To get the DLC for NV I have the game on PC and was just wondering if downloading from steam is the only option to get these

Yes that's the only way for now, however GOTY edition of the game may have all DLS'c included in later time.

Yes as of now Steam is only way for PC. They have not announced a GOTY edition but its very likely they will make such a thing eventually. Or maybe even release a DLC disc like they did for FO3.

i think you can DL it from D2D or something like that but you would still need steam to activate the product

Dead Money - http://www.direct2drive.com/10395/product/Buy-Fallout-New-Vegas-%E2%80%93-Dead-Money-DLC-Download

Honest Hearts - http://www.direct2drive.com/10942/product/Buy-Fallout-New-Vegas-%E2%80%93-Honest-Hearts-DLC-Download

You still have to activate through steam (but you already had to do that for the main game anyway).

It will let you download Dead Money from Direct2Drive but it just gives you the activation code for Honest Hearts and you will download it from steam. This is a way to get them though if you don't want to give your money to steam, which was my case.

Thanks for the links and no I don't wish to give my money to steam.

You don't want to give money to the company that almost single handedly saved PC gaming and whose business motto is give everything we can for as low of a price as we can? man thats messed up.

Cite your sources.

PC gaming will never go away as long as computer hardware keeps on improving.

You obviously haven't been on Steam ever. They frequently have games on sale for 20-30 dollars when there still 50-60 dollars in stores. They have sales almost every weekend with deals that could be only described as crazy they sell entire game companies catalogs for 200-250 dollars when the total cost would be nearly 600. Valve also releases DLC for their games such as TF2 for free. The amount of content in TF2 has quadrupled since it first released all for a total cost of 0 dollars. Frankly how anyone can dislike steam is beyond imagining.

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b200/staplehead78/Untitled-2.png

63 games in total.


I dont deny their deals. But that doesn't prove that they "saved PC gaming".

I dislike Steam with things like Fallout NV requiring steam. Steam should never be a requirement. The only games that should require it are games bought though it.

Do you know how much of a cluster-[censored] that would cause. All game companies would have to make 2 entirely separate versions of EVERYTHING if they did that. They would have to redo tons of code to make a version for steam and a version not for steam.

It would also cause tons of confusion for people who would buy the non-steam version of the game in stores then if they got steam would see the dlc on the steam store and be like "hey ill buy this for new vegas" only to get told that sorry this doesn't work becuase you didn't buy the STEAM version of New-Vegas.

Its simply far to time consuming to redo all that code to make 2 different versions, its terribly unprofitable, and would cause far to much confusion in the long run for a lot of people. It's better in EVERY way to just put everything on Steam.

You have a choice:
1. Steam a program that doesn't need to be online to run games, and can be uninstalled without it leaving tons of crap behind
2. securom which installs itself into your OS, continues to run even after you uninstall the game that uses it, and requires you be on-line almost all the time so it can constantly verify your game is legit.

Steam is a horrible company that is setting back consumer rights. I didn't think this topic was going to come up again since it has already been debated here and many other places on the internet. But since it has come up here are the reasons I can't stand steam.

1. Requiring me to run a third party program whose primary purpose is a sales platform in order to play games that I have not purchased from steam.
2. Games as a service. You aren't getting licensed copies of programs you can run but access to a service which allows you to play games. If they decide to disable your account for any reason you can't play your games.
3. Proprietary business practices much like how Macintosh operates. Poor business practices that don't respect customers rights.
4. Steamworks introducing bugs into games like we saw with the cloud saving bug for New Vegas. This was the only bug that actually severely effected my gameplay.
5. I support game developers and publishers that take a DRM free stance. Steam does not. If a game is on steam it is required to have DRM even if the developer or publisher does not want their game to have DRM.
6. Steam has no legal obligations to make it so you are able to play your games if they cease operating. They have stated that they will but have not stated it in any legally binding way.
7. Steam collects gameplay data from you and gives you no option not to. You agree to it when you agree to the terms of conditions to use steam. This is an unnecessary intrusion into privacy. I would have no problems with this data being collected if it was optional and something you could opt out of.

And before you respond with a list of reasons why steam is good I will say that other digital distribution services do all those things as well while not having most of the downsides I just listed. I am actually a huge supporter of digital distribution. The only games I have not purchased through digital distribution for the last few years have been games that I would only have been able to download from steam.

The two best digital distribution services in regards to respecting the consumers are www.gamersgate.com and www.gog.com. My opinion of course.

Edit: Forgot to mention- 8. Steam does not let you control which patches you want applied or any way to revert patches if they somehow break the game or decrease your enjoyment of the game. Ironically the automatic patching is often one of the features that the fans of steam will list as a positive.

