Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
However, as others have said, it can indeed be abused horribly if you think about it.
As if this whole Family Sharing thing is your birthright or something.
They don't owe you and your family anything.
Or one could have 10 computers on a room and rent multiple games to their 'kids' with a single license. You can't tell if my kid is playing my CSGO or if it's my neighbour I've charged him for, or my dorm roommate. Or half the dorm network...
That's not multiplying users and accounts.
Under a license agreement for personal and non transferable use. As a software engineer I'm sure you know the importance of EULAs.
Consoles are closed hardware, computers not.
#2: If a SINGLE instance of each of your games could be running at once there would be no bigger ISSUES that what we used to have before digital distribution. Since a given game can only run one isntance at any given time you would not be able to run additional compies of games you haven't bought. Letting your neighbour play a game you are not playing is no more of an issue than lending him you disc of GTA IV back in the day when you were not playing it. Charging for that most likley makes you break laws in many countries and should be handled as such. But if they wanted to "secure" and stop abuse I would gladly supply evidence of family members, lock the fature down using digital ID's, only having x member and only allow "changing members" once every 30 days or whatever. If you have issues with people abusing a service you should combat THAT. Not go after the legit users. In the digital age there are a multitude of solutions that could be ut in place that could make this feature quite a pain to try to abuse.
#3: EULAs is not law and many times are incomatible with the law. In that case the law wins, at leas in EU. There are multiple cases of this and even if you click OK you are free to excersise your rights as a consumer within EU. The fact that many digital distribution platforms have tried to curcuvent some laws by saying you "rent" the games etc has seen initial review in court and not been seen as holding water. If you "rent" there must be a time period within which you have access to the software. If you pay and have indefinate access and it does not require monthly costs etc then it has been seen the same as when you went to your local store and bought games on disc before. Thus multiple cases are active or pending where they look at everything from consumers "right" to resell what they have bought etc.
This may turn out either which way. But as a consumer I will not go out of my way to make it possible for the companies to screw us as much as possible. That is their job and they seem to be doing that just fine. It's kind of amazing that digital distribution, that was sold as some golden solution that would make everything better for consumers and but was mostly put in place to reduce cost of distribution and make distributors/developers keep more money, has left us with more restrictions than what we used to have in the physical media age.
#4 "Consoles are closed hardware, computers not.". Closed hardware? What do you reffer to? Do you open up and fiddle around in your GPU? That consoles are more restricted has nothing to do with this. In fact, it would allow even tighter controll. MS tired to mention locking even physical discs to the XboxONE you bought it for, Everyone went crazy. But as soon as it's digital many people are ok with giving up rights and conviniences they used to have.
Sure companies can impose new restrictions and they might even find legal grounds to do so. But why do we conumers let them do it without a fight?
Are we slaves who go out of our way to enable them to make more money?
If Microsoft started imposing a login-fee every time you started you computer, or booted up your XboxONE, would you appluade?
The physical disc fact is not a matter of consoles vs PC, open vs closed systems. Because the exact same statement goes for all of the original PC releases I have on CD-Rom.
I have no problems at all runing one of my games on one computer and another one of my games on another computer at the same time. This is a torally artificial limitation put inplace "becasue they can" when it's a digital platform. But that doesn't mean I think it's something super cool.
If the platform is one like Spotify where you don't pay for individual tracks/albums but pay a monthly fee to get access to the service I 100% agree I should only be able to use it at one place at a time or extend the subscription to include more instances. But if it was a service where I paied to buy each and every album I would excpect to be able to listen to them all.
It would be like comparing a cable service with a monthly subscription with a subscriber card to buying DVD's. The subscription I would excpect to be able to view it on one tv and for as long as I pay the subscription. My DVD collection I would excpect to be able to take "Lord of the RIngs" and play it in one DVD player and let my kids view "Guardians of the Galaxy" in another at the same time. I would not excpect the rest of my DVD collection be be locked while I view the first movie.
And since you pay for each and every game on Steam and there is no monthly subscription to get complete access I, even though they can try and phrase it otherwise to cut legal corners, see this more like the DVD collection than the cable subscription.
The fact that the media in question happens to be games when it comes to Steam does not change that.
#3 So far, the Steam Subscriber Agreement is compliant with EU regulations
#4 Do you install the OS of your Xbox? Users have control on PCs up to the kernel/hardware level. You're just a user of a console.
Now compare that to how I can instantaneously share my games at will with the entire world.
You might notice a slight difference in how that works
From the FAQ.
-----
Can two users share a library and both play at the same time?
No, a shared library may only be accessed by one user at a time.
-----
The OP didn't read the policy before assuming that he could do what he wanted to, then came here complaining about the policy that operates exactly as it always has.
They are not going to give you free stuff because you tell them to.
Get your kids their own accounts and buy them (or let them earn) the games you want to play together.
I find it hard to believe that a software engineer doesn't know to RTFM before spending money.
