Ex-Starforce Publisher turns to STEAM!

I have always had a liking for NFL type computer games/sims - in fact I
owned a thing called Broderbund Playmaker Football b4 I even owned my 1st
PC. This is why I got the PC!

Anyway, I was keen to get NFL Head Coach by EA but it is not relesed in
Australia. It would have taken a few weeks to get it shipped by a local
company for an overall cost of $40 including postal costs. Then I realised I
could download it via EA Link and it only cost me $27. I only have a 512kb
connection and it took me over 24hrs to finally get the entire 2.1 GB down
but that is a lot better than the alternative. It's by far the cheapest non
bargain bin game I have ever purchased and there is no stuffing about
hunting a copy down or waiting for shipping.

This sort of thing is a great developement. The only thing is that
refunds/exchanges are a no go so you need to be sure it's what you want.


"Tim O" > wrote in message
...
> On 16 Nov 2006 23:41:57 -0800, "pc games" >
> wrote:
>
>>SimBin's "RACE - The Official WTCC Game" will be STEAM INFECTED!
>>http://www.race-game.org/
>
> I have HL2, and I'm not really pro or anti-STEAM yet, but I see this
> game being released on STEAM as a positive. I like race sims, and many
> of the World Touring and Rally sims are difficult to find in the US.
> Since the market isn't huge here, some are delayed by months after a
> European market push, and some don't make it here at all.
>
> This is one case where I welcome the availability to download. I've
> never once used a download service for a retail game. This might be
> the one.

"Hank the Rapper" wrote
> pc games wrote:

>> Ex-Starforce Publisher turns to STEAM!

> Wow! What else can he turn into?

Is he a Super hero?

Vince wrote:
> "Hank the Rapper" wrote
>> pc games wrote:
>
>>> Ex-Starforce Publisher turns to STEAM!
>
>> Wow! What else can he turn into?
>
> Is he a Super hero?
>

Is it some fog, is it a car exhaust on a cold morning, is it a bonfire,
no it's Steam Man ...

On Sun, 19 Nov 2006 12:18:32 GMT, JAB > wrote:

>Is it some fog, is it a car exhaust on a cold morning, is it a bonfire,
>no it's Steam Man ...

"Stop right there evil-do'ers, or I'll humidify you!"

"Well Starforce the version used in Retail PC Games is nothing
more than a disk based copy-protection system... yes it is
driver based, it creates incompatibility and stability issues
and overall its a major headache and inconvenience for users,
but that is it, it has no other reach."

Yeah, just like Diarheaa is only a minor inconvience.

Thanks for the monday-morning laugh!

-Larry

It's a good point though. If a developer goes under, one could lose access
to something they paid good money for.

It's already happened once in the Software industry.

The same thing applies to digital music downloads. You could spend $1000 on
music, and the music store could go under. With all the cut-throat dealing
going on in that industry right now, I have no doubt that someone,
eventually, will throw in the towel and the courts are gonna get a good
workout over it.

-Larry

"Andrew MacPherson" > wrote in message
news:memo.20061118133620.16760A@address_disguised. address_disguised...
> (zeez) wrote:
>
>> Any system that forces you to have to "talk" to a provider to
>> keep it running is a VERY BAD THING.
>
> In theory, yes. In practice, I'm sure it's unlikely Steam would just
> vanish without a parting shot of patches.
>
> Bottom line though... life's short, and we're talking about games, not a
> cure for cancer or throwing away thousands of lives in Iraq. The older I
> get, the harder I find it to get upset about gaming.
>
> Andrew McP
>

I dunno. Some people just care about such things as privacy and freedom. I
realize they ain't in-vogue these days, but some people do care.

-Larry

> wrote in message ...

> Usually the only people who yell the loudest about privacy and freedom,
> are
> those that have something to hide... like copying games.

Larry has brought this to us :
> I dunno. Some people just care about such things as privacy and freedom. I
> realize they ain't in-vogue these days, but some people do care.
>
> -Larry
>
> > wrote in message ...
>
>> Usually the only people who yell the loudest about privacy and freedom, are
>> those that have something to hide... like copying games.

I love freedom and privacy too, don't get me wrong, hell, I'm in the
military for crying out loud and defend it every day! I just don't
think every person out there is evil and trying to do sinister things
with my data.

His email struck me as paranoid and over the top. It's like the
NSA/CIA wiretapping overseas calls from terrorists fiasco, everyone was
screaming about privacy and freedom relating to that too, but if you're
talking to terrorists....

That was my point, if you scream the loudest, you are usually the one
doing wrong and not wanting to get caught.

Andrew MacPherson wrote:
> (zeez) wrote:
>
> > Any system that forces you to have to "talk" to a provider to
> > keep it running is a VERY BAD THING.
>
> In theory, yes. In practice, I'm sure it's unlikely Steam would just
> vanish without a parting shot of patches.
>

That is, if they decide to do this in the first place. Right now,
gamers can only *hope* that
if Steam goes under, that it will indeed release patches, rather than
just disappear one day leaving their customers hanging. I don't want to
invest hundreds or even thousands of dollars
in games with Steam only to find my self one day finding that I will no
longer be able to
play what I paid for if they decide to close down and skip town.

> Bottom line though... life's short, and we're talking about games, not a
> cure for cancer or throwing away thousands of lives in Iraq. The older I
> get, the harder I find it to get upset about gaming.

Well, I imagine you would still get POed if something you put alot of
money in became completely worthless and unusable. Bottom line, don't
rely on others to keep your software running, especialy a company.
>
> Andrew McP

Larry wrote:
> It's a good point though. If a developer goes under, one could lose access
> to something they paid good money for.
>
> It's already happened once in the Software industry.
>
> The same thing applies to digital music downloads. You could spend $1000 on
> music, and the music store could go under.

Great point. Thankfuly, the music can still be captured via analog,
and re recorded in
a non "protected" format. ( though there is a group of people
*cough*TRUSTEDCOMPUTINGGROUP*cough* that are working hard to close this
loophole, but it doeen't affect the current hardware on the market.)

> With all the cut-throat dealing
> going on in that industry right now, I have no doubt that someone,
> eventually, will throw in the towel and the courts are gonna get a good
> workout over it.
>

The dot-BOMB bubble of the late 1990's/early 2000's was a great lesson
on just why you don't want to put too much failth in companies.


> -Larry
>
> "Andrew MacPherson" > wrote in message
> news:memo.20061118133620.16760A@address_disguised. address_disguised...
> > (zeez) wrote:
> >
> >> Any system that forces you to have to "talk" to a provider to
> >> keep it running is a VERY BAD THING.
> >
> > In theory, yes. In practice, I'm sure it's unlikely Steam would just
> > vanish without a parting shot of patches.
> >
> > Bottom line though... life's short, and we're talking about games, not a
> > cure for cancer or throwing away thousands of lives in Iraq. The older I
> > get, the harder I find it to get upset about gaming.
> >
> > Andrew McP
> >