Support NeoGAF

[Ceebs]

Retail is still the way to go if you are trying to save money on new releases 9 times out of 10. If you are in the US it's often cheaper to import a UK retail copy that was on sale at release than to buy from Steam. Even if you can't find a deal at retail at least one of the DD outlets will probably discount it a bit.

Steam is great in terms of convenience, but outside of the sales it's often more expensive.

 

[Nemo]

I bought Metro 2033 the other day and turned out it was a steam game. Kinda disappointed by that but eh

 

[Baller. PhD]

*bunch of other games*
Deus Ex: Human Revolution
Rage

And about 100 others....

Yes, you will need to install Steam to play these.

Deus Ex: HR and Rage have already been confirmed as using Steamworks? I didn't know that.

 

[Rebel Leader]

I am more afraid since I feel gabe is watching me

 

[Fugu]

It may come as a shock to some of you, but there are PC gamers (like myself) who hardly ever use Steam. I only have it installed on my secondary operating system because it is necessary to play MW2 (which I haven't played in almost a year) and Civ 5 (which I almost exclusively play in offline mode). Those of us who do not consider steam integration to be advantageous get by perfectly fine without it.

Because I do not need a community interface and a... store, Steam is a liability, not an asset.

 

[Stumpokapow]

It may come as a shock to some of you, but there are PC gamers (like myself) who hardly ever use Steam. I only have it installed on my secondary operating system because it is necessary to play MW2 (which I haven't played in almost a year) and Civ 5 (which I almost exclusively play in offline mode). Those of us who do not consider steam integration to be advantageous get by perfectly fine without it.

Because I do not need a community interface and a... store, Steam is a liability, not an asset.

Where do you buy your PC games and how many do you buy?

I mean, really, there are three choices:

- 1) Retail; selection sucks these days, and prices tend to be pretty pegged at MSRP, plus physical packages tend to use DVD cases and have 2-page manuals with PDFs, so you're not really getting much. There's also the increasing spectre of online activation, so it's not clear that the "liabilities" from Steam are minimized here.

- 2) Buy direct from developers; all of the problems of digital distribution with none of the benefits like autopatching or community features.

- 3) Other services that competing with Steam (Impulse, GamersGate, D2D, GOG, Green Man Games, etc)

 

[John]

Retail's pretty good aside from the UbiDRM games. Target's got Alpha Protocol and Kane and Lynch 2 for $12 right now

 

[arstal]

Where do you buy your PC games and how many do you buy?

I mean, really, there are three choices:

- 1) Retail; selection sucks these days, and prices tend to be pretty pegged at MSRP, plus physical packages tend to use DVD cases and have 2-page manuals with PDFs, so you're not really getting much. There's also the increasing spectre of online activation, so it's not clear that the "liabilities" from Steam are minimized here.

- 2) Buy direct from developers; all of the problems of digital distribution with none of the benefits like autopatching or community features.

- 3) Other services that competing with Steam (Impulse, GamersGate, D2D, GOG, Green Man Games, etc)

Yeah, 1 does suck, and oftentimes if you buy retail it's Steamworks DRM games anyways.
I haven't bought a PC retail game in about 2 years. The last one was Sins due to a huge sale and knowing it was DRM free.

Many indies do offer autopatching- I know Gratuitous Space Battles does. It's not THAT hard to go to a page and apply a patch. I'd rather deal with that then the risks involved with Steam. Also, when you do buy direct, your money goes to the developer fully, not a middleman. You also avoid the problem of someone being able to deactivate all the stuff you paid for. (Yeah, I know Steam won't do it without a reason, but it's still wrong.)

Three is your best bet. Avoiding Steamworks DRM games isn't too hard, since there are so many PC games, that you don't need any one particular game. (note: I don't boycott Steam, but it's a last resort for me, and I will boycott non-Valve Steamworks DRM games)

DD would be a lot better place, if there were no third-party games exclusive to one particular DD service (no problem with Valve/Stardock/Paradox making their own games exclusive). That shit should have stayed with the consoles.

