Stop calling me a fucking liar, alright? I even said "mostly" because I sure as hell don't know all of them off the top of my head, just those I got through Steam and have checked.
Seriously, some people think that if you're not 100% dead on your post you must be lying. Why the fuck would I lie? I WANT to use Steam if only DRM wasn't present in most (not all) of the games!
It's probably due to the fact that in order for Valve to sell the old Doom games so that they can work on modern versions of Windows, going with DOSBox means it would provide the most authentic, classic Doom experience available. It would mean they can use the official ID produced DOS binaries without having to deal with third-party source ports. Allows them to adhere to all the licenses I guess.
Of course, once you've bought the game you can then break out the Doomsday Engine (like I use) with 3D models and texture packs and go nuts like that. But that's up to the purchaser; Valve shouldn't really make that decision automatically.
Yes and No. Not Valve decides if the games use DRM, the developers do (or publisher). Games which do not have DRM on them can be played without Steam with no problem, even games with DRM might be played without Steam with no problem. The assumption that you're only able to play the games if you're logged into Steam is wrong, that depends on the game.
As I told someone else, there are very few games I've tried which work without Steam. DOSBox games like the classic Doom games, Wolf 3D and some others work fine. Skyrim or Deus Ex: Human Revolution? Portal 1/2? Not a chance. Note I'm also not referring to any extra 3rd-party DRM, just the base Steam DRM.
Also, I don't see how a CreditCard/PayPal issue could lock you out of your account?
I have read people's complains on the Steam forums whereby there was an issue when paying through PayPal, for whatever reason PayPal wouldn't transfer funds to Valve even though the transaction was completed in Steam (completely PP's fault mind you, but it happens), and so the account is locked for reasons of fraud or some such BS. If you're good with Steam support it might be a temporary lock while they try to ascertain what happened, but it's still a lock.
Also, people have noted that if credit card chargebacks tend to result in suspended accounts. The reasons for using a chargeback are numerous but if you have to do so on a Steam purchase, your account will be locked. Again, support might be able to resolve this, but it's still a high stress situation that wouldn't be an issue if you could still run stuff without Steam.
I'll crack every single game I bought on Steam...every single one
Seems like we shouldn't have to go to this length though, but yeah, I've thought about that too. You have to wonder then if there will be Linux cracks for Steam games now?:)
At the moment, I fear, it's choosing the lesser of two evils. And Steam is the lesser of all the evils...I mean, I even find Steam even less intrusive then "Insert the disc now!" copy protection.
I've always hated disc-based protection. That's one thing I don't miss for sure.
You do make good points all round. Let's just say that I'm very wary of building a 100+ games library in Steam knowing that it's all authenticated against a third-party and not entirely in my control.
I've read gman003's posts before - he doesn't say anything bad about Steam, ever. He's very much the definition of a fanboy, so only take his words with a grain of salt.
Virtually Steam game has their.exe modified so that they reference a file called steam_api.dll (located in the game's directory). This API provides a wrapper for the game to communicate with Steam, whether it's for achievements or supporting Steam cloud functionality, whatever. It also provides authentication through the Steam client. In other words, that.exe. MUST be launched via the Steam client and can't be run manually. If you try, you'll get an error message. Hence, if the Steam client doesn't like you anymore for whatever reason you're out of luck, and that's what I don't agree with.
There are SOME games which allow you to manually run them, but the only ones I know of are things using DOSBox such as the old Doom games, Commander Keen, Wolf 3D and etc. In these cases since DOSBox already exists in Linux it's not a big deal, but for most other games, you MUST be using the client.
As for transfer of licenses, what you're seeing when people give away games are what's known as Steam gifts. When you buy a game on Steam you can mark it as a gift; it will then remain out of your games lists but available to send to another Steam user via a menu option. But if you've already got a game in your main list of Steam games and want to exercise first sale, you can't do anything about it. If you try to sell your account to someone else and Valve finds out, they will lock the account since account transfers are against the ToS (another thing I don't agree with).
I'm not trying to troll here, so don't take this the wrong way.
From my experience, a lot of Linux users hate Microsoft because of their dominance in operating systems. It has resulted in a lot of software only being available for Windows and not Linux, hardware manufacturers only putting out drivers (decent or otherwise) for Windows and not Linux, and so on. People hate Microsoft due to their effective monopoly in the software industry (now getting less effective, but still)
Once Steam is released for Linux, it's going to be the focal point for virtually all games on Linux just like Steam is on Windows. Sure there are exceptions (GOG, Origin, developers selling directly and so on), but by and large Valve will have an effective monopoly as the primary source of games for most PC gamers.
