Support NeoGAF

[Stallion Free]

Maybe I just installed games/reinstalled a little more than the average user because when Steam started adding non-Valve games I was all over that shit because I was fucking tired of multi-disk installs. If I could rebuy Far Cry or Splinter Cell for a couple bucks and never have to go through 3-5 disks for installing again, sign me the fuck up. I don't give a shit how good those disks feel in my hand.

 

[Fugu]

What the hell type of computer do you have that a small 15MB background process is such a big concern to you!? This isn't the 1990s anymore modern, OSes actually have decent memory management.

I made my qualms clear about the client in an earlier post. None of them had anything to do with memory. I won't repeat myself.

It does, actually; for any game on your account, you can select "Do not update this game automatically." However, you can't download a version of the game earlier than the first time you download it.

You have very little ability to pick and choose what version you want to play if it's not the oldest or the newest version. That's all I meant by that.

Also, I agree that applying a crack is often the only way to remove DRM; my comment was about how ridiculous the assertion is that Steam is alright because even if they do tank, we can just crack all of our games.

So long as you realise that plastic disc and box is completely useless/worthless and gives you no extra flexibility or ownership rights over a digitally purchased copy. Heck, if you value plastic boxes so much you could have had one of the dozen L4D2 boxes I threw out the other day.

Why do you keep saying this when it quite visibly does? The ownership over a physical copy cannot be revoked like a digital copy can. Steam can yank a Steam game from right under me at any given time, but someone has to break into my home and steal my CD/hard drive if they want me to stop using my physical copy.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

The ownership over a physical copy cannot be revoked like a digital copy can. Steam can yank a Steam game from right under me at any given time, but someone has to break into my home and steal my CD/hard drive if they want me to stop using my physical copy.

Not really, no.

Online authentication of CD Keys has not exactly been unusual for awhile, alternatives to Steam can still prevent you playing single player games without internet connections to the publishers master servers.

If you buy Assassins Creed 2 and Ubisofts DRM servers are down, you can't play it without a crack, regardless of if you own the disk or not.

 

[Fredescu]

about how ridiculous the assertion is that Steam is alright because even if they do tank, we can just crack all of our games.

Why would we crack them when we can just play in offline mode? The only worry is what happens to games you haven't downloaded and launched.

Why do you keep saying this when it quite visibly does? The ownership over a physical copy cannot be revoked like a digital copy can. Steam can yank a Steam game from right under me at any given time, but someone has to break into my home and steal my CD/hard drive if they want me to stop using my physical copy.

The topic of discussion was a steamworks game, in which case the physical copy is meaningless once it's installed. There are many other ways to render your physical media inoperable than someone breaking in. I'll take a service that allows infinite downloads thanks.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

I made my qualms clear about the client in an earlier post. None of them had anything to do with memory. I won't repeat myself.

You mean this?

The first reason is that I am effectively licensing my games; I am only paying for the rights to play them insofar as Steam says that I can. Should I ever have a problem with my account (like it gets hijacked, as my battle.net account recently was), this will directly interfere with my ability to play these games that I've paid for. This is an entirely unnecessary risk for me to take; with a hard copy of the software, it is almost impossible for me to lose the "right" to play. There is also a possibility that Valve will change their policies in a manner that I would deem inappropriate and I would have no recourse if such a situation arose.

The second reason is that I am force-fed a client that I would not use if it were not necessary to play Steam games. There are already plenty of chat protocols; I do not want another one. If I want to play a game I installed with Steam, I have to install Steam first and then install the game. As a person with many computers in many locations, this is problematic. I frequently host LANs (before you bring it up/ban me for it, everyone has their own keys/copy of the game; that's not what this is about). When I'm setting up a game on multiple computers, it starts to contribute substantially to the setup time when I must ensure that Steam is installed and up-to-date on all of them.

As well, you interpret automatic patching as a good thing while I do not. There are several games that I intentionally play the old patch versions of because they are more balanced, more fun, or less buggy (or something to this effect). While this doesn't affect the vast majority of games, it is an option that Steam doesn't provide. This also becomes a significant problem when LANning, because being forced to patch is both time- and bandwidth-consuming when it is extrapolated to multiple computers.

I'll give you the first point, but I also game on multiple computers and it's pretty easy to move your installs around with Steam, either directly for the same account or using a backup if you want to enable them for use with multiple accounts. And the client takes about 1 minute to download and install, then it's up to date.

