So we will no longer own games anymore?

[TornadoShun 🌪☀⭐⚡]

I guess i spend so much money on games I don't even have ownership. Or maybe i didn't read the EULA on why I can't play games without Steam client running. I find it how stressful how I spent so much money on games 80, 90 towards 300CAD dollars for more content to keep playing and still, I can't play them without signing in.


Now imagine I have no internet to play Steam on and it signs me out after 2 weeks. Would the customer still be happy? no. because we all want our games to play with or without internet.

The devs, and the big guys who sells their games on here, for more DRM protection even though a lot of players won't crack and tamper with the DRM might make people want to stop buying.

Even the ones who doesn't pirate won't even consider of thinking about pirating a game unless the games from 10+ years are looking for a physical copy and not on the market anymore, harder to find, sure will do it just for emulations.

I do not want to spend another 90 dollars on a game i couldn't play without internet. And there should be no duration left on any game whatsoever. If we pay a lot of money to buy a regular game plus the DLC, it should be playable without online requirement. And i'm wholly sure Valve won't address this.


So what should we players do? in general of speaking.

[TornadoShun 🌪☀⭐⚡]

Publicado originalmente por SlowMango:

Publicado originalmente por veracsthane:

this is something that was false.

you actually owned the product until something like the battery in the cartridge died or the disk failed. there was no means of flipping a switch to make that happen and intentionally making a failed product like you see them doing now got you a lawsuit that put you under.

both the goverment and gamers had standards back then.

i should also note the same can and would be done with gaming if you stop giving companies money when they do it. there are plenty of games where the only limit is when windows breaks their os which agian people are trying to fix with things like linux.

You literally didn't own the game.

You owned the media that contained the game, that's it. The only difference now is the media is your personal computer. The license stayed the same, the enforcement changed.

I think he was saying you owned the copy with the license that's written on that drive. Mostly it's physical media.

Digital media is just license so they can mess with it whenever they want and they're happy with it. imagine buying a game that has online only and the servers got shut down? or the game is removed from the stores including from your library? we seen these things happened before.

[Komarimaru]

Publicado originalmente por TornadoShun:

Publicado originalmente por SlowMango:

You literally didn't own the game.

You owned the media that contained the game, that's it. The only difference now is the media is your personal computer. The license stayed the same, the enforcement changed.

I think he was saying you owned the copy with the license that's written on that drive. Mostly it's physical media.

Digital media is just license so they can mess with it whenever they want and they're happy with it. imagine buying a game that has online only and the servers got shut down? or the game is removed from the stores including from your library? we seen these things happened before.

It's happened many times before, yes Why I had to rebuy games. I've also had to rebuy games, since the physical media was beyond fixable on a few CD's as well.

Such is the times.

[Hobbit XIII]

https://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/7/3877096256097501637/

Are my thoughts in a little more detail.
Way I see it, it's not just gaming where we are held to upgrade.
It is our appliances.
there will come a time in not too distant future where our fridges will order our food and if we do not upgrade we will not be able to use it as a fridge or to order the food the fridge stores.

But that's ok because who needs obsolete technology.
As populations grow and grow shops will be more and more distribution hubs and you need this 'certain tech ' to access them and get it delivered to you.

There was a short story by Ray Bradbury written long before now.
A robotic police car patrols the streets and nobody really goes out and the police car which is automated does not understand why this guy just wants to take a walk in the evening so it 'arrests' him for his own safety and takes him to a mental hospital.

[TornadoShun 🌪☀⭐⚡]

Publicado originalmente por Hobbit XIII:

https://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/7/3877096256097501637/

Are my thoughts in a little more detail.
Way I see it, it's not just gaming where we are held to upgrade.
It is our appliances.
there will come a time in not too distant future where our fridges will order our food and if we do not upgrade we will not be able to use it as a fridge or to order the food the fridge stores.

