You are not buying games on Steam, you are only renting them. DRM is evil

[pmv]

I'm half-inclined to think that a 'hysterical over-reaction' from gamers every time something like this happens, may in fact be the best way of deterring digital distributors and DRM-merchants from sliding down that slippery slope towards rental/pay-per-play models of business.

Eternal vigilence (and repeated outbreaks of nerd rage) is the price of keeping any semblence of 'ownership' of software (using that term in as wide a sense as possible, so including books, music, everything intangible).

I think its particularly relevant to Steam becuase, thanks to their sales, I'm sure I'm not the only person for whom there's a very, very, very long time-lag between 'buying' something and actually getting round to playing it. Be quite irritating if in the meantime it disappears again!

That said, I'd rather leave the actual raging to others and free-ride on the back of it!

[OK, now I've posted this in the correct thread, so hopefully now makes a bit more sense!]

 

[Ancalagon44]

Dont blame Steam here, blame Square Enix.

Or better yet - blame yourselves for purchasing a single player game with always online DRM. If you sheeple continue to buy such things, dont be surprised when this continues to happen. The only always online DRM game I have ever bought is StarCraft 2, and I swore that would be the last. I have stuck to that promise and dont regret it for a second.

 

[BrightCandle]

In a few years time we are going to either end up with people showing us collections of games on steam they can't play or pictures from around now compared to that future date showing their collections culled. Its inevitable at this point that many games from the last 6 years will be completely unplayable. Not because they were really online only games but because the makers hampered with severe DRM schemes. We all made that future, purchase by purchase.

 

[Stringjam]

(As for the longevity of Steam, the real test will be when Gabe finally has a coronary and what happens after that. That'll be a scary day.)

Unless like-minded people take the reigns, Steam will probably go public, which would be a pretty sad day.

 

[Anteaus]

While I think this particular situation was overblown, digital distribution will eventually need to be dealt with legally. The consumer rights addressed in the DMCA don't apply to digital only sales, leading to what can only be described as the wild west of consumerism.

Legally speaking, once you "license" your software there is no mechanism in place to address abuse. Publishers/developers can modify or remove access at a whim, with elusive sections of the EULA to defend themselves with. There are laws protecting people from "small print" abuse in the light of the day, but with software we as users are often buried in hundreds of pages of small print which given developers totalistic power over us.

They get away with things that would never pass muster with physical goods, even though they advertise in the same space and operate from the same point of sale in many cases.

We need a consise Digital Consumers Bill of Rights that deals with not only software but all forms of digitally licenses media. We need it do deal with basic criteria such as:

1. How long must software be available from date of purchase or even from date of discontinuation?

2. What protection do consumers have regarding software that doesn't provide basic advertised features (not bugs)?

3. What methods of DRM are acceptable in order to protect the developer that aren't abusive to the consumer?

4. Is it appropriate for a developer to use a product purchased by the consumer as a vehicle for advertising? I.e, how would you like it if you purchase Chevrolet auto and every time you started the car On-Star would play a commericial. Developer's like to say that games are expensive and they need to tap every revenue stream they can, but that's BS. Make cheaper games. As history has born out time and time again, money can help with polish, but spending more in development does not automatically convert to a better product.

Anyways, I'm sure you guys have you're own ideas about what is important so your opinions are important. The bottom line is until congress actually deals with this we can expect some heartache in the future. Maybe not tomorrow, but a few years from now we may very well have a huge problem. My personal believe is that Steam won't be the first to draw blood, but once the EA or Ubisofts of the world start removing digital content from circulation in a permanant way the house of cards will be viewed for what it is.

In the mean time, everyone one here should consider every digital purchase volatile and vulnerable to removal.

 

[monkeydelmagico]

In the mean time, everyone one here should consider every digital purchase volatile and vulnerable to removal.

Amen.

humble bundles, super sales, promos, free to play, and budget indie games are all I go for. I've got about 50 games on steam and have probably spent around $35.- total for all of them. The whole thing could crash and burn without me losing any sleep over it.

 

[NickelPlate]

Tin foil hat? Are you just trying to be ignorant and insulting? There's already a very extensive list of games that aren't playable anymore because servers have been shut down. GFWL is the latest DRM scheme that has had the plug pulled and every game using it will either get patched to work without it or won't function anymore. This isn't tin-foil hat stuff, it's stuff happening now and already has happened.

While this game isn't that big a deal, the precedent that Valve has set with it is however. They have now demonstrated a willingness to do something they had up to this point never done. Functional game or not. There's already plenty of criticism over their non-existent return policy and the shilling of obvious cash grab alpha scams. This is just another move in a direction that isn't beneficial to the customers. Companies are good up until they aren't.