The last point is also moot because you can disable automatic patching for any game by right-clicking it in your library, going to updates and selecting "Do not automatically update this game".

So in the end you have the Steam policies and losing your games issue, which is fair enough, but applies almost equally to any other digital distributor. It's more of an issue with Steam to be sure, but you can take the exact same measures (i.e. backups) to mitigate the problem as you would with any other service.

Incidentally I'm not trying to convince you that Steam is the greatest, just attempting to correct a few of your misconceptions.

 

[brain_stew]

Why do you keep saying this when it quite visibly does? The ownership over a physical copy cannot be revoked like a digital copy can. Steam can yank a Steam game from right under me at any given time, but someone has to break into my home and steal my CD/hard drive if they want me to stop using my physical copy.

We were discussing Steamworks titles. Those discs do precisely fuck all without the Steam client installed. "Yanking your digital copy" would have the exact same effect and this isn't limited it to Steamworks titles either.

This isn't a DD issue anyway, and it seriously annoys me when people make it out to be one. There's DRM free digitally distributed games just as there are DRM free retail games, equally there are plenty retails games with DRM (the majority these days in fact) and plenty DD games with DRM. Its a seperate issue, and its not going away no matter where you buy your games.

 

[IrishNinja]

Why would we crack them when we can just play in offline mode? The only worry is what happens to games you haven't downloaded and launched.

exactly; correct me if i'm wrong, but in this weird hypothetical where steam tanks tomorrow, how would this affect my ability to launch steam & play my games entirely offline?
the exact same argument being made about physical copies of say blizzard games potentially being borked for online play on blizzard's end, applies to steam's servers/setup (regarding online play portion of said titles).
prior to steam, i greatly valued physical ownership as well; now, i'm having a hard time seeing the advantages.

 

[Tarin02543]

To people who think Steam is just a store, it's a lot more than that. I find that Steam also makes playing your games much easier and by that I mean you do not have to manually install your games anymore. It seems to know exactly what the specs of your pc are and configure your games automatically to match those specs.

It also automatically downloads patches and keeps all your games healthy. When I buy my 32 core computer in 2020 all I have to do is download the Steam client and login. Everything will be downloaded and reinstalled with 10 year worth of patches.

It's awesome!

 

[Fugu]

You mean this?



I'll give you the first point, but I also game on multiple computers and it's pretty easy to move your installs around with Steam, either directly for the same account or using a backup if you want to enable them for use with multiple accounts. And the client takes about 1 minute to download and install, then it's up to date.

It also requires an internet connection and subsequent connections to Steam to keep it up-to-date. I run LANs with up to sixteen people; most of these people do not use Steam regularly. It is also easier to back up a game that does not use Steam than it is to back up one that does.

The last point is also moot because you can disable automatic patching for any game by right-clicking it in your library, going to updates and selecting "Do not automatically update this game".

I have four different versions of Diablo 2 on my computer; how would this be possible with Steam?


As for my comment on Brain_stew's post, clearly I misinterpreted the context so I retract my point.

This isn't a DD issue anyway, and it seriously annoys me when people make it out to be one. There's DRM free digitally distributed games just as there are DRM free retail games, equally there are plenty retails games with DRM (the majority these days in fact) and plenty DD games with DRM. Its a seperate issue, and its not going away no matter where you buy your games.

That steam is both intrusive DRM and DD is why the issue frequently produces overlap.

 

[koji]

Reason I love steam is because I re-install/format quite frequently and steam makes it so easy. Not having to re-install everything again is priceless. (for me)

 

[CecilRousso]

The question about what happens if Valve for some reason is to shut down Steam doesn´t worry me at all. It won´t happen over a night, and when 30+ million subscribers demands for a solution to be able to play their games, there will be one. Maybe the subscriber agreement says that they guarantee one, but no publisher who has sold games through Steam want the badwill they will get if millions of their customer looses their games.

 

[Belgorim]

Of course it is possible, it just depends on what games you like. I think I own about 20-30 games on steam, but I have not had it installed for about 6 months since I only play Starcraft2 and lotro atm anyways.

 

[Firestorm]

It is also easier to back up a game that does not use Steam than it is to back up one that does.

Hell no. There is no easier way to back up a game than "right click > select backup game files".

Most of your posts in this thread are the type of overprotective, paranoid garbage that control freaks will continue to spew forever. I'm not sure why people are bothering to respond to your points. We think the hassle of maintaining our games simply gets in the way of actually playing them and like how Steam does it all for us. You don't want anyone touching your games but yourself. That's really what it comes down to.

