I feel the opposite of option three would be the best, such that the DRM free should be given at the release of beta and updated continuously until the release at which time the game should be put on Steam.
Hi Still a problem, I think, Steam is a realy good idea for most people, but the Beta has to be tested (like a Beta...) a lot... So, for people that can't use Steam, they will not be able to try Beta version, and if they can't get steam, could it be possible that they could have others bugs on the game that "normal" people (using steam) won't have? in that case, Beta wouldn't be completely tested... So... I don't know /o/
If it were that easy, it wouldn't even be an issue. Look, I'm just basing it on other indie devs that have had the same issues. Klei, for instance, just finished their last promised patch. Each patch for the standalone came, at the very best, a few days later than the Steam version. Even then, it had fatal bugs that weren't present in the Steam version. and their patches aren't even as frequent. As a matter of fact, when they do their "testing phase" they don't even bother with anything other than Steam for reasons already listed by the Starbound dev team. For frequent, constantly changing updates, option 3 wins - hands down.
Yes, they will. The whole "Only on Steam" thing will only be for the first leg of beta, when updates are being pumped out very often, like within hours of each other. Once these updates slow down (which could easily happen before even stage 1 is complete) to a level where updating the DRM free client along with steam won't cause development to slow down, then the DRM free beta client would come into being. All they want is to make the first part of beta to get by as quickly as possible, and when that part involves almost a constant flow of updates, Steam is just the best option to get through it quickly so that the rest of the beta after is more of an enjoyable testing period.
Not being certain of folks' reasons for disliking Steam (or as I like to call a dislike of Steam, silliness), a system that allows you to update more frequently, efficiently, and with fewer errors seems like a hands-down decision to me. I know a lot of folks don't like the concept of DRM in general (it can be a double-edged sword), but how would you like it if someone stole your ideas, called them their own, and made buckets of money off of them? Also, though I doubt the person who posted on the first page is still reading - that in-game Steam overlay that slows down your system? You can turn that off. Just sayin'.
I agree, Steam is an efficient piece of software that has proven itself over and over again. Option 3.
Alright, I give up. Option 3 makes the most sense, and I also hope that this game requires us to always be ONLINE. Indeed, it makes the most sense, Steam offline mode should be disabled throughout the whole of beta. In fact, the game should require some form of bio-lock signature to activate and then upon many months of beta testing Gabe Newell shall awaken from his dark cavern and hit the delete game from account button to ensure we feel maximum amount of anger and betrayal.
... I'm not sure if you're trying to make a joke, but... That's a bad idea. For me. Who has virtually no internet 50% of the time. ...
The key word here is the word 'service'. Note it, because it is important. There is absolutely zero problem with T&C changing occasionally, where it just refers to a service. A service is an ongoing thing, and if you happen to dislike the T&C of a service, then well, that's fine, you can terminate the service and you've lost absolutely nothing. You simply need to find a new service. But the service you received in the past doesn't magically disappear when you leave the service. Where the steam T&C differ is that it is referring to the use of a service which is tied inextricably to a product, a game. Something which you have paid for and received at time of payment, rather than an ongoing service, While steam itself is a service, you stand to lose a product if you terminate the service; there is no way to access those games without the service. Now, I'm going to anticipate that you'll say "but there's offline mode, you haven't lost them if you've enabled offline mode and they don't have the restrictive DRM!" and/or "there's a backup feature, so you can keep copies of them locally!". The problem is, that both of those will only work for as long as you keep that install of those games. As soon as you need to reinstall those games (new PC, rebuild of your old PC) you're out of luck, because any installation of the games requires use of the steam service. There. Question answered. I look forward to you telling me that I'm wrong somehow though.
3. Steam haters can wait. if they have a problem where they can't run steam because their computer is too slow, they probably can't run the game.
What's the point? It's like talking to a brick wall. You want to be different so badly you've overlooked logic that people have put actual time into presenting you with. You just did some really impressive logical and linguistic gymnastics to assert that what you're saying about Valve, and what I'm saying about Microsoft aren't exactly THE SAME THING. You've overlooked (ignored) legally factual material in doing so. You're totally right. Valve is going to take away all our games. And it's going to be after we just THREW AWAY our chance at a DRM free version of Starbound. I was so foolish to suggest that you use Steam until you get your DRM free version, and compromise your impressive moral fiber as a consumer. IF ONLY WE HAD ALL JUST LISTENED TO CALRIS. (No)
You do know that a Windows license costs money right? When you buy a computer it is factored into the price. Or do you get your Windows copy free from some magical place? (I'm so sorry, I have a hard time not sounding snarky) So the same thing applies to Windows as it applies to Steam (albeit progressively larger amounts as you get more games for steam), if you cannot agree to the terms of service the service will be made unavailable or you'll have to stop using it (in the case of windows) because just using it is agreeing to the terms of service. Not saying you're outright wrong but the terms of service has become a necessary precaution by large, and many small, companies to have a measure of security against lawsuits, both frivolous and legitimate. Sometimes when I read a ToS I get paranoid but if it is a company I trust or a product I really need/want I agree anyway because the odds of getting backstabbed by these is less than being hit by lightning unless you're doing something wrong. That's my reasoning atleast (and I really want to play some new game, that new game being Starbound ).
Option 3 would be the best in my opinion though i'm perfectly fine with 2. Anyway, does this mean that starbound would be made purchasable on steam directly or must I still buy it from this site to get the steam key?
I bought 4 copies of Starbound because I wanted to enter Beta and play with my friends (LAN) who don't have enough money to buy it for themself. Not one of them has or wants to install Steam (two dont't even have Internet at home). I would be quite sad if we couldn't play the beta together. It would be a shame if users who paid for the game would have a disadvantage to people to pirate illegal copies which don't need steam. I always wanted to play Terraria with them but because of steam it was never possible.
