The Steam/Valve arguement, (Question! not starting a flame war)

[Andy of Comix Inc]

No, I'm asking which part of the DRM is draconian. Publisher/distributor X (not going to start with names) may start sending ninjas to your place right now and, let's assume it fits into the EULA (it doesn't exclusively say you won't get attacked by ninjas I bet!) but that not really part of the DRM itself. If you were required to input a product key, the ninjas wouldn't actually fit into the that function

But Steam is the DRM. Its bells and whistles are unavoidable! You register your game with the client, you have no choice - if you want to play that game you have to be running the client, online, connected to the community, and at the behest of Valve's servers. It's not just a "simple check at launch," you're chained to a whole program whose very point is to chain you to the program. How many DRM clients say "well all your friends are using this!" and "if you buy from our store, your library will get bigger!" Coupling DRM with a storefront was just cruel. And no, you're right, its not specifically a part of the DRM, but you can't have JUST the DRM. Every part of Steam is interconnected. To play a game that runs Steamworks, you need to have Steam installed, you need to be logged in to Steam online (offline mode doesn't really work 100%), you need to have Friends in the corner, you need to get store ads (you can switch them off, but at first launch you'll get bombarded). It encompasses a whole package of storefront, game launcher and DRM, and if you don't think coupling DRM to a storefront and game launcher with no way to break it off is "excessive"? Well, I don't know what to tell you.

You can't just enter a product key into Steam and you get the game. You have to launch it through the bulky mess of a game launcher, and forever be stared down the barrel by the storefront and the community. Tying DRM to a client with conflicting interests just seems like a Draconian measure. (In, of course, the loosest sense of the word.)

 

[DoPo]

But Steam is the DRM.

The DRM is part of Steam, not the whole of it. DRM is the facility to manage access, that facility is (upon launch) 1. having a Steam account 2. having an authenticated client. The friends, messaging, store, and everything else unrelated to that are not part of the DRM. In other words, imagine Steam as a box, that contains three balls - red, blue and yellow - the DRM is the blue one. We are talking about the blue ball.

So there, when I say "the DRM", I actually mean "the blue ball", when you say it, you mean "the box". Yes, you can't have one without the other but I'd rather be using terminology correctly.

 

[Radoh]

Steam DRM?

You mean the offline mode which everyone claims isn't there but I was using just the other day when my internet was down?

Well, it depends on what kind of games you are playing.
Certain games have super DRM, and because some games that have super DRM are also on Steam, people end up thinking that Steam has Super DRM.

 

[Andy of Comix Inc]

But Steam is the DRM.

The DRM is part of Steam, not the whole of it. DRM is the facility to manage access, that facility is (upon launch) 1. having a Steam account 2. having an authenticated client. The friends, messaging, store, and everything else unrelated to that are not part of the DRM. In other words, imagine Steam as a box, that contains three balls - red, blue and yellow - the DRM is the blue one. We are talking about the blue ball.

So there, when I say "the DRM", I actually mean "the blue ball", when you say it, you mean "the box". Yes, you can't have one without the other but I'd rather be using terminology correctly.

Well my argument is that not being able to have one without the other is part of the ingenious cruelty of the Steam client. Once you buy a handful of games that use Steam, you're less likely to stray from the platform. It's DRM as a form of backhanded marketing, and it works.

In the case of solely the activation? ...yeah. Having a Steam account and an authenticated client is pretty much it on the DRM side. I just can't take Steam as a service just on the DRM itself. The rest of the program is too insidiously prevalent to ignore.

...I see where you're getting at, though. The DRM itself certainly isn't Draconian. In fact I guess it's rather fair, all things considered. Well, that's why there was a debate between us, I suppose. Like I (and you) mentioned, I'm taking the Steam client as a whole. I feel I can't really talk about the DRM without taking into account the gunk that surrounds it. Other DRM systems certainly don't tie you to their storefronts or IMs. (Did Stardock do it once they started operating Impulse? Can't remember. But hey, not even Origin does that.)

(You have to launch games through the Steam client, by the way. In case you didn't know. You can't just download and activate it then exit Steam, it has to be switched on. When you close it right down and open a game's .exe, it launches Steam back up again.)

