thats kinda redundant because steam already allows you to install steam on any number of computers you want without issue. You can even install all your games on all those systems. There's no need to install your games on a terribly slow external drive as steam already lets you do what you want. Youre solving a problem that doesn't exist. Unless you want to sneaker net install between computers then copying the steam apps folder is useful. But it's not necessary if you just want to access your games on different systems.

steam has always had a "install anywhere" policy. You just can't use that game on more than one computer at the same time.

note some games have activation limits, but those are separate from Steam And are not a limitation imposed by Steam. Activation limits for Crysis and some older BL1 DLC fall under this umbrella.

Why don't they just sit down at the computer and play?  Why do you have to buy more copies?  Unless you want to have all of you play at the same time on different PC's...then, yeah, you have to buy more licenses.  Why wouldn't you?  If you wanted to play an xbox game on three different tv's and xboxs, you'd have to buy three discs.

You are ignoring the voiced concerns and seem to be ignoring your own distorted mis-phrasing of them in your own statements.

Interesting assumption, but totally incorrect. I've been involved in the software/game development/marketing business since 1989, including as a former business development manager at Stardock. So please don't make assumptions without all of the facts in your hands, Ok?

Support families, in any capacity, but support them. It's good marketing, and good customer service. I like the model of the Antivirus industry (which I have been a paid consultant in for years). You buy a license based on the 'machines' you want to install it on, and the price drops considerably as the number of machines (in the same household) increases. For example a single PC license of a popular AV might run $39, but a 3PC version might only be $49. It's a FANTASTIC upsell, not to mention enduring to families.

Steam to me, is overly restrictive, regardless of my 'intentions' with *ANY* product, which are my business within my household. If my 90 year old grandmother wants to play one of my games, she can, and anyone that says otherwise is a fool. Nevertheless. My points other points are all valid, and still stand as stated. 

And using Steam Family Sharing, she can.  As long as you aren't playing the same game.  Otherwise, if you want two copies, buy two copies.  Claiming to have worked in software, you should be smart enough to realize that.

After you last post, I hope the irony of you whining about assumptions isn't lost on you.

You claim to be in software development since the 80s, and you don't know how to read a license agreement?

You do realize exactly why Stardock isn't taking you seriously, right?

Now you're disproving your own previous argument. If what you do with the software in your house "is your business", why is it now good that the AV company sells you a more expensive version for more computers? Why would you ever need to pay that, since how many computers you put the cheap version on "is your business"?

Family Sharing says she can. If you want to play with her at the same time, you'll need two licenses. That's still true.

I wonder how frogboy would feel about a formder development manager actively promoting piracy? But its none of thier business within your household right? I'm sure frogboy wont care if you have 7 copies of galciv2, 7 copies of "Launch8" and "Window Blinds" when you only bought one of them.

How peculiar then you don't want a Steam version. Steam games frequently have 4 packs for games that give you 4 for the price of 3. Steam frequently does sales for games and for combo packs. Why are you so against a Steam version when they give you several options to 'support families'? 

How even more pecular you want a GOG version. A company that doesn't have multi-product discounts for their products. Yet you want a drm-free version... that doesn't seem to jive wiht the 'support my family' model. It does jive with the "i don't want to pay for 7 copies so I'm just going to pirate them instead" model. All your 'support my family' nonsense is just a fancy smoke screen. You just want options that allow you to easily pirate the games, not to 'allow my family to play them'.

Unless you live in the People's Republic of Kobarno with your own EULA enforcement licensing rules in your republic, you have to adhere to the EULA of all products you purchase. If the license says one installation only, then you have to adhere to that. You don't get to mystically throw out the law because you don't happen to like it. 

Your 'points' are self-conflicting with your actions. And are inconsistent with your intended 'goals'. Steam already has several value methodologies for allowing family members to share libraries, or to purchase mutli-packs, or with future sales. Something no other platform even comes close in providing.

