No Half-Life 2 on Steam?

Karl the Pagan writes "Following on the heels of a previous Steam-related story, Vivendi Universal may block Half-Life 2 distribution via Steam. Additional motions can be filed until November 18th, but since Sierra/VU have final QA approval on the HL2 gold is it possible they could delay the game until after the court decides on these motions?"

Impatience and gamergeeks.

[scowling]

This really shouldn't ever have become an issue. The box-retail distribution model for games is still a viable one. Is it so important for HL fans to play the game as soon as humanly possible? What's wrong with buying it in store on the day of release?

How would Valve be harmed by giving in on this issue? How would the consumers be harmed?

IMHO, neither would, in any important way.

why Steam?

[Turn-X Alphonse]

Steam is one of the worst programs I've seen in the last few years. Everyone seems to have trouble with it... why would ANYONE use it?

I'd much rather have a nice CD/DVD in my hand with the install on then a little code (which I could lose) to let me spend hours downloading it.

I'm trying not to sound like a troll but I really see no sane reason to download HL2 through steam and not just buy the damn CD. Preloading makes sense (install it faster) but why not get a nice shiney CD?

Steam is handy, I think

[dj42]

I prefer Steam to other methods of purchasing a game. You don't have to go anywhere or pay shipping costs, you don't have to keep track of a CD, and hopefully, more of the money goes to the people that MADE the game, rather than filling the pockets of marketers and distributors. If I like a game, I want the people that made it to get the money, encouraging patches, new versions, and modifications. You see all this nonsense about Steam being terrible/people hating it/etc. I think they were using an earlier version. I'm a stickler about what I use / let run in the background of a Windows machine, even. I'm all about Firefox, nothing next to the clock, REALUPDATE.exe can die, all superfluous services are disabled. And still, this Steam software works fine and doesn't bother me. That's a bigger achievement than Realplayer can claim.

October fucking 8th?

[AndyChrist]

"On Friday, when asked if Valve was still intent on making Half-Life 2 available to gamers via Steam, regardless of what was determined on October 8, Lombardi replied, "Yes.""

So this means it's not coming out till at least October? WTF! I had my hopes up with this release candidate news, now this bullshit! Dammit, I'm going to be out of the country by the time it comes out! I may not be able to get it in any timely manner BUT via Steam.

Fer fucksake, games are perishible. Hype even moreso. The more they delay this thing, the less they're going to make off of it. The hype is at it's peak now, without ever having boiled over to the point of insanity (Phantom Menace, FF7). If they don't release this thing soon, they're gonna have another Daikatana on their hands.

Start selling the goddamn game, and settle out who gets how much in court!

Re:Worth the wait.

[IntergalacticWalrus]

Superior to DOOM III ?? Bah, both games were designed with different goals in mind in terms of gameplay, and the engines themselves are more or less equal in capabilities.

Cut out the publishers

[_Wagz_]

I for one would love to see the publisher cut out of the end price. New releases are sucking up $50 of my paycheck every time and it can only get worse. That said, Valve really needs to beef up its infrastructure before I'll join the service. I played CS on it and had nothing but problems with the service.

Re:Duke Nukem is happy

[gl4ss]

duke nukem hasn't had a 'date' in what, 6 years?

hl2 however has been 'just around the corner' and 'almost finished' and 'in the stores by fall' for quite some time.

Re:Impatience and gamergeeks.

[keller999]

The issue is that Valve gets 2.5 times more revenue from each copy of HL2 sold on steam than from boxes on shelves. By circumventing the publisher, they can sell the game at a lower price and make more money. Just the sheer number of people who have pre-loaded HL2 probably scares Vivendi - it's one of the biggest game releases of all time, and it looks like the game creators might actually make more of the pie than the publisher is used to.

Re:nope...

[Nos.]

The question is, will they be able to release with these filings? I imagine Sierra/Vivendi/whoever will try to stop the release until they can decide if Valve can release under steam.

Awesome!

[NetDanzr]

Just the other day I was complaining that there's no innovation in the gaming industry. It's nice to see that Vivendi found yet another new and original way to screw itself and alienate its remaining fans.

Re:Impatience and gamergeeks.

[Babbster]

How would Valve be harmed by giving in on this issue? How would the consumers be harmed?