 

[Zyst]

Anyway, I like steam and don't really have any problems with it, I follow the paranoid stuff I read some fella here does (write down my CD Keys) and if Steam goes down they said we would be given a drm-free patch so we could use our stuff without it. And yeah, I pretty much have internet 24/7 and when I don't offline mode has never not-worked for me so yup.

 

[viranimus]

Ok because I do not feel like writing out the well known arguments against steam yet again. I will simply state.. Demand of giving up rights is wrong.

However, what burns me up about it is "steam powered logic"

For example, people talk about Steam sales, and yes, My abandoned steam account had well over 100 games in it, but most of it... was never touched. However that point is moot.

I have not looked up steams page since the decree patch went out. However, today I did. I was looking at the new indie title "Lucius" I noticed GOG had it on sale 10% off. I wondered if Steam had it on sale too. I checked and sure enough, it was indeed on sale... 15% off. That makes one think of the power of steams sale power.

However, I did a double take. Because despite Gog being 10% and steam being 15... Somehow, the gog version clocks in at 18 USD vs Steams that is over 21$. WTHFH?!?!!?

It astounds me completely. The version that includes NO DRM, not only costs less, but has infinitely more intrinsic value due to the ability to burn it to disc, install it on multiple computers, and use it as if you actually had purchased a product, and includes a few extras like wallpapers to boot.

The steam version costs more both in base and sale price, offers less and is worth less by comparison.

Yet Steam is the dominant form of digital distribution globally in the industry.

HOW?!?!?!?!

You know when I first found out I had no choice but to abandon my steam account, a part of me felt awful for abandoning what I was losing in monetary value. Calculators estimate my librarys value at just under 2000$. I felt like I was losing so much until I realized a couple of things. One, I always approached steam with the ideology that while I used it I only purchased what I could afford to lose. Two.. most of the "value" of my library comes directly from my extensive support of indie bundling.

Once I realized that I did not lose much in regard to games thanks to indie bundles and my bundle collections on each bundle site are stored nice and neatly, )currently using Humble, Gala, Royale, and game stand)I realized I really lost nothing of value. All the games that did not come from indie bundles, were basically a few triple A games that I had already played and beaten (usually elsewhere, but buying new copies such as KOTOR, Fallout NV, GTAIV, etc) that I bought "on sales" simply to have one consolidated collection. Basically for me nothing of value was lost, and coming to adopt GOG and indies in alternative, I found I had so much more that was gained.

I get people want a nice neat collection. Who doesnt. However, There is nothing steam offers that is not matched elsewhere. And if you are falling back on the idea that you want one centralized client for your games in this era of pervasive broadband internet, you are being rather lazy and by continuing to support steam your actually hurting the industry as a whole and every other gamer by accepting practices that should never be accepted.

 

[Adultism]

168 games on steam lol, I love steam its just amazing.

 

[bafrali]

smip

1. You have no idea how much money I have spent on steam so you are just making a baseless assumption about my "fanatism"

2. You claimed that Valve didn't contribute to the industry in any relevant way as a developer (which is your opinion) but you seem to focus solely on the digital distribution platform part rather than the merits of game development.

3. You finished with the cop out argument of "you wouldn't understand" without trying to explain yourself (A point i made in my previous post.)

I see neither confidence nor focus on your part. Just hostility towards the other side of the argument you label as "fanboys".

 

[bafrali]

snip

1. Not relevant to the argument.

2. Half-Life a sci-fi shooter that establish the balance between gameplay and narrative. A linear shooter with narrative set pieces. Sound familiar today?
Portal: A quirky puzzle game with strong characterization and narrative pacing. A step up from the earlier puzzle games don't you think?
L4D: A zombie shooter with actual coop interaction. An AI director that affects the gameplay in real time and strong characterization. Not to mention the mod that lets you control one of the zombies. If this sound familiar, you probably played Resident evil 5 and 6.
To say a few.

3. I don't quite follow you here

 

[Something Amyss]

And the "Con's" are:
- Draconian DRM
- "You DON'T actually own your games"
- Online/offline gaming
- "unfair" market share

-terrible customer support when something goes wrong.