1. You only need Steam installed to run the game you don't have to be online to play games.
-Obsidian didn't make their own video cards to play the game thus you need Nvidia or ATI 3rd party video cards and video drivers to play it.
-Obsidian didn't make their own sound cards/drivers for the game so you need Realteks, or whoever 3rd party sound drivers to get sound in the game
-Obsidian didn't make their own media player for the cut-scenes in the game so they make you download RADtools 3rd party media player to play the opening cut scene.
You shouldn't hate Valve becuase they didn't force Obsidian to put the game on steam, Bethesda and Obsidan CHOSE TO. Its not Valve's fault you need Steam just like it isn't Microsoft's fault that Fallout New Vegas works only on Windows. Its Obsidian's and Bethesda's. Put the blame on the people who made the choice.

2. Yes your are getting licensed copies of the games to play. I might have agreed with this if you had to pay for Steam but you don't, you have to pay for the games themselves, thus you are NOT paying for a service to play the games your paying for the games themselves. The only reason Valve would ever close your steam account is if your breaking the EULA INCLUDED IN EVERY GAME EVER. Breaking the EULA at all is reason to prevent you from playing the game, unfortunately game companies in the past had no way to make sure you didn't, that's why so many went to Steam becuase they actually want you to follow the rules YOU AGREED TO when you installed the game. Valve doesn't make the EULA they just enforce it. Don't blame Valve blame the EULA.

3. Valve has respected customers rights in the fullest. Valve has never denied someone access to a game unless they were caught breaking the EULA or doing some other illicit thing that would normally should prevent you form playing the game.

4. The Steam cloud bug wasn't Valve's fault it was Obsidian's poor coding and lack of knowledge of the Steam Cloud system, and Bethesda's lack of proper testing. Obsidian had all the time they spent developing the game to learn about the platform they CHOSE to release their game on. You can't blame Valve for Obsidian choosing not to test the game on Steam before it was done. Also New Vegas is a buggy game in general, I guess monsters clipping through the ground is Valve's fault too, ohh and quests being broken... yep Valve's fault also. NO IT ISN'T. The blame lies solely on Obsidian and Bethesda and THEIR CHOICE of not going through proper testing.

5. There is no DRM on Steam.

6. No dur Valve has no legal obligation to make sure the games work. THEY DIDN'T MAKE THE GAMES IN THE FIRST PLACE. That's like saying its Microsoft's legal obligation to make sure everything Nvidia makes is 100% compatible with windows, its not, its Nvidias job to make sure their stuff works on windows not the other way around and hating Microsoft becuase NVidia screwed up is just stupid. Valve made a program and said hey you can use this if you want to post your games. ITS THE GAME DEVELOPERS THEMSELVES who have to make sure their games work with Steam. Valve and steam are like Microsoft and windows, they are under no obligation to make sure other companies programs that they CHOSE to release on said platform work on said platform. They are only obligated to make sure their platform itself stays running.

7. Valve and Steam DO NOT collect private information about your PC. All the Steam surveys are opt-in choices that you can deny. As for stuff like how long you have been playing the game, that is purely clientside and not stored in some central database , that's why if you delete steam and reinstall it all those timers get reset. Valve has stated countless time they doesn't look at that, they never have and never will.

8. Making sure updates work is NOT Valve's job its the game developers job. Valve only releases patches as they are given them and when they are told to by the games Devs. It is NOT Valve's responsibility to go through OTHER COMPANIES data in the off chance it might screw up that companies game. In fact going through other companies data would be illegal. If Valve releases a patch and its messed up that's only the Game Devs fault for making the patch broken in the first place.

You seem to have this insane notion that Valve is some evil tyrant that makes game companies put games on Steam and that Valve is supposed to be this omni-present, and omni-knowing entity that's supposed to break the law and rifle through other companies data to make sure everything anyone ever considers releasing on steam works. IT isn't. Valve and steam aren't some sort of game police that you seem to think they should be. Just like it isn't Microsoft legal obligation to make sure Nvidia and Ati products work on Windows it isn't Valve's obligation to make sure any games but their own work on Steam and that their platform as a whole stays up.

Are you seriously comparing steam to drivers and operating systems? If you aren't able to see how that is a ridiculous comparison I feel no need to point it out.



Steam being games as a service has nothing to do with whether you pay for steam or not. And some company who I have not had any business with being able to decide whether I am able to play my games or not (regardless of whether they have used that ability or not) is unacceptable to me.



That is not what I was saying. But I didn't say it particularly clearly. Macintosh limits their products so you are forced to use them in the way that they want and are forced to do business through them or their partners. Steamworks functions the same way. It is supposedly to help out game developers by giving them access to already done multiplayer code and DRM abilities so they don't have to. But The third party sales platform has to be installed and running on any person's computer who wishes to play that game. Steam could separate some of those functions from steam if they really wanted to help indie developers. But It's purpose is to get steam installed on as many computers as possible. Because they hope once you have it installed you will go ahead and use steam to purchase things since it's already there. Steam will actually advertise to you in games if developers let them.



The bug would not have existed if New Vegas did not use steamworks. It's not a matter of blame. Also as I said, This was the only bug I encountered that was more than a slight annoyance. I did not find New Vegas to be a particularly buggy game.