While the actual contract language (probably impenetrable to the layperson, anyway) wasn't in the linked article, the answer to your question is that Valve would be harmed by loss of income. According to the article, Valve renegotiated what turned out to be a bad contract with Sierra (bad because the game turned out to be a huge hit - like musicians signing a contrast for a big front-end payday but a tiny percentage on actual sales where subsequently the album goes platinum) and got the rights to distribute online. That means that - apart from potential future loss in the courts - Valve takes home all the cash from their Steam sales and Sierra/VU doesn't get jack.

The biggest question I come away with is how much, contractually, Valve was permitted to push their online sales. The implication is that the online sales were intended to be a little bonus for Valve since Sierra/VU makes the bulk of the money on retail sales. This would seem to be confirmed by the fact that Gabe Newell downplayed Steam's potential to VU execs and, in fact, claimed that they probably wouldn't profit off the online sales. The truth, of course, is that Steam has the potential to make buckets of cash (especially with a subscription model giving access to multiple games/special mods/etc.) - this is especially true if customers decide that they want Valve to have the money instead of VU.

Re:why Steam?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm starting to wonder if any of these people who bitch about steam have even used it past the amazingly bad "beta".

Steam has given me absolutely ZERO problems for months. It hasn't crashed, locked up, anything.

I feel the same way about the typical Slashdot BSOD jokes. I run a 2 year-old Win2k install that hasn't needed any real maintenence. I haven't gotten a mystery reboot or BSOD *once*, yet all I hear whenever the discussion about Windows comes up is how X Slashdotter can't even get the thing to boot.

So, you're either all stupid as hell (likely), or really unlucky.

Good news? maybe

[wigle]

In order to understand how this scenario could work out to the advantage of gamers, first we should look at Valve's history and how Steam/Half-Life 2 fit in with Vivendi.

1. Half-Life - universally praised for its gameplay and solid (at the time) editing tools. PC Gamer awarded it the highest score ever
2. Team Fortress Classic - excellent multiplayer add-on that extended the game's life
3. Counter-Strike - Valve's involvement with CS has been mediocre at best, from 'updating' maps and player models to altering traditional (and fun) parts of its gameplay
4. Deathmatch Classic - A decent re-make of Quake DM--almost as good as the original--but Valve really should have been working on Half-Life 2 instead of this free and largely unnoticed mod
5. Steam - a really, really unnecessary system that makes it difficult to run LANs, extract game content for editing, or install custom skins, maps, etc. Plus it still doesn't prevent cheating.

Given the current trend of Valve, I'd say the best thing they can do is drop Steam altogether and release Half-Life 2 just like the original. And maybe 4 or 5 Gold Editions or something.

Here's an Idea

[foo fighter]

Hey Vivendi Universal:

License the Steam technology and platform from Valve and use it to distribute the other games in your library. That way you gain the benefits of an electronic distribution channel without having to do the blood and sweat part yourself and you reward one of your forward-thinking business partners.

Or you can sue said customer and make yourself look like the idiotic, money grubbing, fear-mongering institutions of the MPAA and RIAA, which are locked in the past despite all signs customer preferences are pointing the other way. Oh, that's right. Universal is a RIAA member. No wonder.

This is what you get when crotchety septegenarians managing a confused, out of focus multinational try to sell entertainment "to the kids". Heavy handed, out of touch business practices that alienate more people than they are trying to attract.

It's not the bugs, it's the DRM

[Cid Highwind]

Bugs or no bugs, Steam is unacceptable IMHO. When I buy a game on physical media, I have a tangible thing that belongs to me. I can install it on a new machine, I can lend it to a friend, I can sell it on eBay, I can keep playing it as long as I want, even after the publisher goes out of business. Steam allows none of that.

If Sierra goes belly up next week, how long do you think the Steam master server is going to be around? Probably not long. How can you sell a game you don't play anymore if it's on Steam? You can't! You don't actually have anything to sell, you've just been paying for access to someone else's game.

Re:Impatience and gamergeeks.

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesn't matter if you buy the game at a retail store versus Steam... the price will be the same.... its caled the "market price" and if there are enough people willing to shill out $50-$60 buck at the store then they are willing to pay the same online.

Re:Awesome!

[ScrewMaster]

Remaining customers, you mean ... I don't believe that Vivendi has had actual "fans" for some time now.

