Valve head talks digital ownership

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Via

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2009
4,670
4
0
The Servers are unnecessary. They would just release a Dummy Server App or simply remove the need for a Server Call in the first place.

I mean for re-downloading the games you already bought (in case your HD borks, or whatever). To me that's part of the deal when buying the game digitally.

They should maintain servers that contain download copies of all of the games they offered for sale.
 

PhoenixEnigma

Senior member
Aug 6, 2011
229
0
0
The Servers are unnecessary. They would just release a Dummy Server App or simply remove the need for a Server Call in the first place.
There's a decent number of developers who do the right thing, and remove DRM with the final patch to a game. It still doesn't solve the problem of games that need 'official' server for multiplayer, but I don't think those are the developers who are removing DRM anyways.
 
Last edited:

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,858
6,394
126
I mean for re-downloading the games you already bought (in case your HD borks, or whatever). To me that's part of the deal when buying the game digitally.

They should maintain servers that contain download copies of all of the games they offered for sale.

They will have to for awhile, the User would have to backup their Games to Disc. After a period of time there would be no need to continue providing the Server.
 
Aug 11, 2008
10,451
642
126
The Servers are unnecessary. They would just release a Dummy Server App or simply remove the need for a Server Call in the first place.

That is what would be fair or what we would hope for, but I dont think there is any legal reqiurement for them to do so, and thus no guarantee that is what would happen.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,858
6,394
126
That is what would be fair or what we would hope for, but I dont think there is any legal reqiurement for them to do so, and thus no guarantee that is what would happen.

True, but I suspect we won't ever have to worry about finding out. At least with Steam anyway. If people are worried about this, they should just Backup their Steam games to Disc.
 

Nintendesert

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2010
7,761
5
0
Steam has single handily saved the PC gaming industry. Steam sales generate revenue for developers that would have NEVER happened had we still been stuck in the brick and mortar dark ages. That additional revenue from these Steam daily deals and holiday sales are what makes PC gaming so enticing. Not only that but for developers it removed what's really killing their bottom line, Gamestop selling used games right next to new games and pocketing all the profits and cutting the developers out completely.
 

Veliko

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2011
3,597
127
106
I haven't bought a physical copy of a PC game for a long time. Downloads all the way, bro.

There are valid concerns about being able to play the games in the future if the company goes bust but in all honesty I very rarely replay games like that anyway.
 

PrincessFrosty

Platinum Member
Feb 13, 2008
2,300
68
91
www.frostyhacks.blogspot.com
All too often people mistakenly think they own their games, even the ones for which they have physical media. With traditional media you own the physical discs but they're really just a practical way of installing the media to your computer, you don't actually "own" the game, you own a LIMITED licence to play the game.

So the issue is really just a case of having a safety net for if anything happens, as long as you have the physical discs then you're happy because at any point in the future regardless of your actions or the state of the business, you can always access "your" game.

Steam is just a better way of delivering that content to PCs, physical media is next to dead now, but it does raise the question of what is our backup. Thing is though is that we already have that, pirate media is floating about the internet and is just as easy to obtain as downloading games on steam, in fact steam is popular primarily because valve knew they had to alter the convenience of distributing games to be at least on par with pirate copies.

With the ubiquitous nature of pirate material online I don't think anyone should really be concerned with digital distribution, paying for media these days through steam is more or less just a formality, I know many friends who are still paying for releases through steam, but also downloading the pirate version of the same game because it's better for some reason, either it was released earlier or has some other benefit like not wasting an activation, having bloatware like GFWL hacked out, and stuff like that.

In the same way that I know people who pay for TV subscriptions but then just download the episodes from the internet, if there's still some benefit to downloading it (no adverts, being able to seek through content, pause at will etc) then people are just going to do that instead and actually paying for that content through a distribution partner is merely a formality. Distribution of legit media is tending slowly towards the same quality as pirated material which is good because quite frankly pirated material is unquestionably better in most circumstances, but I think as that happens the lines people draw between consuming their media and actually paying for it will become more and more blurry.

I could imagine a future where we pay for the rights to play a game or watch a movie and not actually recieve anything for that payment, that we're at our own discretion to simply find that media online however we think suits us best, that's the ultimate distribution model right, it's basically what exists already except there's no way to pay for it, which is pretty dumb to be honest.
 

maniacalpha1-1

Diamond Member
Feb 7, 2010
3,562
14
81
Do games that come in a box really matter anymore if they require an internet connection to finish installation?

Civ 5 for example installs as a steam game. I haven't tried to install it with no internet, I wonder if you can.
 

lupi

Lifer
Apr 8, 2001
32,539
260
126
Steam in no way is a better way to access your games. They take a magnitude more of time to install, ability to access the service dependent largely on conditions that have nothing to do with what is going on in your house and let's not forget they've already been hacked once.
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,582
12
76
Steam in no way is a better way to access your games. They take a magnitude more of time to install, ability to access the service dependent largely on conditions that have nothing to do with what is going on in your house and let's not forget they've already been hacked once.

I feel like Steam is a faster way to install. Nevermind that I don't have to deal with procuring a physical copy, opening the box, inserting the disc, etc. But my blu-ray\dvd drive can only read DVDs at 16x, or approximately 21 megabytes per second. Steam almost always gives me faster download rates than that, and obviously my Crucial M4 SSD can write way faster than that. So physical media is just plain obsolete, for many, many reasons.
 