Since Steam also uses account-based DRM, your games are linked to a single point of failure. A clerical error, a PayPal/credit card dispute, anything that may or may not be your fault occurs, and you may find yourself locked out of your account either temporarily or permanently. If this happens, you can't play your games.
Linux users traditionally are geeks, and hence know the dangers of relying on a single vendor, a single point of failure. They'd know not to put all your eggs in one basket because otherwise, you don't have control. I'm no Richard Stallman but I'm honestly scared about the fact that everyone appears to be happy giving control out of their hands and to a third-party... EVEN LINUX USERS!
Are people so desperate for games that they don't care about the fact that revocation of your purchases is technically possible due to Steam's DRM? I need someone to post something insightful because I'm going out of my fucking mind with worry that the traditionally anti-DRM crowd here is giving me mixed signals when it comes to Valve. At this point I'm almost ready to give up gaming and do something else if everyone's basically agreed that DRM cannot be stopped.
True, but those are vast exceptions. The games you're talking about are mostly the games which run via DOSBox (e.g. the classic Doom games). Games without DRM on Steam are extremely few. Even simply games like VVVVVV - you try running the.exe directly, see how far that gets you.
Right now it's been so long that the Half-Life magic has gone for me. I don't doubt that eventually something will be released (either EP3 or a full-blown HL3), but life and other games kinda make it hard to care much for a classic series that hasn't been ended yet.
I think he's just concerned (legitimately) that once Steam appears on Linux, sure more games might come out, but they'll likely take the easy road and be distributed only on Steam rather than being also available in a non-DRM form.
Having said that, with the exception of some indie games, most new games these days require mandatory Steam usage anyway, so Steam appearing on Linux hasn't made anything WORSE so much as allowing options for those people who don't mind perpetually renting software. As always if you don't agree with the ToS of Steam (like I clearly don't), then you either stick with the games you've got, buy from places like GOG or move onto another hobby.
Yeah, but it's the integration itself which is the real value, what makes things work together well. Sure, Exchange is not part of Office, but Exchange is specifically designed to work with Outlook and without Outlook, all you have is a very expensive mailing server. So most organizations of a sufficient size tend to use Exchange, hence the workers use Office (and hence Outlook), and as such they see all this useful functionality. Part of it is because of Exchange, but with Office they would never get to use it.
Yep, a pretty similar posting style to his stuff on Neowin. I guess the reason he annoys me more than others is that he appears to know a fair bit about Windows architecture but believes everything Microsoft does is correct and right and the best way to make an operating system. He continually attacks Linux though, and has absolutely nothing nice to say about it. Never gives even a shred of praise for anything Linux does, as if it's entirely useless to anyone, no-one should be using it and instead should be using Windows and Windows-based products instead.
I don't know if he's ex-Microsoft or current, but I don't quite get the feeling he's a shill. He seems basically like someone who thinks he knows everything, and posts extremely long-winded and details comments to try and beat-down anyone who doesn't take Microsoft's side. An ultra-fanboy who unfortunately knows just enough to be taken seriously by those less experienced.
Hey I actually agree - XP has performed admirably but Windows 7 now takes the crown, plus it's been out long enough to support virtually anything you need to run.
Why'd you link to Neowin.net? That place is a cesspool of Microsoft fanboys (particularly thenetavenger - oh my God is he up himself). Sure the info is valid but another site would have been less... grating.
The features he does mention ARE useful. If you know how to use your tools better than the next guy who continually questions what benefit the extra functionality and bloat provides in said tools, you're at an advantage.
I don't consider his post to be shilling - I consider it to be an info-dump of features he considers useful. The edge in his post suggests a frustration from being told continually by people here and other open-source fanatics that such features are bloat, and that somehow open-source software can work with the same level of functionality and integration (which it often can't for someone who's aware of the niceties and uses them in something like Outlook).
It's also amazing how many people, who've never worked in I.T. for a mid to large organization, and particularly a lot of young people (students), who think they know better about what a company needs than what people experienced in how the world works in the corporate environment know.
You're talking to the Slashdot crowd. If they use Windows, they should already be experience enough to always check each installation screen of anything they install for such traps. Even programs which try to bundle Google Chrome I would consider to be nefarious.
In fact, I have yet to see a software installer in a long time which, when giving the user to install this bundled garbage, has the checkboxes off by default. They're always opt-in. Clearly this suggests people don't WANT this shit, but the developers are hoping enough people are impatient enough during installation such that the extra stuff gets installed anyway. Then they'll argue that this is the only way they can fund things like the program's web site.