 

[Mr Nightman]

When Black Ops comes out, I'm getting the best of both worlds, I get a physical disc, and the benefit of steam activation and no dvd in drive crap. Steamworks is the best thing ever

 

[wormstrangler]

The question about what happens if Valve for some reason is to shut down Steam doesn´t worry me at all. It won´t happen over a night, and when 30+ million subscribers demands for a solution to be able to play their games, there will be one. Maybe the subscriber agreement says that they guarantee one, but no publisher who has sold games through Steam want the badwill they will get if millions of their customer looses their games.

Just crack the games.

 

[IrishNinja]

I have four different versions of Diablo 2 on my computer; how would this be possible with Steam?

 

[CecilRousso]

Just crack the games.

Why would I when I can expect a better solution?

 

[jim-jam bongs]

It also requires an internet connection and subsequent connections to Steam to keep it up-to-date. I run LANs with up to sixteen people; most of these people do not use Steam regularly.

Really, now. You're clearly talking about playing games which aren't even available on Steam anyway here. And if they are then it's at least as much work to pass around an install folder on the LAN to ensure that everyone is running the same version as it is to do the same thing with a Steam backup.

It is also easier to back up a game that does not use Steam than it is to back up one that does.

This is not really true. Again, for your own backups you can just move the folder around just like any other installed game, and if you want everyone who owns the game on the LAN to have it then you back it up and pass it over. There is an internet connection required but that's only momentary then it's offline all the way. Not to accuse you of anything shady but these issues are only really problematic if you're trying to play LAN games and not everyone owns a copy of the game in question, so it shouldn't really be a concern.

I have four different versions of Diablo 2 on my computer; how would this be possible with Steam?

Okay now you're just being silly.

 

[Thomper]

The argument Tarin02543 puts up is probably the one I'd most likely refer to as well - my games will be forever available to me, barring Valve filing for bankruptcy, which seems highly unlikely.

Sure, I can keep my discs around forever. But in ten years, I'd have to worry about remembering where I put specific discs, then hoping they still work properly, then downloading the patches for that games - all stuff that might take me half an hour at least. And if I then find out the game wasn't really all that great, that's a lot of time wasted.

For Steam, I double-click the game to start downloading, installing, and patching it, don't have to look at it, and then just... play it.

(Especially so for indie-type games that are also sold through the developers' website. Sure, I'd love to support that developer directly, but that would also mean keeping a list of the download-sites for those developers, and crossing fingers those developers' sites still exist in ten years. At least with Steam, I can always be sure where my games are.)

 

[Minsc]

Yeah but even then, it clearly states there are no refunds except for pre-orders, so if you do a charge back it's your own fault for not reading the TOS.

So why don't they just disable the game in question if you do a chargeback (and prevent you from making any further purchases), disabling the whole account for games you paid for years ago with no problem seems stupid. And they seemingly accept payment methods and have fuzzy math involved when purchasing titles on sale, that you might not initiate the chargeback, but it could happen indirectly.

I've read you need to have enough money in an account to cover the normal price when you buy items on sale, and that at times 3rd parties will initiate chargebacks without even informing you they are doing it, so you have no say in the manner.

This is all easily preventable, but the fact that during the holiday sales I have to worry when I see that servers busy error screen during payment and I re-submit my order for the fourth time whether or not Valve is going to think I'm abusing their system and ban me from all my games is ridiculous.

 

[arstal]

To people who think Steam is just a store, it's a lot more than that. I find that Steam also makes playing your games much easier and by that I mean you do not have to manually install your games anymore. It seems to know exactly what the specs of your pc are and configure your games automatically to match those specs.

It also automatically downloads patches and keeps all your games healthy. When I buy my 32 core computer in 2020 all I have to do is download the Steam client and login. Everything will be downloaded and reinstalled with 10 year worth of patches.

It's awesome!

All the DD services, except D2D, do this.

Many of the things people are saying Steam does that they love- it isn't exclusive to Steam at all.

 

[Fredescu]

All the DD services, except D2D, do this.

Gamersgate doesn't. Impulse, Steam, and what else?

 

[arstal]

Gamersgate doesn't. Impulse, Steam, and what else?

