steam fanboyism

[QUOTE="LongZhiZi"][QUOTE="tempest91"]

So, if someone has 100+ DD games on their PC, you can't empathize with them not wanting to run 5-6 clients simultaneously when they could very easily have just run 1, and that one is currently the best client out there by nearly all given standards. Why is that so unbelievable?

tempest91

Not an outrage that EA is trying the same thing, but just that origin is terrible in comparison. We have experienced a better client running EA games, and now that is taken away and we are forced to use a second, and by many standards, less desirable one. Why is that not a negative?

My only problem with Steam is that it's kind of bloated. My games run better when I kill the Steam client every time. If a game doesn't go through Steam, it becomes a little more enticing for me.

I think GFWL is the reason people dont want another bloody client. Steam is all we need.

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="LongZhiZi"] I don't understand why you are annoyed to have multiple clients to load up games, but you don't mind having one (Steam) FORCED upon you and everyone else. Why should Steam be my game launching client? Why can't it be Raptr? Or Xfire? Or whatever I want it to be. I'm opposed to having to use ANY client to load games (note the word 'load', not 'buy,' 'update,' or 'activate'). Why do you find it acceptable for Steam to force itself upon you but outraged that Origin/someone else would try to the same trick?LongZhiZi

Why not? One (forced) is preferable to multiple (also forced, a la Origin).

Steam has become more than a "game launching client" and has moved into the realm of a service. It provides services other than launching my games.

It's frustrating (not outraging) that another service would do the same, as they are trying to offer games, yet those late to the party are simply withholding in order to gain the advantage.

Erm... Not at all. I'm talking about a single launch client, which you specified by stating "but you don't mind having one (Steam)". To which I stated that one (forced) is preferable to multiple (forced).

Of course no forced clients is best, however then we have no unified service. Like I stated "It provides services other than launching my games".

I really don't like having to repeat myself for no reason :?

Its the community also of steam and ease of it all, comparing it to you liking Best Buy is totally differnt, its more comparable to xboxlive or psn.

At the same time though, I still wont miss out on great games like DIablo3, BF3,etc.. just because they are not on steam.

I know some of my friends though dont want to buy games from anywhere else, as one Digital Download spot is enough for them, thats why they want it on steam.

Yeah Steam fanboyism is pretty bad. It's like these kids want a monopoly. They are the onces that paid 45 for Deus Ex when GMG had it for 34 for the longest time. Let them miss out of BF3, who cares really. I don't want to play with such narrow minded gamers.

I have a friend that is a good example for this. He's a massive AC fan, so I told him Revelations can be bought on GMG for 34 and he said no he will just buy it off Steam. I was like ok smart guy lol.

[QUOTE="LongZhiZi"][QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

Why not? One (forced) is preferable to multiple (also forced, a la Origin).

Steam has become more than a "game launching client" and has moved into the realm of a service. It provides services other than launching my games.

It's frustrating (not outraging) that another service would do the same, as they are trying to offer games, yet those late to the party are simply withholding in order to gain the advantage.

lundy86_4

Erm... Not at all. I'm talking about a single launch client, which you specified by stating "but you don't mind having one (Steam)". To which I stated that one (forced) is preferable to multiple (forced).

Of course no forced clients is best, however then we have no unified service. Like I stated "It provides services other than launching my games".

I really don't like having to repeat myself for no reason :?

company of heroes needs another client along with steam....people just hate EA, and I am sure other games on steam require another client. also gotta include MMOs. I am sure they don't update through steam

company of heroes needs another client along with steam....people just hate EA, and I am sure other games on steam require another client. also gotta include MMOs. I am sure they don't update through steam

gamer-adam1

So you're stating more than one game needs multiple clients... So? I'm simply saying that one launch and service client is better than multiple.

Yeah Steam fanboyism is pretty bad. It's like these kids want a monopoly. They are the onces that paid 45 for Deus Ex when GMG had it for 34 for the longest time. Let them miss out of BF3, who cares really. I don't want to play with such narrow minded gamers. I have a friend that is a good example for this. He's a massive AC fan, so I told him Revelations can be bought on GMG for 34 and he said no he will just buy it off Steam. I was like ok smart guy lol.

Why people don't want to support BF3 for requiring origin and not being on Steam is simple. A few people have already explained the reasons and other seem to ignore them as stupid or ignorant. It's simple...

1) The more crap you have installed/running on your computer just causes more problems. Blue-screen-of-deaths happen because of user error. Completely different story when you talk about buy a game from different stores from buy a game from different DD services.

2) People like to have all of their games in one list, one program to have running in the background. For me I have Steam start up during the start up of my computer. It's nice to know where everything is, having only 1 password and being able to install your games on other computers with ease.

3) People want to stick with a better more relaible service and something that has been great. Loyalty for companies are made in the years of great service, and no point in switching to something else when you are perfect and happy.

