Shadowrun Returns in June

Shadowrun Returns in June

image

A massive news update on the Shadowrun Returns Kickstarter page reveals release date, collector's edition information and DLC details.

Shadowun Returns, is a cyberpunk fantasy tactical role-playing game under development by Harebrained Schemes, an indie game publisher led by Jordan Weisman, the original creator of the Shadowrun tabletop role-playing game. As of writing, its Kickstarter has raised an impressive $1.8 million of its initial $400,000 goal, and Harebrained Schemes has posted a huge information dump on its Kickstarter page. Details revealed include the game's release date (June), as well as information on the collector's edition and future DLC.

The last chance to get the Shadowrun Returns collector's edition is Sunday, April 28th. A breakdown of when backers and collector's edition pre-orderers will get their rewards is as follows:

  • Your DIGITAL rewards (the game, the editor, the wallpaper, special ability, the soundtrack, the short story anthology PDF, etc) will all be available on the Harebrained Account Website on launch day.
  • Your PHYSICAL rewards (the t-shirts, the DocWagon cards, the hardcover short story anthology, the USB dog tags, the deluxe box edition (which contains a bunch of stuff), will ship about 3 weeks after launch day.
  • People who pre-ordered the Shadowrun Returns Deluxe and Collector's Editions will get their digital and physical goodies in the same timeframe as above. (And will download their digital goodies from the Harebrained Account Website too.)
  • Early access to the Shadowrun Returns EDITOR will be available to eligible Backers at the end of April.
  • Backers eligible to have their photo turned into an NPC or CUSTOM PC have already been contacted and work has already begun!

The team released some pictures of the collector's edition dog tags and DocWagon cards and they look pretty badass.

DLC plans for the game were also detailed:

  • Berlin Campaign (new campaigns also allow you to build with an expanded set of tiles)
  • Map Packs (new terrain tiles and props for you to use in your own campaigns)
  • All New Shadowrun Stories (created by HBS)
  • Additional Outfits and Portraits for your character

Backers and collector's edition pre-orderers will get the Berlin Campaign at no charge. Any further DLC developed after launch will require payment.

The game will be available through Steam for PC, with pre-orders opening on April 29th. This means that the only way to get the collector's edition is through Harebrained Schemes' official website.

In complying with their promise that Shadowrun Returns will be completely DRM-free, a non-Steam version of the game will also be offered to every customer (because Steam is actually a form of DRM in itself). Unfortunately, the DRM-free version of the game will not have access to any DLC released for it.

Source: Kickstarter

Permalink

I'll be honest, I didn't like their DLC and "Exclusive content" policy from the start and it was one of the main reasons why I didn't pledge for it while I did for most other RPGs (like Wasteland 2, Project: Eternity and Torment at Physical Reward levels).

This one is still a "wait and see", maybe even wait till they release a Complete Edition at some point.

I'm fine with DLC (unless it's day one), but making it exclusive to Steam is a load of bullshit.

June? so soon? how long has this been in development? because unless i was looking at the other shadowrun game i thought they were still in alpha.

DLC? Meh, I can handle.

June release? Oh boy oh boy oh boy oh boy oh boy oh boy^200

I'll buy the regular edition thank you very much.

I'll just get the Berlin DLC later if the game turn out to be good. I might go with the Deluxe if the bonuses turn out to be good. I am not paying 80$ to ship a physical copy just to get extra DLC.

Is Sahdowrun Returns a single player game or is it more like an MMO? I heard rumors that it is an MMO.

Bat Vader:
Is Sahdowrun Returns a single player game or is it more like an MMO? I heard rumors that it was an MMO.

there is an mmo coming out but that isn't until next year, shadow run returns is a single player only.

ot: glad its coming out soon, didnt back but pre-ordered, kinda hoping those keys are for pre-orders aswell as backers as not being able to use the custom maps would suck.

ramboondiea:

Bat Vader:
Is Sahdowrun Returns a single player game or is it more like an MMO? I heard rumors that it was an MMO.

there is an mmo coming out but that isn't until next year, shadow run returns is a single player only.

ot: glad its coming out soon, didnt back but pre-ordered, kinda hoping those keys are for pre-orders aswell as backers as not being able to use the custom maps would suck.