It does for the games I've bought on Gamersgate. (admittedly, mostly Paradox games)

Well I find some value in them and that's all that matters, and it's not like all games are Steamworks titles either. I just feel more comfortable owning a box and disc with a CD key than I do with a flag on my account with a CD key online saying I bought it. I don't mind updating so much since that is pretty much the norm with patch fixes and such for PC games, but I want some physical ownership on my side.

You might be interested in this then. Stardock's rolling out a new program next year, where on DD purchases of their games, once per year they'll let you order a disc that is the updated version of the game, DRM/activation free, which you can order.

You'd get the benefits of both DD and physical ownership (though you'd have to pay for the disc+ shipping). Elemental and GalCiv II are going to get this.

 

[Fredescu]

Auto patching? How? Gamersgate lets you download the installer and then you're free of the store altogether, which is nice in it's own way, but it doesn't allow for auto patching that I can see.

 

[arstal]

Auto patching? How? Gamersgate lets you download the installer and then you're free of the store altogether, which is nice in it's own way, but it doesn't allow for auto patching that I can see.

I meant installation. I don't like auto patching for the types of games I play- it can ruin things. Impulse's system is the best here- it lets you know there's an update, and then you click to start it- but it's not forced on you. valve's system is really good for shooters, Impulse's is better for strat games. I don't complain about having to manually patch- it's just downloading a file (which is often faster then Steam anyways, which often chugs)

To be fair, Gamersgate often chugs also. Impulse tends to be the quicker service (though my internet sucks, I've heard Euros say there's a bigger difference for them)

 

[Minsc]

The argument Tarin02543 puts up is probably the one I'd most likely refer to as well - my games will be forever available to me, barring Valve filing for bankruptcy, which seems highly unlikely.

Sure, I can keep my discs around forever. But in ten years, I'd have to worry about remembering where I put specific discs, then hoping they still work properly, then downloading the patches for that games - all stuff that might take me half an hour at least. And if I then find out the game wasn't really all that great, that's a lot of time wasted.

For Steam, I double-click the game to start downloading, installing, and patching it, don't have to look at it, and then just... play it.

(Especially so for indie-type games that are also sold through the developers' website. Sure, I'd love to support that developer directly, but that would also mean keeping a list of the download-sites for those developers, and crossing fingers those developers' sites still exist in ten years. At least with Steam, I can always be sure where my games are.)

How do you store your home videos and 10MP+ pictures off your camera/camcorder? Maybe you don't use a camcorder much, but video can be even larger than game images, and I can easily shoot 500MB+ worth of pictures in a day and there's no free Steam service to save it all.

I'm just curious what people who don't trust physical media do for storing their most irreplaceable memories.

 

[Fredescu]

I meant installation.

I don't get it then. What about installation?

Impulse's system is the best here- it lets you know there's an update, and then you click to start it- but it's not forced on you. valve's system is really good for shooters, Impulse's is better for strat games. I don't complain about having to manually patch- it's just downloading a file (which is often faster then Steam anyways, which often chugs)

Impulse is opt in, Steam is opt out. Same functionality, just different defaults.

 

[slidewinder]

So why don't they just disable the game in question if you do a chargeback (and prevent you from making any further purchases), disabling the whole account for games you paid for years ago with no problem seems stupid.

They do it to be harsh, and have said as much. A chargeback costs them enough in fees that they've decided that it's worth it to be as dickholish as they possibly can be in response, so that their users are very reluctant to ask their CC companies for them.

 

[arstal]

I don't get it then. What about installation?


Impulse is opt in, Steam is opt out. Same functionality, just different defaults.

The opt out on Steam is a pain. I can see where Steam's system is better for some games, Impulse's is better for the type of stuff I play, and just one more click for the type of games Steam is better at.

They do it to be harsh, and have said as much. A chargeback costs them enough in fees that they've decided that it's worth it to be as dickholish as they possibly can be in response, so that their users are very reluctant to ask their CC companies for them.

That is as bad as the worst DRM's. That right here is the primary reason I dislike giving Valve my business. Chargebacks are a consumer right (even if they are abused)
This is why for any major purchase, you should always use a credit card (provided you can pay it off in a month)- it's a protection against merchant fraud/error. Valve, especially with its understaffed support, will make errors. (As will Stardock, but Stardock's support is really prompt during busiiness hours, I've gotten same-day resolutions more often then not.)

 

[Stallion Free]

Many of the things people are saying Steam does that they love- it isn't exclusive to Steam at all.

