Steam!
|
Sorry, I meant a source regarding your statement that Steam does something "similar". I've heard of the $40k figure for MS's platform.
The whole "short term, temporary license" doesn't worry me one bit. As ugly as EULAs like that are, ugly EULA terms are hardly a new thing, and regarding Steam, at the moment it looks like just paranoia (and it's really not in Valve's interest to let it become a real, practical concern). Were Valve ever to disable one of my games for no reason, I'd just crack it or download a pirate copy; the effect on me would be minimal. And I'm less certain about this one, but I've at least never heard of Valve "terminating an account for cheating in TF2", either (VAC bans are not account bans), but then I think you'd have to be a moron to cheat in a VAC-secured game anyway. Last edited by GusTheCrocodile#5954 on Feb 16, 2012, 2:52:34 AM
|
|
|
I agree with truekaiser, but he fact is this game is free-to-play and Im not sure if steam will even permit a free-to-play game on their game lists. To me, that is what it comes down to, not whether people or the devs want it on steam, but if it is even allowed and would the devs lose money by doing so.
Last edited by WatchdogTimer#2787 on Feb 16, 2012, 4:25:45 PM
|
|
" Do you..even read your own links? that last one there, they blatantly said that Steam is a good idea and that it doesn't cost buckets of money. "Those systems [Xbox Live and PSN] as great as they are, they're still closed," Schafer said. "You have to jump through a lot of hoops, even for important stuff like patching and supporting your game. Those are things we really want to do, but we can't do it on these systems. I mean, it costs $40,000 to put up a patch – we can't afford that! Open systems like Steam, that allow us to set our own prices, that's where it's at, and doing it completely alone like Minecraft. That's where people are going." Bolded for emphasis. |
|
|
I seem to be wrong, I have forgotten how many free games there are on steam... btw here's a list if anyone wants it http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=851573
but does anyone think it will be worth it to put it on steam |
|
" reading comprehension fail. they can set their own prices for the game. doesn't say if the full sdk for steam integration costs anything or not. sure there are free games on it but those can and are available elsewhere too. let me state this again, there are free games on there that just let steam launch it. and then there are integrated games such as deus ex human revolution where steam is required to run. using steam as a distribution platform means the developers have to accept and abide by what they want as far as patching routines and how to patch. this same question is brought up in relation to minecraft and when notch was in charge his answer was simple. he would not release it on steam as steam's policy on how to update contradicted their own set up for patching and the game's account system. the same thing applies here. |
|
" Wow, welcome to the 20th century. Have you ever seen an EULA before? 1. Of course you don't own Steam. This is true for most software. 2. That's the Steam EULA. That's describing Steam, not the licensing of software distributed by Steam. 3. Here's the roughly equivalent bit in POE's TOS, lol. " "You have three links to articles about the xbox360. All three articles report a line from the same interview. All three articles note that Tim Schafer said that Steam is better than the xbox/psn system. Are you aware that Steam is not a Microsoft product, that it is in no way related to the xbox? Are you going to launch that reading comprehension fail line again? Seriously? Hell, a quick google shows notch didn't specifically say anything about patching and steam: http://notch.tumblr.com/post/9550850116/why-no-steam-notch " It's rather ambiguous as to what about Steam's dev policies are in conflict with his. Furthermore, he was (is?) in talks with Valve regarding making it work. In conclusion, find a better source that clearly explains what about Steam's patching system or account system or anything is bad or expensive or otherwise incompatible with POE. Also, read a book. |
|
"Yes, to use a service you have to agree to its terms. Woo. That's a far cry from the "Steam does something similar to charging $40k to patch a game" scaremongering you were throwing around earlier. |
|
|
I really only use steam as much as I do because of the sales. Almost every game in my library is either the result of a sale, or has steamworks protection even when a physical copy is purchased.
I don't really think steam is really necessary for PoE, considering that it's free already. Come to think of it though, it would do wonders for the game's exposure. |
|
|
caps, you don't seem to understand the difference between claiming ownership of the art and code 'copyright'. which is what the p.o.e.'s eula states. and saying we 'own' that part of your hard drive pertaining X game you paid for and doing what we want with it. also you did not read the entire t.o.s. that part does indeed pertain to the software.
here is the complete section as linked to before i put the quote for people like you who seem to lack the pataince or comprehension to read it. " roughly translated the first two paragraphs state they take complete ownership of the data on your hard drive pertaining to the games and are only giving you a license to access them. this is called software as a service. the rest is giving you the right to freely distribute the steam client as long as you; don't charge anyone for it, modify it, or claim it as your own. GusTheCrocodile, and part of those conditions is the developing company paying for the use of the sdk for the system and/or specific features. the $40,000 is whats called a example of the common practice. in this case part of the xbox live / games for windows agreement for the developer. valve will of course not be exactly like it, but they do charge for complete integration. because it is using their intellectual property and they aren't exactly releasing it under a foss license. |
|
|
Yes, they quite possibly do charge, for all we know. But two things: one, there are a whole range of values inbetween zero and $40,000, many of which it'd be pretty unreasonable to call similar. Two, you've now switched to talking about charging "for integration", as opposed to for patching. There's a massive difference between a one-off fee and charging every patch.
Of course Valve put some restriction on developers. And for all we know, yes, they could be prohibitive for some developers. But they also may not be. Without any details whatsoever, assuming Valve's terms are horrible is not just pointless, it's completely irrational. |
|
