View Full Version : actions to fight steam...
green jacket
10-11-2009, 00:36
hey i know every1 will be like hey welcome to the forums :laugh4:
i take part in the official total war forums but after my fustration with steam i decided to move here aswell
now i was wondering if all the people who wouldnt like to see steam in future games of total war to a petition or summit abit like what they did for left for dead or something
i know some people do *like* steam but to me on the official forums they all seemed.... how can i say... too proper abit sounded 2 much like the admins so decided 2 try here aswell
just leave any ideas you have ect. n try to be civil we want to be taken seriously as i hate steam since i was *made* to have it to play empire total war :/
Anyhoo peace out and i hope this works
green jacket
10-11-2009, 00:37
btw http://shoguntotalwar.yuku.com/topic/61842?page=5
theres the link to the official forums page, my thread got merged so its the top of page 5
peacemaker
10-11-2009, 04:16
Left 4 dead is made by valve, who also made Steam...so It's sort of obvious they would use it. Anyway, I think Steam is fantastic. Whenever I have to re-download my games (which happens a lot), I don't want to have to wait until I have a chance to find my CD. It also helps patching TREMENDOUSLY, because it's all automatic and I don't have to dig through the internet hoping to find a download link.
Owen Glyndwr
10-11-2009, 05:25
But coupled with this you also have problems such as a better enforced DRM and the inability to select which patches you want to and not download.
peacemaker
10-11-2009, 07:25
Wait...better enforced DRM is a problem? :inquisitive:you lost me there
I will agree partially on the which patch you want to download part. However with this game, I would say 1.5 is better than 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4 so It's not a big deal. If patch 1.6 completely destroyed the game, I would agree that it becomes a problem
pevergreen
10-11-2009, 07:43
Automatic patching, is overall a good thing.
It screws up mods, yes, but it puts everyone on the same page.
The steam platform is currently the best DRM measure. Yes it can be circumvented, but it is not widespread.
I do not see what you seek to gain by attempting to get total war off steam. We would move back to secuROM, which may delve into lower rings. The thing is terrible. CA/SEGA don't want it as it loses sales and is not as effective.
On top of that, gone are the terrible lobby days of R:TW and M2:TW, we have steam as an MP platform.
Steam has moved the game forward.
If you install M2TW:Kingdoms, you are made to have secuROM. You have no choice.
Steam is a platform, it is not DRM.
I had steam years and years ago, and I disliked it. But it has changed since then. Steam and Impulse are the best platforms out there for what we need, and what developers and distributors need.
Durallan
10-11-2009, 09:55
steam isn't too bad it would just mean anyone who didn't have an internet connection, or a reliable one couldn't play the game, but there aren't enough of those people around for any game developer to care, unfortunately.
green jacket
10-11-2009, 12:20
sadly not every1 likes every patch out there :/ i would prefer the option to download a patch if i "wanted" and the drm thing is stupid tbh, give companys a false sense of security but its not different than secuROM it just mean the pirates need the internet...... which they all do these days.
my internet is not always on, it switchs off so my little bro isnt on it at stupid times ie when i get back from work lol and thats prob why i find it so annoying i need steam online to log on
the main point steam doesnt "always" work, i do admit i think how it works with the multiplayer is better than the days of med2 and rome but its just how un-damn reliable it is!
pevergreen
10-11-2009, 12:51
In what sense?
Steam is harder to crack than secuROM, and is done less often.
Steam has offline mode. Tis a godsend.
antisocialmunky
10-11-2009, 13:42
I would not claim that Steam is cracked any less. :)
The cracks don't work with Steam multiplayer, and have to use these methods which involve bending over backwards to stick your head where the sun does not shine.
pevergreen
10-11-2009, 23:10
I would not claim that Steam is cracked any less. :)
I would.
As Beskar put it, its a lot easier to crack secuROM.
Krusader
10-11-2009, 23:35
Two things I hate.
1) Adding Friends can be a real hassle.
2) € pricing is whack. Last time I checked, I could by Call of Duty 4 for half the price on Impulse, compared to what it cost on Steam. (50 € on Steam, 37 $ or such on Impulse).