(As for the longevity of Steam, the real test will be when Gabe finally has a coronary and what happens after that. That'll be a scary day.)

I'm trying not to be either. I guess it just amazes me the extreme reactions over something as simple as a PC game with everything else in the world there is to worry about. Online game servers will come and go and be shutdown. To me the Valve thing is no big deal and in fact I'd thank them if I had it my library as it would save me the trouble of having to remove it myself.

You don't need to explain the GFWL stuff to me as I'm already aware and have a GFWL game that I bought and didn't know it required it and never played it consequently. Again I think we just have a very different concept of what constitutes a "big deal". It's obvious from your wording that this upsets you alot and that's fine so let's just agree to disagree and move on.

 

[imaheadcase]

You seriously don't see the hugely bad precedent in retailers forcibly deleting games you've bought from your account?...

Nope, not if its a 3rd party Steam has no control over. Steam removing its own games or SteamDRM based ones is another story, but this is not a precedent at all. Its something out of there control.

 

[ImpulsE69]

Nope, not if its a 3rd party Steam has no control over. Steam removing its own games or SteamDRM based ones is another story, but this is not a precedent at all. Its something out of there control.

Regardless it would hurt their image. It amazes me that so many people here have no concept outside their own "don't bother me" attitude. Seems to be a constant source of forehead smacking.

 

[Rinaun]

As much as I want to say the OP is crazy......I'm starting to tone down my steam usage as well because of this and other reasons. Valve is no longer in a google-like state of "do no wrong". Everything I've seen from TF2 going F2P to what I see in DOTA/CS:GO makes me want to stop purchasing games and just use steam as what it was meant to be used as: a hub to connect to my friends and a place for my valve-made games or games I can't get elsewhere.

Overall I think Valve is going to get ugly come 5-7 years from now. Everyone seems to forget that all these servers, hardware, R&D and other expenses cost valve a pretty dime and while they are a private company that doesn't mean gaben isn't in the game of making quick bucks.

Also, seeing what he did in regards the the steam sale and CS:GO was just slimeball. They put the game on sale, made the legit users deal with so many hackers for 3-4 weeks and now they VAC banned a few hundred people for the first time in months. If that doesn't scream "I want a sleezy quick buck" I don't know what does. Gamers just need to realize this and stop acting like valve/Gabe Newell is some magical wizard/company. For example, if you had posted this on reddit the amount of negative feedback would have been through the roof. Reddit blindly loves Valve for some childish reason.

 

[wanderer27]

I've been saying this for years and folks have thought I was nuts or ""fearmongering"

There's more to it than just this though, and I brought it up early last year.

For those that missed it, here's the post with some number crunching :

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=34912053&postcount=52

Which was a follow up to this post :

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=34909878&postcount=46


I'm glad at least some people are finally starting to sit up and take notice.


.

 

[Arkaign]

The price of convenience. Valve will never stay the same, just like all corporate entities ownership and direction will change. The only function of a company is to make money, as much money as possible. There are no ethics or concern for the consumer in mind beyond the threshold of what people are willing to accept en masse. Hell, they would be incinerating babies on conveyer belts into furnaces if they calculated that there was profit in it and they could get away with it. That's any business.

Caveat Emptor.

In the big picture, it's not really that big of a deal, but it's definitely the future whether you like it or not. The end of net neutrality, paywalls everywhere, hell if there weren't places like GOG and at least some physical distribution left, we'd probably have to pay monthly to gave Steam at all. I'm sure that's coming at some point anyway. Pay your $20/mo or whatever to have steam Access, and if you don't pay, you lose your library. Check back in a few years and see if that isn't true.

 

[beginner99]

The real problem is the always-on DRM and in this case SE. I mean they can disable multiplayer and keep a server for authentication of the DRM only. that wouldn't be hard or cost much at all.

So bascially stay away from always on DRM especially of SE games.

 

[Tweak155]

I will keep buying games on Steam. <3

 

[KeithTalent]

I will keep buying games on Steam. <3

Yep, same here.

KT

 

[Dankk]

Also, seeing what he did in regards the the steam sale and CS:GO was just slimeball. They put the game on sale, made the legit users deal with so many hackers for 3-4 weeks and now they VAC banned a few hundred people for the first time in months. If that doesn't scream "I want a sleezy quick buck" I don't know what does. Gamers just need to realize this and stop acting like valve/Gabe Newell is some magical wizard/company. For example, if you had posted this on reddit the amount of negative feedback would have been through the roof. Reddit blindly loves Valve for some childish reason.

