Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  1. If Steam is not a complete package, Steamworks and CEG would be code made by companies other than Valve but brought into use by them, would they not? Also, I don't split hairs when a client is required to be installed in order to get game data, or start an install. (The GamersGate, and Amazon, .exe files can be stored for future downloads, but once the game is downloaded, they can be deleted without repercussions/restrictions to game usage. They're simply gatekeepers for the data. Unlike Steam where the client must be left installed, and where it functions as the installer itself.) If
  2. And, in turn, here's the rub: What's the ratio of those to the ones that require Steam to be running at all times? Only two of my Steam bought games allowed it versus the 18 that didn't. Again, outliers that are the exception to the rule. That said, this thread is about whether Steam, as a whole, not as parts, is DRM. It is, by your own explanation just now. Looking for exceptions is fine, but don't excuse the whole service because of them. It only makes sense for multiplayer-centric games. Not single-player only ones, like Fallout: New Vegas, Skyrim, or Mass Effect. A do
  3. I would say it does. Remember, DRM is third-party software that restricts access and usage of software, irrespective of other benefits and outliers. Steam is exactly that by how it operates with digital sales, and how if you chose to buy physical disks in stores these days, odds are you must use Steam in some fashion before any installation takes place. Now, if Steam worked the same way GOG's Galaxy service and website do now, and if by buying disks you had the option to get around using it, I'd agree with you that it's not DRM. If Valve's the one with the most distribution power,
  4. Easy answer: Do you have the option to use it or not in order to get the same data you could get with a direct download/DRM-free option? With Steam, no. Desura, GOG and Humble? Yes, yes, and sometimes. Secondary answer: Is it required to be running at all times, even for single-player only games that would have no use for the online functionality the client offers? It's becoming more common, so yes, Steam is DRM in that sense too. Now, if Valve made it so you can get DRM-free downloads without using the client, you'd have a case for it not being DRM, and for that DRM type change on the
  5. If you're trying to imply that EA and Ubisoft using clients on their games is not fine, then the same should apply to Steam and all companies that force its use. You can't have it both ways. Either an installed client is DRM, or it's not. "Is there something that gets screwed with it?" - "You may cease use of a Subscription at any time or, if you choose, you may request that we terminate your access to a Subscription. However, Subscriptions are not transferable, and even if your access to a Subscription for a particular game or application is terminated, the original activation key will n
  6. OK. #1 - Too broad of a claim, and your examples are fallacious/hyperbolic to boot. - Browsers don't ask you for a log-in, except Chrome for Google content and even then, optional. - E-mail can be retrieved on browsers and clients. Bad example. - Skype? Also a bad example because of how many options we now have for voice-chatting and text-messaging, even on smart-phones. - Torrent data access isn't limited by which one you have. Another bad example. - Twitch is a preferred live-streaming service for games thanks to fewer hurdles related to copyrights versus YouTube, among other th
  7. 'Evil' is an excessive label here, as is 'anti-consumer.' However, that comment about FTP servers? Bad analogy because there are hundreds of those on the Internet. PC gaming? We've got around seven major names (Steam, Origin, uPlay, GOG, GamersGate, Humble and Desura), with Valve being the majority holder of data access. That's not 'penalties of the times' as much as consolidation to one, or very few, services in one entertainment sector. And as some of these companies have shown, they'll change your ability to access games you bought on other sites, on their whims, usually for little to n
  8. To put it mildly, and I never said what you're claiming in the second line. Only that the program can keep you from playing games, I.E. other software, on your system without an active log-in. That's a DRM quality: Post-sale control and or restriction of software use. (Steam scans your software and hardware as well if you allow it to, let's not forget.) As for why I consider Steam's client to be DRM, and why I think it should always be considered such: Without it, it's impossible to get access to, or download, your legal purchases, DRM-free or not. And unless I'm mistaken, Steam games, onc
  9. Considering the hysteria (or is it?) you let your post run wild with, a response more in-depth than this would be a waste of time:
  10. If Bethesda restored GOG's ability to sell the Fallout titles they'd been selling for years already, not at all. Their download assistant software is elective to use and the other examples you tried are nonsensical, except where browser compatibility and newer tech like HTML5 are called for. As such, we'd rightly call the people who made those kinds of moves foolish. As for, "Now we're approaching games encumbered with DRM, but who's imposing the DRM?" Who makes the choice of what service(s) handle access? If, as you say, "...developers and publishers decided to distribute only via Steam, t
  11. Difference being if you have everything you purchased from GOG stored offline, the site going down wouldn't hurt you. You have the installers and the data packets. If Steam had this happen, every game you'd yet to download, or that you lost crucial files for, would be lost to you. Both services need servers for data access by users, it's true, but one needs to install a client to allow you access while the other only demands the installer and data downloads from their website. Make sense? http://pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Trine - And yet, looking at this site's entry for it, and GameCo
  12. You're ignoring the fact that access to your legal purchases on Steam can be yanked at any time by request of the companies that put them on there, which is control of product post-point-of-sale, a DRM quality, and there are cases of games on GamersGate and other sites that are retroactively made Steam dependent. Need I bring up Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics and what happened during and after the IP transfer to Bethesda, or how Medieval II: Total War, Crusader Kings II, and others are no longer being sold non-Steam-dependent on GamersGate anymore? And yet it is becoming more necessary
  13. I prefer to simply not buy a game that forces me to use a service I'd rather not use. Games are not essential to own, and if refunds remain off the table in spite of numerous buggy releases, better to avoid spending the money at all, I say. As for the rest of this part, if Valve was not the creator of the DRM-systems Steam is know for, and if Steam wasn't being used more and more as the sole place to get so much game access, despite some games being DRM-free otherwise, I'd agree with you. Until such time, I have to consider the service, which is software that must be installed on your PC,
  14. And yet in a majority of cases, including DRM-free games like Crusader Kings II, you're funneled to the service to get what you paid for. Until that changes, Valve's client is very much DRM by itself. More so because, in cases like Crusader Kings II and Medieval II: Total War, the respective publishers have retroactively forced sellers to change the game listings to Steam-only, even though the games are DRM-free otherwise. Certainly not, like I said back here: http://community.pcgamingwiki.com/topic/1075-analysis-why-steam-isnt-drm/?p=4896 - " The account-locking alone is not enou
  15. The DRM tools Steam has were made by Valve, and are offered by them to whoever uses their service/client. The definition you used doesn't account for that, and it gives me the impression that you're implying Valve's approach to the DRM they make and offer should not be related to their client. If the Steam-DRM systems like CEG and Steamworks were made by a third-party that Valve had endorsed while solely operating their client service, you'd have a point by using that definition. The '...after sale' part of that definition also holds true with Steam sans the DRM. If the client wasn't DRM b
  • Create New...