It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)CD Projekt RED & GOG.com Summer Conference (Watch it here!)(1049 posts)(1049 posts)
(1049 posts)
Pages:
1
10
14
15
16
17
18
30
40
50
60
70
This is my favourite topic
Posted June 04, 2014
All-new Witcher 3 gameplay trailer, pre-orders launch; GOG.com unveils GOG Galaxy, the DRM-Free Online Gaming platform!

All-new The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt gameplay footage, pre-order details, and a look at the exclusive content of the collector's edition. GOG.com unveils its upcoming new project taking a next step in the DRM-Free gaming revolution. All that and more in the CD Projekt RED & GOG.com Summer Conference. Watch it right here!
Post edited June 04, 2014 by G-Doc
Posted June 02, 2014
avatar
JMich: You mean like people willing to pay $50+ for a retail copy of System Shock 2, despite it being available for ~$10? Or willing to pay pre-order price for The Witcher 3, simply for being TW3?

You mean like being denied entry on contests or GOG clubs due to reputation? Despite being a community member for a long time?
"You mean like people willing to pay $50+ for a retail copy of System Shock 2, despite it being available for ~$10?"

not the same thing. having it be $110 after the store owner checked your wishlist would be.

"Or willing to pay pre-order price for The Witcher 3, simply for being TW3?"

not remotely the same thing.

You mean like being denied entry on contests or GOG clubs due to reputation? Despite being a community member for a long time?

two wrongs don't make a right. however, here we run into a convoluted mess with regards to the validity of the rep system, and the integrity of certain aspects of gog culture. ignoring all of that, you could say here again, that data mining causes problems. if there was no rep system, you would eliminate this problem. but where do you draw the line? is the rep system bad information to keep? I think most would say no. but if it keeps a supportive vet out a of contest he was interested in, then maybe it is. is how much you've played a game bad information to keep? again, most would say no. but if it keeps a skilled, earnest player out of a clan because he has other things to see to, then maybe it too, is. I say two wrongs don't make a right but maybe you argue it isn't wrong. okay. but the rep system is also a different thing than time played in a game. rep is doled out not just for forums posts but also curated by the community. your game time has no such inherent element of merit. something like rep would be more like denying someone based on lack of skill-based achievements racked up in a game.
Posted June 02, 2014
high rated
avatar
Zacron: I am very well aware that when I "buy" a game from Steam, I am really renting it at retail cost
The practice has been around since the retail age, and gog uses it as well. I consider it a difficult point to argue for Steam rejecting PC players.

avatar
Zacron: And as far as the claims that Valve watches every thing you do on the computer, I say "so what"? So they track how much time I play a given game? So they look at what my PC Specs are? Who cares.
Ahhhhh.... American.

Just kidding.

They track it, and then they go on to publish it. Is there a button in your Steam profile that says: "Don't publish my statistics"? I'd love to know.

avatar
Zacron: Do you think that they are lying to you?
Valve has always been absolutely open about their business practices, and I've never thought they were dishonest towards their customers. But honesty and morality are not exactly the same thing.

avatar
Zacron: Explain to me exactly what damage a company like Steam does.
See above.

They absolutely control the market and will one day be able to phase out the PC like Sony does the PS3. It should never have come to this.

avatar
Zacron: I can think of a few things... Let's see here. They have massive sales that brings, quite literally, millions of games into the homes of millions of people. They have opened there stores to things like Cryengine, and other full Game Engines, so that home users like me have the option to use them myself. (Yes, I am aware that you could go to Crytek directly, but Steam gets the advertising out there much more.) And they, in turn, force the entire market to reduce prices, which is great for an economy like USA at the moment, because while prices keep going up, I don't make any more money now than I did when gas was 2.69, not 3.69.
Those massive sales bring indie developers down, and those devs are in a love-hate relationship with them because it's like playing Russian roulette. Those millions and millions of customers served would have sustained thousands of alternative game publishing services and thousands of additional jobs in the industry; Valve did not deserve all of these customers. The price reduction has turned into an absolute joke in the meantime, and the industry well knows that it can not survive on these kinds of prices (sure, EA, Rockstar and Ubisoft could). Hence the strong migration towards consoles and mobile.

