Well now, this is quite the gem. I know that reason often falls upon deaf ears, I tell myself that everytime I see a post in a forum about something that is just boardering on troll-level content. You see, you can't help someone who doesn't want to be helped. If you try, you're the asshole suddenly. So yeah, I know it is more or less pointless to try and argue any points here, but I'll go ahead and give out my opinion on some of these posts. The TLDR; My point exactly.
Steam is the bane of my gaming life. I have a corrupt dll on my system, which means that I cannot load Steam, and therefore cannot play any of my games that require it - Mount & Blade, Civilisation.. And now it seems that Lord of the Rings Online have associated themselves with Steam, I can't play that either, and have had to cancel my subscription. Why should we be forced to play the games that we have bought through a third party client, requiring internet connection? It's an outrage. Please, please do not go the same way...
So your computer is malfunctioning, and.. That's somehow Steam's fault that you can't load it due to said malfunction? My face hurts. The palm that just struck it was done so with outragous force.
As much as I dislike Steam for it's very shake offline modes and forced patches which can fail and lock you out of your games for extended periods of time (happened to me very, very often up until last year... so they have gotten better), I must say that Steam is pretty ubiquitous now. Especially if you own both a PC and a Mac.
Forced patches.. That is a false statement. You can toggle that on/off. However, I have mine on auto patching for all of my games, and.. Yeah, in the last 7 or 8 years now, I've never had Steam patch a game and break it in some way that wasn't the DIRECT FAULT OF THE DEVELOPER. Steam does what it is told to do. And who tells it what to do? You.
I dont like DRM including Steam. I certainly understand DRM is protecting game developer's hard work. But I am one of the what "I purchased is what I should own fully" Fan boy - I admit. I leave Civ 5, Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2 behind just because of DRM. I am a returning supporter of DRM- free Humble bundles. Probably a solution for "hopeless fan-boy" like me is to wait until game developer earn enough, passing the risk of profit / product cost and start to considering DRM Free version to earn more money and that is exactly the time I am waiting for, for a product...lol
Blizzard's DRM is very bad yes. Preventing people from playing a games singleplayer aspects while in a singleplayer setting (offline). It is a bummer, but their suits whisper in their ears of the dreaded pirates taking food off of the plates of their children. So the knee-jerk reaction is to put in stupid policies in place that do not hinder in -anyway- pirates, but instead punish those that have done no wrong (paying customers). Pirates do not care about your DRM, they'll crack it. And play the game without the hassle that those of us who pay for our games have to go through.
Now the "DRM" that Steam has.. Is hardly DRM! It isn't there to police your computer or take your candy and eat it in front of you cackling grimly while you sit there awe-struck in horror as the boogeyman is from taking something precious from you! Some of the scaremongering that I have seen on this forum and others about Steam's "DRM" -lol- is a logical fail of such degree that I lack the ability to adequately articulate my thoughts.
Valve has already said in the past that IF steam goes down foe what ever reason, THEY WILL make all the games still available to the customers. So no worries on that front. I love Steam, but that's bullshit. They can do that for their own games, but not for the games from other developers.
So.. You think Steam will be there on Monday, but come Tuesday.. (MK)Whoopsie! It's gone? Like.. No warning? Hm. Now I know it is a possibility, but then again so is going to sleep in your bed here on Earth and suddenly waking up on Mars. Then exploding. Yeah, it can happen! Will it? Sure! Not in the lifetime of this universe, but cross those fingers, might happen in the next one! Yeah.. If Steam was a sinking ship, I'm quite certain they'd give everyone time to make sure they retain access to their assests. This just sounds like scaremongering to me.
Someone on this forum once compared Steam to an evil entity. I don't think that's quite it. Steam is more like a shepherd. It leads you where the grass is green and plenty, and while you sleep, it keeps the wolves away. It's good to you. It's comfortable... Just don't question it's motives, stray from the herd, or look too far into your future. That said, i don't buy games that require steam. I don't even know how i could buy them. As far as i understand it, you can pay for those games, but you can't own them. They belong to Steam. The money you paid just gives you the right to play them. At least as long as Steam can and will permits it, that is.
Another dose of scaremongering. Steam isn't herding people anywhere. At least no more than anything else is. I'm more concerned with the Sun herding the Earth into its belly. It's just letting us fatten up for the big gulp ya know! It's comin! In a few Billion years anyway. Billion.. Biilllion. I wish I could say that with even one tenth the majesty of Carl Sagan. Billion. It's a fun word to say. It's a damn themepark when he says it. But I digress.. Often. So let me point out the highlighted section there. Right there. Yeah, see it? Yep. That right there. It's wrong. Now moving on.
And what exactly do if I want to play my game at an area without an internet connection. You can only go offline if you're already online, which is complete bull. Steam should just require you to connect to the servers every month or something, not after you have already connected to the internet that session.
Well, heres what I'd suggest.. Go in offline mode when you know you are going to be going somewhere without internet connection. Steam is a service, that service requires you the customer to have access to the internet for it to provide said service. So if you go to an area without access.. How is this Steam's fault? Also, once you go into offline mode, you do not have to log back in to go into offline mode once you exit the program. So turn it off, and booyah! It stays off in your area-of-no-internetness. I've played games before on steam without internet access. In fact, when you go to switch to offline mode, it tells you in a little information box that is the express purpose of the switch, and I qoute "Offline Mode is used when you're about to unplug your laptop, or are otherwise expecting to not be connected to the Internet.". There ya go, problem solved.
Quoting Lonemessiah, reply 90switch to offline mode
Which you can only do if you're already online to begin with. My internet connection fails without notice. --> Often while I'm currently logged into Steam online, or playing multiplayer. Heck, I've been kicked off while trying to get into offline mode, while I was trying to log in! It's like telling a man with a lost dog, "use a leash" when the leash is more often than not frayed and otherwise unreliable. First you gotta catch the dog. And besides. I don't like leashes.
Okay.. I'm seeing a pattern here. So you're issue with going into offline mode is that.. Well, your internet is sporadic? How is this Steam's fault? It seems like a case of wanting cake / eating it too. Steam is a service, requires internet. What you're saying is kinda like hating soup because you have a spoon that occasionally pulls a Matrix on your ass. Damn you soup! Stay in the spoon!
If your games become Steam only, you will lose me as a customer permanently. I don't rent games. Either the game is mine to play/install/mod/delete/whatever from now till the end of time, barring failure of my backups, or I am not paying for it.
Alright, well I'll go ahead and be the bearer of bad news here.. You do not own the games you buy. You are in fact (generally).. leasing them with a (generally) one-time payment. You see, you can't do just whatever you want with it. That EULA that pretty much all games now days require you to sign, yeeeahh.. It tells you that in there, somewhere, that you don't really own it. At least, not in the truest sense of the word. I know, total downer. And moving on.
My problem with Steam is its effect on the marketplace. They provide a good service to the majority of gamers. But always online discriminates against poor kids whos parents cant afford an internet connection
. Its already hard enough to find a good selection of videos games in a store. Sooner or later games in stores wont exist at all..and that will unfairly box out a section of gamers.
Steam is an irresponsible choice for the future of gaming.
I apologize if this seems.. Rude, but your vision is short-sighted. Internet access worldwide is becoming more and more affordable to people. Every day it gets better. And if someone is so poor as to not be able to afford internet service, I doubt video games are the thing they're most concerned with. Or even partially. Gaming is a form of entertainment. Not everyone can or will have access to that particular form of entertainment. However, that isn't the fault of the industry, the root cause is something else entirely that isn't the place for this forum. Steam isn't an irresponsible choice for the future of gaming. Steam isn't the villain here. And again, refer to the highlighted section; Steam isn't the one that requires you to always have internet access. You're blame is in the wrong place entirely.
And no, I'm not saying that poor kids do not want to play video games, I'm sure they do. I did. But that was the early 90s, and the internet didn't matter that much. But anyway, what you said about stores eventually no longer carrying games and leaving out a section of gamers and such.. That makes no sense. You're taking into account only one factor of a changing world and ignoring the rest of the change that comes with it, and supplementing it with the current state of things, as if that is the way it will always be.
And I saw somewhere in one of the posts about EA buying out Steam. That was a good one. Though, EA couldn't afford steam. You guys realize how much Steam is actually worth? You'd need Microsoft money to even consider it. Also I doubt Gabe would ever let his baby go, and if something did happen to him, well, then it wouldn't matter anyway. Gabe is the only one keeping Steam from turning into Skynet and all our base are belong to it.