Sheogorath
10-12-2009, 01:49
Please don't use numbers in place of letters. This is a forum, not AIM. I'm not a mod and I'm not trying to sound elitist here, but really. Using '1' in place of 'one' saves you a full two keystrokes. I'm sure it doesn't save that much time.
In any case, I'm no fan of steam. Automatic updates annoy me. Broadcasting what I'm playing to everybody all the time is a bugger. The fact that it's inconvenient to start Steam in offline mode without first going into online mode (and impossible sometimes, if Steam is having a bad day) annoys me as well.
Not having to change CD's all the time is nice, though.
I don't really think it's worth the bother of some crazy uprising or anything, though. It's a minor annoyance.
peacemaker
10-12-2009, 03:16
Offline mode is a godsend, and switching to offline mode is very simple. Just open up Steam, and go to file>Offline Mode.
Steam definetely helps against cracked versions of the game being released, although it's obvious that there will be some copies released over the internet:no:
Sheogorath
10-12-2009, 03:18
Yes, BUT, like I said, you gotta go into online mode to switch to offline mode. Or go in and disable your internet connection. And then if Steam doesn't have your password logged, you have to sign on anyway.
I just don't see a very strong argument against steam.
The only valid one, being the abiltity to choose whether to patch or not, only seems to matter with CA releases.
I cannot recall another developer that I have purchased a game from that releases patches after launch that change the game so radically, as opposed to fixing errors, where I would reluctantly or regret applying a patch.
peacemaker
10-12-2009, 05:18
If you go into steam, and have no internet connection, you'll just get a bigwindow that says 'no internet connection'. Wait until that loads, then go to offline mode.
If you go into steam, and have no internet connection, you'll just get a bigwindow that says 'no internet connection'. Wait until that loads, then go to offline mode.
In theory, yes. In practice, if you aren't connected to any network then you will get that pop-up and Steam will load up into offline mode fine. The problem comes when you are connected to a network but not the internet, then Steam (for me at least) just tries to update itself but as it has no internet connection just gets stuck on 0% :dizzy2:. The solution is obviously to just disconnect from the network and try again but it is slightly annoying and would be nice if Valve addressed the issue.
Having said that, Steam seems fine to me and a good answer to piracy (better than the intrusive DRM you get with some games at least). It could use a few improvements (e.g. the option of whether to install a patch or not) but overall I find the automatic patching better than having to search for download links, etc.
antisocialmunky
10-12-2009, 13:27
I would.
As Beskar put it, its a lot easier to crack secuROM.
You said done less often but all that requires is cracking the game once. Yes it is easier to crack traditional DRM but you can find steam games just as easily and that's all that really matters in the end with regards to piracy isn't it? :beam:
pevergreen
10-12-2009, 14:13
Yes and no.
I feel we are treading the line though. I'm wary of the line right now.
In all honesty, the main reason why I didn't buy E:TW was Steam.
As a matter of principle.
Even if you buy the game on DVD, you need to go online and create a Steam account and have the game activated.
Why would I have to depend on some company to be allowed to play a game I legally purchased?
Call me old-fashioned, but I want to go back to the good old days: 1) I read about a game I like; 2) I go to the store and buy the game; 3) I go home, install the game and enjoy; 4) the copy I bought is mine and I can install and re-install it as much as I want, patch or not patch, in short: it's my copy, my game, I play when and where ever I want.
Give me anything less in return for the full price you want me to pay for your game and I simply will not buy your game, because you are not selling a game, but a permission.
My attitude will probably mean the end of my gaming days for me, since, unfortunately, almost every new game requires some sort of online activation or registration to be able to be allowed to play it.
Not with me, so no more games for me it is.
Originally posted by Andres
Why would I have to depend on some company to be allowed to play a game I legally purchased?
Well, everyone has access to the net these days, so if this measure is effective against piracy for developers/publishers, so be it, imho. Its about a million times better than copy protection software - the SECUROM type, at least for me.
the copy I bought is mine and I can install and re-install it as much as I want, patch or not patch, in short: it's my copy, my game, I play when and where ever I want.
Agreed; this is a pain indeed and it does feel bad.