avatar
Zacron: but I refuse to join the haters
"Hate" is a strong word. I refuse to use it. I'm not that angry at Valve - they saw a market niche and used it, always customer cuddling. I'm angry more at my PC gamer peers who have willingly maneuvered the PC platform into this absurd and destructive market situation. Those who ask for "Steam integration" and Steam keys from every single developer without considering the consequences (4,500 votes on the gog wishlist alone, an absolute disgrace). Those who ask for a GOG "Steam like" client because they're unable to use an .exe file. Those who get aggressive when they buy at the Telltale Store and only afterwards recognise that this doesn't bring them a Steam key. It's completely ridiculous.

You can be against something without hating it.
Post edited June 02, 2014 by Vainamoinen
Posted June 02, 2014
avatar
Vainamoinen: @Steam refusers: Stop arguing the DRM angle that much.

@Steam refusers: Here's a smallish list of angles you could argue instead, because these points affect non Steam users as well.
Really great points. Thanks for the input.
Posted June 02, 2014
avatar
Ebany: I say: "Most likely these people are uneducated, young, greedy, self centred, and probably spend the majority of their time poor."
avatar
Zacron: And those people, including myself, are happy to be this way. The reason: We want to play these games.
That was all you needed to say. Was going to write an extended answer but realised you totally missed the point.

I also find your assumption I'm not wealthy amusing, even more so since you believe US$1 million is rich.

You also failed to read the Steam Privacy Act and attached legal paraphernalia else you would know it's stated they won't intentionally trade the information of a minor (which is illegal in most culturally advanced countries). Facebook states the same, common these days on any age restricted site like Steam, to absolve them of any legal repercussions in case they sell the picture of a 12yo girl to a porn site (which has happened, hence the reason companies now do this). Basically they pass the blame to the parents as that child must have had their permission to make an account or lie about her age.

Either way I don't care if you love Steam, I don't care if you buy from Steam, I just don't understand how a person of good ethical conciousness would promote games been sold exclusively through Steam. Then again, as you said above, some people are simply short sighted & greedy.
avatar
Bouli: Am I the only one around here not giving a f*ck about The Witcher 3 ?

The Witcher 2 was lame and overhyped.
Just then, you don't know how badly I felt the urge to urinate in your coffee.
Post edited June 02, 2014 by Ebany
Posted June 02, 2014
avatar
Ebany: Just then, you don't know how badly I felt the urge to urinate in your coffee.
I don't drink coffee
Posted June 02, 2014
avatar
shmerl: If their official backup tool requires DRM while manually it's not needed it's simply lame and idiotic. It means they can drop DRM from the official tool and it won't make any difference. And since they don't, it's insulting for their users.
I fully agree with you on that point.
Posted June 02, 2014
avatar
Zacron: I can think of a few things... Let's see here. They have massive sales that brings, quite literally, millions of games into the homes of millions of people. They have opened there stores to things like Cryengine, and other full Game Engines, so that home users like me have the option to use them myself. (Yes, I am aware that you could go to Crytek directly, but Steam gets the advertising out there much more.) And they, in turn, force the entire market to reduce prices, which is great for an economy like USA at the moment, because while prices keep going up, I don't make any more money now than I did when gas was 2.69, not 3.69.
avatar
Vainamoinen: Those massive sales bring indie developers down, and those devs are in a love-hate relationship with them because it's like playing Russian roulette. Those millions and millions of customers served would have sustained thousands of alternative game publishing services and thousands of additional jobs in the industry; Valve did not deserve all of these customers. The price reduction has turned into an absolute joke in the meantime, and the industry well knows that it can not survive on these kinds of prices (sure, EA, Rockstar and Ubisoft could). Hence the strong migration towards consoles and mobile.
I don't think it brings devs down per se, but rather strongly influence (read 'dictates') how games are made :
- shorter life cycle (completion time reduced),
- half-assed story (because "statistically" people don't finish games -> this is linked to Steam watching how you play)
- hype and more hype, because half-truths are allowed if that sells.
- you can start selling unfinished products thanks too early access ...

