And there's no way at this very second to emancipate your games from Steam. I'm absolutely sure nobody's ever taken it upon themselves to figure out how to do this.
This really seems like the only bad thing people consistently say about Steam's service, and the tune is starting to get really old.
My problem with Crysis was that they had a specific limit to their "vision" I could stand outside that radius and shoot a guy until he died and he would simply stand there not moving. It was very disappointing for me.
He's saying that he uses pirating to cull out all the worthwhile entertainment. I have spent a LARGE amount of money on very disappointing entertainment (music, movies, games, whatever) where the sample (30-second song bite or 30-minute game demo) looked great, but the remainder was absolute trash. I would love to have the whole product to see if it's worth a purchase.
This method allows your money to go to people who truly deserve it and not people who simply have good marketing departments.
I don't disagree with you. I feel that if you purchase a game, you should be able to play it right when you get home.
But if you didn't want to eat pizza until Friday night but your roommates ate it all Wednesday night, who do you blame? The fridge because it doesn't have a lock?
It's the vendor's fault for offering the company's product before the company requested it, not the company's fault for not calling each vendor to ensure that their product isn't on the shelf.
1) The article cited that if you charge LESS for a game, you make MORE. Presumably, more money to pay for higher quality content.
2) Many of the AAA games that I've played over the past few years I have been vastly disappointed with. I have found the "good" games (such at Team Fortress 2, Left 4 Dead, WoW, and Supreme Commander) to be much more fun than the "premium" games (such as GTA IV, Crysis, Spore, Quake 4, Doom 3 (yeah, I'm dating myself a bit there)).
This isn't an argument about "Game cost more because we need to pay our development"... this is an argument for "Games cost too much because everyone else charges X amount and we don't want to make out product seem 'cheap'."
I have a strong feeling that if Valve dissolved, along with Steam they would offer an unlock or some similar solution to this. Unless every single person working at Valve decided to get into professional miming or something similar where they have NO contact with the gaming community. There would be such a backlash if Gabe folded Valve, didn't have some contingency plan for Steam, and then went off to make a new game company.
As for the internet connection for single player games. Yes, it's annoying. But consider these points: 1) How often are you WITHOUT an internet connection, especially someone who downloads games off the internet for a fee. 2) You can boot Steam in "offline" mode, which allows you to run your games without pinging Steam.
And for your last problem with server problems. I would assume that you have to opt-into saving games on server, and it would probably even still continually keep a version of that save on your local disk. Save games usually aren't very large.
There are already a myriad ways of tracking you, through your phone even. Since it broadcasts what tower it's currently using. Sure it's not accurate like GPS, but you can still get a general idea where the phone carrier is. Tell you what: When Google's toy program turns America into a Dystopian police state, I'll use one of my regulated e-mail chits to send you a formal apology for my narrow-minded thinking.
Please, I have no trust for people I don't know and I don't expect them to be altruistic with the information they might possess. Maybe I'm in the Ignorance is Bliss mindset, but this is something I simply don't worry about. Personally, I don't care for Latitude, it's a neat idea, but not something I feel will benefit my everyday life in any capacity. I'm not disagreeing with you, I guess, I just don't feel that there is some malicious force out there silently pacing, waiting for the technology to constantly track my movements to be available.
It may be naive, but it's also more realistic than thinking someone is actively watching where you go in hopes you slip up somewhere. You also realize that this is something you opt in to. Meaning that unless someone LoJacks your phone you're really in no danger from The Man knowing where you are, and that has nothing to do with Latitude.
Don't worry: you (or I, or most of us for that matter) really aren't important enough to anyone for them to waste their time poking us.
Continue to go about your day.
You do realize you have to opt into this right? It's not like they're gonna hax your phone and suddenly everyone knows where you are (though many tinfoil hat people already believe that.)
Besides, I've been rooting for Google to take over the world for years now. I know it's just a matter of time.
Slashdot Mirror
I would say if you won the lottery even once you'd have a much higher chance, statistically, to nail a super model.
And there's no way at this very second to emancipate your games from Steam. I'm absolutely sure nobody's ever taken it upon themselves to figure out how to do this.
This really seems like the only bad thing people consistently say about Steam's service, and the tune is starting to get really old.
I have a fear that the $50/year is just to USE the service and the games themselves would be an additional charge.
Honestly, I feel that this would be a great service if the issues everyone else is mentioning are ironed out.
If nothing else, if it does go mainstream, I'd be interested in checking it out.
Touche, random internet person, touche.
Or has this already happened?