Now, like a lot of other open-source multiplayer FPSes (Xonotic, Warsow, World of Padman), all we need are people actually PLAYING them online and we'll be set. Bonus points for active players here in Australia.
Fair enough. I shall admit that a good portion of not wanting to use Steam is also because I don't have the discipline to avoid those fucking AWESOME sales they keep having (such as now). I have in the past ended up with a significant backlog of games I simply don't have enough time to play, and often were purchased simply because of a good daily deal, even though they end up not being my type of game anyway.
In any case, I guess I feel concern for those gamers who are adamant of ONLY using Steam for all their gaming needs (even though it's admittedly convenient), since they're putting all their eggs in one basket - a single point of failure. If Steam didn't have DRM and you could play virtually all games via the.exe in their folders, then I'd probably go back to it. It's still possible - Valve are a big player in PC gaming, they could leverage it perhaps.
It's times like this I'm sad when we've got a completely non-DRM store like GOG which is completely overshadowed by something like Steam, where the access to your games are entirely in the hands of Valve and if something fucks up, you can't play. We've now got a generation who believe this is OK, rather than someone older like me who's seen enough issues with such a system to be extremely weary of it.
I guess the only good part is that the number of people who've been fucked by Steam restrictions are probably far and few between, but given the little time most of us have to play games, I don't see why we can't just be fickle and go to non-DRM stores when purchasing games to feed what is ultimately a waste-of-time hobby.
^^ This post is the reason why I feel embarrassed to be part of the Linux community. It seems to be one of the few communities who actively relish hating a company to the point where any debate is dominated with emotions rather than facts. It's enough to push anyone away from Linux - who the fuck would WANT to become like the above poster?
Interesting. I built my wife a desktop because he laptop died and she doesn't need a laptop for a primary machine anymore (if portability is required we use the netbook). Interestingly enough the power of a reasonably specced desktop is enough to warrant getting back into Sims 3, which I doubt she'd enjoy on a tablet given a large monitor and keyboard/mouse provides a far better experience.
Why would invest in such a setup when apparently PCs are dead, tablets are the future and so all this tech will be worthless in... (check's current technologist predictions)... about three months?
Now go away while I transfer all my personal data to the cloud. I hear we won't have a need for hard drives anymore soon either.
Slashdot Mirror
Stop calling me a fucking liar, alright? I even said "mostly" because I sure as hell don't know all of them off the top of my head, just those I got through Steam and have checked.
Seriously, some people think that if you're not 100% dead on your post you must be lying. Why the fuck would I lie? I WANT to use Steam if only DRM wasn't present in most (not all) of the games!
Precisely, that's my point. Humble bundle version? Works fine. Steam version (even if you use the Humble bundle key to acquire it in Steam)? Nada.
It's probably due to the fact that in order for Valve to sell the old Doom games so that they can work on modern versions of Windows, going with DOSBox means it would provide the most authentic, classic Doom experience available. It would mean they can use the official ID produced DOS binaries without having to deal with third-party source ports. Allows them to adhere to all the licenses I guess.
Of course, once you've bought the game you can then break out the Doomsday Engine (like I use) with 3D models and texture packs and go nuts like that. But that's up to the purchaser; Valve shouldn't really make that decision automatically.
Just want to address a few of your comments:
As I told someone else, there are very few games I've tried which work without Steam. DOSBox games like the classic Doom games, Wolf 3D and some others work fine. Skyrim or Deus Ex: Human Revolution? Portal 1/2? Not a chance. Note I'm also not referring to any extra 3rd-party DRM, just the base Steam DRM.
I have read people's complains on the Steam forums whereby there was an issue when paying through PayPal, for whatever reason PayPal wouldn't transfer funds to Valve even though the transaction was completed in Steam (completely PP's fault mind you, but it happens), and so the account is locked for reasons of fraud or some such BS. If you're good with Steam support it might be a temporary lock while they try to ascertain what happened, but it's still a lock.
Also, people have noted that if credit card chargebacks tend to result in suspended accounts. The reasons for using a chargeback are numerous but if you have to do so on a Steam purchase, your account will be locked. Again, support might be able to resolve this, but it's still a high stress situation that wouldn't be an issue if you could still run stuff without Steam.
Seems like we shouldn't have to go to this length though, but yeah, I've thought about that too. You have to wonder then if there will be Linux cracks for Steam games now? :)
I've always hated disc-based protection. That's one thing I don't miss for sure.