You are a terrible parent if you have 500 games in your library and are too selfish to buy the kids a few of their own.
#2 And? It would also require 1000 PC's, the same as playing all of my ~100 Xbox 360 games at once would require ~100 Xbox 360's.
#3 Last I heard there are cases pending. And since it's been updated several times it could also have changed. Facebook etc have been found not to comply and for EU citizens that would just mean that they don't have to follow what the EULA states and would not be in any violation.
#4 I have had multiple consoles that have had the capability of beeing modded etc. Most PC gamers are not hard core users who fiddle around at the kernel level. They are basically "users" the same as console gamers are. If a driver update makes there computer act funny their entire world stops and in a catatonic state sobbinly ask the internet to save them.
As stated. The digital distribution platform, which has helped the distributors save alot fo money, brings with it new challanges. But that should not mean that they should not be faced. Back in the day you COULD share you copy of Zelda 1 with someone in another country if you wanted to by mailing it. Sure it would take some time but it was doable. Now everything is faster, which should not have to be viewed as a problem. Instead it could be viewed as an opportunity.
There are, as stated, plenty of ways to minimize the abuse of a system like this. You can never get rid of it one hundred percent but the same goes for modding consoles and whatever. Heck you could even record streamed DRM music no matter the security put in place by simply recording the audio comming out of your PC. That should not lead to the conclusion that all distribution of music must stop.
With a world that is less about borders than it used to and where information can travel super fast the possibilities are endless. But companies must be willing to take on the challenge. If noone would have had the guts we would never have had the likes of Spotify, we would still be having to buy locked down mp3's tied to a given piece of software only playable on you PC. Not an ideal experience.
The same goes for purchasing your games online. It should be seemless to use it.
Buying multiple games, then multiple Steam links and not beeing bale to use them at once within your house indicates that there is a lot to work on to stream line the experience.
Regarding the possibility for sharing the game with someone in another country I see no imidiate issue with that. Perhaps your child has travled abroad to study and you want to let him play one of your games. So the issue isn't borders, it's people giving a large number of people (who are not family etc) access to their library and possibly setting up services where they charge for this.
Now, this would be illegal in many countries to start with. But ignoring that there are plenty of thigs to do to make this less feasible and minimize the abuse.
Limit the number of family memebers you can tie to your account, make applicatins apply proof of family ties to the users (this would probably have to be a per country solution but in Sweden we have digital ID's that can prove who I am and who my kids are), lock down adding/changing members of your family to one every month (would kill any large scale sharing abuse), charge a small monthly fee to enable "family accounts" (kind of like Spotify) and use that income to make the service more reliable and secure.
With modern cryptography Valve could minimize the abuse without to much effort. It would also be very easy to implement automatic warning systems that would bring a suspicious account to their attention.
So, the fact that something like this can be abused and that simple fact is making it impossible for me to use my two Steam Links in the house at once with my library is not a valid reason not to instead focus on getting rid of the abuse and providing legit paying customers with a streamlined experience.
You seem to missunderstand the "request". That it doesn't work this way NOW has been obvious since the start. So this is not complain about the policy not working as they state. This is a customer wish for things to be even more customer friendly. A mentality that customers should benefit from having.
The fact that Steam was "forced" on counter strike users back when it was launched in order to be able to keep playing the game and get updates has nothing to do with RTFM. But, judging by the way you write, I guess you were quite young back then so you probably don't know how things looked back then. Also, most games back then was still bought on physical discs so how Steam opperated was less of an issue. Now that they almost have a monopoly on the PC gaming market this has changed drasticaly and the impact of any small decision by Valve to the Steam platform has huge affects on a lot of people. At the time I got Steam I dind't have any kids so them playing the games I bought was not an issue. These shortcommings of the system was thus not as visible.
Second, my kids have their own accounts. But since they are under the age of thirteen they are created in my name. But that does not change the fact that I feel things was much easier before. If I bought Half-Life on a disc and played it I could easily have let my son play the game when I was done with it and went on to something else. Today, I would have to buy multiple copies of the same game to accomplish this. Even if I didn't intend to play it at the same time as him. This is a huge step backwards for a consumer. And the consumer is what I focus on here. Not the companies. They do that job very well on their own.
Attacking my parenthood without knowing me or going into more detail shows quite well your level understanding is quite lacking. I don't have to defend myself, but so you understand the next time you assume somthing stupid you might stop and think it through I'll give you the basics. Over a period of 13 years I have acquired my Steam library, I'm not the type of parent who believes his kids should be playing when they are three years old so I have been waiting to introduce them to gaming (responsible parenting). So now that it has become time to play games I have bought multiple copies of some games we can play together. This is fine with me since we intend to play them at the same time and thus I have no issue with requiring multiple copies. Games he sees in my library he often want to try when I'm playing CS for instance. But that doesn't work since I'm playing CS so he can't play ANY game at aoll from my library at that time. That I would have to buy an extra copy of every game in my library he want to test in order to be able to play ANY game in my library at the same time is so anti consumer that it's just amazing.