 

[kodt]

If you are going to buy retail I would use gogamer.com. They usually have the best prices. Otherwise Amazon is nice if they are offering game credit with the purchase + free release day delivery for prime users.

But physical discs are too much hassle these days. I just wait for Steam sales which are usually much better than any retail price.

 

[1-D_FTW]

I assume you guys boycotting Steam are also boycotting GFWL. Most of those games use one time code DRM activation and have re-installation limits (unlike Steamworks).

 

[brain_stew]

Where do you buy your PC games and how many do you buy?

I mean, really, there are three choices:

- 1) Retail; selection sucks these days, and prices tend to be pretty pegged at MSRP, plus physical packages tend to use DVD cases and have 2-page manuals with PDFs, so you're not really getting much. There's also the increasing spectre of online activation, so it's not clear that the "liabilities" from Steam are minimized here.

- 2) Buy direct from developers; all of the problems of digital distribution with none of the benefits like autopatching or community features.

- 3) Other services that competing with Steam (Impulse, GamersGate, D2D, GOG, Green Man Games, etc)

The bolded doesn't apply in the UK and most of Europe, fyi. Most PC releases start out at £20-£25 here whereas they're usually £30-£35 on Steam, so if you like buying games on day 1, then yes, retail will save you quite a fair bit of cash. There's also generally still a few stores with a decent selection of PC titles at retail, though its dwindling. Still sites like play.com and amazon.co.uk will stock absolutely every PC disc release without fail and will deliver your game in time for release for free, so its a none-issue, anyway.

 

[Xilium]

Steam has good sales and I feel that is the primary reasoning behind its popularity.

I personally still buy retail (if I have to pay the same price, might as well get a physical product) and only keep Steam around for Steamworks games. I've never indulged in any of the sales cause I know I would never get around to playing those games anyway (my backlog is large enough as is).

P.S. When I say retail, I mean I order a boxed copy online. I rarely pick up PC games in stores unless its a major release, in which I will typically pre-order from Best Buy.

 

[Shambles]

If you are going to buy retail I would use gogamer.com. They usually have the best prices. Otherwise Amazon is nice if they are offering game credit with the purchase + free release day delivery for prime users.

But physical discs are too much hassle these days. I just wait for Steam sales which are usually much better than any retail price.

Switching disks is so retro. It's easy to either find a no cd patch or worst case scenario make a disk image.

 

[arstal]

I assume you guys boycotting Steam are also boycotting GFWL. Most of those games use one time code DRM activation and have re-installation limits (unlike Steamworks).

I wouldn't buy from there, but I'd use a game that uses GFWL, such as SFIV. Buy it from Impulse you don't have the activation limits. One time DRM activation is fine, Steam isn't one time activation though, but every time.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Three is your best bet. Avoiding Steamworks DRM games isn't too hard, since there are so many PC games, that you don't need any one particular game. (note: I don't boycott Steam, but it's a last resort for me, and I will boycott non-Valve Steamworks DRM games)

This is sort of the reason why I asked Fugu; if the answer is that he has no problem with digital distribution but has a specific problem with Steam (say mandatory client, objections to DRM, don't like Valve's policies about locking out or banning accounts, don't like US-euro price conversions) that's very different than having a problem with digital distribution ("I don't really own my game" / "What if the company goes bankrupt", "There's nothing tangible to look at or put on my shelves"). Of course you can have both sets of complaints simultaneously.

 

[1-D_FTW]

I wouldn't buy from there, but I'd use a game that uses GFWL, such as SFIV. Buy it from Impulse you don't have the activation limits. One time DRM activation is fine, Steam isn't one time activation though, but every time.

I guess were talking different definitions here. I'm talking about locking seriel numbers to your account (either Steam or Live). And by activation limits, I mean you can reformat/install a Steamworks game as many times as you want. Where as Live has a finite limit and then you have to call and get it reset (and it's supposedly limited to one clean reset).