Thank You. I was worried that it was going to end up being an MMO. I have nothing against MMO's. I was mainly worried that if it was an MMO that it would force people to PVP. My fears are gone now. Thank You again.

Bat Vader:

ramboondiea:

Bat Vader:
Is Sahdowrun Returns a single player game or is it more like an MMO? I heard rumors that it was an MMO.

there is an mmo coming out but that isn't until next year, shadow run returns is a single player only.

ot: glad its coming out soon, didnt back but pre-ordered, kinda hoping those keys are for pre-orders aswell as backers as not being able to use the custom maps would suck.

Thank You. I was worried that it was going to end up being an MMO. I have nothing against MMO's. I was mainly worried that if it was an MMO that it would force people to PVP. My fears are gone now. Thank You again.

no worries, and for future reference the MMO is unimaginatively called Shadowrun:Online, different company doing it, did there own kickstarter around the same time as well so i wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people are confused.

Im getting this and probably Eador. Masters of the Broken World on gog.com

http://www.gog.com/gamecard/eador_masters_of_the_broken_world

So many awesome games coming out this month and surprisingly none are from a big bad AAA studio.

ive been waiting 24 freaking years for this game and i cant wait for it. from what ive seen its going to have an extensive community making adventures and campaigns for it as well.

good to hear ill be getting the berlin dlc free as well when its released.

the only concern i have at the moment is how they will do the decker and the matrix in game as the last video they released it was one area they keep trying to get something that has the right feel

Too bad it ain't for console's too.

Apart from that I shall remain sceptical.

You should see all the hate they are getting in the comments from it's own Kickstarter backers. A lot of nasty feedback over this decision to crap out and charge extra for planned "DLC". This from a game we the f'ing people funded ourselves.

Harebrained is trying to spin damage control with the offer of the DRM free version (ONLY to original backers) and all DLC being free to original backers. That's nice and all but they are missing the point that the very practice itself is disgusting and we backers are furious that ANYONE is going to get milked for DLC. It's not about who gets the DLC for free, it's that they are charging ANYONE for it at all.

Buy the product. Get the product. No pieces, no incomplete BS. If they want to develop "extra" material, have at it. You want to charge us for it, keep your extra crap and work on a real sequel. They insult our intelligence with this EA style BS.

"Shadowun Returns, is a cyberpunk fantasy tactical role-playing game"

....Shadow...un..

from the pen and paper RPG the world sounds cool, but i have never really got to the isometric perspective but i see how story and what not is when it comes out.

Nicolaus99:
You should see all the hate they are getting in the comments from it's own Kickstarter backers. A lot of nasty feedback over this decision to crap out and charge extra for planned "DLC". This from a game we the f'ing people funded ourselves.

Harebrained is trying to spin damage control with the offer of the DRM free version (ONLY to original backers) and all DLC being free to original backers. That's nice and all but they are missing the point that the very practice itself is disgusting and we backers are furious that ANYONE is going to get milked for DLC. It's not about who gets the DLC for free, it's that they are charging ANYONE for it at all.

Buy the product. Get the product. No pieces, no incomplete BS. If they want to develop "extra" material, have at it. You want to charge us for it, keep your extra crap and work on a real sequel. They insult our intelligence with this EA style BS.

Except that hate might be misplaced. DRM in a game like this is fairly important because, unlike a major developer, they can't absorb losses due to piracy. Steam is also a very effective distribution mechanism for small games like this. Most people who will likely buy this game will probably have a Steam account (I will and do). They chose an easy and effective distribution mechanism that, yes, uses a DRM system to prevent piracy. I'm not going to fault them for that. That be like faulting them for saying "I want to sell a product, but I don't want to put it in a store." Yes, it is technically possible to do, but you're going to have much more success by selling your product in a store...