Not with me, so no more games for me it is.
No more pc games you mean. Just mafia games :laugh4:
Give me anything less in return for the full price you want me to pay for your game and I simply will not buy your game, because you are not selling a game, but a permission.
But isn't that what has always happened? I was under the impression from all the EULA's you agree to when you install most games (new and old) that all you ever got was permission to use the software, it wasn't yours in and of itself. The only difference I see now is that publishers and developers are trying to find ways to enforce that EULA, they aren't really changing what you are buying.
peacemaker
10-12-2009, 23:15
Call me old-fashioned, but I want to go back to the good old days: 1) I read about a game I like; 2) I go to the store and buy the game; 3) I go home, install the game and enjoy; 4) the copy I bought is mine and I can install and re-install it as much as I want, patch or not patch, in short: it's my copy, my game, I play when and where ever I want.
Like BooHugh said, all you're doing is buying permission anyway. That's the point of EULA. Also, with Steam, you can install and re-install it whenever you want, and now you don't even need the disc. This however stops people from playing the same copy of the same game on two different computers at once. That's the problem with a lot of games, and Steam helps against this.
pevergreen
10-12-2009, 23:47
At least it isnt the EA download service.
I bought Northern Strike for Battlefield 2142. Its the expansion pack. Digital Download only. Now, I get permission to download this for a year, after that, I no longer own it. So I have to buy it again if I want to install it.
Hmm, I started my laptop when it was not online, went to Steam and it said it could not connect and allowed me to use it offline, I could start games as well. Haven't really played around much with it but being offline did not seem to be a problem at all. :shrug:
Elmar Bijlsma
10-13-2009, 02:41
At least it isnt the EA download service.
I bought Northern Strike for Battlefield 2142. Its the expansion pack. Digital Download only. Now, I get permission to download this for a year, after that, I no longer own it. So I have to buy it again if I want to install it.
Burn the installation files on a disc or an external HD or any number of alternatives. Really, some people have only themselves to blame.
On Steam, it's quite good in some places and annoyingly authoritarian in others. It should leave more things up to me, as I am pretty good at knowing wqhat I want and when, unlike Steam. Yet it insists on interfering in my decision making every opportunity it gets.
I'd just as soon not have it, but not quite up for boycotting it. But I must raise objection to the statement that if not Steam, then SecuRom. There are a whole range of DRM that are less annoying, and of course the option of no DRM.
Steam was chosen to help CA/SEGA flog DLC, our ease of use did not figure in that decision at all, so we can gripe about it all day, it would matter not one jot.
Burn the installation files on a disc or an external HD or any number of alternatives. Really, some people have only themselves to blame.
On Steam, it's quite good in some places and annoyingly authoritarian in others. It should leave more things up to me, as I am pretty good at knowing wqhat I want and when, unlike Steam. Yet it insists on interfering in my decision making every opportunity it gets.
I'd just as soon not have it, but not quite up for boycotting it. But I must raise objection to the statement that if not Steam, then SecuRom. There are a whole range of DRM that are less annoying, and of course the option of no DRM.
Steam was chosen to help CA/SEGA flog DLC, our ease of use did not figure in that decision at all, so we can gripe about it all day, it would matter not one jot.
It requires online authentication upon install and to play. No offline mode for EA....
antisocialmunky
10-13-2009, 04:56
At least it isnt the EA download service.
I bought Northern Strike for Battlefield 2142. Its the expansion pack. Digital Download only. Now, I get permission to download this for a year, after that, I no longer own it. So I have to buy it again if I want to install it.
Usually as long as you own the license to play it, getting it in the original(non-cracked) form any way you can is fine. Maybe direct download stuff puts crap in the EULA but I don't think that's quite legal. Companies put all sorts of junk in the EULA that's not actually within their reasonable legal authority since no one nitpicks those things unless a lawsuit comes up.