That's what on the top of my head. But the "gamers don't finish games is important", I don't remember who said in the thread "why should I care Steam if watches how I play ?", here's my answer : I care because they make their stats, probably sale their studies/reports to game devs (or should ....) and help them make average games for the widest range of customers possible. And that sucks, I want good games with good endings.

Edit : and I digressed, I started talking about sales and reduced life expectancy of games, finished ranting against Steam and big modern titles, sorry for that :(
Post edited June 02, 2014 by Potzato
Posted June 02, 2014
avatar
johnnygoging: @Ebany

I'm pretty sure that Valve has never sold personal information.
avatar
Ebany: They certainly share it, Valve has stated this. They can sell the information, it's made clear when reading the legal documentation they provide. That said, I doubt they would publicly announce each time they sell data so we have no-way of knowing. What we know is they've made legal allowances in case they're caught doing so :)

avatar
Zacron: And those people, including myself, are happy to be this way. The reason: We want to play these games.
avatar
Ebany: That was all you needed to say. Was going to write an extended answer but realised you totally missed the point.

I also find your assumption I'm not wealthy amusing, even more so since you believe US$1 million is rich.

You also failed to read the Steam Privacy Act and attached legal paraphernalia else you would know it's stated they won't intentionally trade the information of a minor (which is illegal in most culturally advanced countries). Facebook states the same, common these days on any age restricted site like Steam, to absolve them of any legal repercussions in case they sell the picture of a 12yo girl to a porn site (which has happened, hence the reason companies now do this). Basically they pass the blame to the parents as that child must have had their permission to make an account or lie about her age.

Either way I don't care if you love Steam, I don't care if you buy from Steam, I just don't understand how a person of good ethical conciousness would promote games been sold exclusively through Steam. Then again, as you said above, some people are simply short sighted & greedy.
avatar
Bouli: Am I the only one around here not giving a f*ck about The Witcher 3 ?

The Witcher 2 was lame and overhyped.
avatar
Ebany: Just then, you don't know how badly I felt the urge to urinate in your coffee.
I didn't assume anything. You did. I just decided to go along with it. You said "Most likely these people are uneducated, young, greedy, self centred, and probably spend the majority of their time poor."

I did not state anywhere in my comments that I thought you were rich. I have no way to justify a thought on that matter one way or another. And honestly I don't care if you are rich or not. My points still stand. Nowhere in your reply to me did you even touch on any points that I brought up. My points are valid, and please give me a rebuttal if you disagree.
avatar
johnnygoging: and I don't agree with your pointing to DLC as a measure of value. all DLC has done is create content that otherwise would have been in the game, for the purpose of charging more in bad circumstances, and individually milk more out of people for content that would have been sold in an expansion pack in best circumstances. I am less opposed to DLC from indie games for obvious reasons, and I didn't like the response to The Pit, but by and large I consider DLC and especially the culture of it to be nothing but a problem.
I am a collector. I like knowing I have every aspect of a particular item, whether it is a movie series, a book series, a board game collection, or a digital download collection of add-ons for a game that i barely play.

I also disagree with the philosophy behind DLC, but I am at war with myself anyway, because when I bought Sleeping Dogs, it was on sale for 7.49, or 9.99 with all the DLC. That is one of the best games I have ever played, graphically and otherwise. So, I decided to pay the extra so I could tell myself that I had the whole game.