Re:Duke Nukem is happy

[gl4ss]

yeah, but one of the falls was fall 2003.

the code theft was just bullshit reasoning, they didn't have the thing ready back then.

Re:why Steam?

[NiceGeek]

I still play games that are several years old. Will Steam support HL2 6-7 years from now? I doubt it.

Re:It's not the bugs, it's the DRM

[Poseidon88]

If Sierra goes belly up next week, how long do you think the Steam master server is going to be around?

Probably about as long as the verification servers that check your CD-Key and allow you to play any Half Life based game online. Which means your tangible property becomes a shiny coaster.

Re:nope...

[Mark Imbriaco]

Lose a developer who has slipped numerous deadlines and is literally years behind schedule on the release of their one project? Somehow, I think Vivendi isn't terribly concerned.

Re:Steam is handy, I think

[dzym]

you don't have to keep track of a CD

Nope, you just have to keep track of your account name and password. One of my friends has already been burned for having tied his old HL key to a Steam account that he no longer has access to, which is registered to an e-mail address he no longer has access to. Basically, he has no way of recovering that key for a Steam account unless and until he sends back the entire HL jewelcase (on which the original key is printed) to Valve, and he's not going to get another jewelcase back for a replacement. He's sure as hell not going to bother at this point.

Sucks to be him, right?

What happens when you have NO hard evidence to prove you bought a hard copy of HL2?

Re:Impatience and gamergeeks.

[Colazar]

I am normally all in favor of industries cutting out the middleman. It tends to be the best way to keep prices low.

However, in this case my perspective is that of a Mac gamer. Since the chances of Steam working with the Mac are virtually nil, the more incentive Valve has to steer everything through Steam, the less chance there is that HL2 will ever be available for the Mac.

Not like I ever expected that it would be, given the history with the original Half-Life.

Re:why Steam?

[asdfghjklqwertyuiop]

Lose your copy? Just redownload it. You can start playing as soon as the first level is downloaded, and on increasingly fast connections the download time won't be an issue. For 56kers, you can always get the CD. But as a Cable user I find Steam easier.

What happens if Valve goes out of business, or just doesn't feel like paying for the infrastructure to support steam anymore?

Re:It's not the bugs, it's the DRM

[rd_syringe]

Bugs or no bugs, Steam is unacceptable IMHO. When I buy a game on physical media, I have a tangible thing that belongs to me. I can install it on a new machine, I can lend it to a friend, I can sell it on eBay, I can keep playing it as long as I want, even after the publisher goes out of business. Steam allows none of that.

Why? Steam supports offline play, so there's no issue there. Can you go to any computer, merely log in, and suddenly have access to every Valve product you've ever bought when you buy the DVD version? Nope, you'd have to cart it around with you. Then you'd have to hunt on the web for the latest patches. I'm sorry, but models like Steam is the future of online game distribution. Hell, it's the model for the future of computing--.NET is going this route, the music industry is going this route, etc. It's all going distributed.

For the record, I have never, EVER had a problem with Steam. I kept hearing about all these problems with it, then I finally tried it out of curiosity. I think Slashdotters--as usual--tried it once during the beta and didn't like it and have never even touched it since, but have subsequently used the experience as the basis for all their Valve complaints.

Sierra goes belly up next week, how long do you think the Steam master server is going to be around? Probably not long.

Maybe you didn't know, but Steam is Valve's baby. Sierra wants nothing to do with it (as this article should have hinted to you).

Valve is the good guy here, guys

[rd_syringe]

Good riddance to big game publishers. They push early release dates, delay release dates, they're the ones who insist that you stick your CD in when you start up a game...good riddance.

Some of you may not like Steam (you probably haven't even tried it since it was the crappy beta...it kicks ASS now), some of you love it, but fact is, Valve is treading some innovative new game distribution ground here, and we should applaud them for taking a chance and sidestepping publishers all together. Isn't this in the same spirit of P2P music and other trumpeted mindsets?

Re:nope...

[Ed_Moyse]

Did you read the bit in article where it says " Lombardi told GameSpot last Friday. "We later had to add breach of contract claims for, among other things, refusing to pay us royalties owed and delaying Condition Zero out of the holiday season.""

So perhaps, just perhaps, it did go gold and it wasn't Gabe Newell's fault that it was six months late? Frankly I don't know, but I strongly suspect you don't either.