I've posted perfectly legitimate reasons for not wanting to use steam, only to be told that my reasons are rubbish (and I'm apparently also a bad person for having an unpopular opinion.) Seems to me that people are only asking for reasons so that they can argue about them and/or denigrate the person for the choice they've made. So forgive me if I don't rush to repeat my reasoning - you can find it if you look. To be perfectly frank, it doesn't matter what anyone thinks about my reasons for not using steam, because they're not the ones making that decision - I am. It doesn't matter if my reasons aren't good enough for them, because they don't need to make decisions based on those reasons - I do. If you like steam, I'm not stopping you using it. Go ahead, it doesn't hurt me in any way. Likewise, it doesn't hurt you if I don't use steam, so please be so kind as to let me make the choice that I want to, without recriminations about something which affects you not in the slightest amount. I initially shared my reasoning because sometimes people like to have alternative views to compare and contrast, because it often lets people get a better understanding of not only that other person's choices, but their own as well, by having several perspectives to view them from. But that requires having an open mind, and it seems that most people here don't want to think about other people's decisions - they'd rather have their own choices validated by having them repeated by everyone else. It seems most people here would rather believe that I made my choices for trivial reasons without actually having thought anything through, rather than it being the difficult choice that it is. Seriously, people. I know there are lots of games that are only available on steam. I do consider myself a gamer, so how on earth anyone can think that I haven't thought anything through before deliberately cutting myself off from a huge library of games is simply mind boggling. I am not a stupid person, and that should not be the first and last conclusion you reach about my position.
The gist of my previous post was basically: No, people aren't bad people for having personal feelings about any DRM ever, Quit acting like they are. Give them proper information and if they still have different feelings about it then you; Oh well, they have a differing opinion than you, world isn't going to end. Ironically the exact point as the post above me quoting my previous post. IRRRROOOOONNNYYYYY As for Calris, I applaud you for not having flimsy ideals that are swayed easily by text on the internet; Hate that shit more than anything. As for technical issues (and you know what you're talking about, not just talking through your white hole), if they don't listen then their fault for being stupid like that.
It does not matter as long as you release the beta for steam and update it on a regular basis . Thank you for your hard work
While you did say that personal choices are ok (which I appreciate, and separates you from a fair percentage of the people posting in this thread,) the main argument of your post was that anybody who doesn't use steam hasn't thought about that choice in any great depth because of <stuff>. See quote below. Hence my post - I hope it's clear that I have thought it through in fairly significant detail, and I haven't ignored anything. Also, I don't think steam is bad. That's something that a lot of people have been trying to argue as being something that my posts suggest - that I somehow think that steam is the devil. I don't. I am perfectly aware of the advantages of steam. I'm aware of the vast library of games. I'm aware of how easy it makes maintaining those games. I'm aware of steam sales, and being able to pick up loads of cheap games. I'm aware of all the social features that steam adds. I'm aware of the fact that developers like steam for its ease with patching, as well as it being so popular that some devs don't see the need to release on any other service. Gee, I sound like a steam advert. It's simply that my reasons for not using steam outweigh all of those reasons. It's not that I wouldn't like the features that steam has, or that I somehow don't rate any of those features as important or desirable, it's just that my personal reasons for not using steam are more important to me. I know that's mind blowing for a fair number of steam users, but as I said, I'm not an idiot. There are simply some things which I rate as more important than the average person. While there are undoubtedly some people who have irrational reasons for not using steam, people have to be careful about labeling anyone as 'silly' without having a much better understanding of where they're coming from. Those people may well have good reason for not using steam, but aren't as capable of verbalising their thought processes as others are. ToS and DRM. My issue with steam's ToS I've covered earlier. The issue in a nutshell there is that the steam ToS are a service agreement which ignores the fact that there are products inextricably entwined with that service. Products are generally covered by license agreements, not service agreements. Unlike service agreements, license agreements aren't subject to change. I'm not aware of any other service which ties products into a service agreement, with the possible exception of origin and its ilk which I'm even less likely to touch than steam. As for DRM, I avoid it wherever I possibly can. But DRM itself is not an absolute reason against me using something, and it largely depends on what the DRM is, and how much I value the product. Windows, for example, I consider a necessary evil if I ever hope to be able to play games. If games were available in the same numbers on linux as on windows, your head would spin at how fast I ditched windows. Unfortunately, it looks like gaming on linux is heading to be a steam monopoly, and I'm less unhappy using windows with no steam than I would be if I used linux with steam. But my gaming nirvana would be using linux to play DRM-free games. I live in hope. Thank you. I'd call them closed or narrow minded, rather than stupid though. I'm sure a lot of these people have brains, it's just that they don't want to listen to a different point of view.
I like option 4, we should definitely do that, everyones happy. (except the devs but screw them, they gave me a warn for telling someone to go die in a gutter.) (hoping no one takes this post seriously, I'm just fokling)
Ya'll need to chill the fuck out. I'm pretty sure everyone has made their choice, so no arguing, nothing ELSE to discuss, the thread has served it's purpose. Take that into much consideration.
But eighty pages worth isn't nearly enough incessant whining and bitching. Let's go for zeh record... whine it upppp! (still fokling)
I feel option 3 would be best, you all at the devs seem to know whats best as it is. Which ever helps get the game out solid is what I vote for, so however it is easiest to do
You can always wait until they get Steamplay to android. There's already many games released on Steam with android versions, and there's an android client. The next step is clear!
Steam makes one's life much easier when playing an early access or beta game. You get updated as soon as the update is out, and there is less mess in reporting problems. I can understand why some people might want a completely DRM-free version of the game, but as far as the Beta stage goes, I think people will come to appreciate Steam. If for some people Steam is an inconvenience due to connection requirements, they will not be enjoying the early Beta stages anyhow, when you have to constantly keep your copy up to date. So yeah, my vote would be for option 3 as well.
Totally do whatever makes management easiest for you guys. If I want to mess with this game super early into beta, I can jump through the hoops that requires - ultimately only the final copy of the game needs to have a DRM free version.