But Steam did them first and that's where we first used them so why should we bother with any of the others. My friends list is on Steam, so I have zero interest in jumping ship.

People don't know these things aren't exclusive to Steam simply because Steam has done them so well they haven't bothered to look at anything else.

 

[Dr. Light]

So long as you realise that plastic disc and box is completely useless/worthless and gives you no extra flexibility or ownership rights over a digitally purchased copy. Heck, if you value plastic boxes so much you could have had one of the dozen L4D2 boxes I threw out the other day.

I love it when DD lovers go on and on about "plastic boxes". As if it were about material value. The value of a $10 bill is not the value of the paper it was printed on. The value of plastic is non-zero, so therefore it is always worth more than electronic ROM data which is worth absolutely zero.

Look, clearly you care more about playing than owning. Most people do. Most people aren't collectors. But I consider myself about 60% collector 40% player. I frequently buy games solely for owning, never playing. The $325 I paid more than 7 years ago on Ebay for a sealed copy of Panzer Dragoon Saga that will never open comes to mind. Many other sealed games that I paid $50-100 for. I downloaded Alundra for $6 from PSN so I can actually play it, and not have to open my $100 signed sealed copy. This is normal for collectors. Coin collectors don't put their coins in vending machines, stamp collectors don't put their stamps on the electric bill. The vast majority of my games are not sealed and I can play them freely, which is why game collecting is vastly superior to coin/stamp/baseball card/fungus collecting (in my opinion).

Personally, I'm starting to like Steam quite a bit. I like Steamworks, I can buy a hard copy and still get Steam's community features and not need to touch the disc (I like to keep touching my games to an absolute minimum). Losing resale rights is a bitch that you have to live with for virtually all modern PC games, frequently even ones that have a disc check. So I'm willing to compromise on that. I'm NOT willing to compromise on having a physical copy of a game. If I didn't care about ownership, I'd only buy games that I was actively playing on a regular basis, and frankly that is rather a small percentage of my games. 14 of the last 24 - and 6 of the last 8 - PC games I've bought have been collector's editions. Think of all the lost revenue if I had bought the games as cheaply as possible instead. Why would companies sacrifice that income?

Blizzard has the right idea. They cater to everyone - you can download if you want, you can buy a standard physical copy (much better than most), or you can buy a really kickass CE. They have a ton of crap for sale on their website, both digital and physical. They even got me to subscribe to the WoW magazine (which is quite nice, btw). More extra revenue. On the other hand, Valve is trying to squeeze out people like me, and fuck them for it. I bought the disc copy of L4D2 even though it had the most minimal packaging imaginable (short of a code in the box) because I firmly believe that something is always better than nothing. If I ever stop believing that, the industry will be worse off without my business, or anyone else it drives away through relentless nickel-and-diming.

 

[Stumpokapow]

I love it when DD lovers go on and on about "plastic boxes". As if it were about material value. The value of a $10 bill is not the value of the paper it was printed on. The value of plastic is non-zero, so therefore it is always worth more than electronic ROM data which is worth absolutely zero.

so you're saying if someone backed up their digital game onto a dvd and put it in a case, that'd magically make it worth something, even though the dvd is prone to fail before the hard drive does?

 

[Visualante]

Steam hasn't used just 15mb of ram for years. I had to upgrade my machine because that bloated mess was chugging my machine.

You can't add features and expect the footprint to remain the same. I'm currently on 100mb just for having friends list and a chat window open.

 

[arstal]

I love it when DD lovers go on and on about "plastic boxes". As if it were about material value. The value of a $10 bill is not the value of the paper it was printed on. The value of plastic is non-zero, so therefore it is always worth more than electronic ROM data which is worth absolutely zero.

Look, clearly you care more about playing than owning. Most people do. Most people aren't collectors. But I consider myself about 60% collector 40% player. I frequently buy games solely for owning, never playing. The $325 I paid more than 7 years ago on Ebay for a sealed copy of Panzer Dragoon Saga that will never open comes to mind. Many other sealed games that I paid $50-100 for. I downloaded Alundra for $6 from PSN so I can actually play it, and not have to open my $100 signed sealed copy. This is normal for collectors. Coin collectors don't put their coins in vending machines, stamp collectors don't put their stamps on the electric bill. The vast majority of my games are not sealed and I can play them freely, which is why game collecting is vastly superior to coin/stamp/baseball card/fungus collecting (in my opinion).

