Εγκατάσταση Steam
Σύνδεση
|
Γλώσσα
简体中文 (Απλοποιημένα κινεζικά)
繁體中文 (Παραδοσιακά κινεζικά)
日本語 (Ιαπωνικά)
한국어 (Κορεατικά)
ไทย (Ταϊλανδικά)
Български (Βουλγαρικά)
Čeština (Τσεχικά)
Dansk (Δανικά)
Deutsch (Γερμανικά)
English (Αγγλικά)
Español – España (Ισπανικά – Ισπανία)
Español – Latinoamérica (Ισπανικά – Λατινική Αμερική)
Français (Γαλλικά)
Italiano (Ιταλικά)
Bahasa Indonesia (Ινδονησιακά)
Magyar (Ουγγρικά)
Nederlands (Ολλανδικά)
Norsk (Νορβηγικά)
Polski (Πολωνικά)
Português (Πορτογαλικά – Πορτογαλία)
Português – Brasil (Πορτογαλικά – Βραζιλία)
Română (Ρουμανικά)
Русский (Ρωσικά)
Suomi (Φινλανδικά)
Svenska (Σουηδικά)
Türkçe (Τουρκικά)
Tiếng Việt (Βιετναμικά)
Українська (Ουκρανικά)
Αναφορά προβλήματος μετάφρασης
Alright, it seems we have argued past each other for a bit. What I disagree with is ignornig the distribution and DRM when trying to decide whether or not to buy a game, just because they don't downgrade the game content itself; because they do in fact mean you get less value for your money. I don't want to tell people to not buy games on Origin either. I'm merely arguing for informed purchase decisions. It often seems to me like the less tech-savvy people, and people who don't read forums like these, are deliberately misled by the publishers. I was for example thinking back at Ubisoft's "always-on"-protected games. People who understood what it meant knew it was an insult to paying customers, and predictably it never really worked. But I'm sure many people just wanted to play the new Settlers or SimCity, and didn't know how it would affect them very directly. My argument is that more people need to become aware of these things, rather than told to put up with them even if they hate it.
I don't have a personal problem with Origin either. But what it mostly boils down to, I think, are details like EA's reluctance to do real sales. Digital distribution saves publishers and retailers heaps in manufacturing and distribution. Online-based DRM means you no longer own your copies of any game, and that you're continued use of them is subject to third-party support you have no control over and that will one day inevitably end. Yet none of these factors are generally reflected in the base prices of either Steam or Origin. That's also what I mean by dropping quality. Yes, online activation in any shape or form is a drop in quality, any way you look at it. But the question is whether the price is adapted accordingly.
The difference between the two is Steam's frequent and attractive sales, which brings prices to a level more appropriate for this distribution model. While I'm definitely happy to pay $60 or more for a hardcopy of a non-online-activated game, I have bought very few of my 400+ Steam games at full price, and I know nobody who is in the habit of doing so.
I may drop EA a line and see exactly what the problem is.
Your right there is a complete edition. But there are still short-cut kits you can buy which aren't included. So it won't be on steam as valve want a cut from those as well.
Well until EA include those into some sort of 'super complete edition', or Valve change their policy (unlikely), we won't be seeing BF3 on here for a while. Probably be the same for BF4 also.
True. Though irrelevant for me personally as I already own BF3 and am planning to get 4 after the 2nd explanation/map pack comes out (so I can see if I like the look of it) so probably in January. It's nice having no loyalty to any one client, I go where the games I want are! (But always end up playing theme hospital.... So sad)
That's not sad, that's just a sign of good taste
Why cant we have one Client that runs every game so we don't have to have two separate DRM's if you buy it through Steam :(
That part sucks. On the other hand, it's good to not have all the eggs in one basket, even if it's a slight hassle with the accounts. One system goes down, you still have something else to play. One distributor goes bust, you don't lose all your games at once.