This seems backwards when you consider Steam. Do you truly own your steam games?
May be worth pointing out that Steam doesn't require a paid monthly subscription for access.
This seems backwards when you consider Steam. Do you truly own your steam games?
Even if you didn't, people would just rip them into torrents that could always be found into the future, should Steam deny access to all Steamworks titles.This seems backwards when you consider Steam. Do you truly own your steam games?
This seems backwards when you consider Steam. Do you truly own your steam games?
it's a good thing I've literally purchased almost no DLC for the entire gen and will continue to never purchase DLC
Only DLC I can ever remember purchasing was Minerva's Den on PC. I ain't responsible for this future, no sir. ;P
it's a good thing I've literally purchased almost no DLC for the entire gen and will continue to never purchase DLC
I ain't responsible for this future, no sir. ;P
The only safe haven for backwards compatibility and games library preservation is the PC. Even if official support ends there are ways of keeping the games alive.
Nice stealth Steam Is Savior post, but Steam is the worst offender on this subject.
Nice stealth Steam Is Savior post, but Steam is the worst offender on this subject.
Nice stealth Steam Is Savior post, but Steam is the worst offender on this subject.
Nice stealth Steam Is Savior post, but Steam is the worst offender on this subject.
I would have thought that it was embarrassingly clear
Sounds great, can't wait. All digital, all the way!
As far as ownership is concerned, it always confused me that people implied they had ownership of their console games. The consoles are DRM boxes designed to ensure you don't get too much ownership of your games, the license you bought to play the game is included and tied to a physical disc. If that disc gets lost or damaged, the license to play that game could never have been backed up and continued to be used because of DRM.
I'm fine with it all, but I think people forget that they already gave up a decent amount of 'ownership' of their games when they accepted the console model (I know there have been some consoles have had basically non existent DRM, but they've generally been the exception). So it always seems odd to me when people try and take a principled stand against DRM and ownership of their games whilst supporting the things that go against those principles.
Just like people accepted that, they'll accept this too. It's inevitable, and the way many games are designed to be disposable, with a limited shelf-life (so they can sell you a new one in a year or two) - people generally won't care about the longevity of their games in the future. It's happening with every other digital medium, it'll happen with video games too, and it already is happening.
Nice stealth Steam Is Savior post, but Steam is the worst offender on this subject.
I'm really not worried about the "servers going down" argument. These companies would have to get to a point where they simply don't exist anymore for them to bring the servers down, and even the a company like Sony would just sell off the PlayStation brand and another company would maintain the storefront. If the world economy ever gets to a point where Steam, PSN, or XBL have to close down for good we are going to have a lot more important things to worry about than not being able to download old games.
But servers for original Xbox live have already gone down, and they did host DLC.I'm really not worried about the "servers going down" argument. These companies would have to get to a point where they simply don't exist anymore for them to bring the servers down, and even the a company like Sony would just sell off the PlayStation brand and another company would maintain the storefront. If the world economy ever gets to a point where Steam, PSN, or XBL have to close down for good we are going to have a lot more important things to worry about than not being able to download old games.
But it's not like one day Sony goons will knock down your door, take your PS3 and all the physical games you have left for it. If it's physically in your hands, in your home, you can do essentially whatever you want with your console and your games. On the other hand, someday those Plus games will no longer be available for download and here EA is already proposing that their version of that doesn't even let you keep games that long. They can be switched out as you "own" them here and now. Not in some relatively distant time when support for old games goes down.
The article seems to be focusing most on physical game going away, and because of Steam's popularity, its actually one of the worse offenders in that regards. Steam wont save physical games, it will actually contribute for it to go away. If people are happy with digital distribution, then its a bigger chance of physical games going away.The fact that Steam exists on an open platform means it can never be the worst offender. And regardless, Valve's ecosystem provided the right trade-offs to make digital worth it, drastically cheaper games, convenience compared to where physical was on PC at the time and no subscription or 'use-by-date'. The benefits outweighed the negatives on the platform, so digital worked well into the consumers favor. It seems that every other platform wants to have the digital cake and eat it too, with expensive games, the looming generation shift and locked-in subscriptions. I don't see the trade-offs for consoles and other digital platforms right now, especially when you can trade games in.
Only if you let it happen.
Retail forever, I only buy digital if there's no other choice.
The article seems to be focusing most on physical game going away, and because of Steam's popularity, its actually one of the worse offenders in that regards. Steam wont save physical games, it will actually contribute for it to go away. If people are happy with digital distribution, then its a bigger chance of physical games going away.
.Only if you let it happen.
Only if you let it happen.