You can play the game on whatever PC you want, it just has to be installed and you need your password. I think it's awesome.

No, you missed my point. Steam is DRM and it is thus bad; other DRM is still bad, even if Steam is bad. I have yet to buy a game with any DRM (apart from CD check of course, and I don't really mind that - especially because I can bypass that check with cracks if I really want to) and I hope it will stay that way. Well, Half-Life 2 is an exception but back then I didn't even know what Steam was, not to speak of DRM. It was a mediocre game anyway. Oh, and Steam gives me no useful features. Auto-patching is the only one that could really be useful but it could be done without Steam. Besides, only multiplayer games require the newest patch. I have two friends lists on PC already and of those I'm happy with Xfire (well, mostly) and MSN for real-life friends. In-game browser is mostly a useless feature, especially since I know how to minimize games. It's probably a rather useless feature for the most anyway. Disc checks aren't that bad unless you play a different game every day or several games a day. Even then it's not unbearable.

I think I've never heard Newell say anything that makes sense and that DRM thing makes even less sense than anything else I think I've heard from him. Well, he does make sense but Steam's DRM is still very restrictive compared to most other DRM.

Now that we've gone pretty much where I though we'd go, I might as well explain a bit more. Other DRM offers no advantage but they aren't as restrictive as Steam. Steam, on the other hand, offers many good things (well, they'd be good if I could choose whether to use them or not) but it's probably the most restrictive DRM I've ever seen. While other DRM systems may be a bit of a hassle, they don't actually set any permanent restrictions while Steam ties a game to my online account. Not only do I need to be connected to the internet even in a single-player game (not much of a problem these days but I hate the idea), I also cannot sell my games if I wanted to. In general, no DRM >>>>>>>>>> other DRM > Steam. It's a bit like free online gaming (PC, PS3, Wii etc.) versus a regular fee for online gaming (X360 and Live), though a direct comparison is probably impossible.

those are the min. but whats the recommended?

What benefit does owning a physical copy exactly have if you have to use Steam? You'll have to use Steam and its online activation anyway so the disc itself is mostly useless.

Oh i want this game now man, it is so epic i mean look at it aahhhhhhhh.

I like having the physical copy, and as it is a special edition, I get lots of nice bonuses like a very nice map in it, as well as some very nice packaging... I like that kind of thing. It is also cheaper than downloading it from steam in the UK

I'd call them bonuses rather than advantages... Well, they're not necessarily bonuses either but in some cases they could be basic stuff. Anyway, they're not advantages even if they are nice. Oh, and you mentioned of the the more recent reasons why I hate Steam - the stupid conversion rate and the overall price despite not having to package the game.

Well it is an advantage for me because I like having the physical package, and certainly in this case, you don't need to buy anything from steam

Alright, then don't buy the retail copies of Steam-integrated games, which doesn't make you buy the game on Steam rather than retail. Don't buy during the awesome Steam Weekend Deals that have amazing promotions. Don't buy Steam games during Holiday sales, when ALL Steam games get discount and you could get Bioshock for $5 or the 'id Super Pack' that has ALL games ever developed by id for only $30 (all quake games, all doom games, all wolfenstein, all hexen, comander keen, etc...), or both Max Payne games for $7.50, etc...

@ shio, the facts are, in the UK, it is £10 more expensive to download from steam than to order from amazon or play and that is also true for the special forces edition, when you don't even get the bonus items