You do make good points all round. Let's just say that I'm very wary of building a 100+ games library in Steam knowing that it's all authenticated against a third-party and not entirely in my control.
I've read gman003's posts before - he doesn't say anything bad about Steam, ever. He's very much the definition of a fanboy, so only take his words with a grain of salt.
Virtually Steam game has their .exe modified so that they reference a file called steam_api.dll (located in the game's directory). This API provides a wrapper for the game to communicate with Steam, whether it's for achievements or supporting Steam cloud functionality, whatever. It also provides authentication through the Steam client. In other words, that .exe. MUST be launched via the Steam client and can't be run manually. If you try, you'll get an error message. Hence, if the Steam client doesn't like you anymore for whatever reason you're out of luck, and that's what I don't agree with.
There are SOME games which allow you to manually run them, but the only ones I know of are things using DOSBox such as the old Doom games, Commander Keen, Wolf 3D and etc. In these cases since DOSBox already exists in Linux it's not a big deal, but for most other games, you MUST be using the client.
As for transfer of licenses, what you're seeing when people give away games are what's known as Steam gifts. When you buy a game on Steam you can mark it as a gift; it will then remain out of your games lists but available to send to another Steam user via a menu option. But if you've already got a game in your main list of Steam games and want to exercise first sale, you can't do anything about it. If you try to sell your account to someone else and Valve finds out, they will lock the account since account transfers are against the ToS (another thing I don't agree with).
I'm not trying to troll here, so don't take this the wrong way.
From my experience, a lot of Linux users hate Microsoft because of their dominance in operating systems. It has resulted in a lot of software only being available for Windows and not Linux, hardware manufacturers only putting out drivers (decent or otherwise) for Windows and not Linux, and so on. People hate Microsoft due to their effective monopoly in the software industry (now getting less effective, but still)
Once Steam is released for Linux, it's going to be the focal point for virtually all games on Linux just like Steam is on Windows. Sure there are exceptions (GOG, Origin, developers selling directly and so on), but by and large Valve will have an effective monopoly as the primary source of games for most PC gamers.
Since Steam also uses account-based DRM, your games are linked to a single point of failure. A clerical error, a PayPal/credit card dispute, anything that may or may not be your fault occurs, and you may find yourself locked out of your account either temporarily or permanently. If this happens, you can't play your games.
Linux users traditionally are geeks, and hence know the dangers of relying on a single vendor, a single point of failure. They'd know not to put all your eggs in one basket because otherwise, you don't have control. I'm no Richard Stallman but I'm honestly scared about the fact that everyone appears to be happy giving control out of their hands and to a third-party... EVEN LINUX USERS!
Are people so desperate for games that they don't care about the fact that revocation of your purchases is technically possible due to Steam's DRM? I need someone to post something insightful because I'm going out of my fucking mind with worry that the traditionally anti-DRM crowd here is giving me mixed signals when it comes to Valve. At this point I'm almost ready to give up gaming and do something else if everyone's basically agreed that DRM cannot be stopped.
True, but those are vast exceptions. The games you're talking about are mostly the games which run via DOSBox (e.g. the classic Doom games). Games without DRM on Steam are extremely few. Even simply games like VVVVVV - you try running the .exe directly, see how far that gets you.
Right now it's been so long that the Half-Life magic has gone for me. I don't doubt that eventually something will be released (either EP3 or a full-blown HL3), but life and other games kinda make it hard to care much for a classic series that hasn't been ended yet.
I think he's just concerned (legitimately) that once Steam appears on Linux, sure more games might come out, but they'll likely take the easy road and be distributed only on Steam rather than being also available in a non-DRM form.
Having said that, with the exception of some indie games, most new games these days require mandatory Steam usage anyway, so Steam appearing on Linux hasn't made anything WORSE so much as allowing options for those people who don't mind perpetually renting software. As always if you don't agree with the ToS of Steam (like I clearly don't), then you either stick with the games you've got, buy from places like GOG or move onto another hobby.
Yeah, but it's the integration itself which is the real value, what makes things work together well. Sure, Exchange is not part of Office, but Exchange is specifically designed to work with Outlook and without Outlook, all you have is a very expensive mailing server. So most organizations of a sufficient size tend to use Exchange, hence the workers use Office (and hence Outlook), and as such they see all this useful functionality. Part of it is because of Exchange, but with Office they would never get to use it.
Yep, a pretty similar posting style to his stuff on Neowin. I guess the reason he annoys me more than others is that he appears to know a fair bit about Windows architecture but believes everything Microsoft does is correct and right and the best way to make an operating system. He continually attacks Linux though, and has absolutely nothing nice to say about it. Never gives even a shred of praise for anything Linux does, as if it's entirely useless to anyone, no-one should be using it and instead should be using Windows and Windows-based products instead.