4) People like to have thins simple no matter what, adding another program and DD service to someone's computer makes people iffy about doing it. They don't know if it'll be safe, reliable and supported years later. People want to know that their money is safe and being used wisely. Like I said people will stay at their prefered store.

4) Things that are more framiliar are nicer and prefered, sometimes people don't care if they can't get a certain product and just get other things (or their usual) at their prefered store/place.

5) The fact that BF3 isn't really turning out to be the amazing game we thought it was going to be. The fact that it won't be on Steam is just another side effect, not the main reason for not buying the game.

6) Starcraft 2 is another example of a game I didn't support being of Blizzard's terrible Battlenet 2.0. I just stuck with playing Starcraft 1 from time to time instead of supporting a service I don't like.

[QUOTE="gamer-adam1"]

company of heroes needs another client along with steam....people just hate EA, and I am sure other games on steam require another client. also gotta include MMOs. I am sure they don't update through steam

lundy86_4

So you're stating more than one game needs multiple clients... So? I'm simply saying that one launch and service client is better than multiple.

I was just saying its not a big deal, I do think all PC games should work on any service, and you should not be forced to use one over another. someone should make a client, that takes all of your games puts it into one place, and hides there clients from view, so it feels you are only using 1 client

I was just saying its not a big deal, I do think all PC games should work on any service, and you should not be forced to use one over another. someone should make a client, that takes all of your games puts it into one place, and hides there clients from view, so it feels you are only using 1 client

gamer-adam1

Ahhhh, I see. I do agree, if only publishers would not be so greedy as to create their own services for distribution. There are advantages to an open system, and there are down sides, as seen.

[QUOTE="Slashkice"]

[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"]it's not as much "not being on sale on steam" as it is "not being on my steam library, where i can access all my games, and not having support for steam in-game, thus keeping me from chatting with friends, checking the internet, steam achievements, among other features. not that i'm not getting it, i already have it pre-purchased, but there are very good reasons to be mad at this.wis3boi

Technically you can get most of those things to work just by adding the game as a shortcut to Steam. It's mostly a matter of principle. While EA are acting like morons, and Origin is just a poor service at the moment, it's not like it's GFWL where the service you're forced to use can randomly delete your save files.

Why people don't want to support BF3 for requiring origin and not being on Steam is simple. A few people have already explained the reasons and other seem to ignore them as stupid or ignorant. It's simple...

1) The more crap you have installed/running on your computer just causes more problems. Blue-screen-of-deaths happen because of user error. Completely different story when you talk about buy a game from different stores from buy a game from different DD services.

2) People like to have all of their games in one list, one program to have running in the background. For me I have Steam start up during the start up of my computer. It's nice to know where everything is, having only 1 password and being able to install your games on other computers with ease.

3) People want to stick with a better more relaible service and something that has been great. Loyalty for companies are made in the years of great service, and no point in switching to something else when you are perfect and happy.

4) People like to have thins simple no matter what, adding another program and DD service to someone's computer makes people iffy about doing it. They don't know if it'll be safe, reliable and supported years later. People want to know that their money is safe and being used wisely. Like I said people will stay at their prefered store.

4) Things that are more framiliar are nicer and prefered, sometimes people don't care if they can't get a certain product and just get other things (or their usual) at their prefered store/place.

5) The fact that BF3 isn't really turning out to be the amazing game we thought it was going to be. The fact that it won't be on Steam is just another side effect, not the main reason for not buying the game.

6) Starcraft 2 is another example of a game I didn't support being of Blizzard's terrible Battlenet 2.0. I just stuck with playing Starcraft 1 from time to time instead of supporting a service I don't like.

Stream_Beta

Steam is all hype, because its not on steam you shouldn't play it? this is worse than judging a game of how fun it will be before it comes out. pretty much all your points sums up to, if its not on steam don't play it.

I got impluse for Sins of the solar empire, awesme game, I don't even think Impluse needs to be open to run it, nether does GFW. Steam is the only service thats open all the time.

whats wrong with Battlenet 2

[QUOTE="Stream_Beta"]

Why people don't want to support BF3 for requiring origin and not being on Steam is simple. A few people have already explained the reasons and other seem to ignore them as stupid or ignorant. It's simple...

1) The more crap you have installed/running on your computer just causes more problems. Blue-screen-of-deaths happen because of user error. Completely different story when you talk about buy a game from different stores from buy a game from different DD services.

2) People like to have all of their games in one list, one program to have running in the background. For me I have Steam start up during the start up of my computer. It's nice to know where everything is, having only 1 password and being able to install your games on other computers with ease.

3) People want to stick with a better more relaible service and something that has been great. Loyalty for companies are made in the years of great service, and no point in switching to something else when you are perfect and happy.

