I didn't know anything about Civ 5, yet I had placed money that this thread had to be about some ridiculous DRM complaint. Good to see that I was right. Call me crazy, but I buy games based on how much fun they are and how easy they are to use. I have to log onto Steam ONCE, set it on offline mode, and I get to play fun games. If you don't have the internet at least one time in your life to run Steam on offline mode, then I'm not sure what the hell you're doing on an internet forum. I don't buy Ubisoft games because I'm not always connected to the internet when I want to play. The difference between the two of them is night and day.

You clearly don't understand how markets work. Games sold by one vendor isn't a bad idea. Larger vendors get to take advantage of economies of scale and that allows them to produce products at lower cost. This is a good thing. The fact that there is only one producer is not evidence of a "monopoly." It's evidence that the firm knows what consumers want and does a better job of providing it than competitors.

Your "higher" prices claim is absolutely nonsense, and you would know this if you used Steam. Steam FREQUENTLY offers games at substantial discount during weekend deals. Do you know why they do this? It's to maximize profits. There's more to maximizing profits that charging "higher prices." You have to take price elasticity into account. Steam is so versatile that their menu costs are practically nonexistent, and the EXTREMELY low transaction costs of buying games through it allows them to make profits by offering special deals. Almost EVERY single Steam game that I own was purchased at 75% discount. Retail outlets CANNOT profitably do this, and smaller online distros cannot offer them as frequently due to the fact that they are SMALLER.

End users always have the final say in games they don't like. They don't have to buy them. If consumers want something different then entrepreneurs will provide it. No one is forcing consumers to buy games they don't like.

In essence, stop worrying about the economics of the matter, because you really don't know what you're talking about. Just buy games because you have fun playing them. If the DRM is too inconvenient and makes games unplayable, then obviously don't buy them. On the other hand, if you're not buying a game from a vendor simply because they're a "monopoly," then you're cheating yourself out of a lot of fun. Your misguided notions are cheating you out of enjoying a TON of cool games, and that is where the REAL tragedy lies.

I agree that this is preety gay... I was really looking foward to civ 5.

Its so ironic though, cause I recently picked up a copy of civ4, because on the box it said "no drm"... and its great, no serial number to type in, hell, i dont even need the cd any more.... it was sweet...

and now... this...

eww.

I just cant buy anything from steam. They are just... they shit on us, and they can get some of us (see psot above) to get them to think that its ok.

horrible.

I have never have been shit on by Steam. Perhaps if you had indoor plumbing nearby (as I do) they could shit in that instead.

I know, I'm crazy for thinking that buying games at 75% discount is an awesome thing. I'm one of those weirdos that cares about maximizing the value of my hard-earned money instead of worrying about some friviolous DRM complaint.

Now you are just being rude. My understanding of economics are just fine. You dont listen to others but go for the easy insults. I am 38 years old, have 7 years of economic education after mandatory school and I work with developing Private Banking websolutions. That should be enough, but it isnt really relevant here. What is relevant is that one should be able to have an educational discussion without insults.

I love all the furor over Steamworks when Impulse sells Ubisoft games. Yeah, way to rally against DRM, when you yourself support draconian DRM that doesn't add ANY features. Steamworks is nothing more than Windows Live. The only difference is that Steam is a better distribution platform than Windows Live (yes, Windows Live does sell games).

I'll be happily playing this game. And when my clanmates need to fill our TF2 server, they can send me a Steam message me while I'm in a Civ 5 game, and I'll save, and leave to join them.

This isnt a rally against DRM (for me anyways). The problem is not that CIV V is on Steam. The problem is that it is Steam ONLY...

The only problem is that crazy Steam weekend deals have started only after Impulse started their weekend buy deals. So you really need some competition for customer interests.

I do listen to others. I'm pretty sure that I understand the anti-Steam arguments pretty well as I've heard them ad infinitum. I'm not trying to be rude. I'm being honest. In fact, I actually thought I was being helpful. I'm trying to show you guys that it's more important to buy games because they're fun rather than worry about the economics, because the economics are MUCH more complicated than most people here seem to think.

I'm getting a PhD in econ, but I agree that the level of education doesn't matter. Just buy games that are worth the money you spend on them. Otherwise you're cheating yourself from a great time.