Personally, I'm starting to like Steam quite a bit. I like Steamworks, I can buy a hard copy and still get Steam's community features and not need to touch the disc (I like to keep touching my games to an absolute minimum). Losing resale rights is a bitch that you have to live with for virtually all modern PC games, frequently even ones that have a disc check. So I'm willing to compromise on that. I'm NOT willing to compromise on having a physical copy of a game. If I didn't care about ownership, I'd only buy games that I was actively playing on a regular basis, and frankly that is rather a small percentage of my games. 14 of the last 24 - and 6 of the last 8 - PC games I've bought have been collector's editions. Think of all the lost revenue if I had bought the games as cheaply as possible instead. Why would companies sacrifice that income?

Blizzard has the right idea. They cater to everyone - you can download if you want, you can buy a standard physical copy (much better than most), or you can buy a really kickass CE. They have a ton of crap for sale on their website, both digital and physical. They even got me to subscribe to the WoW magazine (which is quite nice, btw). More extra revenue. On the other hand, Valve is trying to squeeze out people like me, and fuck them for it. I bought the disc copy of L4D2 even though it had the most minimal packaging imaginable (short of a code in the box) because I firmly believe that something is always better than nothing. If I ever stop believing that, the industry will be worse off without my business, or anyone else it drives away through relentless nickel-and-diming.

Do you care if the disk has function?

BTW, Stardock, for its own developed/I think published games , offers CE boxes, as well as starting a program that offers updated discs for a price once a year for collectors. I think they're offering it at cost also, to please people like you. It's a nice touch- though one I doubt I'll not use, unless I end up losing my job and taking the Antarctica offer up.
It's a really nice touch though, and they do support the disk lover (even if Wal-Mart is the main place to find their stuff per their business strategy)

Admittedly, and Steamworks games I buy in future, I'll only buy retail, but that's more due to not wanting to use the Valve store due to their policies then any preference. I already know some people who use a seperate account for each game due to Valve's policies.

 

[coopolon]

They do it to be harsh, and have said as much. A chargeback costs them enough in fees that they've decided that it's worth it to be as dickholish as they possibly can be in response, so that their users are very reluctant to ask their CC companies for them.

Do you find this acceptable?

 

[Curufinwe]

Steam can yank a Steam game from right under me at any given time, but someone has to break into my home and steal my CD/hard drive if they want me to stop using my physical copy.

I think the latter alternative is more likely.

 

[Stallion Free]

Steam hasn't used just 15mb of ram for years. I had to upgrade my machine because that bloated mess was chugging my machine.

You can't add features and expect the footprint to remain the same. I'm currently on 100mb just for having friends list and a chat window open.

I don't have any Steam windows open (same as when I play a game) and it's using 22mb. If 22 mb is too much for you, then you need a new PC.

 

[Dina]

Of course it is, don't be dumb. I don't even like gaming through the Steam cloud, installation/patching aside, all that much. And they're usually not cheapest either. Most PC-games I get, I don't enable in Steam. My friends are not on Steam either.

 

[jambo]

Steam is using 70MB with the mini list, friends list and a chat window open.

I have 4048MB of RAM. 70MB is 1.7% =\

 

[SmokyDave]

I can't imagine why anyone would hate Steam. Dislike DD, sure, but hate Steam? That's got to be some hardcore anti-monopoly or open-source 4 life principles.

As far as I'm concerned, Steam is the only reason I'm gaming on PC more than on consoles. It's all the best bits of console gaming & PC gaming with (almost) none of the drawbacks.

Steam hasn't used just 15mb of ram for years. I had to upgrade my machine because that bloated mess was chugging my machine.

You can't add features and expect the footprint to remain the same. I'm currently on 100mb just for having friends list and a chat window open.

Perhaps it's your machine, not Steam. It uses 45-50mb on my work machine and about 25-35mb on my home machine. Negligible RAM usage, at best.

 

[slidewinder]

Do you find this acceptable?

Acceptable in that I use Steam and am overall still a big fan of the service in spite of what is plainly a very consumer-unfriendly policy.

 

[BomberMouse]

Why do you keep saying this when it quite visibly does? The ownership over a physical copy cannot be revoked like a digital copy can. Steam can yank a Steam game from right under me at any given time, but someone has to break into my home and steal my CD/hard drive if they want me to stop using my physical copy.

As someone else pointed out, it's really more probable for your house to burn down and lose all you precious physical copies (a problem you'd have to solve on your own btw) than steam shutting down (a problem that with such huge user base is bound to have some kind of alternative).