Granted, Live has different levels of DRM. But I was under the assumption the generic serial numbers have been phased out for the strict one time use codes that are unique to every purchase.

 

[Pimpbaa]

People who hate steam are some serious fucking wierdos. Their reasons for hating it are never legitimate and rank up there with conspiracy theorists who wear tinfoil hats.

 

[brain_stew]

I wouldn't buy from there, but I'd use a game that uses GFWL, such as SFIV. Buy it from Impulse you don't have the activation limits. One time DRM activation is fine, Steam isn't one time activation though, but every time.

Yes it is. Offline mode wouldn't work if it wasn't.

 

[Ceebs]

The bolded doesn't apply in the UK and most of Europe, fyi. Most PC releases start out at £20-£25 here whereas they're usually £30-£35 on Steam, so if you like buying games on day 1, then yes, retail will save you quite a fair bit of cash. There's also generally still a few stores with a decent selection of PC titles at retail, though its dwindling. Still sites like play.com and amazon.co.uk will stock absolutely every PC disc release without fail and will deliver your game in time for release for free, so its a none-issue, anyway.

I think I ended up paying like about 30(US) for Alpha Protocol release day by importing it from a UK based online store. You often get around the taxes that are included in the price at some places since you are not buying in the UK (not sure exactly how that works so I could be wrong, but the price is still lower than I could have gotten it for here). You also get the occasional game that has different publisher in Europe who releases the game months before the NA version.

 

[Baller. PhD]

People who hate steam are some serious fucking wierdos. Their reasons for hating it are never legitimate and rank up there with conspiracy theorists who wear tinfoil hats.

I agree. Steam is awesome, and the people who hate it are dudes I would never want to hang around in real life. :lol

 

[arstal]

I guess were talking different definitions here. I'm talking about locking seriel numbers to your account (either Steam or Live). And by activation limits, I mean you can reformat/install a Steamworks game as many times as you want. Where as Live has a finite limit and then you have to call and get it reset (and it's supposedly limited to one clean reset).

Granted, Live has different levels of DRM. But I was under the assumption the generic serial numbers have been phased out for the strict one time use codes that are unique to every purchase.

Yeah, D2D uses the same system- and I do flat out boycott them. To get a game playing I had to get the .exe for the one game I bought for them emailed to me from someone who got the Impulse version.

As for offline mode, If Steam disables your game, it won't work offline. You'd have to never play online for it to be one time activation (and from what I've heard, if you're online in offline mode, it still checks)

 

[brain_stew]

I guess were talking different definitions here. I'm talking about locking seriel numbers to your account (either Steam or Live). And by activation limits, I mean you can reformat/install a Steamworks game as many times as you want. Where as Live has a finite limit and then you have to call and get it reset (and it's supposedly limited to one clean reset).
.

That's not technically true. Modern GFWL DRM (the one that blocks day zero piracy and ties your key to an account, just like Steam) doesn't have any install limits but it can be used with a DRM scheme that does. Often this is what happens (usually by way of Securom) in most cases and since its never been properly explained or advertised, this is where the confusion comes from. But no, modern GFWL DRM doesn't have any explicit install limits at all, its basically an exact replica of Steam just without the option of re-downloading retail games.

 

[brain_stew]

I think I ended up paying like about 30(US) for Alpha Protocol release day by importing it from a UK based online store. You often get around the taxes that are included in the price at some places since you are not buying in the UK (not sure exactly how that works so I could be wrong, but the price is still lower than I could have gotten it for here). You also get the occasional game that has different publisher in Europe who releases the game months before the NA version.

Well when games use Steamworks its even easier to take advantage of for foreigners. I helped out several dozen GAFers by buying a copy of L4D2 or AVP for them (using the money they sent me over Paypal) and just emailing them the code once the box arrived. Oz GAFers ended up paying like a third of the Steam price in some cases.

