- Status
People need to get over themselves, it just temporarily breaks mods. This will happen again people so get used to it, when they patch the game, they will often break mods. It seems to me that this was a necessary patch to make sure the DRM was working as intended. Don't cry like a little bitch.
Nothing against you Steam fans, but honestly I don't get why you guys love Steam so much.
I have purchased games through Steam when they have their sales and it's been an OK experience. But NOTHING can compare to owning a physical copy of a game. You are paying the same price (unless you buy a game on sale) why not just go to the store?
I do fear Steam has been helping for sometime speed up the momentum to a day where games are 100% digital and that's the only option we will have as consumers. I hope this doesn't happen though.
There are things about Steam that are annoying as hell though. Like for example, buying a game (through Steam or a physical copy) and installing it ... then after waiting sometimes 20 minutes for the game to install you are FORCED to update the game through Steam before you can even play it (I'm talking campaign mode too, not online) If you do not have a fast connection, you could be waiting hours before you are even able to play the game. What a joke!
If the physical copy of the game was not tied into to some 3rd party software like Steam, you could install the game and play it immediately and bypass all this other BS.
I have purchased games through Steam when they have their sales and it's been an OK experience. But NOTHING can compare to owning a physical copy of a game. You are paying the same price (unless you buy a game on sale) why not just go to the store?
I do fear Steam has been helping for sometime speed up the momentum to a day where games are 100% digital and that's the only option we will have as consumers. I hope this doesn't happen though.
There are things about Steam that are annoying as hell though. Like for example, buying a game (through Steam or a physical copy) and installing it ... then after waiting sometimes 20 minutes for the game to install you are FORCED to update the game through Steam before you can even play it (I'm talking campaign mode too, not online) If you do not have a fast connection, you could be waiting hours before you are even able to play the game. What a joke!
If the physical copy of the game was not tied into to some 3rd party software like Steam, you could install the game and play it immediately and bypass all this other BS.
larkspur
Distinguished
- Mar 10, 2011
- 2,252
- 111
- 21,090
[citation][nom]zilnicra[/nom]with the exception of HL and HL2, i haven't played a game worth coming back to. [/citation]
That's too bad. I go back to 10 and 15 year old titles quite a bit and its nice to just pop in a disk to install and play rather than wait for a DL. Getting them to work on modern OSes though is the pain. Steam works fine, I haven't had problems getting mods to run, but I do worry that someday they won't be around. I imagine though that I could still find a way to play them.
That's too bad. I go back to 10 and 15 year old titles quite a bit and its nice to just pop in a disk to install and play rather than wait for a DL. Getting them to work on modern OSes though is the pain. Steam works fine, I haven't had problems getting mods to run, but I do worry that someday they won't be around. I imagine though that I could still find a way to play them.
@longliverock1974: Don't expect to get less restrictions simply because you buy something on a disc. In the end, it can be tied to Steam just as easily as downloading it directly from Steam.
vaderseven
Distinguished
- Aug 4, 2009
- 21
- 0
- 18,510
HL and HL2 the only ones?
I still, to this day, play the following games from time to time:
Warcraft3
StarCraft BW
HL1 & 2
TF1 & 2
Diablo 2
CS 1.6 & Source
I usually only play them if a friend wants to play them but I do play them. Hell I played through Planescape Torment recently and thats single player only.
Saying its ok to be screwed out of a game that you dont own but just have a right to play when the developer says its ok to play its BS. I want to own my games and play them with my friends. Thats it. Nothing complicatd or dumb about that.
I still, to this day, play the following games from time to time:
Warcraft3
StarCraft BW
HL1 & 2
TF1 & 2
Diablo 2
CS 1.6 & Source
I usually only play them if a friend wants to play them but I do play them. Hell I played through Planescape Torment recently and thats single player only.
Saying its ok to be screwed out of a game that you dont own but just have a right to play when the developer says its ok to play its BS. I want to own my games and play them with my friends. Thats it. Nothing complicatd or dumb about that.
[citation][nom]jacekring[/nom]This will let you take off the FPS cap. I used it, and it works just fine.[/citation]My monitor only supports 59/60 hz, I use it at 60hz which means it can only display 60 fps anyway. Even if I was getting 200 fps, it would still only render 60 on my monitor. So I don't see any point in raising the fps cap as it will not make the game look any nicer or run any smoother. It would only raise the temp of my graphics cards as they would max out at 100%, and it would increase the responsiveness of the game as there would be frames rendered that you don't see. (mind you even if you are rendering at 120 fps and only seeing 60 it would mean AT MOST a 1/60th of a second lag, as it would skip every other frame from displaying.)I have a 27" LCD which renders at 1920x1200 in 16:10 aspect ratio. I use a Spyder Pro color analyzer to get my display colors photo accurate. I need a new monitor but I can't' justify a new one as this one is huge and the resolution is good enough to the point that my wife would KILL me if I bought a new one.[/citation]
You can get over 60FPS on a monitor that only displays 60Hz. When you turn off Vsync, this is why you get tearing (the FPS and screen refresh are not synced) and you are sometime seeing a partial frame. Still even with tearing, I've always thought it makes most games a bit more fluid.
