy, they have become dissatisfied of fattening retail channels not respecting their end of bargains.

Developers enjoy the ability to patch quickly, often and to do so reliably and consistently, they also learnt to love the ability to have large games without having to think in terms of production constraints (ie. not having to cut content because it would mean one more optical disc in the box).

Gamers enjoy not having to constantly switch media, not having to search for the latest patch, having patches disappear with the publisher, being able to quickly install/uninstall games without having to shuffle through kilos of 500-CD cases (guess what, I own over 2000 optical discs of games, including archived floppies and so on... I absolutely don't miss having to rely on those).

Another game changer was the rise of online gaming, which is, at least at my scale, a pretty recent development... and that requires different infrastructures, measures to fend off cheating if you plan on having competitive gaming and it's cheaper to rely on specialized platform than having to develop a system for every game.


In short, this is a Luddite argument...

How did we manage to eat just fine all these years before some smartass invented fire ?

How did we manage to live just fine all these years without electricity ?

The list of such dumb questions is endless...



And keep the generational contempt to yourself will you, you obviously have little clue on how old I am or how far back my computing practice dates... And you really should know that age doesn't make you wiser, it only makes you older; there's no age to be a clueless idiot... or to use your brain.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, you've misrepresented just about everything I said....which is fairly typical. Just a few quick notes:


I didn't say, suggest or imply (to use your analogy) the baker wouldn't exist without bread to sell. Oddly enough, you alone don't seem to understand what I said - but there are certainly others here who do.


And I definitely didn't start the "generational contempt". If you actually read my post, I indicated this was started by a person over on SimHQ, who insists that someone doesn't like Steam simply because they are [sic] "an old guy who refuses to accept changing technology". (Go on, read it...I did say that...)


I most assuredly do not think my view is the only view. As I've clearly stated a number of times, there are others here who made up their own minds, but just so happen to agree with my perspective. (But thanks for the extensive effort to assault and insult...) You'd just as easily dismiss us all as "idiots", as you say. Remarkable how we can all have it so wrong, but you have it right.


You continually argue all the same points you claim are positive about Steam, without ever really addressing the negatives. For instance, the capability for easy automatic updates. How many of us have been totally screwed by some friendly, automatic update that caused problems on our setup? You say automatic updates are good, which might be true for you. But I would reserve the liberty to decide for myself whether I want an update or not. (Oddly enough, even Microsoft understands this, and lets the user decide about WIndows updates).


You do bring up another interesting point, though - one more thing about these so-called "distribution systems" that I hate and will be a huge problem, but hasn't been mentioned yet: That is, Steam has their client...then Origin has theirs, of course...then what?


Are we actually supposed to run a different client app on our PC's, for every game we own, just because a lot of other companies decided to jump on Steam's bandwagon and create an entire client that would, by default, be running all the time?


And you actually cannot see what's wrong with this (nevermind all the other problems)?


You actually have to ask me what liberty I am giving up, for God's sake? How about the liberty of using my computer for what I want, without stupid, uneccesary encumberances?


If you still cannot understand this, let me try another way: How many games will it take, each loading their own respective client on your machine, before you decide you've had enough? Well, when that day comes (and it will, either that or you'll forego a game due to it, or maybe quit gaming altogether)....but when that day comes, remember: YOU were among those defending the whole thing.


Do you actually already have Steam and Origin (and whatever else) running on your machine? Are you among those people I see all the time, with a system tray full of junk and a computer that runs like junk to match?

Edited by Tamper

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tamper, automatic updates are on by default but can be disabled on a per game basis, just because you don't know how to use a tool doesn't mean it doesn't work.


Yes, by default it launch at start-up... by default, nothing is stopping you from changing that as I and countless other Steam users do, once again, if you don't know how to use a tool, don't blame it on the tool.


And who's forcing you to use Steam, is anyone putting a gun to your head ? You want the liberty of using your computer as you see fit, do so, don't come ranting because some new game requires a DRM, or to update your graphic card driver, or whatever conspiracy you're seeing...


As for the generational contempt, I don't give a fig about your discussion with other people on other boards, in the present case YOU were the once trying to use your age and my supposed own as a reason to explain away our differing opinion on the matter at hand.


Seriously, you have absolutely no clue on the topic, on the history of personal computing and try to gain some legitimacy by using your "old age" as an argument ? You are ranting about people going after bells and whistle software, but you are the kind of people running an OCed rig and a RAID 0 array of SSD, proudly displaying his WEI and you talk about unnecessary encumbrances... Can't you be more ridiculous ?


You, sir, are a poser and a vile troll.

Edited by Gunrunner

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear, oh dear - you guys know how this is gonna end...

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't worry too much about WOFF being on Steam. It's not a stand-alone game, it's a total conversion mod, and the last I heard, the underlying game (CFS3) isn't on Steam.