 

[brain_stew]

As for offline mode, If Steam disables your game, it won't work offline. You'd have to never play online for it to be one time activation (and from what I've heard, if you're online in offline mode, it still checks)

Oh come on, we're stepping into serious tin foil hat teritory now. The only DRM system that guarantees continued impeded access to your games is no DRM system at all and that only works if you are very proactive about creating backups, so unless you only buy PC games from gog.com, then you've really not got a leg to stand on here. There are weaknesses in all DRM schemes.

 

[1-D_FTW]

That's not technically true. Modern GFWL DRM (the one that blocks day zero piracy and ties your key to an account, just like Steam) doesn't have any install limits but it can be used with a DRM scheme that does. Often this is what happens (usually by way of Securom) in most cases and since its never been properly explained or advertised, this is where the confusion comes from. But no, modern GFWL DRM doesn't have any explicit install limits at all, its basically an exact replica of Steam just without the option of re-downloading retail games.

You have some relationship to MS. You're absolutely sure? Because I burned through a lot of "activations" by repeatedly entering codes trying to get Live to recognize my save files from a previous install on one game. And a clusterfuck of technical glitches on Fuel (memory leak from audio that would never allow me to make it all the way to a save. Had to keep on rinse and repeat the registration as I tried to isolate the issue). Didn't think much of it (other than annoyance) and then some people claimed it was locked in at 10 installs lifetime.

 

[sflufan]

Well when games use Steamworks its even easier to take advantage of for foreigners. I helped out several dozen GAFers by buying a copy of L4D2 or AVP for them (using the money they sent me over Paypal) and just emailing them the code once the box arrived. Oz GAFers ended up paying like a third of the Steam price in some cases.

Or you could just gift the game directly to them through Steam itself.

 

[brain_stew]

Or you could just gift the game directly to them through Steam itself.

You could but then they'd be paying £30 not £18. Retail is much cheaper here for new releases than Steam pretty much without fail.

 

[brain_stew]

You have some relationship to MS. You're absolutely sure? .

For games that use the new account based DRM system (not the old clusterfuck you saw in Halo 2 and SFIV) then yes, I'm positive. Of course most of these titles also use an extra layer of DRM which introduces a machine limit but that's purely a publisher choice and not part of the GFWL DRM.

 

[sflufan]

You could but then they'd be paying £30 not £18. Retail is much cheaper here for new releases than Steam pretty much without fail.

Oh yeah! I guess I meant if you were using Steam in the US.

 

[Vinci]

I think the effort required to never use steam would far out weigh any negatives of using steam.

It's not a matter of if you could not use steam, but more.... why?

I know some games are more expensive on Steam in some areas, but buy those at a B&M store then. To outright avoid using steam in any way shape or form would take a lot of work and yield little to no benefits.

Pretty much this.

 

[arstal]

Oh come on, we're stepping into serious tin foil hat teritory now. The only DRM system that guarantees continued impeded access to your games is no DRM system at all and that only works if you are very proactive about creating backups, so unless you only buy PC games from gog.com, then you've really not got a leg to stand on here. There are weaknesses in all DRM schemes.

Both Stardock and Gamersgate, once you DL the game, it's yours. You don't need Impulse running ever to play an Impulse game, and Gamersgate has nothing to run period.

It's just Steam that requires a client running to play a game. Yeah, most likely nothing will happen, but why take a chance when you don't have to? The only way I'd play a Steamworks DRM game is if I can buy at retail, or I can take the game off Steamworks (GSB and Mount and Blade series you can)

BTW it doesn't take any work to be Steam-free, as long as you avoid Steamworks DRM games. Just use other services.

 

[Fugu]

Where do you buy your PC games and how many do you buy?

I mean, really, there are three choices:

- 1) Retail; selection sucks these days, and prices tend to be pretty pegged at MSRP, plus physical packages tend to use DVD cases and have 2-page manuals with PDFs, so you're not really getting much. There's also the increasing spectre of online activation, so it's not clear that the "liabilities" from Steam are minimized here.