So why exactly are you against steam again?j Ah yes. Because it's harder for you to pirate your games.

Reading them is one thing, taking them seriously is another.

Do you read mattress labels? How many EULA's have you read in the last few years? I'd venture about as many as most everyone else - which is zero. For me, I choose to ignore draconian ones at my whim, and I justify it by the fact I already paid for it. It's much better if a company simply supports family/multipack, or DRM free versions in the first place, then it really isn't an issue. But if it becomes an issue, then we do what we do, right?

By the way - since 1978 (my first foray into computers), I have only met one person, ever, arrested for piracy. That particular guy had roughly 12,000 programs for download on his BBS. So really, one can pound their chests, and scream about EULA's all they want, but it's all really meaningless. I will continue to ignore draconian DRM after paying my entrance fee, period. End of story. The fact that steam makes it difficult is all well and good, it just means steam cuts revenue. No big deal for me.

Well allow me to introduce you tthe Microsoft licensing team. Or the Adobe licensing team. Or the Autodesk licensing team. They are all VERY VERY serious about enforcing the licensing model. And will gladly rip you a new one if the find even one iota of discreptancy in your licensing adherence.

You buy more copies as needed. Just like you're SUPPOSED TO DO. 

Note that 'family packs' have NOTHING TO DO WITH DRM FREE VERSIONS. How does a DRM free versikon 'support' families. DRM free versions have license restrictions, just like DRM software. Stardocks own products have 1 usage at a time licesense despite being DRM free. So do other DRM free software. You want family packs? Steam has 4 packs available. DRM free isn't about 'supporting families'. Its about you 'enabling your own piracy'

I've never met anyone who's done meth/cocaine/heroine. So I guess that's not a problem either huh? Well the war on drugs is over. Huzzah! Wow glad that's done wiht. Back to my weed hydroponics lab then.

Yeah no one takes these EULA serously

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vernor_v._Autodesk,_Inc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDY_Indus._LLC_v._Blizzard_Entm%27t,_Inc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowers_v._Baystate_Technologies

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT%26T_Mobility_v._Concepcion

Well at least you're admitting to be a pirate. Sorta.

Whining that steam makes your piracy 'difficult' is not a complaint.

Double post... which is weird since I cant figure out how to delete it...

You really can't carry on a conversation without labeling, or calling people names, can you? 

My advice to kids like you is simple, don't worry about what other folks do, Ok? All of this is merely YOUR OPINION, and given it is exclusive to you, it's really none of my worry - your opinion is invalidated by your name calling, and of course I have my own opinions, which differ - but are mine nonetheless. It's not really difficult to understand.. Stop worrying about other people.

Now if you are such a big advocate for buying games, why not go preorder your founders and STFU? This is why I avoid forums like the plague, kids like you soil them with your self important opinions - which really mean nothing, but you aren't mature enough to realize that. That comes with age, and maturity, you'll get there someday.

Look, pal. You are a pirate. You are one because you are pirating games and programs. You use more copies than you are legally allowed to do so. Denying that does not make that fact go away. You are what you do, not what you claim you are.

I prefer it if you stopped talking. I'm in the DRM free boat, and I think you are making the boat sink. Your comments are not helping. Laws and rules in our society are there to prevent people from doing bad things, or make sure that good things happen. Take street lights for instance. It is not rational for a bunch of people to collectively agree to pay for lights. Instead it is more rational for everyone to wait for one person to pay for the lights so they can free ride on the benefits. Same goes for police, road construction and maintenance, military, etc. These are not things that would not be easily or fairly paid for without some government applying and enforcing a tax on society.

Similar things happens with businesses. When some people pay for products, and others don't but get copies anyways, those who don't pay are free ridding on those who do pay. Not only do such people not contribute to the system, they also get companies (and customers too) thinking that something should be done to prevent such things. We have had laws for centuries to prevent theft, but now we also have DRM.