But that's ok because who needs obsolete technology.
As populations grow and grow shops will be more and more distribution hubs and you need this 'certain tech ' to access them and get it delivered to you.

There was a short story by Ray Bradbury written long before now.
A robotic police car patrols the streets and nobody really goes out and the police car which is automated does not understand why this guy just wants to take a walk in the evening so it 'arrests' him for his own safety and takes him to a mental hospital.

That should never happen and it did there will be a big fight. Valve should move its company to europe for its safety.

[BJWyler]

Publicado originalmente por lsdninja:

So what you’re saying is Steam needs to charge a monthly subscription fee? 😆

I'm not saying they need to, just saying people seem to understand the concept that they don't "own" their games when there's a monthly fee attached.

Publicado originalmente por TornadoShun:

There was a similar topic I have made but different. I was asking in the future, what will happen if gaming companies decided to make customers pay their licenses every year for the games they want to play? and the ones that's not paid won't be playable but greyed out/blocked you from accessing the game?

This will come pretty soon.

Tons of people disagreed. But they never think ahead to prevent the problem.

Got news for you bud, that's been happening for nigh on 20 years already. They're called MMOs.

[Hannibal]

I have a closet full of owned games that just require a serial number. So at one time you did actually own games in physical format.

[Paratech2008]

Except many had DRM that may not work anymore like Starforce or SecueRom, and or compatibility issues with modern day OSes.

On the Apple PCs, nothing 32bit runs anymore.

[xBCxRangers]

Correct. We own nothing. We're renting all this stuff put until they decide to yank it or block it from us.

[Bishop]

Unfortunately you never owned any game you purchased on steam. That's why many older PC gamers resent Valve since they popularized the DRM model and took a sledgehammer to customer rights. The steam launcher itself isn't that different from Denuvo but most people don't think of things like that since the steam storefront is convenient for them.

[Paratech2008]

Any service could shut down. Desura shut down and it was DRM FREE....

[Boblin the Goblin]

Publicado originalmente por Chross:

Unfortunately you never owned any game you purchased on steam. That's why many older PC gamers resent Valve since they popularized the DRM model and took a sledgehammer to customer rights. The steam launcher itself isn't that different from Denuvo but most people don't think of things like that since the steam storefront is convenient for them.

Except not everything on Steam has DRM.

[Tito Shivan]

Publicado originalmente por Chross:

Unfortunately you never owned any game you purchased on steam. That's why many older PC gamers resent Valve since they popularized the DRM model and took a sledgehammer to customer rights. The steam launcher itself isn't that different from Denuvo but most people don't think of things like that since the steam storefront is convenient for them.

The popularisation of online DRM would have happened regardless. Likewise for service-tied games.

[RiO]

Publicado originalmente por 🎃👻d3str0y3r👻🎃:

Buying games has never been a transfer of ownership, you are buying a license to play the game and nothing more.

Yes it has been a transfer of ownership before.
Ownership of the physical medium holding that one copy of the game and the license that comes with it, though. As well as the sovereignty to decide what to do with that copy of the game. Like deciding when and if to update it with any patches that might've been made available you.

Licenses that forbid transfer to another owner didn't come into being until roughly the 1990s.
And licenses that required you to bend over a barrel and accept enforced remote updates that could change whatever the hell they want about the product and you have no recourse but to swallow it, didn't fully come into being until the 2010s.

I still have a copy of SimCity 2000 here which even explicitly states in its license agreement that I'm allowed to sell on the copy and license and that the game's publisher would confer the same rights in license to the new owner, such as the right to obtain and apply any available updates.

[Kargor]

Publicado originalmente por Crazy Tiger:

DRM with the intent to limit what one can do has been around since before games went digital. Publishers tried the limited activation DRM back then already.

Yeah, and that was horrible. As were those last years of copy protection, with kernel drivers and whatnot.

Steam really just checks that I own the game. Never felt free-er.

[Desti1337]

o