I know I am playing right into their hands when I do this, but, to me, it really is worth it. I could decide today to never buy another DLC pack, and it would not change a thing. It would take hundreds of thousands of people doing the exact same thing to change anything, and I am too tired and too greedy for revolution. (Cue people jumping on my case for admitting that I am greedy)

You may not call me an idiot, and yet I may still be one, because I read your comment, I agree with what you are saying, but I still don't care about the data they mine. I don't play multiplayer games anyways. I play single player ones, and I put time and energy into the ones I like. I don't care if I am rejected by a group for not having enough time in a game. That has been around since long before steam, and it will be there long after. Those types of people are the ones I try very hard to avoid anyways.
Post edited June 02, 2014 by Zacron
Posted June 02, 2014
avatar
Potzato: But the "gamers don't finish games is important", I don't remember who said in the thread "why should I care Steam if watches how I play ?", here's my answer : I care because they make their stats, probably sale their studies/reports to game devs (or should ....) and help them make average games for the widest range of customers possible. And that sucks, I want good games with good endings.
Those devs "that make average games for the widest range of customers as possible" would make such games anyway. You want them to accidentaly make games more to your tastes because they didn't have proper data? Me, I want devs that believe in their work, such devs wouldn't be swayed by the data about "majority" but would deliberately push towards their niche of choosing. There just needs to be business model for that and a culture of that. Just like with niche movies, art and such. Nothing to do with data. You don't need much data to know that you can't top charts with ambient music and yet there are bands making just that. I believe more data as such is good, for scientific purposes at least (the problem is how it is handled, but that's a completely different topic).
Posted June 02, 2014
avatar
Bouli: Am I the only one around here not giving a f*ck about The Witcher 3 ?

...

But I'm waiting for the announcements regarding GOG.com as I am a big supporter of this site.
I give a f--k to the extent that I want to see it checked off the wishlist and for it to act as a mechanism to get other big publishers interested in GOG ("Wow, CDPR is selling their AAA game DRM-free; maybe we can at least sell our classics in that way to make some money...)

But I too am mostly interested in the GOG announcement.
Posted June 02, 2014
Woot, time to re-play The Witcher 1 & 2 :)
Posted June 02, 2014
avatar
Bouli: Am I the only one around here not giving a f*ck about The Witcher 3 ?

The Witcher 2 was lame and overhyped. I don't really like the hype around Witcher 3 as well. It will surely be a beautiful game, but then? I don't trust CD Projekt communication anymore (as well as the critics) after Witcher 2 huge disappointment. I think they should stop boasting off and concentrate about making a real game, not a beautiful-hdr-mature-boobs-wtf-RPG.

But I'm waiting for the announcements regarding GOG.com as I am a big supporter of this site.
I didn't play the Witcher games either, because of several things about the game that made me not want to play it. So, I'm afraid I can't quite muster up any enthusiasm for Witcher 3 either. So, for those who are fans, good for them and may they enjoy the surprises GOG is unveiling.

I'm more curious about Cyberpunk 2077, and would love more details, mainly to know if it will be a game for me, as I can't tell at this point. Overall, my current excitement is pegged for the GOG announcement. :)
Post edited June 02, 2014 by Nicole28
Posted June 02, 2014
avatar
Nicole28: I didn't play the Witcher games either, because of several things about the game that made me not want to play it.
Interesting. Can you share what were those things? I've heard various criticisms of the Witcher games, but usually from those who played it and didn't like for some reason.
Post edited June 02, 2014 by shmerl
Posted June 02, 2014
avatar
Bouli: Am I the only one around here not giving a f*ck about The Witcher 3 ?
No. I haven't played any of them, and I have no interest whatsoever in doing so, for some reason. They just don't spark my interest, and there isn't enough time in the universe to play every game people say I should, so I'm totally okay with the fact that I will likely never touch a single Witcher game.
Posted June 02, 2014
avatar
Nicole28: I'm more curious about Cyberpunk 2077, and would love more details, mainly to know if it will be a game for me, as I can't tell at this point. Overall, my current excitement is pegged for the GOG announcement. :)
Me too but mostly because I want some gameplay footage to hang onto and frankly something that isn't made to look more awesome than it actually is.
Pages:
1
10
14
15
16
17
18
30
40
50
60
70
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)CD Projekt RED & GOG.com Summer Conference (Watch it here!)(1049 posts)(1049 posts)
(1049 posts)