- 2) Buy direct from developers; all of the problems of digital distribution with none of the benefits like autopatching or community features.

- 3) Other services that competing with Steam (Impulse, GamersGate, D2D, GOG, Green Man Games, etc)

I buy the majority of my games retail, although rarely at their MSRP because most of the games I buy are not new releases. I would estimate that I buy at least a dozen PC games every year, although it would probably average out to more than that if I actually counted. I occasionally use online retailers although mostly for the purposes of importation. The rest of my games are bought through GOG, which addresses my primary complaint with Steam.

Here is a rough list of games that I bought this year, and the price that I paid for them (I'm Canadian, so all prices are CAD):
Starcraft 2 - $50 (Retail)
Civilization 5 - $50 (Retail)
Densha De GO! Final - $15 (Online seller in Japan)
Sacred - $10 (GOG)
Icewind Dale + HoW - $10 (Retail)
Might and Magic 3-7 - $10 (GOG)
Minecraft - $14 (...Minecraft)
Divine Divinity - $20 (Retail)
Beyond Divinity - $10 (GOG)
Mirror's Edge - $5 (Retail)

Steamworks game in bold.

Steam is a liability to me for a few reasons.

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 don't give a shit that a lot of people don't consider Steam a liability as long as it doesn't interfere with my ability to continue to enjoy PC gaming. But Steam is undeniably a liability for me and I can't see that changing in the near future.

 

[SturokBGD]

Steam and PC DRM in general doesn't really concern me too much (even the confusing activation limit DRMs out there) because I know there will always be some smart cookie out there, somewhere, who will make my game work. Unfortunately this generally (but not always) means the guys that put out the cracks that lead to mass piracy. It's a circle within a spiral. At least I pay for my shit, my conscience is clean.

So long as I know that in the event of, say, Steam closing up shop, that I make sure to remember I'll be busting my bandwidth limit that month downloading and backing up everything on my Steam account; there's no way I can have it all installed at once, and I don't like to have it backed up now (defeats the purpose, IMO), so Steam's #1 convenience to me is that it's a place to "store" my games (without the wall of shame, it's "shelf space" that my wife can't physically see, ha ha).

There's a ton of games on Steam that don't actually require Steam to be running to launch, by the way (just go to the steamapps folder and launch it as if it was the retail version)... but it's usually older games that weren't build around the Steam UI in the first place.

It also makes me smile when publishers put out patches that remove DRM from their games some time after they're first launched. The only reason for DRM is to protect them from losing those early sale, I for sure have appreciation for those who remove it when it's no longer relevant.

 

[Hylian7]

Both Stardock and Gamersgate, once you DL the game, it's yours. You don't need Impulse running ever to play an Impulse game, and Gamersgate has nothing to run period.

It's just Steam that requires a client running to play a game. Yeah, most likely nothing will happen, but why take a chance when you don't have to? The only way I'd play a Steamworks DRM game is if I can buy at retail, or I can take the game off Steamworks (GSB and Mount and Blade series you can)

BTW it doesn't take any work to be Steam-free, as long as you avoid Steamworks DRM games. Just use other services.

So....you just simply miss out on some good games? That doesn't sound very logical to me.

You theoretically COULD avoid using Steam if you don't want to, but you'll be missing out on a lot. DRM is everywhere these days, and pretty much the only place you'll see a DRM free game is on GoG.com. In this situation, you should pick the most user-friendly DRM, which is without a doubt Steam/Steamworks. I do kind of agree that a lot of complaints against Steam are venturing into tinfoil hat territory. A similar argument could be made about any game. What if your physical discs of all your PC games burn down in a house fire? What if your hard drive with all your one-time downloads of games goes kaput on you?