 

[bafrali]

Snip

That silly argument again. They are made by guys hired by Valve using their engine, their programmers, their workforce, their writers, their composers, their voice actors which means that these games are made by Valve. Do you think Portal would become a million seller franchise today if it was solely by funded by EA, not to mention the critical acclaim by both critics and fans? Or L4D for that matter. It isn't that simple you know. Resident Evil 5 and 6's shittines don't change the fact that they are clearly influenced by L4D series.

As for the Half Lıfe argument, I refer you to Yathzee's Half Life review. I don't have much more to say than he already does in a few words.

You alo seem to think that those who spend any amount of money on steam doesn't deserve to be talked with which is quite the bias, don't you think?

 

[Radoh]

1. Not relevant to the argument.

Actually it is very relevant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_Dissonance

If you do not reveal how much you have spent then I won't waste my time trying to argue a point with someone who could potentially be holding an extreme bias towards Steam.

So you will only discuss what's wrong with Steam with people who do not frequent Steam enough to have an understanding of it. That's absolutely hilarious.

 

[Vigormortis]

When my connection drops it's not kind enough to wait for everything to finish downloading. I've NEVER had offline mode work without setting it beforehand. I don't shut down my computer, but I don't know how to sync my games to make sure they'll work. If it's suppose to do it automatically it does a pretty bad job. Or is there an issue because I don't leave it running 24/7, I only boot it up to play games and close it when I'm done.

That's all I ever do when I use Steam. I open it when I want to play my games or chat with friends. I close it when I'm done. (not that I need to, it uses very few system resources while running in the background, but that's besides the point)

But just so I can perhaps help you a bit more, and assuming you won't mind, I'd like to ask a few questions:

When you "close" Steam, do you shut down the program or just close the window? I know it seems simple, and I mean absolutely no insult (as some have assumed in the past) but many times I've met people that just click the "x" button at the top of the main Steam window, thinking that shuts down the client process. (it doesn't, because the client isn't tied directly into the main window)

Do you have Steam store you account credentials locally? This not only let's you open and login to Steam without having to type in your account info, it's essential to having offline mode function.

Do you have the Steam client and your game library set to keep everything up-to-date? This isn't absolutely essential to the function of the client, but if some things are set to update and others are not, that can cause problems.

Have you allowed Steam network access through your firewall? This usually isn't an issue, but sometimes firewalls can be finicky or, in some cases, very "draconian" in their permissions. (there's that word again)

Do you have any malware or security software installed that could interfere with Steams functionality? This doesn't happen often, but there are some malware defense programs out there that tend to hinder anything that isn't a part of their, Microsoft, or other similar companies suites of software. Norton comes to mind.

I have other questions, but I'll wait to hear back about these. Also, to avoid potentially cluttering the thread with long posts, perhaps we should us PMs to discuss this.

 

[Chaosblade]

It makes buying games, for me, convenient and cheap, on top of giving me a way to communicate with friends. I haven't had any problems with it so far either.

 

[Vigormortis]

Portal: A quirky puzzle game with strong characterization and narrative pacing. A step up from the earlier puzzle games don't you think?

That wasn't made by Valve.

L4D: A zombie shooter with actual coop interaction. An AI director that affects the gameplay in real time and strong characterization. Not to mention the mod that lets you control one of the zombies.

Also not made by Valve.

So...two game series, crafted by people who work for Valve (i.e. employees), are not made by Valve?

Yep. That makes sense. Can't believe it never occurred to me.

I guess, then, every game Bioware, Blizzard, Epic Games, Naughty Dog, and just about every other major game study in existence wasn't actually made by those companies, seeing as not every person at those companies was involved in every game they put out. And, even then, a number of those who were involved in their creation were new hires, much like the students from Digipen were new hires at Valve.

But hey, that doesn't make sense, right? Because those other companies aren't Valve. They don't get the privilege of being judged unfairly by people who, quite literally, have to reach for excuses to hate them. All the while ignoring the real, quantifiable grievances that could be levied against Valve, and choosing instead to base their entire arguments on fallacies.