FWIW, things like Steam (and the competing Storm Powered--shameless plug) are actually GOOD overall because they allow small developers to get products out that would otherwise never see the light of day. This is because they make games directly available from developer to consumer, cutting out the publishing and retailing middlemen. Those evil slugs are responsible for today's video game market utterly dominated by low-brow console games, and they intend to keep it that way because that's how they make money. So if you EVER want to see another PC game for a niche market like flightsims, you'll probably only see it on Steam, Storm Powered (RoF anyone?), or whatever similar system comes out in the future.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a hardware enthusiast; my pride in my accomplishments in building my own hardware detracts in absolutely no way from whatever argument there might be about Steam. The two simply have nothing to do with one another, except as you attempt to imply. I build my PC for top-notch performance, I get what I worked for, and I'm proud of it. Jealous?


It happens that I know a great deal about the history of personal computing. It happens my family's personal physician (now passed) and long-time friend was Dr Ed Roberts (look it up). Until his death, he resided where I grew up; this was long after he pretty much invented the PC; back before Bill Gates, etc. But I wouldn't expect you to comprehend or respect any of that, no not at all.


I started this thread as a reflection of what's being discussed on the "official" board; I titled it as such, and even indicated it might be OT. *YOU* chose to come in and comment on the thread, but do so out of it's context. If you don't give a fig about the other board, then why would you need to comment on my expression of how regretful *I* see the other discussion is?


I also note you completely evade the matter of these 'systems' each having different clients, and where it will end. What will finally be considered too much? Perfectly legitimate question; again, no answer.


And again, with the name calling. Folks can't support their perspective with sound factual reasoning, so they invariably resort to the attacks, insults, and name-calling.

Edited by Tamper

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

BH, those things are "good" IN YOUR OPINION (which I do, believe it or not, respect your right to). Just don't understand why the "pro-Steam" bunch cannot seem to admit there are substantial drawbacks to these 'systems', and that, in the end, they simply are not necessary.


And good lord, RoF...for once, I'm actually glad it got brought up. Because, as much as there MAY be to dislike about RoF, at least they - a bunch I'm not known for admiring at all, mind you - but at LEAST they managed to find a way without resorting to nonsense like Steam. By comparison, their scheme is less intrusive, and it only starts/runs while the game is in use. I'm not saying theirs is the best, mind you - many have argued it's also over the line (myself included). But Steam goes well beyond that.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

And what if Ed Roberts was a family friend, how does that make YOU in any way competent or knowledgeable ? Does one man's accomplishment by some magic rubs off on people he happens to know ? What sort of logic and appeal to authority is that ?

Should I take credit for the accomplishments of friends, relatives, professors, colleagues as well or does that rule only apply to you ?


As for your claim of being a hardware enthusiast just because you think that throwing money and childish tricks will make you a "power user", let's not get into that, I don't want to grow contemptuous, clearly we don't belong nearly in the same computing culture, in my world, computers are above all work tools, not the latest way to compare penises, stability and adequation to the workload are more important than theoretical peak-performance.

But just one thing... since when assembling a modern computer is "building your own hardware" ?


I'm giving you facts, I'm countering your arguments one by one and still you refuse to admit that you are mistaken in both your target and analysis and keep on piling up more strawmen, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and swims like a duck, I think I might allow myself to call it a duck.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're calling names. You're not addressing key points. You're dismissing relevant fact, because it doesn't suit your purpose.


I learned a lot from Ed Roberts, both about hardware engineering and also software. It's not a question of competence magically "rubbing off", it's a question of study. A career of study, if I may, that's spanned some 30 years now, including some of the best hardware and technical schools out there. Just because I understand money is sometimes necessary to get the best from a system doesn't mean I'm guilty of "throwing money". If you knew me at all, you'd know I'm exactly opposite that - for instance, I have never bought any piece of new computer technology when it first came out; I wait until it is reduced in price due to the next "latest thing" which has saved me countless thousands of dollars in building my machines.


I understand the purpose of computers as work tools, since I do work with them every day professionally. I also understand the purpose of automobiles primarily as transportation...but I still can admire those folks who put a lot of hard work into getting the best from these machines as a hobby. Their primary use doesn't mean there is no other use. Not only that, but much of what I spent (time and money) on my various computing experiments was educational for me. I learned a lot in the process.


And you may term the methods I've learned and study as "childish tricks", but that's just another reason for the specs I cite. I can show proof the real-world performance that I worked to earn. There are no tricks here, just learning to get it right. Oddly enough, many people - family, friends, coworkers - all trust me to advise them and work on their machines.


But, most of this is really getting off the subject of this thread...which you seem to be intent on dragging further and further from the subject...

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  


Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..