No it's not. It uses Steamworks. They will be using 2k publishing for the in store copies.

Steamworks is not Steam. Steam is not Steamworks. Steamworks' best equivalent is Windows Live. The reason you don't see Steamworks on Impulse is because they choose not to support it (yet support Ubisoft's DRM). Any online distributor can sell the game; you just  have to eventually install Steam, just like you have to install Windows Live for some games. Of course, Stardock allows Ubisoft DRM, EA download manager, and Windows Live because their online distribution platforms are simply not as successful as Steam's.

It's all good business, but I wish people would stop pretending this is some holy crusade against the "evil" Steam.

Steam was offering 75% off deals before Impluse was even around. They were taking advantage of differing price elasticities of different consumers. It had nothing to do with direct competition from Impulse per se.

Hypocrisy to ask for a single player game to be (or have without extra modes like the "offline mode" of Steam) offline and don't force me to use the internet? And you dare to compare it with my right to enjoy the multiplayer game known as "Posting in a forum"? Next level raise your Perception skill. It lacks.

Don't be so humble. I can do it. You are.

Clearly you get on the internet at least once a day. Why is it such a big deal that you are asked to connect once? Is it such a big deal that you are willing to forgo great deals and awesome games? Clicking a button once while online just doesn't seem to that big of a deal when compared to the stuff you're missing out on. I've gotten to play tons of addicting games for a quarter of the cost. What did it cost me? I had to be online once. just once. and i had to click a button labelled "offline." That's hardly inconvenient.

Single player game in Impulse:

1) Open Impulse
2) Buy game
3) Download and install game
4) Close Impulse
5) Launch game, enjoy
6) Subsequent launching: just doubleclick on the desktop shortcut!

Single player game in Steam:
1) Open Steam
2) Buy game
3) Download and install game
4) Set Steam to offline mode
5) Launch game, enjoy
6) Subsequent launching: just doubleclick on the desktop shortcut! Steam will launch in offline mode, and then automatically start the game.

well, there you have it.

Regarding your post comparing impulse with steam. You forgot point 7. Steam will have to run for you to play even in offline mode. Impulse doesnt.

Sorry but that's not true. I've seen people on forums claim that Steam was doing weekend deals before Impulse (they don't provide evidence, they just insist that's the case despite archive.org making it pretty obvious that weekend deals didn't show up until AFTER Impulse came out).

Steam didn't start doing 75% off deals until AFTER Impulse did the 75% discount on Space Rangers 2 on Impulse. 

It's the same on the big huge Christmas sales.  No one has ever claimed that there weren't sales of some kind now and then. But it was Impulse's aggressive weekly sales and such that changed the game.

Personally, I don't have an issue with the "DRM" aspect of Steam. Steam works fine. I have it on my machine. I use it every day.

The issue is the lock-in to the Steam client. Steamworks could have been architected not to force the bundling of their store client. But it does. 

I like Steam. And as a developer, I appreciate what Steamworks provides. However, I do not want to be lending my support to something that is clearly designed to turn the PC into a closed platform.

If I make a game for the iPhone, I understand that I have to sell it on the App store (as a practical matter).  But as a PC developer and consumer, I don't want to see the PC become a closed platform.

If you take Steamworks to its logical conclusion, then in 5 years, the PC platform will be closed. If you want to make a PC game that will see a reasonable audience, you will have to sell it on Steam and accept whatever requirements Steam insists on. We already have people trying to pressure us to sell our titles on Steam (even though Steam takes about a third of the revenue on any title sold on it).

Let's be realistic here, in 5 years, if Steamworks and Steam were to completely dominate the market, there'd be no real reason to have games at retail. Putting games at retail is expensive.  Think that's a great thing for consumers? Think again.

If the PC were to become a closed platform, then as a developer, I might as well pick a closed platform where the the platform owner provides a lot more services to the developer (i.e. consoles, iPhone/iPad, etc.).  Why make a game for the PC, with all its headaches, if I'm going to ultimately be forced to sell it in one place?

Consumers are rarely aware of what they are missing in the absence of competition.

2KGames is certainly free to use whatever SDK they choose to and accept whatever strings come along to it. As a consumer and modder, I can choose not to support that. That's the beauty of the free market.