As for DLC: This is another thing that I understand and actually support. A lot of games cut story or quests because they don't have the time or resources develop them fully (and others are cut because it falls under the "too big to fit in this game, too small to justify it's own"). Post-shipping DLC does three positive things: (1) it gives more time to develop and polish non-essential elements of the game, particularly the stuff that just wasn't ready to ship but can't justify a delay of the main product, (2) it prevents underwhelming sequels (i.e. games that are essentially the same game with a new plot and minor tweaks) by essentially giving us a new/additional story without building an entirely new game unnecessarily (see Bioshock 2, which felt more like Bioshock with a few minor needed tweaks and tacked on multiplayer than a proper sequel), which is much more efficient than the sequel model, and (3) it extends the life of the product significantly longer with actual content rather than just advertising and hoping for the best. Let's be honest here, this does not belong in Farcry 3, but it definitely would not work as a stand alone game (and, no, Hotline Miami is not a counter point to that). We had no problem buying "expansions" for games in the past. DLC is just the current more-convenient form for of that.

And yes, unscrupulous corporate publishers will abuse this system (see EA, Activision), but I view it as a lesser of two evils (DLC or microtransactions) with the potential for interesting plots attached to it.

Backed this and cannot wait <3 this will be out just as i catch up with Bioshock, tomb raider and a couple of others. Should keep me busy for a few weeks hopefully.

P.S also agree with the above Gentleman its not the end of the world and as a backer I do not personally care. People have to show a little understanding for once.

I just took a peek in the comments on Kickstarter for the project and the hate there is palpable. What is the problem with offering a Steam download in addition to the DRM free version from the HBS site?. I'm so looking to this game, from all the updates they have put out I'm very optimistic that it's going to be a fun return to the SR universe.

Dexter111:
I'll be honest, I didn't like their DLC and "Exclusive content" policy from the start and it was one of the main reasons why I didn't pledge for it while I did for most other RPGs (like Wasteland 2, Project: Eternity and Torment at Physical Reward levels).

This one is still a "wait and see", maybe even wait till they release a Complete Edition at some point.

I feeling exactly the same. It is a shame I was thinking of picking this up after seeing the gameplay, having not originally backed the project. But the idea that the drm-free version of the game is possibly hamstrung by not having the same support for mods and dlc as the Steam version has cooled my interest. I've got no problem using Steam personally but if I'm given the choice between steam and DRM free, drm free wins every time for me. Expect on this occasion where it seems at first that the drm-free is an inferior version of the game.

Epitome:
I just took a peek in the comments on Kickstarter for the project and the hate there is palpable. What is the problem with offering a Steam download in addition to the DRM free version from the HBS site?. I'm so looking to this game, from all the updates they have put out I'm very optimistic that it's going to be a fun return to the SR universe.

The fact it's on Steam isn't the problem.

The problem is that only backers (and not all of them at that) will get the DRM free version, and the rest of us plebes will have to make do with just the Steam version.

Plus the Steam version is the only version that will get the DLC.

Genocidicles:

Epitome:
I just took a peek in the comments on Kickstarter for the project and the hate there is palpable. What is the problem with offering a Steam download in addition to the DRM free version from the HBS site?. I'm so looking to this game, from all the updates they have put out I'm very optimistic that it's going to be a fun return to the SR universe.

The fact it's on Steam isn't the problem.

The problem is that only backers (and not all of them at that) will get the DRM free version, and the rest of us plebes will have to make do with just the Steam version.

Plus the Steam version is the only version that will get the DLC.

Isn't that HBS's decision to make? I mean the backers were the ones who took the risk on this game (Not much of a risk I know but still), those people get the DRM version that was promised to them in the KS campaign. Everybody else is just a potential consumer and the method HBS chooses to sell the game to the wider audience is down to what they feel will earn them the most profit?

Like I'm all for DRM free games, big fan of GOG and buy from them over Steam where the choice exists. I imagine however that Steam was the best business decision and trying to support post-release DLC for two different versions of the game just wasn't worth the investment. Besides I'm pretty sure there's no method for selling DLC via GOG? Maybe I'm wrong there.

