[quote=“Daff!yflyer”]
Might be possible, or might be horribly complex and unrealistic for a tiny team like us. We’ll see.[/quote]
I certainly hope so. I really don’t want to miss out on Automation. 
To put it this way, I’ve been without Internet (I’m using my mobile phone and data currently) and I’m still playing the release when the tracks first came out! I live in a rather remote location. Internet is expensive out here. Going to update tomorrow though, can’t wait
This is my first and probably only message in this forum. Why? Because deal with it. I like the game since beside of being innovative it’s really well done, but I’m quite unsocial in the game community. It’s just my leisure and I don’t want to get it too complicated. Also there are plenty of people who know how this game should look and work to be as much realistic and still playable as possible, so I don’t want to get in such debates. I only want to lay out my point of view in this matter.
From this short intro you could possibly deduce that I’m not a supporter of Steam-only idea. Yes, I don’t like Steam (and any other similar services) so I don’t use Steam and I never will. It’s just a burden to me. I don’t think that technically it would not work for me, but still it’s another thing I would have to do / get to play my games. It’s also letting a middleman between me and the developer - something you don’t do if you really, really don’t have to. Stupid and unthinkable. I want to pay you for your product and not some agent just for standing between us.
It won’t bother me if there still will be an option to just dl game from your site (or through launcher like it works now), but If this will be a condition to get the game - well, I guess I won’t get it then, which is quite unfair since I paid for it already. Real cars and engines are much more satysfying anyway, even if we’re talking about Automation.
Conclusion? Never pay in advance for an unfinished product. This is the first game that seemed to be worthy of such action and considering this backstab I think it will be the last one.
What backstab? Our asking “would you be fine with Steam only”? How is that a backstab in any sense?
Is it a backstab, really, when people are, as a majority, asking for this convenience? Be as passionate as you like about it, let us know what you want, that is why this post was made. It isn’t another thing, but rather THE thing you would have to do. People want this because having one launcher for 30 games is much more convenient than 30 launchers. It also would be less work for the devs, would better spread the news about the game through Steam’s own advertising, and would make things in general more stable. Why is it more work to go on Steam? HOW is it a burden, over the current Camshaft-run launcher? You forgot to put reasons into this comment.
Please, try to keep in constructive, rather than hateful.
Out of interest, why would you not want to open an account there? Quite a few people seem less willing to create a Steam account than an Automation account and I’d like to know why.[/quote]
Because I do not want to support the company, I dislike it. I’m fine at supporting Automation because I like your company.
Also if it does not work (bug or anything), automation wont work.
[quote=“Borobej”] It’s also letting a middleman between me and the developer - something you don’t do if you really, really don’t have to. Stupid and unthinkable. I want to pay you for your product and not some agent just for standing between us.
[/quote]
Clearly you do not produce a good or service yourself that you distribute through an electronic medium, or you would never make such a statement.
I do (not games, book). What you just said is tantamount to “I’d like to buy your books directly through you, because Amazon is a middleman, and that’s stupid to go through them”. Quite the opposite. Going through Amazon makes my market and audience so much larger it’s ridiculous, and it would be stupid of me NOT to use them.
Pretty much the same here with Automation and Steam. And the developer was NICE ENOUGH to ASK your opinion rather than just simply making their own decision.
The fact that the vast majority of the users that answered the poll prefer the Steam only option should tell you two things:
Don’t like it? Start your own game with your own launcher. Go capture the 6% of the market that is vehement enough against Steam to be in your corner. 6%.
Or at least interact with the devs in a civilized way, instead of throwing a tantrum that’s on par with my 6 year old kid.
(Or hey, wait to find out if they ACTUALLY go Steam-only, or decide to keep a separate launcher as an option. I know that’s a novel concept…)
Although i play with this regularly i dont really come on the forum very often, but after receiving an email i thought with a big move like this on the cards i may as well give my opinion.
I’m very much for going down the steam route, i have been a firm believer in steam since its early days and have the vast majority of my game collection on steam, thats not to say i limit myself to only purchasing games on steam but its a lot more convenient for me if games are steam based.
I feel that if you were to use steam as a distribution method it would open up the game to a much wider audience, personally i happened upon the game by chance, i think steam would boost the sales side of things vastly.
at the end of the day i’m happy either way, but i think it would benefit the Devs in the long run if they were to go with steam.
but i’ll support whatever action the devs take.
Note that there will most likely be a way of buying a Steam key directly from our website, for which Valve does not take a cut. Also it’s worth noting that from our point of view as a developer, the share Valve takes of sales compared to the services they provide us are pretty good value.
Also we’re going to see if we can do a version that works without Steam (but doesn’t have any kind of Multiplayer features). So folks who really really want to avoid Steam can do so, as long as they don’t want Multiplayer. I’d therefore hold off on calling it a backstab quite yet.
It’s a bit dramatic and misguided to call your actions a “back stab”. Taking the time and effort to ask your player base what they want and what would best suit them is the complete opposite of a back stab!
Anyway, I voted for steam only. Though it would be good if you could make the game available to the people who won’t/can’t use steam my vote IS for my personal preference and that is that you invest the time that would be spent on keeping a second version of the game going on making the steam version of the game better.