As you can see, similar concerns can be raised about any other form of PC game. It can be hard for people to embrace new ideas, and I can see why people are still uncomfortable with something like Steam, because it's not what they're used to. I honestly want digital distribution to take over, and I would have no problem with this. The last time I bought a physical copy of a PC game was one time when I saw Viva Pinata on PC for $8 in the Gamestop bargain bin. It's only cases like that where I'll buy a non-digital copy. Hell, even the digital copies of games get better deals. While unintentional, who remembers that Splinter Cell: Conviction for $1 (yes, the one where everyone used the 10% off coupon on it)? Stuff like that is INCREDIBLE. Even intentionally on Steam you see games drop to $2 frequently! I remember during the last holiday sale, I bought S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl for $2, and if you look now, it's $20.

 

[water_wendi]

It's not a matter of if you could not use steam, but more.... why?

The benefits that Steam provides i dont need or already have. The downside is the monthly post on GAF about someone not being able to play their games. i bought HL2 and tried Steam out but when i had to be online and running Steam to play a single-player game i returned it (the only game i ever returned). Sure its supposedly all fixed now but its not uncommon to hear about people not being able to play games or whatever weird issue (the latest being Fallout: New Vegas where your saves would be overwritten by Steamcloud every time you started up the game). i would rather not deal with the headaches.

 

[brain_stew]

Both Stardock and Gamersgate, once you DL the game, it's yours. You don't need Impulse running ever to play an Impulse game, and Gamersgate has nothing to run period.

It's just Steam that requires a client running to play a game. Yeah, most likely nothing will happen, but why take a chance when you don't have to? The only way I'd play a Steamworks DRM game is if I can buy at retail, or I can take the game off Steamworks (GSB and Mount and Blade series you can)

BTW it doesn't take any work to be Steam-free, as long as you avoid Steamworks DRM games. Just use other services.

And what happens if you install a new OS or buy a new PC and Gamersgate or Impulse vanish inbetween. You may have the game activated on that one PC but you don't have access to a completely DRM free installer.

The idea that Stardock retail games are DRM free hardly paints the whole picture either since you need to have a key assigned to an account in order to receive critical updates.

 

[AzureNightmare]

PC gaming without steam is like a fish swimming without water now.

 

[brain_stew]

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. .

This has always been the case and always will be. Its got nothing to do with Steam.

 

[arstal]

And what happens if you install a new OS or buy a new PC and Gamersgate or Impulse vanish inbetween. You may have the game activated on that one PC but you don't have access to a completely DRM free installer.

The idea that Stardock retail games are DRM free hardly paints the whole picture either since you need to have a key assigned to an account in order to receive critical updates.

First argument is a strawman, if Steam goes under in the same scenario, you'd be SOL also. Besides, Impulse and GG aren't going away- they're profitable also.

As for the patches- companies have a right to protect their patches. To get a patch, you have to be online anyways, so online authentication for those is perfectly reasonable.

 

[Fugu]

And what happens if you install a new OS or buy a new PC and Gamersgate or Impulse vanish inbetween. You may have the game activated on that one PC but you don't have access to a completely DRM free installer.

The idea that Stardock retail games are DRM free hardly paints the whole picture either since you need to have a key assigned to an account in order to receive critical updates.

What happens if you install a new OS or buy a new PC and Steam vanishes in between? That's only a knock against Impulse/Gamersgate in the same way it is against ALL digital distribution systems.

 

[water_wendi]

This has always been the case and always will be. Its got nothing to do with Steam.

This is true but Steam makes it easy to limit your access to the games you paid for. If you have the disc the publisher would have to come here in person and smash my discs. Its like the thing that happened with 1984 and Kindle(?).

 

[Fugu]

This has always been the case and always will be. Its got nothing to do with Steam.

Yes it does. Blizzard can tell me I'm licensing their game from them, but at the end of the day I will always be able to install and play Diablo 2 because I own the CDs. They have no power to take the physical disc away from me and therefore they don't really have any leverage to tell me that I'm licensing the game from them.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

Steam is almost always cheaper than retail in Australia so it's a pretty easy choice. Putting aside price, I really can't see any reason not to use Steam.

 

[Stink]

There is an awful lot of Kevin Phillips on this page.

