DRM-Free Option -- Why not just make all Steam copies DRM free?

[Tigranes]

No, because you're one dude and there's a lot of Steam users, who have proven time and again that they like achievements and will complain if they are not there.

[Uomoz]

I *never* heard about a complain because a game have no achievements. Some players might enjoy them but are they a requirement for anyone? I think not.

[Tigranes]

I have. So I'm one dude, you're one dude. I'm not sure what relevance that has. What's important is that it is now an accepted industry wisdom that players have come to expect and demand achievements, and these players have a high level of overlap with Steam enthusiasts.

 

Me, I'd prefer no achievements and I won't touch Steam unless I have to, but that's how it's panning out these days.

[AwesomeOcelot]

Achievements can be great, but most of the time they're pointless. The problem is developers are told to put them in or they use them to track what users are doing, so either way you get "first 50 kills" and "completed level 1". Fallout 1 & 2 had things like "Child Killer", which were a kind of achievement, and DX:HR has "non-lethal apart from bosses" and "no alarms". I don't generally bother with them, but I think they're a great idea, it's just that a minority of developers seem to know what to do with them. I took a screen shot of a round in a pub game of CS:S where I killed half the other team with a P90, and the other half with a knife, 10 kills, before achievements were introduced into the game. I would have been happy to see a few achievements pop up for that, I think the point is achievements should be special and rare, if it makes you go "WTF" or "That. Just. Happened." then it should be an achievement.

[vv221]

DRM is evil.

Steam is DRM.

Steam is Evil!

 

I pledged for P:E because : it's GNU/Linux compatible ; there's a boxed version ; there's a DRM-free version.

 

 

[Uomoz]

DRM is evil.

Steam is DRM.

Steam is Evil!

 

I pledged for P:E because : it's GNU/Linux compatible ; there's a boxed version ; there's a DRM-free version.

 

 

 

Read first 3 sentences, thought a joke. It was not :D

[Hassat Hunter]

One good example of Achievements done bad is The Walking Dead.

It's just 8 achievements for playing the game. Doesn't matter what you do or find in the game, just play it, done... :/

[Delicieuxz]

Sorry, can't make all versions DRM-free, since then there would be no Steam version.

 

And yes, Steam is DRM. I don't need to activate my games with Firefox, I might need to with Steam (Think DX:HR or JC2). More nonsense you want to throw our way?

 

I'm afraid nobody would be able to top your post in that department. Since you've obviously never used GoG before, here's a quick fill-in:

Your GoG downloads are tied to a person GoG account. You don't simply visit the site and download whatever you want without verifying that you actually bought the games. Similarly, Steam only lets you download the games which you have on your account.

 

Now you know.

 

Arguing that Steam isn't DRM is a pointless argument. I know, I've been on your side.

 

People who don't like Steam because they consider it DRM.. don't like Steam. Requiring them to use Steam will not benefit anyone.

 

Yes. I'm not suggesting there only be a Steam version, I'm suggesting to not inject the Steam version with DRM that other versions don't have.

 

Steam as far as I'm aware wraps the main exe with a steam application that prevents it from running without Steam.

This is optional, up to the game's uploader, as far as I'm aware. As I mentioned, some older games don't require Steam running to launch the game, and Skyrim on launch didn't require Steam to run - but Bethesda patched it shortly after it was publicly revealed.

 

why have achievements at all, I really don't get it lol

The Steam residents freak out when there are games without Achievements.

No, really. Many insane rants of modern games without achievements... :/

 

I don't get it either.

 

People like/dislike achievement according to ratios unaffected by the Steam variable. I'm a Steam user, I hate achievement. Non Steam games have achievements too. I habitually ask developers to provide an option to disable achievements. They really cheapen the game experience for me and take me out of immersion with the game world.

 

One good example of Achievements done bad is The Walking Dead.

It's just 8 achievements for playing the game. Doesn't matter what you do or find in the game, just play it, done... :/

 

That seems to be how most achievements are done, unfortunately. It makes them non-achievements, and basically checkpoint markers. I was just playing Metro 2033 and received 2 achievements in a row for killing enemies which I had to kill, otherwise be killed and get a game over. They weren't even hard to kill, instead were a couple of the easiest moments in the game yet.

Edited October 14, 2012 by Delicieuxz

[Hassat Hunter]

I'm afraid nobody would be able to top your post in that department. Since you've obviously never used GoG before, here's a quick fill-in:

Your GoG downloads are tied to a person GoG account. You don't simply visit the site and download whatever you want without verifying that you actually bought the games. Similarly, Steam only lets you download the games which you have on your account.

 

Now you know.

And then when I want to play my game do I need to login to GoG again? Nope.

I do with Steam. I need to activate the client. Login. How is that NOT DRM? How is that the same as GOG?

 

It's not.

Now you know.

Yes. I'm not suggesting there only be a Steam version, I'm suggesting to not inject the Steam version with DRM that other versions don't have.

The only additional DRM the Steam version will have is Steam.

This is optional, up to the game's uploader, as far as I'm aware. As I mentioned, some older games don't require Steam running to launch the game, and Skyrim on launch didn't require Steam to run - but Bethesda patched it shortly after it was publicly revealed.

I have plenty of old games on Steam. Heck, most of my library is made of them. And none can work without activating the client.

[Zoraptor]

Sorry, can't make all versions DRM-free, since then there would be no Steam version.

 

And yes, Steam is DRM. I don't need to activate my games with Firefox, I might need to with Steam (Think DX:HR or JC2). More nonsense you want to throw our way?

 

I'm afraid nobody would be able to top your post in that department. Since you've obviously never used GoG before, here's a quick fill-in:

Your GoG downloads are tied to a person GoG account. You don't simply visit the site and download whatever you want without verifying that you actually bought the games. Similarly, Steam only lets you download the games which you have on your account.

 

Now you know.

No, you miss one very important difference, despite it being explicitly spelt out for you. You must download and install steam's client in order to install games. This is not an intrinsic requirement for any and all DD as purchasing the game is, since many vendors do not require a client. The client is a separate gatekeeper application designed specifically to check that you have the right to install- ie activation based DRM, same as SecuROM's launch control and others which are acknowledged by everyone to be DRM. In contrast, you do not need anything at all running (well, except windows) to install from GOG and you have your choice of any browser you want to download via, or their client if you so desire. If GOG had a compulsory client, or forced you to use 'GOGfox' or 'CDPR GOGzaic' or 'GOGle Zinc' to download, you'd have at least some sort of point- but they don't, so you don't.

[Oerwinde]

The thing with steam, if you actually take the time to read the license agreement, is you aren't actually buying games, you are licensing them. Valve can at any time revoke your license and you can't play the games you've purchased. In practice its essentially the same as buying it, because its not likely Valve will revoke any licenses unless someone is found trying to hack steam or something, but in theory if you had any licenses revoked and your hard drive died, you would have to shell out again for any of those games.

[AGX-17]

I don't think some of you understand how Steam games works. To work with steam, a game has to have the Steamworks API integrated into its program. https://partner.stea...cumentation/api

 

The Steam API includes a number of features (access to steam community, updates, achievements, etc.) but it's also a form of DRM. Purchasing a game on steam is licensing that software's use solely for the Steam account that purchased it, unless it's bought as a gift. If the game is to be available DRM free, there will have to be a non-Steam version distributed through some other source.

 

Now, before anyone goes shooting off on Steam DRM, remember that Steam can run in offline mode and any games you own with the account can be played without an internet connection after installation (which does require a connection.) Unless it's a multiplayer online game, of course.

 

 

The thing with steam, if you actually take the time to read the license agreement, is you aren't actually buying games, you are licensing them. Valve can at any time revoke your license and you can't play the games you've purchased. In practice its essentially the same as buying it, because its not likely Valve will revoke any licenses unless someone is found trying to hack steam or something, but in theory if you had any licenses revoked and your hard drive died, you would have to shell out again for any of those games.

 

The thing with nearly all video games, if you actually take the time to read the license agreement, is you aren't actually buying games, you are licensing them. You are purchasing the license to play the game, you are not purchasing the source code to do with as you please.

Edited October 14, 2012 by AGX-17

[Reddie]

No, you miss one very important difference, despite it being explicitly spelt out for you. You must download and install steam's client in order to install games. This is not an intrinsic requirement for any and all DD as purchasing the game is, since many vendors do not require a client. The client is a separate gatekeeper application designed specifically to check that you have the right to install- ie activation based DRM, same as SecuROM's launch control and others which are acknowledged by everyone to be DRM. In contrast, you do not need anything at all running (well, except windows) to install from GOG and you have your choice of any browser you want to download via, or their client if you so desire. If GOG had a compulsory client, or forced you to use 'GOGfox' or 'CDPR GOGzaic' or 'GOGle Zinc' to download, you'd have at least some sort of point- but they don't, so you don't.

 

This. I don't realise how people can say things like "Steam is not a DRM, Steamworks is". You need a Steam app to install a Steam game. Steam app checks if you have rights to install it. Should it determine you don't, it won't let you install it. That's pretty much a definition of DRM: an app checking whether someone has license rights and enabling or disabling certain actions based on the outcome of that check.

 

Just because there are arguably less convenient forms of DRM out there (i.e. UbiSoft's) does not make Steam less of a DRM it is.

[Hassat Hunter]

Now, before anyone goes shooting off on Steam DRM, remember that Steam can run in offline mode and any games you own with the account can be played without an internet connection after installation (which does require a connection.) Unless it's a multiplayer online game, of course.

Still needs to boot up the Steam client for that offline play...

So, yup... DRM.

[Elixer]

Of course Steam is DRM.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is only fooling themselves.

With DRM-free games, you don't need to login to anything to play.

 

Since PE will offer two version (Steam DRM and NO DRM), this thread is ...odd, trying to convince people that Steam isn't DRM ?

[anek]

The thing with nearly all video games, if you actually take the time to read the license agreement, is you aren't actually buying games, you are licensing them. You are purchasing the license to play the game, you are not purchasing the source code to do with as you please.

 

Yes, the EULA may specify lots of restrictions for what you may or may not do with the software.

But that's still a long way from installing technical measures (a.k.a. DRM) on the user's PC that will enforce those restrictions at the will of the publisher.

 

For one thing, it bypasses the arbitration provided by the legal system - if the publisher thinks you've violated their terms, they can't just sue you (which in most cases they would shy away from), they can actually enforce their "sentence" on you at will by revoking your ability to play the game (or at least, to install it on a new computer in the future). And good luck trying to challenge that decision or getting your money back once that happens to you.

 

For another thing, in most non-US countries, the law gives only limited power to EULA's. In some countries they don't count as legally binding at all (since they're not mutually agreed upon contracts before sale of the product). In others, they count only in a limited fashion, i.e. some of the sensible standard clauses that most EULA's have are indeed legally binding, while many of the more extreme and arbitrary restrictions that game publishers like to invent are legally void in those countries even if explicitly specified in the EULA.

 

So no, you can't equate DRM-infested software with DRM-free software that merely comes with a license agreement.

[Reddie]

Also, he's mostly right that we're buing a license and not a game, but Steam pushed it futher as they don't offer licenses, only license subscribtions. As in, software licensing is not about product anymore (yes, a software license is considered a product in court practice) but about a service. It's not only the matter of technical restrictions, as with this practice they are avoiding i.e. european law that states licenses can be given away or resold, because obviously this law don't apply to service subscribtions.

[Delicieuxz]

Also, he's mostly right that we're buing a license and not a game, but Steam pushed it futher as they don't offer licenses, only license subscribtions. As in, software licensing is not about product anymore (yes, a software license is considered a product in court practice) but about a service. It's not only the matter of technical restrictions, as with this practice they are avoiding i.e. european law that states licenses can be given away or resold, because obviously this law don't apply to service subscribtions.

 

Whether you buy through Steam or physical retail, you are, in both cases buying a game license and not the game itself.

 

Steam is a license reseller and the license agreements given through Steam read the same as those sold through retail. However, yes, there is the obstacle of then having access to the software downloads those licenses tied to a Steam account. Afaik, a license entitles a person access to use the relevant software without stipulation of where the software is acquired from. And I suppose that, technically, at least in Europe, you retain the right to sell those licenses by passing on serial keys or whatever, and would then be obliged to not access the game yourself anymore on your Steam account by choice. Since Europe law entitles a person to sell their licenses, I wouldn't be surprised in Valve is forced to implement a license transfer system for that region at some point, similar to how Blizzard was forced to offer D3 refunds in Korea. Surely just a "people have to make enough noise" thing to the applicable EU commission.

Edited October 18, 2012 by Delicieuxz

[Feynt]

So Steam is a punishment? Jeez, there's a DRM free version, stick to it.

 

I have no idea why so many people hate having steam open.

Would you like to have Photoshop or Windows Movie Maker start everytime you run a game?

 

This is a false equivalency and a rather poor one at that. Steam is DRM - it just so happens to be a DRM that a fair number of people find acceptable. If you don't find it acceptable, no problem! Just stick to a version without DRM - or, just don't support the project at all! I personally refuse to buy the Assassins Creed games, for example, due to the highly intrusive DRM they have had. I find steam drm to be much more palatable - I don't exactly prefer it, but it is something I can live with, that only minimally restricts me.

 

I agree, this is most definitely false equivalency. Photoshop takes up many hundreds of megs, sometimes several gigs of RAM. Its default state takes up like 300-500 megs without any images loaded (at least as of CS2). Doing any sort of illustration work, I've pushed it well over 3 gigs on images. Steam tops at 150 megs on my computers at idle. I have never, ever, seen it go past 250, except when verifying file integrity or doing its own form of defragging.

 

That said, I have had photoshop running in the background while I've played games in the past. On Steam. With 60+ tabs open in chrome. It's just how I use my computer. Also helps I have 16 gigs of RAM and an OS capable of accessing it all, but not actively trying to fill it all.

 

 

And as for GOG as a DRM site, you're forced to use your account once to download the game. After you download it, you can burn it to a DVD, store it on your NAS, upload it to the cloud service of your choice, whatever. You could, hypothetically, also distribute it across the vastness of the intarwebs for all to use. They almost don't care (that last one would probably make them mad, and spoils DRM free for the rest of us). And you would never have to log into your account again. This is effectively the same as going into a Game Stop to buy a game, and then never going to Game Stop again.

[Bryy]

So, after reading, I take it this is simply a Stealth "Why Are Devs Evil?" Thread.

[underageaoler]

I think a few of you are focusing in a bit too much on the original poster's claim that Steam is not DRM and disregarding the intent of their post: Steam does not require the Steam client to run every time a game within Steam is run. Essentially, what that means, is that there are two 'levels' of Steam 'DRM':

1. Steam is used to download and install the game client, providing updates and other features like achievements, cloud saving, et cetera. This is the way most games use Steam, starting the Steam client (if it is not already started) when running the game, even from the game's executable.
   
2. Steam is used to download and install the game client as well as providing updates, but is not otherwise required to run when the game's executable is running. This means that you can run the game, from a shortcut for example, and it does not start Steam. This is the option the original poster is talking about.

Some folks have mentioned that in order to have features like achievements and cloud saving, the first option (running Steam alongside the game) is required. I do not know if this is true, but, if it is, I think it answers the original question. That is, making Steam copies "DRM free" (option two, and there seems to be contention as to whether it still counts as DRM) will disable the previously mentioned features that seem to be the impetus for (or at least a substantial benefit of) having it on Steam in the first place.

I can't seem to find a definitive answer as to whether the first option is required for the extra features, but, if it isn't, then I agree with the original poster and think allowing us the flexibility of running the game without Steam (while still enabling the extra features) seems to be a strictly superior option.

 

tl;dr: Whether or not Steam is or isn't DRM, it is possible to have a game through Steam that does not require Steam to run concurrently. Does anyone know if enabling this option precludes using the cloud saving/achievement features?

[Elerond]

 

 

tl;dr: Whether or not Steam is or isn't DRM, it is possible to have a game through Steam that does not require Steam to run concurrently. Does anyone know if enabling this option precludes using the cloud saving/achievement features?

 

You need connection to your steam account to use steam's cloud saving and achivements as they are saved on steam's servers.

[KhaineGB]

tl;dr: Whether or not Steam is or isn't DRM, it is possible to have a game through Steam that does not require Steam to run concurrently. Does anyone know if enabling this option precludes using the cloud saving/achievement features?

 

All 100+ games I've got on steam REQUIRE the client to be loaded in order to play the game (and that includes old ones like UFO: Enemy Unknown and X-Com: Terror From The Deep).

 

So I don't believe it is possible to have a game sold on Steam that doesn't require the client. Also, not running the client disables cloud saving and achievements (unless the achievements are actually IN the game, Dragon Age: Origins being one such example).

[underageaoler]

So I don't believe it is possible to have a game sold on Steam that doesn't require the client. Also, not running the client disables cloud saving and achievements (unless the achievements are actually IN the game, Dragon Age: Origins being one such example).

 

Commandos 2 (according to the original post) is one game that does not require the Steam client to run. However, it seems to be the case that games not requiring the Steam client are far less numerous than games that do, so either: most developers/publishers choose to use the Steam 'DRM', or, perhaps more likely, the games that don't require it do so because of some idiosyncratic incompatibility with it, not because it is an option given to them by Valve.

 

That being said, it seems to be the consensus that achievements, et al. require Steamworks, so it seems unlikely Obsidian would choose to go without it in the case of Project Eternity. Those who would rather avoid Steam are free to choose the DRM-free copy, so in the end everyone can get what they want regardless.

[Aoyagi]

Here is a question: Why do you care about what others will buy? You can buy your DRM-free version. Frankly, I don't care if it has some kind of (working) DRM or not, but I'm presuming DRM is going to be Steam in this case and I see no problem there...

Edited October 20, 2012 by Aoyagi