I personally like the Op Flashpoint and Arkhem Asylum methods of DRM where they embed hundreds of lines of conditional statements instead of function calls that only work if it can detect a scratch pattern on the disk. :beam:
Thereby the game is broken and extremely hard to make player from a cracked version. :2thumbsup:
Also its pretty hilarious when someone posts the problem on the help forums and gets pwned by the devs.
pevergreen
10-13-2009, 05:05
Usually as long as you own the license to play it, getting it in the original(non-cracked) form any way you can is fine. Maybe direct download stuff puts crap in the EULA but I don't think that's quite legal. Companies put all sorts of junk in the EULA that's not actually within their reasonable legal authority since no one nitpicks those things unless a lawsuit comes up.
If I dont have it installed when the time is up, i lose it. Thats it.
No installer files nothing. Its all automated inside the evil giant that is EA.
antisocialmunky
10-13-2009, 14:17
But did you actually have the EULA? There are other ways to obtain it but then we get into the grey zone. At any rate, you should have bought a license to install the thing on one computer at any one time that is not voided by lack of product. If you can get the product, you can still use it - legally.
The direct download people are abusing the fact that software is both a physical commodity and an electronic medium. I mean, they even tell you to back it up which means they sold you a license to use it instead of sell you just one electronic copy. I guess you could be paying for the download link and the license but really, you have the license use it.
Really, people could probably take them to court over turning off the download link but most people don't care or are stuck on the 'I'm buying the physical software' paradigm which the law hasn't used since the early days. The consumer protection people would have a field day with it.
I mean, remember back in the 90s when you bought the software and your disk broke? You could write the company and they would charge you $5 to ship you a new disk and the cost was for the disk and shipping.
The only thing I don't like about Steam is the possibility that you lose all the games you bought if it ever get's shut down. Steam seems to be doing pretty well but times change. Still, I don't really play my old NES games anymore. I assume I will not be interested in playing ETW anymore in 20 years. (I think Steam should last at least 20 years from now based on the current state.)
Edit: Other thing being that my PC in 20 years probably won't be able to play ETW anyways.
nameless
10-15-2009, 21:41
The only thing I don't like about Steam is the possibility that you lose all the games you bought if it ever get's shut down. Steam seems to be doing pretty well but times change. Still, I don't really play my old NES games anymore. I assume I will not be interested in playing ETW anymore in 20 years. (I think Steam should last at least 20 years from now based on the current state.)
I don't see that possible at all and a very very weak argument.
If you're concerned about that, you should be more concerned about Microsoft. If that giant goes down, everything goes down. *Especially since you need to activate it*
For example with ETW on STEAM.
If say STEAM went down, what happens? CA will need to step in and deal with it or they lose their customers.
If CA went down itself, I do not see a problem with STEAM keeping the game on file and then you got SEGA which in itself is the publisher.
If SEGA went down, well then CA goes and finds another buyer but that shouldn't affect it.
The only way for this whole thing to go bellyup is for STEAM, CA, and SEGA to all go down.
pevergreen
10-16-2009, 00:58
Good thinking.
If steam went down, CA could just release a patch which would allow you to install it, and launch. You still own the game (physical form) or if digital, CA can provide their own download.
antisocialmunky
10-16-2009, 17:55
The issue wouldn't be playing games you already had, it would be installing old steam games.
Threads like this are one thing that could cause Steam to go down, a bit like a self-fulfilling prophecy. :whip:
As has been said, what if Microsoft will go down and you cannot activate Windows anymore? Will you just install all your games on Linux or a Mac? :laugh4:
nameless
10-16-2009, 18:56
The issue wouldn't be playing games you already had, it would be installing old steam games.
Well like I said the devs and publishers will just have to look for someone else to provide the digital copies...isn't there like D2D drive or something? But for really really old games I think you'd be out of luck for that.
you just install all your games on Linux or a Mac?
Yes that's true.
So it's four entities. Three are connected but if the fourth one (Windows) goes down everyone's screwed.
satchef1
10-16-2009, 23:46
The only way you're likely to lose your Steam games is if you get banned, which sadly does happen. I know someone who's little bro logged in to his Steam account, he then proceeds to try some CS:S aimbots and as a result the account got banned by VAC. There goes £250 worth of games...
Call me old-fashioned, but I want to go back to the good old days: 1) I read about a game I like; 2) I go to the store and buy the game; 3) I go home, install the game and enjoy; 4) the copy I bought is mine and I can install and re-install it as much as I want, patch or not patch, in short: it's my copy, my game, I play when and where ever I want.