 

[Diablohead]

Steam is using 70MB with the mini list, friends list and a chat window open.

I have 4048MB of RAM. 70MB is 1.7% =\

Steam is using 98MB for me right now and I have 4gigs of ram also, I've never noticed a performance hit with steam running on this new pc but it did cause a few frame drops on my old 1gig pentium 4 pc, not surprising.

 

[ghst]

As far as I'm concerned, Steam is the only reason I'm gaming on PC more than on consoles. It's all the best bits of console gaming & PC gaming with (almost) none of the drawbacks.

if i had a mind for politics i'd be sure to propagandize your odyssey into pc gaming. you'd be my joe the plumber.

 

[Dr. Light]

so you're saying if someone backed up their digital game onto a dvd and put it in a case, that'd magically make it worth something, even though the dvd is prone to fail before the hard drive does?

You can't understand the difference between a copy and an original?

And optical discs can outlive you, easily. If they fail it's because of a manufacturing defect and you can tell about that pretty early. Disc drives are another matter, but it just depends on how much you use it.

Do you care if the disk has function?

Of course. The game has to be playable, even if you never actually play it. Otherwise it has no value to you or anyone else. I obviously woundn't buy a used PC game and I hope no one else would either. Of course, I try to avoid used games in general.

BTW, Stardock, for its own developed/I think published games , offers CE boxes, as well as starting a program that offers updated discs for a price once a year for collectors. I think they're offering it at cost also, to please people like you. It's a nice touch- though one I doubt I'll not use, unless I end up losing my job and taking the Antarctica offer up.
It's a really nice touch though, and they do support the disk lover (even if Wal-Mart is the main place to find their stuff per their business strategy)

That's cool. Unfortunately the only Stardock game I own is Sins of a Solar Empire and frankly I regret buying it.

 

[Minsc]

You can't understand the difference between a copy and an original?

And optical discs can outlive you, easily. If they fail it's because of a manufacturing defect and you can tell about that pretty early. Disc drives are another matter, but it just depends on how much you use it.

.

My impression was this all started over whether or not an original disc has any worth for a Steamworks game, and my answer is no.

Why? The disc does nothing, and half the time, Steam won't even let you install from the disc, even if you put it in the drive and run the installer (this is what happened with WH40K: DoW2 for me).

That kind of disc is worthless.

 

[The Technomancer]

Do you find this acceptable?

Do you find it acceptable that stores don't allow you to return an item if you've opened it? They can't re-sell it, so refunding you your item costs them money they can't make back.

Valve doesn't like charge-backs because the hassle of doing so costs them money they can't make back.

The only difference is that the store is losing money due to having paid for the item from the supplier, while Valve is losing money to fees.

 

[Dr. Light]

My impression was this all started over whether or not an original disc has any worth for a Steamworks game, and my answer is no.

Why? The disc does nothing, and half the time, Steam won't even let you install from the disc, even if you put it in the drive and run the installer (this is what happened with WH40K: DoW2 for me).

That kind of disc is worthless.

Why wouldn't it? I've never had any problem. In any case, it's not like I'm paying a premium for it (in many cases, actually less). A code in a box would still be better than nothing, unless there's a significant price disadvantage, and retail is almost always equal or cheaper for brand new games. I'm not the type to wait around for a sale, which is the only time Steam has particularly good prices.

Do you find it acceptable that stores don't allow you to return an item if you've opened it?

Just a few weeks ago, I returned a $600 TV to Target because I didn't like the input lag. It wasn't banged up or anything, but it was opened. I simply said "The screen is laggy" which was technically true, but it wasn't actually broken, it just wasn't designed for games. They gave me a refund with no problem.

 

[The Technomancer]

Just a few weeks ago, I returned a $600 TV to Target because I didn't like the input lag. It wasn't banged up or anything, but it was opened. I simply said "The screen is laggy" which was technically true, but it wasn't actually broken, it just wasn't designed for games. They gave me a refund with no problem.

Really? Most places I've seen you can't get a refund unless its unopened or something is actually wrong with the product.

 

[Htown]

Just a few weeks ago, I returned a $600 TV to Target because I didn't like the input lag. It wasn't banged up or anything, but it was opened. I simply said "The screen is laggy" which was technically true, but it wasn't actually broken, it just wasn't designed for games. They gave me a refund with no problem.

Now try it with a piece of software.