So instead he has turned to the consoles that are so much more user friendly. That's kinda funny, because I remember when we used to consider them to be the hassle.
Now you can have multiple Xbox One's in the house, set one as the "home" one, share the game libraries, handle syncing of saves on each profile etc.
That is how it should work. That consoles got that first is something I didn't think I would see since PC is often at the front of innovation.
Imagine buying two expensive Steam machines, setting one up in you family living room and one in your bedroom and then noticing you can only use one at a time. It's a joke. It's extreamly anti consumer and amazing that PC gamers (who are used to be on the front line) quitly just accepts this as the new reality.
To get the same experience my family get with the Xbox One's today, where the library is available on each of my console in the house, with Steam instead I would have to purchase several Steam machine or multiple gaming PC's. If I don't intend to have them by the TV I would possibly have to invest in several Steam Links. Then, on top of this I would also have to purchase all of the games in my library one more time for each PC.
You are free to spend your time and energy making it easier for the companies to lock consumers down and make more money. But I'm also free to do what I can to make sure that my experience as a consumer is as good as it can get. I can't force Valve to do what I want, but I can point it out to them and hope that they listen and see the shortcomings in their platform. Especially if they want to "replace" the consoles of the home.
Family Sharing was already a thing way before that. It is hardly a so-called new reality.
Imagine being the only one in the world who didn't notice—and bought all that stuff anyway.
Yes, and that is the issue. Someone could allow those 1000 games to run on those 1000 computers, going as far as to charge for it as well. This would also be a violation of copyright laws as the person would not have a right to make money doing that.
Pending does not mean they are in violation or have been revoked.
Even if parts of an EULA are struck doen by a court, that does not invalidate the entire EULA, not to mention nothing in invalidated until the court decides, so bring up a case against diffrent company over completely diffent issues won't help.
And modding them is against copyright laws. You really need to start reading these things instead of guessing that they are allowed. For example, the X-Box will lock out your console if it detects your system has been modded.
PC is far more accessable then a console for modding. PC, you just have to run a program someone posted in order to mod something or even remove the game's protection. You don't get the same with a console at all. For a console you have to open it up and modify the hardware before you can even try to install any unauthorized programs.
Don't like Steam family share? Then don't use it. If it wasn't for Valve creating Steam Family Share in it's current form, we wouldn't even be able to share what we have unless we were violating the SSA with account sharing.
Family share was already like this when it came out, before the Steam Link even existed.
Have you seen how people react to now forms of DRM? That would cause far more issues then leaving Steam Family Share in its current state.
Also, cryptography has nothing to do with DRM or preventing games from being shared. I suggest looking into exactly what cryptography is and how it is used.
Reading a post before commenting on it isn't apparently a criteria for you. I never said I bought a Steam machine. I compared how the experience to get the same level of comfort would be between the two platforms. It's like comparing two different cars against eachother. Doesn't make one car "wrong", but a comparison is still valid to show what the experience would be like for a customer.
No it's not the issue. Since it would be a piece of cake to make sure that not 1000 different users from all over the world could run allt hose games at once.
So, you are dismissing a modded console (which at times does not require opening up the console at all but instead using a special cartridge or similar) since it's illegal and thus would not be a problem if people obeyed the law and then see PC as a problem since people can more easily pirate games? Kind of a pick and choose. Either pirated games in any form is wrong or it's not. I would find it quite hard to argue that a pirated game on an Xbox is ok but one on PC is not.
Reality is that, in most countries, it's NOT illegal to mod your console. It can break your agreement to have access to the online platforms since you can cheat etc and allow the provider to block your console. But the act of modding in itself is not illegal. However, pirating games to play on your modded console is. Just as it is on PC.
The entire Steam platform is a DRM system. If DRM would cause people to leave Steam we would have no users. The fact that this system is already in place makes "securing" the sharing features that much easier than starting from scratch.
"Cryptography has nothing to do with DRM"? Ehhhh... A source on that would be great.
When I studied Computer Security cryptography was a big part of it. How it was used in basically every single thing that we needed to protect in our digital life-style, including DRM systems, was explained again and again.
Well, since it's a major part of online identification it would most likely play a major role. It, with a high degree of certainty, already does today in the Steam platform when it comes to you and your access to your own library. So to grant access and avoid that granted access to be used by additional parties etc it would be a crucial component.
The issue with making sure 200, or 2.000.000 people don't get access to your account at once, could be easily handled as explained time and time again.
But, all that aside, we can just agree to disagree. I will continue to wish for the ability to better take full advantage of my Steam experience and you are free to feel the opposite. This happens every day. There are probably people out there who hate Steam sales since it makes Valve less money per sold game. But I will continue to think the sales are a great thing either way. The universe won't collapse due to different views about these things.