You can do all of that on Steam. The only restriction it adds is you have to have an internet connection when you install the game, to verify that your copy is genuine. Personally I'd say Steam is far, far easier than the old method and the benefits greatly outweigh the (few) disadvantages. I'm guessing CA and Sega looked at it in the same way.
(e.g. the option of whether to install a patch or not)
Click on the 'Games' tab in Steam
Right Click on Empire
Go to 'Properties'
Click the 'Updates' tab
Select 'Do not Automatically update this game' from the drop down list
Freedom Onanist
10-20-2009, 09:41
No issue with Steam here. If you really want to get a crowd to be really down on most things ETW/Steam head over to TWC :dizzy2:
As has been stated, Steam doesn't stop you playing the game offline. The bit about slectable patches is a bit moot really given the online elements and the number of "problems" people reported. But yeah, maybe.
The "old fashioned" view was invalidated when the first EULA was written and included with the "accept/reject" options.
The main inconvenience in my view would be my data download limit imposed by my ISP - then again I bought a hard copy game anyway.
Praetor Rick
10-21-2009, 20:52
There are lots of common sense answers to how CA, SEGA, or Steam might respond if one or two of the three went down/out of business. The problem is, they're not necessarily legal, which means they would likely not happen.
It's pretty common that when a publisher goes out of business, the developer still doesn't have the rights to sell the IP to somebody else. Those rights still belong to the now-defunct publisher, and will be sold as part of its assets to pay off the debts that put it out of business. The buyer almost certainly got them in a package, and will likely have no clear idea how much (or little) they may be worth, and will usually be somewhat obstinate about selling them back to the developer. Red tape ensues. This isn't hypothetical, look at other games whose publisher goes belly-up. Fairly routinely, they end up in abandonware limbo, with nobody who is interested in continuing development or even republishing them legally allowed to do so, and nobody legally allowed to continue development or republish interested in doing so.
Short story: if Steam goes to the bucket, CA and SEGA don't magically get rights to ETW back, unless their contract with Steam specifies that they do. And unless Steam goes under next week, it will probably be more work for CA and SEGA to get those rights back, in terms of legal fees researching who owns what and how much the IP is worth, than those rights are actually worth.
Sad to say, if Steam goes out of business, anything Steam had is probably gone for the foreseeable future, until its value has depreciated so much that somebody like GOG.com can buy 'em dirt cheap and sell them for $5 each and still make good money.
All IMHO, based on what has happened in the past when publishers suffer sudden existence failure.
nameless
10-21-2009, 22:43
I can understand the argument, but the problem with that is that STEAM itself is simply just a digital distribution and rights management system. It's not a publisher.
STEAM has no involvement in creating ETW, it's just the middle man.
pevergreen
10-22-2009, 02:26
Developer: CA
Funding and marketing, publisher: SEGA
Distributor: Steam
Steam has no hold over anything to do with E:TW. It hosts servers for people to download off and play on.
It is like saying Microsoft own everything on windows because thats how you use the programs.
Nebuchadnezzar
10-22-2009, 05:05
So when you take away a persons "Title of ownership" as well as their consumer rights and replace it with a no return, no guarantee subscription service then this is not to say they have no hold over anything. They have hold over EVERYTHING.
As a consumer you are entitled to certain rights such as quiet possesion (steam says when and if you can play), clear title ie goods belong to you whether that is a licence or whatever at least to the extent any EULA allows. You own them outright to do as you please such as resell etc. but steam hijacks your ownership in lieu of subscription service.
Steam is oppressive and dictatorial that eats at the fundamental fabric of consumer rights.
pevergreen
10-22-2009, 05:17
Its not secuROM.
:beam:
Its not secuROM.
:beam:
Steam is actually worse than Securom. Yes Securom installs crapware without the users permission, but Steam is "phone home" software that reports usage statistics back to it's servers, consumes resources and is much more intrusive. It's more of a parasite than Securom is.
Securom is local and is designed to verify that the CD/DVD in the drive is the genuine CD/DVD. It does not have the same intrusiveness and privacy concerns as Steam.