Epitome:
Isn't that HBS's decision to make? I mean the backers were the ones who took the risk on this game (Not much of a risk I know but still), those people get the DRM version that was promised to them in the KS campaign. Everybody else is just a potential consumer and the method HBS chooses to sell the game to the wider audience is down to what they feel will earn them the most profit?

But how does alienating users who wanted a DRM free game earn them more profit than simply putting the DRM free version up for sale?

Surely making it available to more people would bring in more profit?

Epitome:
Like I'm all for DRM free games, big fan of GOG and buy from them over Steam where the choice exists. I imagine however that Steam was the best business decision and trying to support post-release DLC for two different versions of the game just wasn't worth the investment. Besides I'm pretty sure there's no method for selling DLC via GOG? Maybe I'm wrong there.

GOG does sell DLC, but the DRM free version will be downloaded straight from their website. Not sure if they've got a system for it on there.

The only thing I am concerned about was the policy of the DLC, and it's the main reason I did not pledge.
I'm used to Steamworks, but would have preferred a direct-purchase route as an option.

Still, this Summer looks like it's going to be amazing for games, for the first time in years.

The Gentleman:

Nicolaus99:
You should see all the hate they are getting in the comments from it's own Kickstarter backers. A lot of nasty feedback over this decision to crap out and charge extra for planned "DLC". This from a game we the f'ing people funded ourselves.

Harebrained is trying to spin damage control with the offer of the DRM free version (ONLY to original backers) and all DLC being free to original backers. That's nice and all but they are missing the point that the very practice itself is disgusting and we backers are furious that ANYONE is going to get milked for DLC. It's not about who gets the DLC for free, it's that they are charging ANYONE for it at all.

Buy the product. Get the product. No pieces, no incomplete BS. If they want to develop "extra" material, have at it. You want to charge us for it, keep your extra crap and work on a real sequel. They insult our intelligence with this EA style BS.

Except that hate might be misplaced. DRM in a game like this is fairly important because, unlike a major developer, they can't absorb losses due to piracy. Steam is also a very effective distribution mechanism for small games like this. Most people who will likely buy this game will probably have a Steam account (I will and do). They chose an easy and effective distribution mechanism that, yes, uses a DRM system to prevent piracy. I'm not going to fault them for that. That be like faulting them for saying "I want to sell a product, but I don't want to put it in a store." Yes, it is technically possible to do, but you're going to have much more success by selling your product in a store...

As for DLC: This is another thing that I understand and actually support. A lot of games cut story or quests because they don't have the time or resources develop them fully (and others are cut because it falls under the "too big to fit in this game, too small to justify it's own"). Post-shipping DLC does three positive things: (1) it gives more time to develop and polish non-essential elements of the game, particularly the stuff that just wasn't ready to ship but can't justify a delay of the main product, (2) it prevents underwhelming sequels (i.e. games that are essentially the same game with a new plot and minor tweaks) by essentially giving us a new/additional story without building an entirely new game unnecessarily (see Bioshock 2, which felt more like Bioshock with a few minor needed tweaks and tacked on multiplayer than a proper sequel), which is much more efficient than the sequel model, and (3) it extends the life of the product significantly longer with actual content rather than just advertising and hoping for the best. Let's be honest here, this does not belong in Farcry 3, but it definitely would not work as a stand alone game (and, no, Hotline Miami is not a counter point to that). We had no problem buying "expansions" for games in the past. DLC is just the current more-convenient form for of that.

And yes, unscrupulous corporate publishers will abuse this system (see EA, Activision), but I view it as a lesser of two evils (DLC or microtransactions) with the potential for interesting plots attached to it.

I'll admit I'm less concerned about Steam as a DRM platform though GOG, CD Projekt and Minecraft have definitively proven that it is not necessary. Steam has only ever locked me out of my own library once; once too many but it was a temporary fluke rather than s.o.p.

Will stand my ground against DLC. When did this even become a business practice? Ah, the moment it became technologically possible to gouge us with it. What did you pay for Dragon Age 2? Add $37 of DLC. Mass Effect 3? Add $50. The Sims 3? Add a mind boggling $410. Fable 3 will charge you $1... to dye your clothes black. That's just, wow. Truly. A pallet swap. And oh, Capcom, where to begin.

But now the meat of it, Cost to Value ratio. When they are "done" with DLC for a title, the total typically comes to 50 - 100+% markup over the original game price tag. At that combined price point, they could be halfway if not fully done outright with a full sequel. Imagine cutting out half or whatever % of the original game equal to that exchange rate. Are those two quantities the same value? I say no. Horribly, undeniably no.

That handful of retooled and recycled maps and quest chains they peddled to you is nowhere near worth half or more of the original game. It is naught but a backhanded scheme to charge you more for less and pad their bottom line.

"Then don't buy it!" the sheep bleat, the magical chime of wool clippers twinkling in their furry ears. Can you honestly imagine if ANY other medium tried to get away with this? Books? Movies? Music... hm, well music has evolved past all that now, can get it all legally at a buck a track.

Anyhow, just because they CAN get away with doing it does not mean we should all silently ponder our hooves while the farmer sheers us. Screw that crooked farmer. We should knock him down and eat him. We cannot eat the people at Harebrained but we can snarl and scream till their ears bleed in the hope that maybe, just maybe, we will discover that they care after all. This whole mess honestly makes me wonder if EA is innocent of the SimCity fiasco after all. Maybe Maxis really IS full of incompetent pr_cks.

Nicolaus99:
I'll admit I'm less concerned about Steam as a DRM platform though GOG, CD Projekt and Minecraft have definitively proven that it is not necessary. Steam has only ever locked me out of my own library once; once too many but it was a temporary fluke rather than s.o.p.

Again, you're mistaking "possible" with "financially prudent." Steam is a store, and unless they plan on shipping SRR to brick and mortar stores (which is way more expensive), they're going to need to put it somewhere else other than their own site to reach more potential customers.

Will stand my ground against DLC. When did this even become a business practice? Ah, the moment it became technologically possible to gouge us with it. What did you pay for Dragon Age 2? Add $37 of DLC. Mass Effect 3? Add $50. The Sims 3? Add a mind boggling $410. Fable 3 will charge you $1... to dye your clothes black. That's just, wow. Truly. A pallet swap. And oh, Capcom, where to begin.

Back when I started playing games, we called them expansion packs, and they were much more expensive at $40 a piece minimum (well, except for the Sims, although you could argue that they've been getting cheaper with the new a la carte style so you're not buying massive packs that you only used about 10% of).

But now the meat of it, Cost to Value ratio. When they are "done" with DLC for a title, the total typically comes to 50 - 100+% markup over the original game price tag. At that combined price point, they could be halfway if not fully done outright with a full sequel. Imagine cutting out half or whatever % of the original game equal to that exchange rate. Are those two quantities the same value? I say no. Horribly, undeniably no.

Except you're not being forced to buy the DLC. For example, with the original Black Ops, I was not (and still am not) a big fan of zombies, so I bought the multiplayer map packs (which I played regularly) but not the zombies-only map packs.

Also, quantities of what? If it's solely gameplay value in terms of hours played, then you may have a point in some cases, but not others.

That handful of retooled and recycled maps and quest chains they peddled to you is nowhere near worth half or more of the original game. It is naught but a backhanded scheme to charge you more for less and pad their bottom line.

Do you even buy DLC? The only time I've seen recycled maps are the FPS map packs, and that's because those maps were wanted by the community.

"Then don't buy it!" the sheep bleat, the magical chime of wool clippers twinkling in their furry ears. Can you honestly imagine if ANY other medium tried to get away with this? Books? Movies? Music... hm, well music has evolved past all that now, can get it all legally at a buck a track.

Books: some of the most famous books were sold at a chapter at a time in magazines starting over a hundred years ago. My particular favorite was the American book Upton Sinclair's The Jungle.

Movies: The Hobbit, Lord of the Rings, Kill Bill, Star Wars, and pretty much any movie which was offered in 2D and 3D.

And the a la carte music selection now is no different than buying singles back when people sold music in stores.