I think that DRM reduces the quality of products, and you seem to agree with that. However, where we differ is what to do when we deal with DRM we don't agree with. You seem to think that you are allowed to bypass any and all legal agreements (with some flawed logic that badly justifies your actions) and install as many copies as you like. I however, think that if you don't agree with the DRM, then you shouldn't even touch the product (do not buy, do not pirate, there are no exceptions unless the company says otherwise).

The simple fact is, its not you or I who decides that a product is to be developed, it is the developers. If they don't feel that its worth their while, or if they feel they are being cheated, then they might stop. Then something worse will happen than DRM, there would be no more products being made for anyone to have and therefore everyone loses... I hope you now understand why it is rational for me to want you to either buy the copies (err licenses) you need or don't touch the programs at all.

Only the parts of the EULA that don't contradict local law. 

Does Stardock's software also use a one-time activation like their games? If so, then they are not DRM free.

Agreed.

Yeah, he's kind of the Reductio ad absurdum version of a Steam opponent. The comedic part is that he doesn't seem to realize it.

A few posts up you're calling people idiots, and now you're complaining about name calling?

Man, this just keeps getting more and more hilarious.

 There you go with the assumptions again, but you complained about that too. You're awfully inconsistent.

Actually, that you're a pirate is a fact. You said it yourself. That you're engaging in so much cognitive dissonance that you've managed to convince yourself that you're not doesn't change reality.

That's the great thing about reality - it's true, even if you don't want to believe in it. But if you're really not worried about other peoples opinions of you, why have you spent the last couple of pages arguing with them about it?

And of course, being a pirate there is exactly zero incentive for Stardock to spend their money to make it easier for you to pirate the game.

If you avoid forums like the plague, why are you still here making a progressively larger fool of yourself? A "mature" person would have seen that the company owner isn't interested and moved on, instead of making all kinds of claims, hurling all kinds of insults, and generally acting ridiculous in an effort to explain why they should spend more money on development so you can more easily pirate the game.

(Then again, that age = maturity is another common fallacy...)

Like many people when steam came out (I remember around the time CS1.4 or 1.5 came out...) I was vehemently against it...my brother and I used to pool our resources together to buy games...so how much fun would it be to only be able to single play with that one copy...Blizzard had it right back then 1 real game allowed 7-8 spawn copies and the real game disk was required for single play.

I noticed some talking about the family sharing while it's nice it clearly states "

CAN TWO USERS SHARE A LIBRARY AND BOTH PLAY AT THE SAME TIME?

No, a shared library may only be accessed by one user at a time." - Basically it's like checking out a book if you've got spare licences then their are two copies of the book else there is just 1. 

So if you both want to play at the same time (Even a single player only game) YOU CAN'T even though you can buy 1 DVD and watch it with 5+ people they restrict the games following the BS licensing...that no one in their right minds actually believes. If you've read some of the Licencing agreements I have they put all faults on you and then restrict your use of the product you are "leasing from them"... It's like a lease saying if it screws up/doesn't work etc. it's on you but you can't do blah blah blah and blah with it... Most of them are so absurd if someone said it to me I'd tell them to go screw themselves! We all know no one reads them they just click agree...

I'd prefer the game to be distributed from GOG... where I buy a lot of my games because I don't think art should be locked away but shared with the world. I've even bought games I have still on CD... 

So pro's of steam:

1 Stop list for a lot of games.

You Know what your buddies are up to.

Some games allow you to click your buddie and connect to the same server and team with them.

The shared achievements/Achievements.

The centralized modding...not that I use it (I use Nexus for Skyrim but I've been there since morrowind could be a habit )...

Fast downloading (controls for limiting it as well)

Well established group.

Windows, Mac, and Linux gaming - basically all computers supported.

Cons:

Always on (if you start a game from the exe it automatically connects to steam even if you don't want it to.)

