安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
i own gmod on 2 accounts but not my 3rd
it would be nice to be able to play gmod on my 3-4 comps/accs
So much wrong here.
1. So easy to spoof IP with hamachi or other software to make it look like your on the same LAN, so this will be abused to share games.
2. What is your magic way to limit it with no exploits?
3. Even if steam did it your whole point of it being unique makes no sense, anyone else could copy it and do the exact same thing.
You are a few years too late...
https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/store/application/packages
Yeah, I was referring to the "legacy examples." However, admittedly I didn't notice that even these are either no longer available or are being phased out by the developers. I must be getting old. I guess the devs have little incentive to cater to LAN enthusiasts when so much money can be made selling DLCs.
https://www.wepc.com/news/video-game-statistics/
There's reasons why Family sharing works the way it does.
Not even mentioning how the feature could be used to use multiple instances of the same license (Which Developers would frown at, see how the actual Family Sharing feature works by not allowing multiple instances of the same license to run simultaneously) Which also presents a problem for many games (You simply can't run multiple instances of games tied to a third party service or under a single Key license) and how 'Everybody in the LAN' can become a large number of people.
There's also the potential abuse for financial gain (Run a cybercafé and charge people for commercial license use)
And let's not even go into the rabbit hole of what could happen if someone within the lan starts using cheats with other LAN users licenses.
What do you read out of this? I dont want any cybercafe featurs nor any other extensive abusive featurs for whatever reasons... This is totaly stupid.
I just want to have some fun with some friends and not half the world and share my games for a short time, like a weekend. There is no way, a cybercafe could abuse it this way. Also could this become even a new market for cybercafes aswell. What is the problem about a cybercafe licensing system? Also is it easily cappable to a maximum of users. So it will be impossible to be shared in an "unexpected" way, because steam could just limit it however they want to.
There is absolutely no need to get more out of it as i suggested and there are tons of ways and solutions how to implement it without abuse.
All the reasoning to make this suggestion a bad choice is nonsense. Sure you could create a virtual lan with hamachi. But even this is easy to find out. Hamachi didnt even try to have ghosted lan, it is just a way to make a virtual lan over internet more easily doable. I am talking about a real lan.
I only hear reasons why it would not be possible, but it is just your negative imagination. I can provide solutions for each "problem" in just a few moments thinking.
I dont see any technical or software limitations.
Why are you so negative? What does this topic has to do with dlcs??? It is the publishers who are interrested in selling dlcs or whatever else. What does it have in common with this topic?!?
Whats wrong with you guys... are you hired to stomp down any ideas?
It would be a great feature and if 90% would not use it, doesnt matter. 10% having more fun is still 10% more service than other launchers will have. Even if 1% will use this new mode, it is still enough in total to make it worth.
You want to find negative critic where is none. Valve never produced stupid naive features. Why should they begin featuring new stuff in a complete naive and stupid way? Do you think they are not capable? I believe their developers are alot smarter than your arguing.
Bet there were a lot of people saying "e-cars are stupid, too many downsides", still tesla is producing them. Because problems can be solved. Even if you have failures, you will learn out of it.
You are just negative people.
Again you can't implement a feature without downsides, its inherint to the feature.
Hence why Valve is highly unlikely to implement this
Again, at the most basic level allowing multiple people to play games if they are "on the same network" is HIGHLY abusable and easy to spoof. No amount of design on Valve's end can prevent that. Hence why everyone is pointing out its a bad idea.
That is so incredibly easy to abuse its not even funny, and its the linchpin your whole idea rests on hence why it won't ever be done.
Welcome to the Suggestions / Ideas forum!
It isn't. You want to run multiple copies of a game with one license and no extra cost to yourself.
Sell that idea to Valve, sell it to the devs and publishers. How do they benefit?
Sorry, i think i edited my post as you were writing yours and took the bit aboit LAN parties out...
I dunno, I just remember that era as a time when no one i knew really bought PC games. Some guy you knew would give you a stack of cds with god knows how many games and everyone was running the same copies of everything...
Different times, pre Steam times....
If you have a feature in its core, and you only consider its benefits for the users, there is yet no downside, except the ones you will face only because your implementation is bad.
It is like saying "it would be great, if america will have a good health insurance" and you guys say "it is a stupid idea, consider the downsides" and politicians think the same way. But anywhere else in europe, we found solutions.
Of course there are real problems with real downsides you cannot solve easily.
But for a lan mode, this problem doesnt apply. Every "downside" you mentioned, is a bad implementation and not a real downside. It is just a mentioned "what if" situation, with "we dont know a solution, there is none" arguementation. But i say:
"You are wrong, you can easily implement it without the downsides with only benefits"
But still , you dont believe it. You just say, it is not true. Because you dont have the expertise to know better. But thats not the point. It is not your job to find out the solution, for issues. You dont need to do. But valve will do, because they can. Because they have the people who are smarter than you.
And it is not a discussion about piracy at all. I am talking about legal implementations, not violating any contracts. Still all your doubts about piracy is nonsense.
Why should you not buy a game like counter strike in general, just because you dont own it yet.
It is also a question about good marketing. They may play it free for this weekend. Why is it piracy, if steam allows it? When they like the game, it is their choice to buy it when the lanparty is over. It is a big chance for games, to have players test their games and consider to buy it afterwards.
With your arguments, the "play this game for free on weekend" is also piracy in a way. Still steam has these events where you may try out different games, for free.
It would just be a different type of marketing. And if it is not possible yet, because of running contracts, this does not automatically mean, there is no way to create new contracts in the future.
I am not talking about drm free games, which does also work for other publishers/launchers very well. I mean, we are still buying our games on steam. You could easily buy all games on gog, but you don't do it. It is totaly legal, still nobody cares.
This is a new feature, where steam can grow with and gain experience. And i bet my ass, the sales will become better this way and not worse.
It is just a question on "how" you create such a new feature. Not "if" you do it.
Nobody would be so stupid, to produce it in a way, all your mentioned downsides will become an issue. That would be recless and totaly dumb. But why do you even consider this. Why do you even think about it? Why do you expect, that a new feature will automatically fail because of dumb implementation? With your way of thinking, not one game would be produced. Not one software. There "could" always be "this one critical" downside.