Slimeball? It sounds like you don't understand the story correctly. Valve recently made some big changes to their homegrown anti-cheat system, and to test it's effectiveness, put CS:GO on sale for really cheap (so all the online hackers out there could buy a bunch of copies for their alternate Steam accounts to test on). Subsequently, all of the hacks that previously went undetected for the longest time, suddenly became detected and Valve managed to ban a ton accounts on New Years Eve (and make a bunch of aimbot developers very unhappy). It was actually pretty brilliant.

 

[Rinaun]

Slimeball? It sounds like you don't understand the story correctly. Valve recently made some big changes to their homegrown anti-cheat system, and to test it's effectiveness, put CS:GO on sale for really cheap (so all the online hackers out there could buy a bunch of copies for their alternate Steam accounts to test on). Subsequently, all of the hacks that previous went undetected for the longest time, suddenly became detected and Valve managed to ban a ton accounts on New Years Eve (and make a bunch of aimbot developers very unhappy). It was actually pretty brilliant.

Except the fact that there's people already on the servers hacking again with modified hacks. You'd be stupid to think hackers bought a single account. At 3.50$ an account you can make your money back playing CS:GO in less than 2 case drops, which take less than 24 hours of gameplay. Selling the accounts for 3.50$ was to try and make the game popular during the period that valve was encouraging people to buy items (Dreamhack). People warned valve on making the game so cheap; let me know when you can name a non-hacked extremely popular game (Edit:FPS) under 10$. CS:GO is so big player-wise because of the amount of new accounts made through smurfing and mostly hacking. Valve isn't retarded and they want money is the bottom line.

 

[Rezoke]

Steam has been so good to me, though! At this point I've invested so much I couldn't back-out now.

 

[SlitheryDee]

This doesn't bother me terribly, but I don't understand why valve didn't try to avoid all controversy by just leaving the game in people's libraries. It's extra action they took that could only have negative effects. It doesn't really make sense. The gamers themselves might worry away at square for some kind of private server solution, but at least valve would be out of it.

 

[Squeetard]

"Update: It appears that contrary to what I first believed, the single-player portion of the game&#8212;Order of War without the &#8220;Challenge&#8221;&#8212;is still available on Steam, and only the multi-player content has been removed."

 

[lupi]

Find it funny that the whole steam is drm discussion just now gettig more traction.


Also think I still have SW:Galaxies still under my library last I checked.

 

[PrincessFrosty]

Not trying to defend steam but if the game isn't playable for external reason then what's the issue here exactly?

This is not new and it's not unique, almost all games these days have some kind of online activation requirement, very few are simple CD key checks anymore either tying them to email accounts via an activation server or counting the number of unique installs clocked.

Lets be clear, it was the developers that disable the service, valve have nothing to gain but bandwidth to lose if people who own the game are allowed to download it from their servers.

Steam also lets you do local backups of installed games, if you backup games you own you can reinstate them from the backup to save bandwidth, while it might have disappeared from the steam list you could still add it back as a "non steam game". It's not gonna work because the auth servers are down but again, that's not valves fault.

And the notion that you somehow "own" other games is completely false, we see this retared argument come up again and again with copyright discussions, you do NOT own your games, you own a limited licence to use someone elses software, any vendor can implement online auth systems and chose to disable them at any time and there's nothing you can do about it, whether that system is wrapped in steam and other DRM, or not.

Before some of you fly off the handle about filing class action lawsuits it might be worth actually understanding what you're talking about first.

 

[mizzou]

Should STEAM still offered it for use with the game being effectively shut down, they could have been violating some type of EULA.

Sort of akin to how people illegally run Ultima Online shard servers.

No outrage found here....Steam didn't "take your game"....Square Enix shut it off! It's a fucking mmo!

 

[Squeetard]

"Update: It appears that contrary to what I first believed, the single-player portion of the game—Order of War without the “Challenge”—is still available on Steam, and only the multi-player content has been removed."

Steam made good on the single player.

 

[Dankk]

No outrage found here....Steam didn't "take your game"....Square Enix shut it off! It's a fucking mmo!

Right. I haven't read the whole thread, but from what I've seen, it looks like people are blaming Steam and not Square Enix. It should be the other way around. Square Enix shut down the game. There is, literally, no legal way of playing the game now. They probably asked Valve to take down the game from Steam because it was officially unplayable anyway, and Valve complied because they didn't feel like putting up a fight and making the situation into a hot mess.