In order to play a single player game it must connect to the internet to ask permission. (Can be in offline mode, but this has to be done when connected to the internet).

By default it keeps statistics on what you play...gaming habits...buying habits..friends and what they buy, general location of where your machine is. (You know invasion of privacy).

-----

Basically Valve turned DRM into a social bonus vs straight up assuming everyone was a pirate.

A major annoyance of mine is the industries belief that a Pirated copy = Lost sale...that's totally STUPID.

I was a big supporter of Star Docks method...you buy the game then if you added the keys to stardock you can get updates but you didn't need to type in those big long keycodes to play the CD/DVD you bought.

LOL this forum is infiltrated with the same tools every forum is, the no lifer segment.

Not sure why I even bothered to voice my opinion on a subject I've already long made up my mind about it because I have absolutely zero interest in convincing anyone the virtues of my position. That's the beauty of being comfortable in your skin, you do what you do because that's who you are, without fear, worry, or concern of what anyone else thinks/feels. I've long reached that point, and the comments in this thread illustrate perfectly why I don't bother anymore.

This lifestyle gives you one of the most liberating, best feelings ever. The moment you dislodge yourself from all worry/concern about how others perceive you, you start to become free. Think about how much energy/time/money is wasted trying to do/convince/impress others in life, it's astounding, and it's a prison. The very second you realize everyone has their own opinions, and they don't really care, that's the moment you are freed from attempting to assuage them otherwise, or to gain their approval. So don't for a minute think your opinions have merit, or your insults have power, I've long overcome this sort of petty nonsense.

Carry on if you want, I've outgrown this petty nonsense, and moved on. I know it will pain you energy leeches I won't read your responses. <snicker>

Ignoring the troll and back on topic

So I realize not everyone is a Steam fan. But at the core I think most people probably are mostly concerend about Steam 'getting in the way of playing my game'. And that's a legitimate question. At the end of the day we're all wanting to play GalCiv3. Steam can enhance that experinence in a few ways, but those aren't useful if you can't PLAY the game at all. That's not fun for anyone!

So in terms of stuff where Steam can screw up how you play your game:

1) Offline mode

So this isn't exactly the most robust thing as any googling of Steam's offline mode shows many users have issues with it. So I'm not going ot pretend this isn't a problem. It is. In 'theory' Offline mode is supposed to be indefiinte and is NOT supposed to phone home every 30 days as widely reported

http://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/1/864969953572102601/#c864969953730401285

The last of most games have been converted to the new content sytsem so hopefully this means that Offline mode will be more robust when GalCiv3 comes out

Of course I can't discount esoteric situations like living out in some Army base with spotty network, or other weird issues like needing to sneaker net data from your 'fast' connection at work/university and then getting the data back home. Offline mode only helps those people if they can actually get online to activate the product. 

Offline mode isn't a panacea, but it 'genererally' should address concerns about steams 'always online' requirement. 

2) patch managment

As I've discussed before manual patches are a blessing (hey this patch fixed feature X so now I can storm the galaxy) and a curse (hey this patch totally screwed up feature Y, now my diplomacy is in the toilet and everyone hates me!). In theory Steam allows for beta streams so users 'might' be able to at least stay on one rev behind if a particular patch totally screws up your game for some reason. Again not a panacea but options exist to allow users some granular control on patch revisions.

---------------------------

I think discussing the core posistion of 'playing your game' is probably the best to concentrate your concerns. I mean we can go on and on and on about esoteric licensing, First Doctrine rules concerning the non-tradeabliity of games in Steam, privacy concerns with playtime, is Steam itself a gigantic F2P game with trading cards, does the steam client suck (yeah it does in a few ways because library magement is still pretty terrible), Hey what the hell is this class action opt out nonsense in the SSA, etc etc etc.  But at the end of the day, PLAYING is really the most important thing with GalCiv3 and if steam gets in the way of that, then that's a problem.

Feel free to add any concerns/questions/opinions.