It's already happened several times, actually.
No, this was right when the game came out, so I don't think there were any patches at all. Maybe I'll try it again some day.
My problem with Crysis was that they had a specific limit to their "vision" I could stand outside that radius and shoot a guy until he died and he would simply stand there not moving. It was very disappointing for me.
Maybe my game was bugged or something.
Actually, the first thing I read when I saw "Ponn Farr" was "Porn Star" ... so I thought that things were getting a bit off base right there.
Oh no, you used Steam and DRM in the same sentence, here comes the stampede! *runs for cover*
He's saying that he uses pirating to cull out all the worthwhile entertainment. I have spent a LARGE amount of money on very disappointing entertainment (music, movies, games, whatever) where the sample (30-second song bite or 30-minute game demo) looked great, but the remainder was absolute trash. I would love to have the whole product to see if it's worth a purchase.
This method allows your money to go to people who truly deserve it and not people who simply have good marketing departments.
Man, that question applies to a lot more things than just video games.
I don't disagree with you. I feel that if you purchase a game, you should be able to play it right when you get home.
But if you didn't want to eat pizza until Friday night but your roommates ate it all Wednesday night, who do you blame? The fridge because it doesn't have a lock?
It's the vendor's fault for offering the company's product before the company requested it, not the company's fault for not calling each vendor to ensure that their product isn't on the shelf.
You're forgetting two things:
1) The article cited that if you charge LESS for a game, you make MORE. Presumably, more money to pay for higher quality content.
2) Many of the AAA games that I've played over the past few years I have been vastly disappointed with. I have found the "good" games (such at Team Fortress 2, Left 4 Dead, WoW, and Supreme Commander) to be much more fun than the "premium" games (such as GTA IV, Crysis, Spore, Quake 4, Doom 3 (yeah, I'm dating myself a bit there)).
This isn't an argument about "Game cost more because we need to pay our development"... this is an argument for "Games cost too much because everyone else charges X amount and we don't want to make out product seem 'cheap'."
If the price drops, everyone benefits.
I have a strong feeling that if Valve dissolved, along with Steam they would offer an unlock or some similar solution to this. Unless every single person working at Valve decided to get into professional miming or something similar where they have NO contact with the gaming community. There would be such a backlash if Gabe folded Valve, didn't have some contingency plan for Steam, and then went off to make a new game company. As for the internet connection for single player games. Yes, it's annoying. But consider these points: 1) How often are you WITHOUT an internet connection, especially someone who downloads games off the internet for a fee. 2) You can boot Steam in "offline" mode, which allows you to run your games without pinging Steam. And for your last problem with server problems. I would assume that you have to opt-into saving games on server, and it would probably even still continually keep a version of that save on your local disk. Save games usually aren't very large.
I don't see how Valve upholding a mutual agreement whilst some stores decide to break it lays the onus on Valve here.
There are already a myriad ways of tracking you, through your phone even. Since it broadcasts what tower it's currently using. Sure it's not accurate like GPS, but you can still get a general idea where the phone carrier is. Tell you what: When Google's toy program turns America into a Dystopian police state, I'll use one of my regulated e-mail chits to send you a formal apology for my narrow-minded thinking.
Please, I have no trust for people I don't know and I don't expect them to be altruistic with the information they might possess. Maybe I'm in the Ignorance is Bliss mindset, but this is something I simply don't worry about. Personally, I don't care for Latitude, it's a neat idea, but not something I feel will benefit my everyday life in any capacity. I'm not disagreeing with you, I guess, I just don't feel that there is some malicious force out there silently pacing, waiting for the technology to constantly track my movements to be available.
It may be naive, but it's also more realistic than thinking someone is actively watching where you go in hopes you slip up somewhere. You also realize that this is something you opt in to. Meaning that unless someone LoJacks your phone you're really in no danger from The Man knowing where you are, and that has nothing to do with Latitude.
Don't worry: you (or I, or most of us for that matter) really aren't important enough to anyone for them to waste their time poking us. Continue to go about your day.
Well the '?' means that there's a question. The summary gave the conclusion to that question.
Hell, we were BORN out of a partially nude woman, I don't see what the problem is here.
You do realize you have to opt into this right? It's not like they're gonna hax your phone and suddenly everyone knows where you are (though many tinfoil hat people already believe that.) Besides, I've been rooting for Google to take over the world for years now. I know it's just a matter of time.
Stop global wind entropy!
More like 2 minutes amirite?
This is like if someone mixed the movies Office Space and Fight Club together!