4) People like to have thins simple no matter what, adding another program and DD service to someone's computer makes people iffy about doing it. They don't know if it'll be safe, reliable and supported years later. People want to know that their money is safe and being used wisely. Like I said people will stay at their prefered store.

4) Things that are more framiliar are nicer and prefered, sometimes people don't care if they can't get a certain product and just get other things (or their usual) at their prefered store/place.

5) The fact that BF3 isn't really turning out to be the amazing game we thought it was going to be. The fact that it won't be on Steam is just another side effect, not the main reason for not buying the game.

6) Starcraft 2 is another example of a game I didn't support being of Blizzard's terrible Battlenet 2.0. I just stuck with playing Starcraft 1 from time to time instead of supporting a service I don't like.

gamer-adam1

Steam is all hype, because its not on steam you shouldn't play it? this is worse than judging a game of how fun it will be before it comes out. pretty much all your points sums up to, if its not on steam don't play it.

I got impluse for Sins of the solar empire, awesme game, I don't even think Impluse needs to be open to run it, nether does GFW. Steam is the only service thats open all the time.

whats wrong with Battlenet 2

The fact that you don't know what is wrong with Battlenet 2.0 basically makes everything else you said VOID.

why in the hell wont you buy a game because you cant get it in one store? I like best buy but i will go els where to buy my games. Why does bf3 HAVE to be on steam? Steam is going to end up with a monoploy which never ends well for the consumers. Why so much loyalty to a store?

dontshackzmii

I don't think its bad to play BF3 without steam.. I kinda prefer that way, I like to play games without the steam overlay on the background.

The problem is that EA is forcing us to use origin to play the game. That's all the fuzz is about, I guess.

I have been seeing many comments about bf3 saying " no steam no buy" why in the hell wont you buy a game because you cant get it in one store? I like best buy but i will go els where to buy my games. Why does bf3 HAVE to be on steam? Steam is going to end up with a monoploy which never ends well for the consumers. Why so much loyalty to a store?

dontshackzmii

I dont want to have different game programs all over the place, I want everything in one localised place on my computer. Instead I will end up with a program from each publisher under the sun!

Not a big PC gamer personally, despite spendng more time with WoW than most other games I've played combined, but I like having most of my PC games on my steam library.

Ubisoft StoreShadowDeathX

I prefer retail, but Steam is always a nice second option to get games at a nice sale price, or to get titles that aren't sold in the stores anymore.

[QUOTE="Arach666"]

i have a hate for digital games and monopoly's its nothing personal.

Onlive and steam are not even close to being in the same boat onlive is much different its gaming on demand.

dontshackzmii

[QUOTE="tempest91"]

I think that it's mostly due to people not wanting to use EA's DD service origin because it's terrible. At least it was for the alpha. Who knows, maybe that will change before the game launches, but right now, Steam is 1000 times better. Physical copies are always there, but for some Steam is the best option and it sucks that they won't make it available for those who prefer that service.

dontshackzmii

It just came out so calling it bad is unfair. Most of these guys are just fan boys to valve. The game will play the same so why does it matter where you get it?

No clue.

I dislike DD.

[QUOTE="tempest91"]

[QUOTE="LongZhiZi"] Ok, now I believe there's selective reading going on, so I'm just going to condense it into one simple question. Why is it okay for Valve to force you to run Steam every time you want to play a game bought through Steam or has Steamworks but it's an absolute outrage when EA is trying to the same thing with Origin?LongZhiZi

Not an outrage that EA is trying the same thing, but just that origin is terrible in comparison. We have experienced a better client running EA games, and now that is taken away and we are forced to use a second, and by many standards, less desirable one. Why is that not a negative?

Wait, you accuse me of selective reading, then completely misinterpret what I say and put words in my mouth? Bravo. I never said anything to the efffect, good try though. I mrerely said that EA was already on Steam and doing fine, and now they are unnecessarily making us use a second client without any advantage, but actually a worse experience. How is that encouraging mulitple clients exactly?

Origins is bad...really bad.

I find Origin very expensive and hard to navigate, plus I find there are more specials on steam. If I can find a game cheaper else were though, then I'll buy it from there not Steam.

[QUOTE="gamer-adam1"]

[QUOTE="Stream_Beta"]

Why people don't want to support BF3 for requiring origin and not being on Steam is simple. A few people have already explained the reasons and other seem to ignore them as stupid or ignorant. It's simple...

1) The more crap you have installed/running on your computer just causes more problems. Blue-screen-of-deaths happen because of user error. Completely different story when you talk about buy a game from different stores from buy a game from different DD services.

2) People like to have all of their games in one list, one program to have running in the background. For me I have Steam start up during the start up of my computer. It's nice to know where everything is, having only 1 password and being able to install your games on other computers with ease.

3) People want to stick with a better more relaible service and something that has been great. Loyalty for companies are made in the years of great service, and no point in switching to something else when you are perfect and happy.

