Steam Family Library "Sharing"

[AnthrSolidSnake]

Have you guys all heard of this yet? Apparently Steam is going to beta test "Library Sharing", and here I jump the gun, thinking they're going to see about letting us do what we all dreamed we could do with our Steam accounts: Activate our account for a friend to download and play one of our games, while we can still continue to play another game on that same account. However, upon further reading, it seems that's not that case at all. Instead, it simply hands over your ENTIRE library to that person or family member, lets them download the games they want, and play them. However, as long as they are playing a game from your library, you no longer can access your library at the same time (at least, that's what I've gathered from reading and seeing everyones responses). If you want to access your library, but your friend is playing one of your games, then they will be asked to either purchase the game, or stop playing so you can access the account. This pretty much makes this entire thing useless. I can already do this! I just let my friend log into my account, they download a game, and play it as long as I'm not logged on. However, the only thing this changes is that someone can play a game and have the game save on their account, as well as have separate trophies, so as not to interfere with the lenders progress. That's all this changes, which is nice for families that only have one computer to share, but this is all I can see is worth it. My PS3 is more capable in this regard. I just activate my account of a friend's PS3, and he can download and play a digital game of mine, while I can still use my entire account.

However, this is just a beta, right? They could change how it works later? Though, I'm cautious to think how publishers and developers would think about it.

Source: http://steamcommunity.com/groups/familysharing

 

[Vegosiux]

]I can already do this! I just let my friend log into my account, they download a game, and play it as long as I'm not logged on.

You might not want to be open about that; it's a breach of the terms of use.

But I agree that locking down the whole library is a stupid way to go about it. Well, smart too, seeing as that's another way to make people buy stuff, and suddenly it's the users doing the advertising. I'll see how it goes.

Logical next step: Make friends in timezones at the other side of the globe!

 

[AnthrSolidSnake]

]I can already do this! I just let my friend log into my account, they download a game, and play it as long as I'm not logged on.

You might not want to be open about that; it's a breach of the terms of use.

But I agree that locking down the whole library is a stupid way to go about it. Well, smart too, seeing as that's another way to make people buy stuff, and suddenly it's the users doing the advertising. I'll see how it goes.

Logical next step: Make friends in timezones at the other side of the globe!

I appreciate the concern, but I've never done it personally, I just know that if someone were to do it, they could. My friends usually have the same games as I do anyway

 

[TehCookie]

I still want to be able to inherit games. My dad died, he's not going to be using his account anytime, why can't I merge it with mine?

 

[BrotherRool]

I don't see what functionality it's offering that you don't have if you just share your account with someone. In fact if you sign out of steam then you can both be playing games at the same time.

At the moment it doesn't even solve the most basic problem steam DRM creates, when you're living with your brother, using the same computer which has all your steam games on them and then one of you moves away, what happens to the account and the games? With discs at least you can divide up the games between the two, with Steam one of you has to lose your entire game library if you want to keep within TOS. The very minimum of functionality should allow two people to play different games at the same time (and I don't mind if they drop the number to something like 5 or even 3).

 

[Vegosiux]

And yet, simply giving away the games from your library, or better yet selling them on the community market, is still not an option.

Of course it's not. Capitalism, ho! Why would valve give you an option that makes them less money?

 

[BrotherRool]

And yet, simply giving away the games from your library, or better yet selling them on the community market, is still not an option.

Of course it's not. Capitalism, ho! Why would valve give you an option that makes them less money?

Because it's technically illegal? I'm pretty sure the EU is suing them over it at the moment.

Plus this is Valve, they'd make it make money for them. Fix minimums, taking heavy cuts from each sale, they made a hat-based economy. This should be easy. Heck if they wanted to play evil it's basically the equivalent of a sale except they don't have to pay the publishers any money