So you would not consider a program needing to be run to validate and allow you to use another program a form of DRM?

How you answer that question isn't important anyway because I was using the general use of the phrase DRM (which includes all forms of copy protection) in my previous statement and not the specific use of the phrase DRM (only certain forms of copy protection). Which steam indeed is.



That isn't the point I was making. My point was that if for some reason the steam network goes away. You will not be able to play your games, or reinstall your games. Steam has said that if this were to happen they will release patches that unlock the games so they don't require steam validation. However as I said, they have never said this in any way that is legally binding. Such as the terms and conditions you sign when you agree to steam. So there is no legal obligation for them to do this.

Perhaps Valve's word is good enough for you. But it is not so for me. Because steam may be bought by someone else who is not willing to fulfill that promise, Valve may be bought by someone else, Steam going down may be related to them going out of business and they may not have the resources to do it.



I didn't say that steam collects private information so I wonder why you are stating this? I said steam collects gameplay data (which does consist of more than just how long you have been playing the game) which I consider an unnecessary intrusion of privacy. I understand that developers use that data to help improve levels and games (especially multiplayer ones) but I would appreciate being asked if it was ok with me.



Another rebuttal which basically ignores what I said. I said that steam does not allow the user the choice of which patch version they want installed. In other games, that do not use steam, if you find yourself with a patch that has actually made the game less enjoyable or playable, in your opinion, you can reinstall the game and then patch to the level that you desire to be patched. This is another way in which steam takes control away from the user.



It's interesting how I never made any of the points you are arguing against in your final statement here. Perhaps if you read what I wrote in an attempt to understand what I am saying instead of trying to defend your precious Valve it would be easier to provide counterpoints.

So Oblivion has 2 versions? Fallout 3 has 2 versions. Borderlands has 2 versions? Aion has 2 versions. Guildwars has 2 version? Are you serious? You must be trolling or just dont know how steam really works.

Steam already includes notices that the steam version of games are required for DLCs from Steam.

And you CLEARLY have no idea what Securom actually is. It is a copy protection program with MANY forms. Oblivion and Fallout 3 use it. Mind blown? They used a basic disc check version of it, so nothing was ever installed.

Steam may not be required to be online, but it still has to run, and THAT is my problem with it. I have the damn physical copy of the game. I dont want Steam running. We almost didnt get the script extender for modding because of Steams encryption.



QFT: Back in the day, Interplay's old game Descent 3, you needed to get the Aussie version of the 1.4 patch as the US version was bad. If steam were around back then (1998-1999) then US players would have been screwed as Interplay went down shortly after.

I loved how this turned into an anti-Steam thread. I bought FONV on the XMas Steam sale and I got it much cheaper than it was in stores, so I have nothing bad to say. I love Steam and buy (just about) all my games on it.

I originally bought Oblivion in stores and then again when it came out on steam. I can confirm that the Steam bought version of Oblivion has more files in it and different file sizes for files in both versions, showing that the Steam version of Oblivion is different from the store bought version, and after comparing my store bought version of GW to my friends Steam bought version, GW2 is gonna be an amazing mmo by the way, I can confirm that they are different as well. So yes there are 2 different versions of it. Many files in both games have been changed and code has been rewritten to add compatibility with Steam. That's why most game compaines now-a-days put Steam as a requirement for their games, becuase they don't want to have to go through the unnecessary trouble of rewriting a number of files to make two versions.

The Securom date checker program that Oblivion and FO3 use is a completely different and entirely separate program then normal Securom. You do not need the Securom base that games like Crysis use that installs itself into your OS to have the Securom date checker. I think the point that was trying to be made was that Base Securom as in the Crysis Securom and others like it are a lot worse then Steam.

Steam as a program uses virtually no system resources and in offline mode it uses even less. it causes no hindrance to the performance of your PC, so I don't really see the problem of having it on. Also I don't see why your hating on Valve becuase you almost couldn't get some 3rd-party, script extender to work. Neither Valve nor Obsidian are under any obligation, nor should they be, to make sure FAN-MADE content works. What the fans chose to do and make on their own time is solely their responsibility to keep track off, maintain and to build around whats given to them. Game companies shouldn't have to bend over backwards contemplating every possible thing someone might make and make sure it works with their games or the programs they release their games on. You should feel privileged you got the power to modify anything at all. Many game companies never release any sort of modding tools or outright ban people for trying to modify their games in the first place.

Also you shouldn't claim to know how valve would have acted back in 1998-1998 there's as much evidence to show Valve would tired to released the Aussie patch to the rest of the world to fix the game as there is to show they wouldn't have. Also even if they didn't that still wouldn't be Valve's fault, it would be Interplay's for giving a broken patch to Valve and telling them to release it.


ON a side note nice Eureka 7 avatar. It was a good anime.

the Steam pro/con should be discussed in this thread-> http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1179634-unofficial-steamdrm-thread/