The true test would be try the Skyrim tweak with Vsync on and off and decide for yourself. I applied the tweak and although there is some minimal screen tearing, I still prefer Vsync off.
You can get over 60FPS on a monitor that only displays 60Hz. When you turn off Vsync, this is why you get tearing (the FPS and screen refresh are not synced) and you are sometime seeing a partial frame. Still even with tearing, I've always thought it makes most games a bit more fluid.
The true test would be try the Skyrim tweak with Vsync on and off and decide for yourself. I applied the tweak and although there is some minimal screen tearing, I still prefer Vsync off.
dickcheney
Distinguished
- Aug 11, 2011
- 194
- 0
- 18,680
[citation][nom]jacekring[/nom]This will let you take off the FPS cap. I used it, and it works just fine.[/citation]My monitor only supports 59/60 hz, I use it at 60hz which means it can only display 60 fps anyway. Even if I was getting 200 fps, it would still only render 60 on my monitor. So I don't see any point in raising the fps cap as it will not make the game look any nicer or run any smoother. It would only raise the temp of my graphics cards as they would max out at 100%, and it would increase the responsiveness of the game as there would be frames rendered that you don't see. (mind you even if you are rendering at 120 fps and only seeing 60 it would mean AT MOST a 1/60th of a second lag, as it would skip every other frame from displaying.)I have a 27" LCD which renders at 1920x1200 in 16:10 aspect ratio. I use a Spyder Pro color analyzer to get my display colors photo accurate. I need a new monitor but I can't' justify a new one as this one is huge and the resolution is good enough to the point that my wife would KILL me if I bought a new one.[/citation]
Grats on defeating your own argument. The advantage of having more than 60fps is that each frame displayed is ''fresher''.
My GPU is always at 99% and thats how it should be. Heat is irrelevant.
Grats on defeating your own argument. The advantage of having more than 60fps is that each frame displayed is ''fresher''.
My GPU is always at 99% and thats how it should be. Heat is irrelevant.
dontknownotsure
Distinguished
- Jan 4, 2011
- 298
- 0
- 18,790
I have a bad feeling entrusting all my games to single service such as steam, what if the service are to be terminated? it should provide option to permanent convert games into offline mode.
daneren2005
Distinguished
- Aug 11, 2011
- 25
- 0
- 18,530
[citation][nom]dontknownotsure[/nom]I have a bad feeling entrusting all my games to single service such as steam, what if the service are to be terminated? it should provide option to permanent convert games into offline mode.[/citation]
Then just download the game and don't feel bad because you previously legally purchased it. I have never looked for a game that wasn't full cracked before. There are usually fully-playable and unbugged cracks available within a few months of release.
Then just download the game and don't feel bad because you previously legally purchased it. I have never looked for a game that wasn't full cracked before. There are usually fully-playable and unbugged cracks available within a few months of release.
[citation][nom]dontknownotsure[/nom]I have a bad feeling entrusting all my games to single service such as steam, what if the service are to be terminated? it should provide option to permanent convert games into offline mode.[/citation]
I agree, this is a very valid point. And to the guy above who is saying pirate them, what about playing online?
I don't care how many hardcore Steam fans there are, I'll never trust Steam with all my games.
I agree, this is a very valid point. And to the guy above who is saying pirate them, what about playing online?
I don't care how many hardcore Steam fans there are, I'll never trust Steam with all my games.
Why do they keep doing this to us.. Let us play the game the way we want to play it. If they make a crap looking console game, let PC gamers mod it to meet their specifications! Time to write some angry emails at Bethseda [sic]. If they lock my recently bought game to enjoyment level okish but poo, I'll typo their name from now on.
lordstormdragon
Distinguished
- Sep 2, 2011
- 153
- 0
- 18,680
Actually, fixing or solidifying the .exe itself has NO bearing whatsoever on mods to the game, new user-created content, or anything else that PC users expect from an Elder Scrolls title. No mods or add-ons affected the .exe itself in Morrowind, Oblivion, or Fallout 3. All mods for the previous TES titles either came in as data files copy-pasted into the game's Data directory (which is below its .exe file, at the root folder anyway) or were extended scripts which used OBSE for example, which has its own launcher anyway.
