Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: WoodMan

I think this question was asked before quite a while back.  Erik said something about Steam taking such a large slice of the profits it was actually more profitable to sell here at Matrix to a smaller audience, or something along those lines.

You need to generate a hell of a lot of sales on Steam to make up for what they take, which makes it okay for all the huge games from the massive companies, those games sell 10s or 100s of thousands and in some cases millions of copies.

How do sales work on Steam and Impulse for the develpers/publishers? When a game is 75% off is the percentage of the sales divided the same between digital distributer and publisher/developer?

ORIGINAL: Data

If that is the case than steam is too intrusive for my taste

I played Empire:Total War on Steam- because I had to. Every time I logged on, I had to wait while Steam rummaged around on my computer- hated it...

I kind of like steam. As long as I don't lose my password or their password retrieval service works. Ok, it has to run and wastes a bit time when launching a game. But come a new computer, it is just a matter of launching steam, and all your games are there (after a download first time). For instance, back in the days I bought HL2 (on dvd) and registered it on steam. When I got a new comp I noticed I could download it. Not that it did much good, I hated that game [:D]

Now I prefer to buy games on steam, but the Matrix thing (no copy protection) is better of course. I guess I like having all the eggs in one basket...

ORIGINAL: Bingeling

Now I prefer to buy games on steam, but the Matrix thing (no copy protection) is better of course. I guess I like having all the eggs in one basket...

I guess that makes us very different. I prefer to have my games on disk, where I can load them when I want and delete them at will. I prefer games that I don't require an internet connection to play them or install them. I prefer games that don't rummage through my HDD collecting Zarquon-knows-what personal information.

And when I buy a game, it's MINE - it's not up to the publisher to delete it or deny me the use of it after the fact. Call me paranoid, but I feel far more comfortable being able to play my game on my completely disconnected and private PC.

I hate Steam. How ever i don't mind Gamersgate because you can get DRM free games from Mainly Paradox and indie Developers.

The reason why Matrix doesn't use Steam or any other services is because of the cost. Steam and other providers take 30% and this is industry standard.

If Matrix were to put this on steam. They would also have to provide for other providers and formats like discs. This would be very costly and at the end of the day the cost of games would only go up. And then you have the patching issues.

I am sure Matrix would lose customers if it were ever to go on to Steam as a exclusive. I don't think they would take that risk.

I most decidedly don't want my games on disc. The less stuff the better. I guess having too much stuff can do that to you

The most annoying thing with games on discs have traditionally been having the extra step of locating no-cd cracks to be able to play without the disc. I always wondered why it should be more annoying to own games than to pirate them. Too bad I always did the more annoying option [:D]. 10s of Steam doing its stuff I can handle, though. If I could be bothered to buy a proper disk it would probably be less than 10s too.

ORIGINAL: Kayoz

And when I buy a game, it's MINE - it's not up to the publisher to delete it or deny me the use of it after the fact. Call me paranoid, but I feel far more comfortable being able to play my game on my completely disconnected and private PC.

Actually you only buy a license to use the software, and not the software itself.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/0 ... -doctrine/

ORIGINAL: Kayoz

ORIGINAL: Bingeling

Now I prefer to buy games on steam, but the Matrix thing (no copy protection) is better of course. I guess I like having all the eggs in one basket...

I guess that makes us very different. I prefer to have my games on disk, where I can load them when I want and delete them at will. I prefer games that I don't require an internet connection to play them or install them. I prefer games that don't rummage through my HDD collecting Zarquon-knows-what personal information.

And when I buy a game, it's MINE - it's not up to the publisher to delete it or deny me the use of it after the fact. Call me paranoid, but I feel far more comfortable being able to play my game on my completely disconnected and private PC.

I agree with you Kayoz. Its nothing like having a Box in your hand. I prefer to have the cd version and no extreme DRM. as I said Gamersgate, impulse, or GOG is good if you buy games that are DRM free. And Matrix DD is good as well no DRM no activations.

I believe if the big gaming companies made very good quality games there would be no need for DRM. EA anyone?

ORIGINAL: OverlordCW

ORIGINAL: Kayoz

And when I buy a game, it's MINE - it's not up to the publisher to delete it or deny me the use of it after the fact. Call me paranoid, but I feel far more comfortable being able to play my game on my completely disconnected and private PC.

Actually you only buy a license to use the software, and not the software itself.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/0 ... -doctrine/

The gaming industry are the only ones i know of who can get away with this type of thing and it is wrong. Imagine if GM said we own this car you can not sell it. Or if the movies studios said you don't own this DVD and you cant sell it. The same with music. I know the record companies would love to stop people from selling secondhand CD,S and records. But they cant and they know they cant but they have tried and failed.