 

[arstal]

Yes it does. Blizzard can tell me I'm licensing their game from them, but at the end of the day I will always be able to install and play Diablo 2 because I own the CDs. They have no power to take the physical disc away from me and therefore they don't really have any leverage to tell me that I'm licensing the game from them.

They can ban you from battlenet and ban you from patching. (so can Stardock BTW, but they've only ever done it twice with GalCiv II at least, and both cases were due to serious abuse of their support staff, and they refunded the purchase price when they did this. If Steam refunded the money paid when they locked out your games, then I wouldn't have issue with them doing this)

 

[brain_stew]

First argument is a strawman, if Steam goes under in the same scenario, you'd be SOL also. Besides, Impulse and GG aren't going away- they're profitable also.

So both solutions leave you equally unprotected, great. Why exactly is Steam so much worse, again. The point is that all DRM systems could leave you without access to your content, Steam is no more susceptible to that than the alternatives.

 

[Burekma]

I'm surprised at all the "they took mah games" discussion. I guess you guys missed this:

Steam and PC DRM in general doesn't really concern me too much (even the confusing activation limit DRMs out there) because I know there will always be some smart cookie out there, somewhere, who will make my game work. Unfortunately this generally (but not always) means the guys that put out the cracks that lead to mass piracy. It's a circle within a spiral. At least I pay for my shit, my conscience is clean.

So long as I know that in the event of, say, Steam closing up shop, that I make sure to remember I'll be busting my bandwidth limit that month downloading and backing up everything on my Steam account; there's no way I can have it all installed at once, and I don't like to have it backed up now (defeats the purpose, IMO), so Steam's #1 convenience to me is that it's a place to "store" my games (without the wall of shame, it's "shelf space" that my wife can't physically see, ha ha).

There's a ton of games on Steam that don't actually require Steam to be running to launch, by the way (just go to the steamapps folder and launch it as if it was the retail version)... but it's usually older games that weren't build around the Steam UI in the first place.

It also makes me smile when publishers put out patches that remove DRM from their games some time after they're first launched. The only reason for DRM is to protect them from losing those early sale, I for sure have appreciation for those who remove it when it's no longer relevant.

The funniest part is, downloading an up to date Steam version and then proceeding to apply a crack is still more convenient than any of the alternatives you've mentioned.

 

[Fugu]

They can ban you from battlenet and ban you from patching. (so can Stardock BTW, but they've only ever done it twice with GalCiv II at least, and both cases were due to serious abuse of their support staff, and they refunded the purchase price when they did this. If Steam refunded the money paid when they locked out your games, then I wouldn't have issue with them doing this)

They can't ban you from patching because Diablo 2 uses separate, distributable packages to patch. They CAN ban you from battle.net but CD keys are rarely banned permanently. Besides, it's irrelevant because you can still play your game.

I'm surprised at all the "they took mah games" discussion. I guess you guys missed this:

The funniest part is, downloading an up to date Steam version and then proceeding to apply a crack is still more convenient than any of the alternatives you've mentioned.

Forgive me if I don't find a scenario in which I must download a third-party application (in a realm of third-party applications where a good percentage are actually just trojans) to get a game that I paid for to work optimum.

 

[Burekma]

Forgive me if I don't find a scenario in which I must download a third-party application (in a realm of third-party applications where a good percentage are actually just trojans) to get a game that I paid for to work optimum.

It's usually a single file a couple MB in size. Hardly an "application". And from my experience, they're as stable as the original game exes.

As for trojans, they are a non-issue if you know where to look. Just play with google. And remember, these aren't pirated copies we're talking about here. There are legit sites hosting these files.

 

[bloodydrake]

But isn't steams drm pretty easy going compared to the type of drm that publishers tack on after the fact?
having to authenticate for installation and for online play but only occasionally for offline play...isn't that pretty damn good compared to the securom crap and its ilk?

I guess the fear that steam will shutdown someday is valid i guess..but if steam fails out like that,isn't there just as likely to be a workaround for old stuff?