That said, it's really only something affecting Steam users. And THAT said, it's what you should expect when you use such a service - letting an online entity control your experience is preposterous for a game such as Skyrim, which has no reason to ever access the Internet on its own anyway. Downloaded content should simply be downloaded. If you can't copy-paste a file into a proper directory or run an official DLC launcher, just stick with your Xbox or PS3 please.
Steam is basically a Windows game-dumber-downer. Why do you need Steam? You simply don't.
There's nothing to cry about. My Skyrim runs great, flying along on a measly GTS250 at 35 FPS, 1680x1050, with minimal enhancements - but it's fluid, never crashes, and is as great an experience as I had hoped!
That said, it's really only something affecting Steam users. And THAT said, it's what you should expect when you use such a service - letting an online entity control your experience is preposterous for a game such as Skyrim, which has no reason to ever access the Internet on its own anyway. Downloaded content should simply be downloaded. If you can't copy-paste a file into a proper directory or run an official DLC launcher, just stick with your Xbox or PS3 please.
Steam is basically a Windows game-dumber-downer. Why do you need Steam? You simply don't.
There's nothing to cry about. My Skyrim runs great, flying along on a measly GTS250 at 35 FPS, 1680x1050, with minimal enhancements - but it's fluid, never crashes, and is as great an experience as I had hoped!
eddieroolz
Splendid
- Sep 6, 2008
- 7,057
- 0
- 25,860
tehinternetguy
Distinguished
- Jun 25, 2010
- 31
- 0
- 18,530
[citation][nom]eddieroolz[/nom]Way to go Bethesda, way to go. Your reputation goes further down the drain for me.[/citation]
Oh man, all those guys at Bethesda Softworks must be crying right now.
Oh man, all those guys at Bethesda Softworks must be crying right now.
this article is very misleading. The only reason the one mod broke was because it modified the executable file, which is a very bad way to go about implementing the mod in the first place. This update will not impact the modding community in any way, shape or form, and Bethesda isn't out to ruin the ability for people to mod the game.
Fact: Only 17% of initial sales of this game were on the PC.
Fact: The other 83% of sales were on console.
Can you really blame them for focusing on the consoles?
Fact: $300+ for a good console and accesories, $1500 for a good gaming PC with software. Both with a lifetime of about 3 years before upgrade/new console.
Consoles cost ~20% of what a good, lasting gaming PC costs, hence, 80% of people buy consoles rather than PCs.
The odds are stacked against us...
Fact: The other 83% of sales were on console.
Can you really blame them for focusing on the consoles?
Fact: $300+ for a good console and accesories, $1500 for a good gaming PC with software. Both with a lifetime of about 3 years before upgrade/new console.
Consoles cost ~20% of what a good, lasting gaming PC costs, hence, 80% of people buy consoles rather than PCs.
The odds are stacked against us...
I do not understand Why No one reads any more? Skyrim installs the client first. It logs you on, Many Hosts have explained the hard work around to intall the Game including Gstaff at Bethsoft as well. The steam Client is not going anywhere, It's here to stay, They have provided the needed software to prevent it's own client from doing what all of you are complaining about. How I know this is the fact you are complaining, this tells me you have not read the client software at all. Games Drop down, Select Non steam game to add to your library, Select the skyrim executable and set it, install the game, Steam will not touch that executable any more, IF IT DID ! Valve would be liable to lawsuits coming out of their ears ,I use the client for Crysis 3 Engine, it has not touched it, It does provide me with more tools than you will ever know. I know this too because you dont read any thing at all. There is no AI there, The software has been Provided at Great cost. If the patching destroys the execitable, then it's on them NOT you to complain, reinstall the game with this in mind, Later , down the road , when they have got it right, then you can patch the executable. Stop Fighting Valve, Use it instead. YOU PAID for it, Why are yuo not using it?
[citation][nom]dontknownotsure[/nom]I have a bad feeling entrusting all my games to single service such as steam, what if the service are to be terminated? it should provide option to permanent convert games into offline mode.[/citation]
Buy the game and dl the crack. I prefer getting the boxed version of the game and downloading the not so legit copy. If it has a really good multiplayer then I'm forced to open the box. lol
Buy the game and dl the crack. I prefer getting the boxed version of the game and downloading the not so legit copy. If it has a really good multiplayer then I'm forced to open the box. lol
I HATE this new direction of gaming. I paid $60 for a game and am FORCED to use Steam? I don't happen to like Steam! This is all over advertising...like Facebook trying to force you into so many 'clicks'. They can charge more for advertising if they can prove X amount of traffic will see it. The first day I ran this my game shut off on it's own and then Steam ran me through some advertisements! Total BS!!