As far as i am concern if i own the game i should be allowed to sell it.

This is debatable, afaik you own the use of it not the game itself.

ORIGINAL: Data

If that is the case than steam is too intrusive for my taste

Gamersgate by Paradox is good if you get the DRM free games. SR By Blind Mind and SR2020 by Battlegoat are DRM free on GG. And so are many PDX games.

ORIGINAL: Data

This is debatable, afaik you own the use of it not the game itself.

But you might as well say that GM owns your car because they design it and put in there own engine. I am sure they would have copyright on the design and engine.

That is correct indeed.

ORIGINAL: Bingeling

... extra step of locating no-cd cracks to be able to play without the disc...

What you're stating is patently false. Lack of Steam does not require copyright protection. Why do publishers force their users to deal with buggy CD-searching software and to dig up dusty CD cases for codes? They're doing so because they're been operating on the incorrect belief that piracy costs them sales.

No copy protection equals financial ruin, right? If that's the case you're arguing, then do the facts support that assertion?

As to the question of "purchase game" vs. "purchase license to use" - it's irrelevant. The courts have already decided in Vernor v. Autodesk, that "you bought it, you own it". (see also Bobbs-Merrill Co v. Straus).

edit:
Another interesting outlook on the fallacy of the economic argument:
http://torrentfreak.com/report-despite- ... re-110325/

ORIGINAL: Data

That is correct indeed.

Wrong.

They have a patent on it - that's not copyright. Copyright applies to written works - and the derivations, such as music, software, motion pictures, etc. Copyright does NOT apply to manufactured products - machinery, engines, pharmaceuticals, etc.

Make genuinely great games, makes people buy them, destroys piracy. Solution sounds obvious. Problems related to greediness of majority of human gaming companies. Problematic...

ORIGINAL: wozza

But you might as well say that GM owns your car because they design it and put in there own engine. I am sure they would have copyright on the design and engine.

They own the trademark for the car - be it "GM" or "Hummer". You can't use their trademark willy-nilly.
They own the copyright for the owner's manual - you can't copy the manual and sell it.
They own the patent for the design and processes used in manufacturing the car. You can't make a knock-off and sell it as your own. Nor can you use their process (steel forging, for example) in your own car manufacturing without their permission.

But you own the car. You can drive it, sell it, crush it or fill it with grape jelly and have an orgy in it. It's yours to do with as you please.

ORIGINAL: Kayoz

As to the question of "purchase game" vs. "purchase license to use" - it's irrelevant. The courts have already decided in Vernor v. Autodesk, that "you bought it, you own it".

Did you even read the article?

The decision was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which issued a decision on September 10, 2010, reversing the first-sale doctrine ruling and remanding for further proceedings on the misuse of copyright claim.

The net effect of the Ninth Circuit's ruling is to limit the "You bought it, you own it" principle asserted by such organizations as the Electronic Frontier Foundation (or EFF).

ORIGINAL: OverlordCW

The net effect of the Ninth Circuit's ruling is to limit the "You bought it, you own it" principle asserted by such organizations as the Electronic Frontier Foundation (or EFF).

[/quote]

Oops - didn't follow the case since the first judgement. Sorry about that - UK law here, USA isn't my thing. Sept 2010 ruling hasn't crossed my desk yet.

Seems there's some confusion in the American courts as to the meaning and intent of the 1908 ruling. But that's inherent in the precedent system - lower courts will disagree, and it's finally up to the supreme court or legislators to make the final decision. The legal fight isn't over yet.

Is the 9th Circuit ruling "correct"? If so, then the entire 2nd hand games market should disappear overnight. They don't seem to be too worried, so I'll leave off panic mode.

On a UK note, Asda is planning on entering the second-hand games market, as well as Tesco. I'll just hide under the legal umbrella they provide.

I love Steam.

Unless it's true about Steam taking a large slice of the profits, I too believe it's a major mistake for any indie game (DW being no exception) not to be on Steam. Games on Steam receive MASSIVE exposure - there are literally millions of Steam users.

If Matrix made a 'free weekend' deal on Steam for Distant Worlds (basically, a time-limited demo where users can play the full version for a whole weekend, open coupled with a discount to purchase of the game during the same period) the size of this community would quadruple, at the *very* least. There are thousands of gamers out there who would enjoy something like Distant Worlds but simply don't know the game exists.