Also if Steam's servers fail for a time, or even permanently (i.e. they decide to go out of business or discontinue the service) paying customers are left with games that they can no longer activate or play. There's also the point that Steam is useless for people that don't have an internet connection. Then there is the issue of regional restrictions.
In essence though Steam means putting all games distribution under the control of one entity. If it continues to gain ground it will also gain a stranglehold over the market. Freedom of choice is a good thing, being forced to install this "platform" is not a good thing. It should not be a requirement but a choice. The situation is bad enough as it is, with 99% of PC games being developed for MS Windows platform - it does not need to get any worse.
Steam is simply not needed yet Valve and other developers that have jumped on the bandwagon seem to have convinced many gamers that it is. Steam is more of a market research/data mining tool combined with the ever present DRM than something that benefits the end user.
pevergreen
10-22-2009, 08:57
Steam has a direct competitor in Impulse.
Steam still gives you the full program to play the game, if steam collapsed, the games are still there, they could be hacked. There is no question there.
I did an indepth investigation of secuROM last year.
Problems with secuROM that are recognised:
Under Windows Vista, SecuROM will prevent the game from running if explicit congestion notification is enabled in Vista's networking configuration.
Disk drive emulators and some debugging software will also cause the launch of the game to fail and a security module error to be generated. In fact a reboot of the entire system was required if Process Explorer prior to version 11 was used before an attempt to run the protected software. That problem was caused by a driver that was kept in memory after Process Explorer was closed.
BioShock
The game required consumers to activate the game online and originally set a maximum of two activations before they would have to call to get more activations. This was raised to five activations because an incorrect phone number had been printed on the manual and call centers were only in the United States. Users also found that the game had to be activated for each user on the same machine.
In 2008, 2K Games removed the activation limit, although users are still required to activate it online.
In May 2008 EA announced that Mass Effect for the PC would be using SecuROM 7.x requiring a reactivation of the software every 10 days. Due to complaints, EA removed the 10-day activation while keeping SecuROM tied to the installation. SecuROM's product activation facility was still used to impose a limit of three times that a customer is allowed to activate the copy of Mass Effect they purchased. The game becomes unplayable "as is" after the activations are used up, until EA's customer support is contacted to reset the activation limit, or until activation is bypassed using one of a number of available tools. Unlike BioShock, uninstalling the game does not refund a previously used activation.
And thats just secuROM.
Do you really care if steam tracks that you are online?
Freedom of choice is a good thing. What if I don't want secuROM. I have no choice. I'm not even told its being installed.
Steam is a multiplayer platform as well.
If Games For Windows Live went down. :shrug:
What happened to the good old days when a CD-Key was all that was needed.
I've never had an issue with the current steam. The old one, I loathed with a passion. (old as in 5+ years ago now)
Steam is the chosen copyright protection. It functions as many other things for the games as well. Break your disc of Med2: total war? What are you going to do now. Ask for another? Like thats going to work.
Either buy another or download illegally. With steam, its yours.
Freedom Onanist
10-22-2009, 09:17
Steam is actually worse than Securom. Yes Securom installs crapware without the users permission, but Steam is "phone home" software that reports usage statistics back to it's servers, consumes resources and is much more intrusive. It's more of a parasite than Securom is.
Securom is local and is designed to verify that the CD/DVD in the drive is the genuine CD/DVD. It does not have the same intrusiveness and privacy concerns as Steam.
Also if Steam's servers fail for a time, or even permanently (i.e. they decide to go out of business or discontinue the service) paying customers are left with games that they can no longer activate or play. There's also the point that Steam is useless for people that don't have an internet connection. Then there is the issue of regional restrictions.
In essence though Steam means putting all games distribution under the control of one entity. If it continues to gain ground it will also gain a stranglehold over the market. Freedom of choice is a good thing, being forced to install this "platform" is not a good thing. It should not be a requirement but a choice. The situation is bad enough as it is, with 99% of PC games being developed for MS Windows platform - it does not need to get any worse.