Red Storm

Lifer
Oct 2, 2005
14,233
234
106
I feel like Steam is a faster way to install. Nevermind that I don't have to deal with procuring a physical copy, opening the box, inserting the disc, etc. But my blu-ray\dvd drive can only read DVDs at 16x, or approximately 21 megabytes per second. Steam almost always gives me faster download rates than that, and obviously my Crucial M4 SSD can write way faster than that. So physical media is just plain obsolete, for many, many reasons.

Your download speeds are faster than 21 Megabytes per sec? Who's your internet provider and how much do you pay?
 

lupi

Lifer
Apr 8, 2001
32,539
260
126
I guess your d/l is faster if you stick to those 5 meg indie titles. Otherwise your smocking the crack pipe as with the standard large sized games I can go to tthe store, brring it home, and install from disc quicker than steam installs.
 

TheKub

Golden Member
Oct 2, 2001
1,756
1
0
Steam in no way is a better way to access your games. They take a magnitude more of time to install, ability to access the service dependent largely on conditions that have nothing to do with what is going on in your house and let's not forget they've already been hacked once.

Scenario:

You are at location A your disks are at location B. You want to install and play your game at location A.

Steam 1, Physical Media 0
 

PrayForDeath

Diamond Member
Apr 12, 2004
3,478
1
76
I feel like Steam is a faster way to install. Nevermind that I don't have to deal with procuring a physical copy, opening the box, inserting the disc, etc. But my blu-ray\dvd drive can only read DVDs at 16x, or approximately 21 megabytes per second. Steam almost always gives me faster download rates than that, and obviously my Crucial M4 SSD can write way faster than that. So physical media is just plain obsolete, for many, many reasons.

Are you saying you have an internet connection speed that's in the realm of 160-200 mbps?
 

coloumb

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,069
0
81
How would you feel if EVERYTHING was subscription based where you would rent the songs, movies, console games, etc even if you bought a hard copy of the item at the store? That's honestly what STEAM is - a rental system.

If STEAM truly wants to offer the best customer service, then we should be allowed to have a DRM Free off line version of the game as we're allowed to have offline versions of songs, movies, etc.
 

Red Storm

Lifer
Oct 2, 2005
14,233
234
106
How would you feel if EVERYTHING was subscription based where you would rent the songs, movies, console games, etc even if you bought a hard copy of the item at the store? That's honestly what STEAM is - a rental system.

I'd love a digital movie/music rental system that only needed a one time payment, was free to use, and had many, many sales over the course of a year and allowed me to access said media from any internet-capable device.
 

PrincessFrosty

Platinum Member
Feb 13, 2008
2,300
68
91
www.frostyhacks.blogspot.com
Anyone that thinks discs are better has clearly never cracked one or got a bad scratch rendering the disc useless, or even recieved a bad disc to start with.

And I treat (used to treat) my physical media with a lot of care, only use decent DVD drives and the rest of it, they still die. My new PS3 slim killed my copy of Demon's souls and I was so angry...relying on physical media is a joke these days, it's 2012 not 1999 lol
 

Anteaus

Platinum Member
Oct 28, 2010
2,448
4
81
How would you feel if EVERYTHING was subscription based where you would rent the songs, movies, console games, etc even if you bought a hard copy of the item at the store?

That's exactly what it has been for many, many years. Except we call it fee based, open ended licensing. Basically you pay a flat fee and in exchange you recieve a license to use said product for as long as you want, assuming you don't change the product in any way that would invalidate said license.

The only difference between then and now is that now they can actually enforce the license. Just because fifteen years ago DRM was virtually non existant doesn't change the fact that the licenses held the same legal weight as they do now. The term "ownership" has been improperly used in regards to software for so long that some people have trouble getting out of the mindset. No one likes to think that they are paying for something that is designed purely for consumption and has no intrinsic value whatsoever.

The annoyance is that if I buy a game on any digital service, I have no real way of knowing if that game will be available 1 year or 10 years from now. It is completely their right to remove access and any point they see fit. We rely on the good graces of services like Steam who tend to be the good guy, but eventually as economics change games WILL get dropped. Maybe the original OS won't be supported. Maybe the developer decides to pull the plug. Either way, at that point it doesn't matter if you paid $5 or $60 dollars that game is GONE.

For the most part, hard copies are only there to ease installation. Many games mandate online activation and even console games are getting this treatment now. I'm willing to bet that the next Sony and MS console platforms will require internet access for all gaming, as will future PC users. When that transition takes place is anyones guess, but even (MS or Sony..can't remember which) recently stated openly that economically it's worth shutting out people that don't have broadband in exchange for a system that provides dramatically higher margins than brick and mortar in addition to DRM that dramatically reduces the amount of piracy that occurs. In other words, they will make more money with fewer users and simply wait for the people without broadband to catch up later.

That's the future.
 
Last edited:

wanderer27

Platinum Member
Aug 6, 2005
2,173
15
81
The only Steam positive I can see is the convenience of having all your games readily available in one place.

Aside from that:
- It's just another layer of DRM on top of what's already in the game.
- The only time it's cheaper is on rare sales, usually it costs more (new titles)
- Why would I want/need an Adware/Spyware client running full time while playing a SINGLE PLAYER OFFLINE game?

It never fails to amaze me at the blind support Steam garners on these forums :rolleyes: