Nvidia GeForce 7600GS finally out for AGP

EDM wrote:
Like every other copy protection scheme ever
devised, Steam will mean far more financial losses than
gains for Valve.

I'm not so sure. If Steam was just a copy protection scheme I'd agree,
but it's also an easy content-delivery service... I've bought games
from Steam that I probably never would in the 'real world' because it's
so easy to do so: just enter the credit card number and it's there by
the next morning, rather than waiting days for the post, or having to
drive to the nearest game store. And no need to find the bloody CD to
stick in the drive every time I want to play them.

Mark

"EDM" writes:

"pc games" wrote in message ups.com...
EDM wrote:

And most of your other assumptions are equally absurd.
"Every year we have seen less and less releases"????
That's unqualified nonsense. If you want to use Valve as
one example among many, they've been releasing more and
more titles every year, not less.

So basically what you are saying is you prefer someone like
Valve telling you what to do than you deciding for yourself?

Valve has already decided for you when it comes to STEAM
Do you think STEAM lets you lend PC Games to your friends?
NO!
Do you think STEAM lets you use the 2nd hand market?
NO!
So if STEAM imposes the authority set by Master Valve then
no problem... you become a well behaved obeying slave
But if I say you should think TWICE before lending to friends
or using the 2nd hand market cause it MIGHT be damaging for
you cause its damaging for the PC Game market then you don't
accept.
If I ask you to use your own BRAIN, you say NO!
If Valve tell you what to do, you say YES!

And likewise, you condemn piracy and selling 2nd hand
software, and then you blame Valve for preventing what
you've just condemned. How much sense does that make?

Look, I'm the last person who would attempt to defend
Steam. Like every other copy protection scheme ever
devised, Steam will mean far more financial losses than
gains for Valve. My point is, the PC gaming industry has

It will? How?

I think the companies who do the work also do their homework with regard
to "lost customers" v "loss through piracy".

never been so alive and well, regardless of these pointless
attempts at trying to stop human nature and the inevitable.
Valve will learn their lesson, like Lotus and Novell and
1000 other companies have over the last 30 years.

"Walter Mitty" wrote in message ...
"EDM" writes:

"pc games" wrote in message ups.com...
EDM wrote:

And most of your other assumptions are equally absurd.
"Every year we have seen less and less releases"????
That's unqualified nonsense. If you want to use Valve as
one example among many, they've been releasing more and
more titles every year, not less.

So basically what you are saying is you prefer someone like
Valve telling you what to do than you deciding for yourself?

Valve has already decided for you when it comes to STEAM
Do you think STEAM lets you lend PC Games to your friends?
NO!
Do you think STEAM lets you use the 2nd hand market?
NO!
So if STEAM imposes the authority set by Master Valve then
no problem... you become a well behaved obeying slave
But if I say you should think TWICE before lending to friends
or using the 2nd hand market cause it MIGHT be damaging for
you cause its damaging for the PC Game market then you don't
accept.
If I ask you to use your own BRAIN, you say NO!
If Valve tell you what to do, you say YES!

And likewise, you condemn piracy and selling 2nd hand
software, and then you blame Valve for preventing what
you've just condemned. How much sense does that make?

Look, I'm the last person who would attempt to defend
Steam. Like every other copy protection scheme ever
devised, Steam will mean far more financial losses than
gains for Valve. My point is, the PC gaming industry has

It will? How?

I think the companies who do the work also do their homework with regard
to "lost customers" v "loss through piracy".

One thing's been consistent over the last 30 years: companies
have clearly /not/ done their homework in this regard. Every
copy protection scheme ever devised has been an unqualified
failure (in fact in most cases, catastrophic) for the bean counters
who've implemented them.

The bottom line is, 90% of us are honest, and that's enough to
keep any software developer who produces good products in
business and profitable, and the other 10% who won't buy
software regardless of whether it's copy protected aren't worth
trying to stop. Do you seriously believe Valve has received
more in revenue from reduced piracy than they've spent
designing, coding, implementing and supporting Steam? Every
formal review of Valve products has complained bitterly about
Steam; amazon.com calls it the "spawn of satan". How many
lost sales did that cost Valve, from just a single retailer?

The question isn't whether Valve will eventually drop Steam,
it's just a question of whether they'll be pig-headed and greedy
enough to let it drive them out of business before they drop it.

EDM wrote:
Do you seriously believe Valve has received
more in revenue from reduced piracy than they've spent
designing, coding, implementing and supporting Steam?

No, but I bet they've more than paid for it in increased income. A game
sold through a retailer probably gives them less than 50% of the sale
price, a game sold through Steam gives them the full price minus the
cost of bandwidth.

Every
formal review of Valve products has complained bitterly about
Steam;

Maybe I don't read enough reviews, but I haven't seen a single one
complain bitterly about Steam myself.

amazon.com calls it the "spawn of satan".

Even if that's true, it's hardly surprising that a retailer would
complain about a system which cuts out the middlemen in game
distribution. If all game companies start distributing games
themselves, that's the end for retail gaming profits.

How many
lost sales did that cost Valve, from just a single retailer?

I'm sure Valve are very, very happy to lose retail sales to Steam: it
must dramatically increase their income.

The question isn't whether Valve will eventually drop Steam,
it's just a question of whether they'll be pig-headed and greedy
enough to let it drive them out of business before they drop it.