Steam is simply not needed yet Valve and other developers that have jumped on the bandwagon seem to have convinced many gamers that it is. Steam is more of a market research/data mining tool combined with the ever present DRM than something that benefits the end user.Some good points there, though a bit paranoid Orwellian. But yeah, Steam is not needed. The point about the user friendliness and ease of patching/DLC and whatnot could be done direct with the Publishers. Even if they don't want to get involved in web and net management they could contract that out to a service provider. A bit like the situation with Steam but transparent. This would open up the whole niche Steam occupy. Oh, and without the constant pinging back and forwards with usage data, permissions and "phone home" stuff.
However, some way of purchasing and keeping software up to date via the web is needed. Here in the UK a major internet provider has just decided to make 50mps as standard, and the UK lags behind many other places in this respect. With those kind of online speeds online purchasing is going to grow. On the one hand it is natural for companies to try and control that as much as possible but on the other I think the offerings are oging to get a bit simpler than Steam's offering.
Steam has a direct competitor in Impulse.
Until one buys out the other? There will not be room in the market for two such platforms. It matters little which one becomes the standard the end result is the same.
Steam still gives you the full program to play the game, if steam collapsed, the games are still there, they could be hacked. There is no question there.
They could be "hacked"? I think you've missed the point. I also think Securom protected games could be hacked and have been hacked. This is a moot point. :inquisitive:
I did an indepth investigation of secuROM last year.
Problems with secuROM that are recognised:
etc
I'm well aware of the problems with Securom - though I do not see this as a case of choosing the "lesser of two evils". Games should simply not come bundled with this kind of intrusive software full stop. The problem is that over the years gamers have simply accepted their lot and taken everything the industry has thrown at them.
Do you really care if steam tracks that you are online?
Yes.
Freedom of choice is a good thing. What if I don't want secuROM. I have no choice. I'm not even told its being installed.
Precisely, though you don't have any choice with Steam either. If you want the game and the game uses Steam then you are stuck with Steam even if you don't want it.
Steam is a multiplayer platform as well.
Games have / should have their own multiplayer functionality. This worked well in the years before Steam arrived. Steam is not needed for this.
If Games For Windows Live went down. :shrug:
Don't get me started on that...
What happened to the good old days when a CD-Key was all that was needed.
Games publishers got greedy and began treating all customers as thieves. Basically you are paying the premium for a game that others will crack and download pirate versions of anyway. The annoying DRM and activation hits you the law abiding, paying end user. It does not hit the fellow that downloads it for nothing from a P2P. This kind of software was not designed to stop mass piracy and illegal distribution/copying. It is there to stop little Jimmy from installing the game on his brother Billy Bob's PC. Meaning that Billy Bob has to go out and buy another game disc. This is both ludicrous and immoral. If you had three DVD players in your house would you buy the same movie three times so that you could play it on each one??
Steam is the chosen copyright protection. It functions as many other things for the games as well. Break your disc of Med2: total war? What are you going to do now. Ask for another? Like thats going to work.
Who chose it? Not me. What else does it do that other software cannot? What functions does it have that can't be built into the game itself, independent of Steam? I've never damaged or broken a game disc. What do you do if you break a film DVD or music CD? What do you do if you break your £1000 bone china?
:inquisitive:
Either buy another or download illegally. With steam, its yours.
Unless of course the Steam servers go down, the service is discontinued or you happen to not have an internet connection (or a fast internet connection).
Replacement discs should not be an issue as in the past users were allowed to make a backup copy of the installation media and run from that (keeping the original safe). The illegal copy protection employed by many developers effectively blocked this forcing the end user to use the original and keep it in the drive.
As long as the consumer is content to contine letting games developers erode their rights and take even more liberties with their privacy this can only get worse and worse.
:2cents:
pevergreen
10-22-2009, 10:16
Not in a good enough mood to riposte (correct word i hope) politely, so I withdraw for now.
:bow:
In hindsight, I probably should've moved this thread to either the Arena or Backroom, as the subject is more appropriate to those areas. As it is, however, I believe this conversation has pretty much spent itself out anyway, given that it's evolved (devolved?) into the usual pro- and anti-Steam arguments.
As Tosa would say, "Topic needs a nap." :yes:
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.