I don't recall anywhere saying steam would be required for this game.  Did I miss a something somewhere?

I have no problems with the game being available on steam, but I prefer that the game doesn't require steam.

My issue with steam is that it is another log in.  I don't like the proliferation of log ins that are required for things.  I have a log in here, a log in on impulse (game stop) and one on steam and so on and so on and so on.  Some people will agree with me, some will not.  Some hate steam, some love it.  But regardless of any of these issues, if steam isn't required to get or run the game, you satisfy all.  Those who love steam can get it there.  Those who love game stop can get it there. 

When I purchased the elite founder, I noticed that I can download GC2 and other content from there with neither steam nor game stop.  I wonder (and expect that) if GC3 will be the same.

Bottom of the store page:  'All game code will be delivered through Steam when available.'

It's on the store page in a somewhat indirect way

http://galciv3.com/store

At the very very bottom in tiny tiny print.

https://forums.galciv3.com/449023/

You may voice your concerns here. However note that while other options may be investigated, at best, you might get OSX/Linux versions. Non-steam versions are sort of unlikely. Keep your expectations accordingly. It doesn't hurt to ask of course. 
 

Like most steam games, GalCiv3 willl be available at a lot of online retailers. However as a primarily steamworks game, you'll need to activate the game on steam, regardless of where you purchase it (Amazon/GG/GMG/Gamestop/etc)

 

If the game is Steamworks then this is unlikely. For example, if you register Fallen Enchantress:LH to your Stardock account, you cannot download it from Stardock. You have to download it from Steam. Older games like GalCiv2 and Sins have direct download links from your Stardock account

I've never truly had a personal problem with steam or the way it operates (saying this i know friends who have), If anything steam in its own way cuts down on piracy by requiring purchase through a third party vendor that is (reasonably) reliable and requires retail keys. The only concern i'd have concerning DRM management in the game is whether i can access it when, when and however i want to be it on a different country or continent, as well as allowing for a modding community access to create great content, but with Gal Civ III i can't see the later being a problem. This franchise and dev team have always been open and fair with people who wish to be creative, something that most DRM laws inhibit.

As for issues concerning pirating a game, most of us here would be lying if at some stage in our life we haven't directly or indirectly pirated music, movies or game content for our personal use, in current times its a way of life everybody wants something for nothing and peoples moral compass are totally fine pirating games as long as the blame goes elsewhere. More than anything investing in a kickstarter or being a founder to a game is showing support for the franchise that otherwise it simply wouldn't get in an age of Internet trolls and pirate-bay clones, people don't seem to realise if these guys don't get paid for there hard work, well simply put there wont be any more content.

Going back to the point of the topic (radical i know), the fact that its on steam shouldn't discourage people from becoming a founder i think, there's always going to be issues with third party distributes online, and i'd rather put my faith in something like steam than purchase it off a website I've only just visited, i know for a fact when i get the funds i'm 100% putting come funding towards this project and investing in a great game.

There are shady cd-key resellers that sell low priced retail cd-keys from cheaper regions online. 

However this won't be an issue wiht GalCiv3 since there is no retail product to 'unbox' and get a serial from in a cheaper region.

Steam itself supports multi-install anywhere and everywhere. Regional restrictions may be added by developers/publishers. If a game has regional restrictions, it's because the developer/publisher put it there. Steam simply gives the tools to do it, but the restriction is at the behest of the developer/publisher.

As a 'general' rule safe Steam resellers are the usual players, GamersGate, GreenManGaming, GameFly, Gamestop, Amazon.

Also note that if you want to support devs, try to purchase games directly from their websites. Indie devs that use the Humble Store get a much bigger chunk of your purchase. Most game stores charge a 30% margin to sell your product. The humble store, only takes sub-10%. So if you see a game y ou like and the Humble Store offers you steam keys, then do the dev a favor and buy it there. They'll get more money and you'll be financially supporting the dev directly.