4) People like to have thins simple no matter what, adding another program and DD service to someone's computer makes people iffy about doing it. They don't know if it'll be safe, reliable and supported years later. People want to know that their money is safe and being used wisely. Like I said people will stay at their prefered store.

4) Things that are more framiliar are nicer and prefered, sometimes people don't care if they can't get a certain product and just get other things (or their usual) at their prefered store/place.

5) The fact that BF3 isn't really turning out to be the amazing game we thought it was going to be. The fact that it won't be on Steam is just another side effect, not the main reason for not buying the game.

6) Starcraft 2 is another example of a game I didn't support being of Blizzard's terrible Battlenet 2.0. I just stuck with playing Starcraft 1 from time to time instead of supporting a service I don't like.

Stream_Beta

Steam is all hype, because its not on steam you shouldn't play it? this is worse than judging a game of how fun it will be before it comes out. pretty much all your points sums up to, if its not on steam don't play it.

I got impluse for Sins of the solar empire, awesme game, I don't even think Impluse needs to be open to run it, nether does GFW. Steam is the only service thats open all the time.

whats wrong with Battlenet 2

The fact that you don't know what is wrong with Battlenet 2.0 basically makes everything else you said VOID.

I play lots of SC2 and haven't found any problems

[QUOTE="starwarsjunky"]call me a fanboy if you like, but i just like having all my games in one place.AncientDozer

[QUOTE="LongZhiZi"][QUOTE="topgunmv"]

I don't care about whether a game uses steam or not. What I do care about is having to install another stupid game client on my computer. I already have games for windows live and steam, I don't need a third app in my system tray.

What if I buy an ea game through steam that runs on games for windows live but requires me to be logged into origin to play multiplayer or something?

I don't need to be cluster ****** by 3 different programs to play a game.

tempest91

So, if someone has 100+ DD games on their PC, you can't empathize with them not wanting to run 5-6 clients simultaneously when they could very easily have just run 1, and that one is currently the best client out there by nearly all given standards. Why is that so unbelievable?

I have hundreds of PC games, installed all right now from many different sources including retail. No client starts on my PC at boot. ZERO. I launch my games from the desktop, and if a client is needed it starts then. Steam, GFWL, D2D (no client is needed after d/l and install!) all work like this. All this talk about too many clients is ****ing nonsense. I'm more opposed to putting in a DVD when I have hundreds of games that launch with a click (even if a small prgram launches with it :roll: )

Wan't a single place to keep track of and launch all your PC games? You already have it. It's called Windows.

No Steam no buy is stupid. Its a service to let you play games. If you have a way to play a game you want and you avoid it because you can't use steam you are not fan of games. It is a great service though which shouldn't be overlooked.

I don't have a "I only purchase games on Steam" attitude.

I generally get games from the cheapest source, be it my local store, Amazon, D2D, Steam, etc..

I also have GoG and GFWL installed (hate GFWL though, terrible service).

I won't buy BF3 because I refuse to bow my head before EA and have Origin (another terrible service) forced on me. I don't care missing out on BF3, there are tons of awesome games I can buy instead. Moreover, I don't like the direction taken by Bioware since they got swallowed by EA, and that's another reason for me to enjoy not giving them additional money.

I like Steam for the convenience of having many games centralized on it (and the possibility to install them on another computer when I'm not at home), because I've got a decent friend list on it, and above all for the awesome sales.

If someone wants to label me "Steam fanboy" because of this, I don't give a damn. I game how I ****ing want. EA is losing a sale by making Origin mandatory; I'm not losing anything since I don't consider BF3 the second coming of Christ. And I'm laughing hard in advance, waiting for EA to blame the lost sales on piracy rather than this poor decision.

Wait, you accuse me of selective reading, then completely misinterpret what I say and put words in my mouth? Bravo. I never said anything to the efffect, good try though. I mrerely said that EA was already on Steam and doing fine, and now they are unnecessarily making us use a second client without any advantage, but actually a worse experience. How is that encouraging mulitple clients exactly?

tempest91

So, if someone has 100+ DD games on their PC, you can't empathize with them not wanting to run 5-6 clients simultaneously when they could very easily have just run 1, and that one is currently the best client out there by nearly all given standards. Why is that so unbelievable?tempest91

[QUOTE="LongZhiZi"]

Erm... Not at all. I'm talking about a single launch client, which you specified by stating "but you don't mind having one (Steam)". To which I stated that one (forced) is preferable to multiple (forced).

Of course no forced clients is best, however then we have no unified service. Like I stated "It provides services other than launching my games".

I really don't like having to repeat myself for no reason :?

lundy86_4

But seriously, the "service" aspect of any digital distributor is more or less the same- downloading the games. I can't really think of anything Steam does that cannot be achieved with another digital store and something like Raptr (or oddly enough, launched through Steam).