TBH, for years I was one of the “I’ll never use steam” people, I hated the very idea of it! I didn’t want everyone to know what I was playing and when etc etc, all the usual stuff. But then a close friend wanted to multi-play a game on steam so I relented an got an account but it was “only going to multi-play that one game, I’m not using it for anything else”.
Fast forward a few years later and I’m a true convert now, Automation is the only game I ever play that isn’t on Steam.
There are so many reasons I love steam, most centre around convenience, patches are easy, mods are easy, DLC is easy, multi-player is easy, not having dozens of DVD’s to cart around every time I move house is easy.
So what if my friends know what games I’m playing? I might get more friends playing my favourite games and get more people to play with because of it.
Steam fucking sucks
I hate this. I just want the stupid launcher as it is. It works fucking fine. I don’t want to have to link up a bunch of shit.
I don’t like steam but I wouldn’t call it a backstab either! I appreciate that you asked. That courtesy goes a long way!
[quote=“Daffyflyer”]Well, we can probably promise that if anyone randomly loses a copy of Automation that we’d provide a new key for free. But if folks aren’t willing to use the service then I just don’t know.
We will investigate further if it’s possible to maintain a non-steam version that still works yet doesn’t take up our entire lives to maintain, I suspect if it is doable the tradeoff is that multiplayer might not be workable in that version[/quote]
Another game (of many, no doubt) that has faced a similar situation is Kerbal Space Program. A steam key, as well as a launcher is available (I don’t use either), and they also have a full download available on their webstore. I have no idea if a webstore download is even plausible for your team, but it would avoid the need to maintain a launcher.
No multiplayer is not an issue for me.
[quote=“Diax1324”]Steam fucking sucks
I hate this. I just want the stupid launcher as it is. It works fucking fine. I don’t want to have to link up a bunch of shit.[/quote]
Yeah, lucky installing Automation is much more simple and reliable than Steam 
Yeah, it’s made a bit easier for them by lack of Multiplayer, but I think we can work something out. Folks will just have to accept that the cost of their refusal to use Steam might be lack of multiplayer, and a more complicated, less reliable patching & installing process.
On the topic of people being worried that Steam is A: difficult to install/sign up for etc. or B: buggy/unreliable. It’s worth noting that our current launcher is both quite unreliable at patching, and confusing enough that we get quite a few support emails regarding the activation or install process.
A thing that nobody has mentioned, I think that the guys who does not want the steam launcher are generally pirates who does not use steam 
Also for me online is no issue I do not online game so a stand alone game to download from the forum will be fine, if you decide to do it. Will probably get some hate from this post but I think it is the cold hard truth.
[size=50]Im against steam too 
[/size]
If really its going to affect to final design or quality i prefer steam option
I’ll chime in here, as someone who can understand both sides of the argument (For: Easier Patching, Social, Multiplayer - Against: Another app eating system resources, steam’s quirks, privacy, lack of reliable internet connection) and as someone who’s worked in IT Infrastructure, it seems to me that some folks are missing the point.
I know that Steam can be a PITA to deal with (heck, I’m not crazy about it at times), but it provides a lot of the infrastructure that the devs need and they don’t have to double up their workload for updates + maintaining servers, network infrastructure, database backends, etc. And seeing as they’re only about 6(?) guys, that’s a lot of work to do. Heck, it takes a team of 6 just maintain the servers in the small building I work in (and that’s just only 500 people).
To be able to create a standalone version, you’d need to develop an API and back-end to allow the launcher to talk to the server to authenticate your game, check for updates, process transactions, verify that they aren’t fraudulent, etc. Well… that requires more time and work from the devs, possibly hiring a specialist (or two) to help develop the system, then they need to learn how to maintain said system, fix it if things bork up, etc., etc. Thus, taking time away from creating more content and ironing kinks out. Also, you lose out on multi-player and possible DLC (as that takes even more work to add into a system).
By using Steam, the devs can just use a common API and tools to handle the bulk of the above work and technical issues and all they have to do is focusing on putting a quality product. Steam takes a cut of the profits, but it would end up saving the guys a lot more time and money in the long run as someone else is dealing with the infrastructure and supply chain so to speak… let’s face it, renting racks in a datacentre (or hosting your own) ain’t cheap and I should know, I rent a rack of machines from a datacentre in Montreal and it costs me a pretty penny and I have to maintain it all on my own (apart from hardware replacement and cabling which is handled by the datacentre) and they make sure I pay for everything… electricity, connectivity, the space the rack occupies, access to a remote KVM…
Make that 3, out of which one has a normal day job as well. 
Otherwise you are correct! The Steam integration seems to be very dev-friendly, too.
Hate to say it but the current launcher could be alot better. it only downloads 1 update at a time and i find the download servers to be rather slow. steam implimentation would make updating a far more simple and straight forward process. however good it would be to have the option to use either, it is much better use of resources to focus on steam release as that will be a much larger croud to tend to. the people who cant play on steam, sad to say its probably going to have to be the only way. poll says it, 666 people (82%) have voted for steam only.
No need to hate to say it! We’re not very happy with it either