If you really have a problem with DLC, you chose the wrong hobby. DLC was just the logical and organic development of the genre (see below). Unless they're charging you extra to make a game work (And day-one DLC does not count, see below as well)

Anyhow, just because they CAN get away with doing it does not mean we should all silently ponder our hooves while the farmer sheers us. Screw that crooked farmer. We should knock him down and eat him. We cannot eat the people at Harebrained but we can snarl and scream till their ears bleed in the hope that maybe, just maybe, we will discover that they care after all. This whole mess honestly makes me wonder if EA is innocent of the SimCity fiasco after all. Maybe Maxis really IS full of incompetent pr_cks.

It appears you're missing something really important here.

*Ahem*

GAMING IS A BUSINESS. THEY NEED TO MAKE MONEY TO SURVIVE. LABOR IS NOT FREE AND THEY NEED TO GET PAID.

All that DLC, even the obvious stuff, takes time to create. It's not easy to do, especially if you need to add or change substantial mechanics to make them work (see multiplayer). As much as we like to think of them, programmers and staff need to get paid for their work. What doesn't go to them, particularly for smaller developers, go to future development. Welcome to the basis of capitalism. This isn't new (replace machinery and efficiency with manpower, licencing, and further product development).

Contrary to earnings reports of the big publishers (Activision, EA, Ubisoft, etc.), games are not very profitable. Only about 20% of titles break even, of which sequels make up a disproportionate amount (They almost never know which new IPs succeed or flop, similar to the movie industry, and, as LucasArts in the '90s demonstrated, quality is not a indicator of sales; sequels are going to be safer no matter how much we hate the practice). Not helping is the prevalence of used game sales, where these companies games are sold but they don't get a dime. This is why we have day-1 DLC: because people were reasonably intelligent and opted to buy the cheaper version of the game for $10 less than a new version of the same game, with the publishers getting nothing while the retailers pocketed up to 80% of the original costs. The companies responded with the obvious solution: make the practice of buying used game less viable by figuring out a way to raise their price after the fact. And thus day-one DLC was born, which tacked on $20 if you bought a used copy, but not if you bought a new one, effectively rewarding customers who bought new copies rather than used ones.

But, as I noted before, post-launch content DLC is not a new thing and has actually gotten cheaper in the last 20 years. Blizzard gave us SC Brood War and WC:III the Frozen Thone, Age of Empire II had the Conquors expansion, Empire Earth added two tech levels and space combat, Civilization has had 6 expansions since CivIII, HalfLife2 had the two episodes expansions. Hell, the Skyrim expansions were the first used in the Elder Scrolls sold via digital download. These expansions used to (and in the case of Blizzard, still do) cost $40 a pop unless you bought collected editions. Now they're down to $20 each and have 75-100% of the level of content they used to have. The only difference now is that I don't need to walk into a store in order to buy them. And this doesn't even cover the MMO models where expansions are practically sequels.

I buy DLC for games that I want to play more of, and I can't think of games which I have bought DLC for that weren't entire and complete games on their own (I didn't buy the Sims or Simcity after 2 and Societies, but almost everyone who looked at the Sims model and Zynga games like Farmville knows where those games were going). And when I played the DLC, I noted a distinct difference between that content and the content of the main game. I almost never buy skins or weapon packs (at least the ones not included in larger content packs), but I do buy extra mission lines and map packs. And I'm fine with this model. I get more of the game I want for less than the cost of a sequel and in sometimes less than a fifth of the development time. I want more of this game that I enjoyed, but not a half-assed sequel. DLC provides exactly that in a matter that saves costs and development time that would have been needed to develop the mechanics and puts much more weight into the development of new content. It can tell side stories that you didn't see (such as GTA IV's episodes) Even better, it can gauge whether there is even an appetite for a sequel. If you have a problem with it, then you're forgetting that this is a business and that development time is money spent on a gamble.

The Gentleman:

Nicolaus99:
I'll admit I'm less concerned about Steam as a DRM platform though GOG, CD Projekt and Minecraft have definitively proven that it is not necessary. Steam has only ever locked me out of my own library once; once too many but it was a temporary fluke rather than s.o.p.

