Then there's two possibilities:

1. They think that the lost sales number will be more like 0.01%, which given the cost of integrating and testing a replacement probably wasn't worth worrying about, especially since there wasn't anything during development that did everything Steamworks does. (Reactor is very new, but Stardock could always go pitch it to them.) Given that outside of forums like these you find just as many people saying "I only buy games on Steam" as you do people who say "I refuse to buy games on Steam", I really doubt the lost sales are that big a number for a game this big.

2. Valve gave them a better publishing deal then usual, something like 25% instead of the standard 30%. If that's the case, 2k makes more money off every copy sold on Steam and the extra money will easily make up for any lost sales.

Since anybody selling a really big game has the market clout to try and negotiate with Valve on Steam's cut, there's really nothing out of the ordinary going on.

One competitor cant just arrange a deal that keeps the others from selling the same product. It's not a publisher&developer&valve deal, it's just competition.  This is starting to look like M$ with their saying what goes pre-installed on every copy of Windows. 

Just me reading the supposed, "OMG Steam only release article" But no where does it say that CIV V will be available only via Steam. It says that the pre-order versions can be downloaded early via steam, and that copies purchased via Steam will have a new civ and map included in the game (which considering how much you can mod a civ game is nothing).

Oh, steamworks will be included in the game. Whoppity-do. It won't cause the game to not load, just means any achievements or internet multilayer is out for me. Good thing LAN connections were confirmed still.

So all in all, the article is no different then saying Wal-Mart editions have a new shiny toy gun or some such, and in addioton to all the old multiplayer functions we gave you in Civ IV you now get a matching style via steam if you want it.

Wow. End of the world type stuff.

1.  Uh...  what?   People saying that they only buy on Steam were fine regardless.  No one is discussing the idea that Civ V shouldn't be offered on Steam at all. 

Anyway, the number of lost sales is probably in the high thousands, low tens of thousands.  That's real money.

2.  However, the question is, did Valve give them a better deal because it's exclusive?  They almost certainly did.  This is, de facto, more money in 2K's pocket, and is the same as Valve paying 2K to make it exclusive.

Again, I'm not saying that this is out of the ordinary, I don't know why you persist in trying to cast my comments in that light.  This is just ordinary business.  The business of screwing the consumer

D2D gives you a Steam activation code. Civ 5 is indeed Steam exclusive.

IMO another big reason is elimination of second hand sales.

I never was going to buy it.............play it yes, buy it no.

It's all good in my books.  I have over 130 games currently on my STEAM account.  I buy, I download, I play, when finished I move on to the next one.  Like I said in my previous post.  Some of us approach gaming as a "consumer-sport" (to me it's like eating a cookie.....I consume it....and then I reach into the bowl for another one...hehe).   No problems with the STEAM model.  Rinse and Repeat! 

In that case: STFU and GTFO !!!

I do see a difference and that's why I said that I can understand being concerned about technical issues like Steam being down or not being able to access the internet. I just don't think it's reasonable to be concerned that Steam will suddenly decide to hold all of your games hostage. I could imagine them deciding to for example charge for premium call of duty MP server access or something like that. But everyone would just buy from someone else if they started adding a fee to play all of your games after you bought them. I mean by the same logic you should be afraid to put your money in a bank....afterall your giving up even more control of something even more important and they have much power to screw you over compared to Steam.

Worrying that they will go out of business is more reasonable, but that's where the physical copy matters. Worrying that they will go out of business and say "haha nobody in the world can ever play civilzation again because we aren't unlocking your games" is less reasonable however.

As I said even without a physical copy though I tend to prefer digital copies to physical, because I think it's a much greater risk that I will lose, damage or just throw away a game I want to play later then that the company will go out of business. If your better organized then me though then that might be different! Something like Civ 5 however where you get both the digital copy and the stored electronic copy is the best of all worlds for me.

[Civ 5 Customers] minus [Pre-existing Steam Customers] = [New Valve Customers].

This is the problem I have with the situation.  Turning all PC Gamers into Valve customers gives Valve a very powerful position, and considering the history of very powerful Computer Based companies (Microsoft, Activision, EA, etc.) I can't say I'm thrilled.

Its private company (AFAIK 100% owned by Gabe Newell)

If it was public company I would already bought some stock

I realized that was a little unclear while I was writing it. I meant the copy that's kept on Steam that I can download at any point later in addition to the physical copy. In terms of security it means you have a physical copy of the game so that if Steam goes out of business and you get a new computer you won't lose the game like white elk described happening to his purely digital music.