Discussion in 'Games' started by TheMailMan78, Jun 8, 2010.
At least its not Windows Live or "always on" DRM.
Not bad. I don't mind DRM in this flavor.
thats not bad if you plan on keeping the game
at least with steam its tied to your account so you can download it or play it as often as you like, you only need to 'activate' it online with steam once in order to play it offline
bad thing is no resale so you have to keep the game so be wary in case you wont like it lol
Fair enough: I prefer Steam to any form of Securom, even the simple disk check variety that was present on Fallout 3.
steam is no were near perfect BUT it is much better then GFWL or "ubisoft" DRM.
Hate Steam. I won't buy it untl it is under $10 if it requires Steam and, knowing that Fallout: New Vegas is a big title, that will probably never happen (the lowest it will get is $20 before skyrocketing in price). In other words, I am never buying it.
GFWL is just a serial number. Hell, most GFWL games work fine without it in offline mode (which it defaults to). The problem is, GFWL is never alone. Almost all GFWL games have SecuROM too.
Why do you hate steam ?
I hate 3rd party software running just for the sake of DRM. Not to mention all the downtime for Steam to update itself. GFWL updates what, once every six months? Just out of curiousity, I started Steam just now and, I'll be damned, 4 updates (in a week or two). Useless POS. Not to mention all the ads and bloat. EA Download Manager is less spiny than it.
I found that the features steam offers outweighs the DRM side of it. Anyway thats my opinion.
yeah sounds great to me. the original (beth title) and exps were through steam.
and I don't mind steam as a drm, as it is more than that. server lists, community features, and an actual game library built in. there is an offline mode that allows ALL of your offline games to be played no problem even without an internet connection.
for what few negatives their are, steam has so many positives as to make it well worth it.
and given the alternatives at this time - i see no better digital distribution site.
Gamersgate is very good. No DRM either.
I only used Gamer's Gate once for Hard Truck: Rise of the Clans (only way to get it). I hate how they have amature software (can't remember all the bugs at the moment but they were numerous) and no portable installer (for backup sake).
I'm waiting for a download service that offers ISOs and no limitation to burn them for backup purpose as well as installation.
I bet if I said the sky was blue you'd find some argument to say it was green.
True about the software I hope it should improve over time if they gain a larger user base. I've used them once myself though.
The sky is green.
Personally, I like Steam. It's a great platform and Valve supports it well. Besides, Valve is a local company to me, so I contribute to my neighbor's paychecks (possibly).
i think that'd be a great service and all, but hell for content producers. worse than now.(Ford's ISO downloading)
I understand, and too have a want- for as much freedom as possible with my purchases . but my desire for freedom has to be matched by their desire to make a bit of profit and continue making these games.
I think companies like Steam fill that niche and bridge that gap rather well. I can reinstall windows as much as i want -leaving my steam install on a separate drive. I have a nice pretty list with infos, pictures, as well as community info on who else plays this game i like.
none of the stuff is important, but it's nice fluff... the core of the system is what matters - and that is solid. I pay for a game, i download it. I can archive it for back up, play it on any computer i want (after installing steam on it) and if something happens to my reinstall just LEGALLY re download the game.
as far as making it a good experience and workable for both devs and consumers, steam/impulse(gamersgate, though i haven't tried it), etc do great jobs.
I am so pissed about all these games that have DRM protection. When Steam dies when I am much older, and I want to play these games way down the road, I won't be able to. That makes me so sad.
So in order to play these games later down the road, when Steam or whatever is around no longer, I will just have to keep all the cracks till MUCH later... sadly enough.
true. but at that point - i have done my moral and societal obligation. I worked a job and paid for it myself. if after the fact, days or years down the road - for whatever reason i do not care - i am told those games are no longer legally valid - i'll have to do the same.
it's only right to pay for games you play - but it's also only right for games you pay for to be rightfully yours to play , regardless of whether they want to consider it "YOUR" property or not.
of course i can't legally reverse engineer it. but this physical disc (or steam download) and this little number ARE mine, and they will stay that way and let me play them until i am long dead - or i'll find another way.
I still stick to my guns... Bethesda's Morrowind and Oblivion's original disks had NO drm whatsoever, not even a disk check. And I bought them twice apiece because the disks wore out, and the games were so good that I found it worth it to pay them for the game twice. I honestly wanted to support them. If game makers didn't shoot for the least common denominator then there would be no need for DRM. At least for me.
I will admit though, I've hated steam in the past, but if this is the model they use for it (ie letting us download, install as many times as we want, have offline mode, etc) then I am all for it. I hate the fact that the damn program has to run in the background eating up my meager resources, but I haven't noticed any slowdown from it while playing the couple of games on it I have. I wish it wouldn't start up and annoy me on windows startup too. But if that is all that comes from it, with all the good things they do (maybe even a mod distribution channel???) then I'm all for it. Steam is doing it right IMO, and with a few tweaks it would be perfect.
AND congrats to valve for thier planned port of steam to linux... maybe we'll be able to play fallout on linux one day?? I'd ditch windows in a heartbeat if I could game on linux.
You can set it to not start on windows... and yeah the overhead it has is minimal.
IMO Steam is literally the best thing since sliced bread. I wish they did more than just games.
maybe it's just a simple over-look, but I haven't been able to find the setting. Thats another gripe I have, the interface is sometimes non-user-friendly, and its not consistant through different screens.
must be an overlook.
steam(where "file" would normally be)->settings->interface tab -> uncheck "run steam when my computer starts"
the new interface is a bit iffy, but it will be worked out. the one they had for the first decade did a great job but was looking stale. in not too long the new interface will have the best of both worlds.
Only games that original supported Linux or made to support Linux would work on Linux. Valve supporting Linux just means that the Steam client (and maybe Valve titles) will be available to Linux users. A game like Saints Row 2, for example, would never work on Linux without emulation.
i think it's only a matter of time before more titles work on both mac and windows. the only real drawback before was coding for different cpu algorithms. now they both use intel based cpus so that major hurdle is gone.
yes os differences are still there, but those are nothing compared to the old barriers now gone.
not to say tons of old games (fallout, saints row) will start working - but i think many new games will work out of the box before too long.
Of course. But if steam supports linux, devs have their opening into the market. If they already have an easy distribution system, (especially for valves own games) then why not go for it? All i'm saying is, it's a step in the direction.
Separate names with a comma.