Last time I checked, we were talking about the PC here as opposed to closed platforms like consoles. Admittedly, I shouldn't have used the word "exclusive" since it unfortunately does not cover the entirety of the subject - ZehDon was kind enough to lay out the issue well.

Good questions, but I'm afraid Brad either has NDAs or there's hardly any interest in the service.

While their competition might not like Steamworks integration, its not enough for antitrust lawsuit. Business isnt same as Olympic games - if you invest into creating technology which will make your solution better and your competitors dont, its their fault not yours.

Oh and it would be great if this forum allowed user to quote someone without such poor results...

Civ 5 not being on Impulse, a DD service that disproportionately favors strategy gamers, is a sign that Stardock had its profits impaired by the tie-in between Steam and Steamworks. 

The fact that Impulse is forced to cannabilze is the anti-competitive impact to me.

Supporting the market leader is not considered anti-competitive behaviour, regardless of it's implications.  Valve was founded by ex-Microsoft employees, which in itself means nothing however it does give the situation an sense of deja vu.  The problem is no cares right now because Steam isn't abusing it's position.  When it does - and it will - people will turn on Valve like they turned on Microsoft and Activision.  The problem is that then - like Microsoft and Activision Blizzard - they will have enough of an established position that people will still give them their money.

Vista was a piece of shit, and everyone knew it - yet it still sold.  Modern Warfare II was worse than it's predecessor in every way yet it's the highest selling game of this entire generation of Consoles.  Once they reach this level, they have the ability to do whatever they want, because enough people want what they sell.  Abusing your customer base, raping them at every opportunity and selling garbage isn't against the Law.  Hell, with EULA's going the way they are, Valve could do just about anything they wanted and simply include the waiver in the Terms we all agree to when installing their software.  People won't care, because they still get their games.

Although even with an established position, not treating your customers well will still be costly, even though it might take significantly longer.  Lower quality does eventually leave a tarnish.  (And I don't think the quality of games today is better than it's ever been. )

Best regards,
Steven.

Given the fact that Impulse can still sell Civ5 and make profit, Steamworks isnt preventing Impulse from making profit, which IRL means that it would be pretty mcu impossible to base antitrust lawsuit and Steamworks current implementation. Monopoly itself isnt illegal - abuse of monopoly is what MS and Intel were sued for.

Impulse is not the only competitor to Steam, and the online market cannot possibly be seen as completely disconnected from retail sales.

Obviously it's a smart move by Steam to take on Civ5, a game they know will see huge sales, without making a profit on it. We've seen this behavior from Steam before, where the goal is not to make a profit but to attract users for the Steam software (I believe the free Alien Swarm game was the latest). Arguably, the "weekends" with lower price may be seen to serve the same goal. Not to mention the multiplayer service they're providing, embedded with their DRM (games now announcing that they're going to be released with Steamworks WAY ahead of release).

I think what they're doing can, in the long run, mount up to a monopoly. However, on it's own, Civ5 is barely a case of predatory pricing (since there are more competitors). In the meantime, Steam stands to make an increasingly large profit from the market.

As a consumer, the best thing you can do is purchase games elsewhere.

As a consumer, the worst thing you can do is request that new games be available through Steam (unless you like paying higher prices).

^This.  It always amazes me that there are so many people who actually want their games locked down with Steam DRM and tied to a single account that may one day not be accessible to them.

Steam is very convinient + cheap games during sales. Before I started using Steam it was major PITA for me to manually update all my games. I also never had any problem accessing my account, except once when I screwed up change of password - Steam Support reseted it in less than 24 hours since I submited my ticket.

Because MoH tries to be both MW2 and BC2, and fails on both counts. The shooting in it is more like MW2, where you point is where you hit, and scoring kills is ridiculously easy. But the class system and maps "try" to be like BC2.. only with 1 less class, very little class variety besides what weapons they can use, fewer weapons and on top of that there are few maps and they all pale in comparison with the maps in BC2. So, it's basically a Frankenstein game and doesn't really do any of those things well. Anyone who loves MW2 shooting mechanics might as well just stick with MW2 because it has more customization and more weapons. Anyone who loves BC2 maps and game modes and classes might as well just stick with BC2 because it's better on all those counts.

I'm not arguing Steam's quality, though I could.  My main issue with Steam is that I dislike their anti-consumer policies, poor support, and unstable servers.  I prefer Gamersgate and Impulse for those reasons

I'm arguing that they are engaging in what is POTENTIALLY predatory, anti-competitive behavior.

http://www.newrules.org/retail/news/walmart-charged-predatory-pricing (last among many)