I don't know if he's ex-Microsoft or current, but I don't quite get the feeling he's a shill. He seems basically like someone who thinks he knows everything, and posts extremely long-winded and details comments to try and beat-down anyone who doesn't take Microsoft's side. An ultra-fanboy who unfortunately knows just enough to be taken seriously by those less experienced.
Hey I actually agree - XP has performed admirably but Windows 7 now takes the crown, plus it's been out long enough to support virtually anything you need to run.
If you've got any history on this thenetavenger guy I've love to hear it. :)
Why'd you link to Neowin.net? That place is a cesspool of Microsoft fanboys (particularly thenetavenger - oh my God is he up himself). Sure the info is valid but another site would have been less... grating.
The features he does mention ARE useful. If you know how to use your tools better than the next guy who continually questions what benefit the extra functionality and bloat provides in said tools, you're at an advantage.
I don't consider his post to be shilling - I consider it to be an info-dump of features he considers useful. The edge in his post suggests a frustration from being told continually by people here and other open-source fanatics that such features are bloat, and that somehow open-source software can work with the same level of functionality and integration (which it often can't for someone who's aware of the niceties and uses them in something like Outlook).
It's also amazing how many people, who've never worked in I.T. for a mid to large organization, and particularly a lot of young people (students), who think they know better about what a company needs than what people experienced in how the world works in the corporate environment know.
Sorry, that should be opt-out. They're by default checkboxed, which means you have to opt-out, not in.
You're talking to the Slashdot crowd. If they use Windows, they should already be experience enough to always check each installation screen of anything they install for such traps. Even programs which try to bundle Google Chrome I would consider to be nefarious.
In fact, I have yet to see a software installer in a long time which, when giving the user to install this bundled garbage, has the checkboxes off by default. They're always opt-in. Clearly this suggests people don't WANT this shit, but the developers are hoping enough people are impatient enough during installation such that the extra stuff gets installed anyway. Then they'll argue that this is the only way they can fund things like the program's web site.
Guess I think about the long-term and what-if's too much then. Oh well.
Now, like a lot of other open-source multiplayer FPSes (Xonotic, Warsow, World of Padman), all we need are people actually PLAYING them online and we'll be set. Bonus points for active players here in Australia.
Fair enough. I shall admit that a good portion of not wanting to use Steam is also because I don't have the discipline to avoid those fucking AWESOME sales they keep having (such as now). I have in the past ended up with a significant backlog of games I simply don't have enough time to play, and often were purchased simply because of a good daily deal, even though they end up not being my type of game anyway.
In any case, I guess I feel concern for those gamers who are adamant of ONLY using Steam for all their gaming needs (even though it's admittedly convenient), since they're putting all their eggs in one basket - a single point of failure. If Steam didn't have DRM and you could play virtually all games via the .exe in their folders, then I'd probably go back to it. It's still possible - Valve are a big player in PC gaming, they could leverage it perhaps.
It's times like this I'm sad when we've got a completely non-DRM store like GOG which is completely overshadowed by something like Steam, where the access to your games are entirely in the hands of Valve and if something fucks up, you can't play. We've now got a generation who believe this is OK, rather than someone older like me who's seen enough issues with such a system to be extremely weary of it.
I guess the only good part is that the number of people who've been fucked by Steam restrictions are probably far and few between, but given the little time most of us have to play games, I don't see why we can't just be fickle and go to non-DRM stores when purchasing games to feed what is ultimately a waste-of-time hobby.
Nah, I look better than you anyway (as per your livejournal). :)
^^ This post is the reason why I feel embarrassed to be part of the Linux community. It seems to be one of the few communities who actively relish hating a company to the point where any debate is dominated with emotions rather than facts. It's enough to push anyone away from Linux - who the fuck would WANT to become like the above poster?
Interesting. I built my wife a desktop because he laptop died and she doesn't need a laptop for a primary machine anymore (if portability is required we use the netbook). Interestingly enough the power of a reasonably specced desktop is enough to warrant getting back into Sims 3, which I doubt she'd enjoy on a tablet given a large monitor and keyboard/mouse provides a far better experience.
Why would invest in such a setup when apparently PCs are dead, tablets are the future and so all this tech will be worthless in... (check's current technologist predictions)... about three months?
Now go away while I transfer all my personal data to the cloud. I hear we won't have a need for hard drives anymore soon either.