Of course not: I'm sure it's been a great success for them so far...
though given the bandwidth usage for perpetual updates I do sometimes
wonder if they'll eventually lose more money than they gain. I suppose
they'll stop releasing any significant updates for older games after a
while, so there's a finite cost for most games they sell.

Mark

"EDM" writes:

trying to stop. Do you seriously believe Valve has received
more in revenue from reduced piracy than they've spent
designing, coding, implementing and supporting Steam? Every

Yes. The main point was to stop the initial pirating. Even if cracks do
exist, a lot of people are a little in awe of STEAM and think they might
end up being caught out. I can only go on who I know : and I know noone
who pirated it or obtained a crack - they all paid and preloaded it
waiting for the big day, the launch of HL2.

formal review of Valve products has complained bitterly about
Steam; amazon.com calls it the "spawn of satan". How many
lost sales did that cost Valve, from just a single retailer?

Not many. Only people who dont know how it works really complain. See a
recent thread on how long it took to installed.


The question isn't whether Valve will eventually drop Steam,
it's just a question of whether they'll be pig-headed and greedy
enough to let it drive them out of business before they drop it.


Are you crazy? They're earning a *fortune* from it. Have you seen the
growing online catalog? Every online game they sell, its money back into
the bank for them - hardly any overheads at all. Hopefully this will
guarentee their continued presence in the games design and
implementation market : they produce excellent SW.

wrote in message ups.com...
EDM wrote:
Do you seriously believe Valve has received
more in revenue from reduced piracy than they've spent
designing, coding, implementing and supporting Steam?

No, but I bet they've more than paid for it in increased income. A game
sold through a retailer probably gives them less than 50% of the sale
price, a game sold through Steam gives them the full price minus the
cost of bandwidth.

Guess what percentage of people get the game via download.

Three out of every four internet connections are dialup.

Do the math.

"EDM" writes:

wrote in message ups.com...
EDM wrote:
Do you seriously believe Valve has received
more in revenue from reduced piracy than they've spent
designing, coding, implementing and supporting Steam?

No, but I bet they've more than paid for it in increased income. A game
sold through a retailer probably gives them less than 50% of the sale
price, a game sold through Steam gives them the full price minus the
cost of bandwidth.

Guess what percentage of people get the game via download.

Three out of every four internet connections are dialup.

Do the math.


What math?

We would need to know about what % of users with dial up modems also
play FPS.

And Ill bet you a far higher% of people with DSL play FPS than do those
with old tech dial up modems.

"Walter Mitty" wrote in message ...
"EDM" writes:

wrote in message ups.com...
EDM wrote:
Do you seriously believe Valve has received
more in revenue from reduced piracy than they've spent
designing, coding, implementing and supporting Steam?

No, but I bet they've more than paid for it in increased income. A game
sold through a retailer probably gives them less than 50% of the sale
price, a game sold through Steam gives them the full price minus the
cost of bandwidth.

Guess what percentage of people get the game via download.

Three out of every four internet connections are dialup.

Do the math.


What math?

We would need to know about what % of users with dial up modems also
play FPS.

No, we just need to know that 3 out of 4 people can't download
entire games even if they wanted to. Which roughly translates
into 75% of the gaming market, maybe slightly less overall.

"EDM" writes:

"Walter Mitty" wrote in message ...
"EDM" writes:

wrote in message ups.com...
EDM wrote:
Do you seriously believe Valve has received
more in revenue from reduced piracy than they've spent
designing, coding, implementing and supporting Steam?

No, but I bet they've more than paid for it in increased income. A game
sold through a retailer probably gives them less than 50% of the sale
price, a game sold through Steam gives them the full price minus the
cost of bandwidth.

Guess what percentage of people get the game via download.

Three out of every four internet connections are dialup.

Do the math.


What math?

We would need to know about what % of users with dial up modems also
play FPS.

No, we just need to know that 3 out of 4 people can't download
entire games even if they wanted to. Which roughly translates
into 75% of the gaming market, maybe slightly less overall.

That makes no sense.

The bit that ruins your assertion is the "if they wnated to" bit. We
dont know if they want to or not : and I'm asserting that a lot dont
want to either download or buy and play FPS games.

"Walter Mitty" wrote in message ...
"EDM" writes:

"Walter Mitty" wrote in message ...
"EDM" writes:

wrote in message ups.com...
EDM wrote:
Do you seriously believe Valve has received
more in revenue from reduced piracy than they've spent
designing, coding, implementing and supporting Steam?

No, but I bet they've more than paid for it in increased income. A game
sold through a retailer probably gives them less than 50% of the sale
price, a game sold through Steam gives them the full price minus the
cost of bandwidth.

Guess what percentage of people get the game via download.

Three out of every four internet connections are dialup.

Do the math.


What math?

We would need to know about what % of users with dial up modems also
play FPS.

No, we just need to know that 3 out of 4 people can't download
entire games even if they wanted to. Which roughly translates
into 75% of the gaming market, maybe slightly less overall.

That makes no sense.

The bit that ruins your assertion is the "if they wnated to" bit. We
dont know if they want to or not : and I'm asserting that a lot dont
want to either download or buy and play FPS games.

30% of PCs have no internet connection at all. Of the 70%
that do, 75% are dialup.

That leaves 17.5% as potential HL2 downloaders. What
percentage of broadband users are also gamers? Figuring
half (which is probably exaggerated), that's just under 9%
of the market.