Again, you're mistaking "possible" with "financially prudent." Steam is a store, and unless they plan on shipping SRR to brick and mortar stores (which is way more expensive), they're going to need to put it somewhere else other than their own site to reach more potential customers.

The problem isn't that its on Steam, the problem is that it is a Steam exclusive and that a lot of people funded it because they said it wouldn't be. What Harebrained Schemes does not seem to understand is that they are selling to a niche audience and that many in their audience are very against DRM and Steam exclusives(many of us still play 20+ year old games and don't trust Steam to still exist in 20+ years) and they may be losing more money in the long run with this lie then they save.

Darknacht:

The Gentleman:

Nicolaus99:
I'll admit I'm less concerned about Steam as a DRM platform though GOG, CD Projekt and Minecraft have definitively proven that it is not necessary. Steam has only ever locked me out of my own library once; once too many but it was a temporary fluke rather than s.o.p.

Again, you're mistaking "possible" with "financially prudent." Steam is a store, and unless they plan on shipping SRR to brick and mortar stores (which is way more expensive), they're going to need to put it somewhere else other than their own site to reach more potential customers.

The problem isn't that its on Steam, the problem is that it is a Steam exclusive and that a lot of people funded it because they said it wouldn't be. What Harebrained Schemes does not seem to understand is that they are selling to a niche audience and that many in their audience are very against DRM and Steam exclusives(many of us still play 20+ year old games and don't trust Steam to still exist in 20+ years) and they may be losing more money in the long run with this lie then they save.

What they gain: More security, much larger pool of possible customers.

What they loose: a handful of people who are willing to boycott a game they supported and are emotionally invested over any DRM (as opposed to just bad DRM, as is the case with EA).

I'm not seeing losses exceeding gains in this case.

Also, if Steam goes down for the count, which is possible, but unlikely without any real competition (iTunes, the Google Play Store, and EA Origin are giving tries, but, with the exception of EA, they seem more focused on mobile gaming and other media than PC games), I suspect someone at the remains of Valve or whoever is operating the service at that time will send an unlock script with a final update to prevent class-action lawsuits over lost content. It's going to be really difficult to explain to a judge why Steam would be a licencing service with the same prices as purchased digital goods, along with practices that are mysteriously similar to physical goods.

The Gentleman:

Darknacht:

The Gentleman:

Again, you're mistaking "possible" with "financially prudent." Steam is a store, and unless they plan on shipping SRR to brick and mortar stores (which is way more expensive), they're going to need to put it somewhere else other than their own site to reach more potential customers.

The problem isn't that its on Steam, the problem is that it is a Steam exclusive and that a lot of people funded it because they said it wouldn't be. What Harebrained Schemes does not seem to understand is that they are selling to a niche audience and that many in their audience are very against DRM and Steam exclusives(many of us still play 20+ year old games and don't trust Steam to still exist in 20+ years) and they may be losing more money in the long run with this lie then they save.

What they gain: More security, much larger pool of possible customers.

You think that they gain more customers by selling through fewer distribution services?

Darknacht:
You think that they gain more customers by selling through fewer distribution services?

Steam is the distribution service by which all others are measured. It's like being offered the choice of selling a product through several smaller chains or the biggest retailer out there with a temporary exclusive contract.

Here's how big it is: I keep a reasonably close eye on the gaming industry's economics and I can't name a real competitor to it other than Origin (which is competing with Steam like a village newspaper competes with News Corp.) and Amazon (whose trade practices in general make me cringe to the point of an actual personal boycot; also, I just found out about their digital downloads today). A lot of independent developers set up their own sites for downloads and maybe band a few together, but Steam is the Juggernaut that everyone refers to.

EDIT: I should add that SRR could have not had exclusivity with Steam, but I suspect that they have opted for exclusivity for assistance with promotional activity and better terms.

Did not Kickstart; will probably buy at first opportunity unless it turns out godawful. I can understand some degree of disappointment with the Steam stuff, but it doesn't matter all that much to me.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here