[citation][nom]PraxGTI[/nom]Fact: Only 17% of initial sales of this game were on the PC.Fact: The other 83% of sales were on console.Can you really blame them for focusing on the consoles?[/citation]
You mean focus on the Xbox 360, since the PS3 is still awaiting the slowdown bug.
[citation][nom]PraxGTI[/nom]Fact: $300+ for a good console and accesories, $1500 for a good gaming PC with software. Both with a lifetime of about 3 years before upgrade/new console.Consoles cost ~20% of what a good, lasting gaming PC costs, hence, 80% of people buy consoles rather than PCs.The odds are stacked against us...[/citation]
My PS3 lasted 4 years, but had to be serviced because of the Blu-ray diode burning out (a common problem). It cost me $150+tax to fix it. Cost me $399 to buy the 40GB fat model and I spent ~$90 for a 250GB hard drive at the time to upgrade it. Plus, there is no sight of a PS4 on the horizon, although I'm not too concerned with it since there are still lots of games I haven't played yet.
On PC though, if a game is going to be stuck to an online service like that, I think I'd rather just omit upgrading/replacing a PC every two years and just settle for a service like OnLive where all the settings can be cranked up (let their datacenter handle it) and I don't have to be putting out $1500 on graphics and CPU replacements all the time. Plus, I have a choice on what I can play it on - PC, tablet, or their $100 microconsole. I use OnLive right now on my laptop. It's got an E-350 APU in it (Lenovo ThinkPad x120e) so it can't exactly play new games. I found a hack for using my PS3 controller on my laptop though, and it emulates an Xbox 360 controller for Xinput games (even with rumble), and OnLive kicks ass on it. I played Batman Arkham Asylum on it with no lag whatsoever and yet I knew the graphics would never look like that if it played locally on this APU. I think Steam should either invest heavily in media streaming servers with high-end GPU's or partner up with OnLive to increase their library. I don't see anything wrong with partnering, since OnLive already has this infrastructure in North America. Games should just come with an "Streaming mode" and "Download mode" for different computer and internet types.
You mean focus on the Xbox 360, since the PS3 is still awaiting the slowdown bug.
[citation][nom]PraxGTI[/nom]Fact: $300+ for a good console and accesories, $1500 for a good gaming PC with software. Both with a lifetime of about 3 years before upgrade/new console.Consoles cost ~20% of what a good, lasting gaming PC costs, hence, 80% of people buy consoles rather than PCs.The odds are stacked against us...[/citation]
My PS3 lasted 4 years, but had to be serviced because of the Blu-ray diode burning out (a common problem). It cost me $150+tax to fix it. Cost me $399 to buy the 40GB fat model and I spent ~$90 for a 250GB hard drive at the time to upgrade it. Plus, there is no sight of a PS4 on the horizon, although I'm not too concerned with it since there are still lots of games I haven't played yet.
On PC though, if a game is going to be stuck to an online service like that, I think I'd rather just omit upgrading/replacing a PC every two years and just settle for a service like OnLive where all the settings can be cranked up (let their datacenter handle it) and I don't have to be putting out $1500 on graphics and CPU replacements all the time. Plus, I have a choice on what I can play it on - PC, tablet, or their $100 microconsole. I use OnLive right now on my laptop. It's got an E-350 APU in it (Lenovo ThinkPad x120e) so it can't exactly play new games. I found a hack for using my PS3 controller on my laptop though, and it emulates an Xbox 360 controller for Xinput games (even with rumble), and OnLive kicks ass on it. I played Batman Arkham Asylum on it with no lag whatsoever and yet I knew the graphics would never look like that if it played locally on this APU. I think Steam should either invest heavily in media streaming servers with high-end GPU's or partner up with OnLive to increase their library. I don't see anything wrong with partnering, since OnLive already has this infrastructure in North America. Games should just come with an "Streaming mode" and "Download mode" for different computer and internet types.
yeah well now tht ive given up for bethesda im going to enjoy my other copy i bought for xbox...I knew a back up game was nessecary Im tired of pc being fingered by bethesda
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question New build wont post Gigabyte B650M Gaming Plus wifi , AMD Ryzen 5 7600X CPU, 32GB T-Force RGB DDR5. Need help!
- Started by Notmiserable
- Replies: 26
-
Discussion PSU recommendations and power supply discussion thread - Tom's hardware- Started by Darkbreeze
- Replies: 2K
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
-
Question Upgraded from a 1060 6GB to a 2070 Super, barely notice the difference in fps???- Started by MrFlyingstickman
- Replies: 17
-
Question Debit card compromised, paranoid about malware
- Started by royrichard1290
- Replies: 3
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram