Valve Claims New Steamworks Update "Makes DRM Obsolete"
Lulfas writes "Steam is implementing a new anti-piracy solution that, according to them, removes all DRM. Called Computer Executable Generation (CEG), this system creates a unique copy of the game when it is purchased through Steam, essentially using a 100% unique keygen system. It will be installable on any system, but only playable by one person at a time (hooked into the correct Steam account, of course). Will this be enough to satisfy anti-DRM players while at the same time giving the publishing companies what they require?"
In what sense is this not DRM?
Thank you, Mr. Uninformed Ranter. It has been said, again and again that if Steam's servers are taken offline, access controls will be removed.
I can't believe you don't know what a Hasemalphaginnojinglanaporphomism is.
That may be a saner DRM, but it's still DRM.
If you're going to sell a service, then sell a service. Don't sell software and try to control it like a service.
Can I sell it?
If Steam goes down, can I still play?
Reviewing just the first hour of video games.
Who has said this? Steam?
Next up: "When CD sales go back up, we promise to quit suing people, RIAA"
And when Steam places an access-control removal patch under 3rd party escrow to be released upon loss of the servers due to whatever reason, or to be released upon a significant change in terms of access (such as going to a pay-per-month for Steam access scheme), then I would believe them.
Until then?
It's simply feel-good words with nothing to back them.
I bought the game, I own the media. I should NOT have to connect to the internet, download a client, download whatever updates it deems are necessary. Maybe there's some cheesy exploit I like in the FPS I'm playing alone? You got my money - leave me alone!
It was really frustrating when I was between broadband watching Steam try to download huge updates so I could play the game I bought specifically so I'd have the media and wouldn't need to download anything. Naive me, assuming you can actually play a game you own the discs to.
PS - how is this not DRM?
- The files are encrypted with a 'unique' key
- Steam acts as the DRM license server
- Any attempt to play the game without access to Steam the new DRM license server will fail
- You access or validate the game by a user/login combo
- If Steam ever goes away, has server/capacity issues (which they have, when new games are released) you are shit out of luck to play the game you PAID for
The _only_ current difference I can see is that you can 'transfer' it between PCs and play it. Guess what - you could do that with DRM as well, albeit laboriously and somewhat error prone. Most services even allow you several "free" additional downloads that give you another license.
It's so similar to DRM that this is just a lame publicity stunt.
I think we're about to have a pissed off Linux community if so.
When, exactly, is the linux community NOT pissed off about something?
On that particular topic, your opinion is just as valid as the opinion of those of us who choose to take them at their word. You have no evidence other than your gut feeling that they would renege, we have no evidence other than our gut feeling that the'll honor the promise.
But, on the other hand, there are a number of people who act as if we are required to take their opinion as if it were the Gospel Truth. Please don't make the mistake that just because it seems so clear to you, it seems anything less than insulting pessimisim to us.
Second, Gabe himself said that if steam were ever to go down, he would remove any and all restrictions from playing your game, without the steam servers.
Pardon me if I don't believe the promises of a man who isn't fully in control of what may happen in the future. He may intend to do that, but that doesn't mean it will, in fact, be done.
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
Wait, it's not DRM... because it's Steam... but without Steam... it won't run. Or without your specific keycode, login, etc PLUS a Steam installation, it won't run.
A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. DRM by any other name is still just a big STEAMing turd.
That doesn't take market forces out of the equation. Supply is being controlled by the producer (as it always is), and demand is controlled by the consumer. If the price is too high, don't buy. If people don't buy, they go out of business. Market forces!
If Valve goes out of business, their property will be turned over to creditors, and they might not even be able to make the choice themselves. The cheapest option for the creditors would always be to simply shut off the servers rather than wasting time and bandwidth creating and distributing a mythical "no phone home" patch. That's a realistic view of what happens when a company goes out of business. Even if you believe Valve is totally honest, it will probably not be up to them if it ever comes to that.
(-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
Implemtation costs of those tecnhical measures ARE the costs of taking advantage of the global market. What other costs of global markets would you have them assume?
Are you still considering their product to be a good? It's not -- it's a service. Reconsider your opinions in that light, and it will come clear to you.
Hruh? What market forces are they taking out of the equation? This is how economic transactions work -- if you deem the value of what they are selling to be equal or higher to the price they offer, you buy.
If Steam sales suck, then game producers will use a different distribution channel. If Steam sales are good, then obviously the value they provide for the price they are charging is not a problem.
People just need to factor in everything when they make a purchase decision. I prefer not to buy games via Steam, first because I don't play enough to warrant their prices... But also because when I do buy games, it's more important to me that they are unencumbered by an activation protocol. The pain of dealing with an activation protocol (and the risk it involves) decreases the value (to me) of games sold via Steam. So if a game was $10 cheaper on Steam, I'd still rather buy it elsewhere... and if the game isn't offered elsewhere, I'll buy a different game.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
you upgrade from Steam to Electricity??
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
"When CD sales go back up, we promise to quit suing people, RIAA"
"When the terrorists are defeated, we promise to give you your civil liberties back" - governments everywhere.
Read Pynchon.
And that's exactly when I'll crack my games. Until then, Steam works great.
Exactly. Saying that this isn't DRM is disingenuous.
What they're really getting at is that this makes things like SecuRom obsolete. Requiring that a person log in to play their offline game is about as good as you can get in the DRM world. You no longer have to deal with bugs related to copy protection that tries to disable functional software on the computer. No more registration limit nightmares. All you do is sell the game and tell the user to log in to the service.
It's convenient for users, too, but it's still DRM, no matter how you look at it.
Just so you know, region locked DVD players were deemed illegal by the high court of Australia so all players sold here are able to play DVDs from any region. For once the Australian legal system got something right.