Another Call For It: Ban All Third Party DRM From Steam

[.]

That means third-party logins (Uplay), third-party DRM measures (Denuvo, Enigma, SecuROM, etc), and third-party verification methods (accounts hosted with other companies).

Makes things better for everyone around here: publishers don't waste money on useless resources, and consumers get the product they paid for.

[Bassilth]

I am not going to read all 5 pages, so here is my independent opinion:

I agree. They are on a store platform that brings them millions of costumers, an exposure that they will get nowhere else, tools that help them manage their games. All this comes (or should come) with rules. Like...

If you sell on Steam, then you obviously should not force the Steam costumers to install a rival's launcher and register an account on a rival's website. The costumers should be given the option to opt out of third party launchers for convenience. I would buy way more games if I did not need to make an account or install their launcher while I purchase on Steam. STEAM, for goodness sake. I would buy the entire Assassin's Creed franchise games, just one example.

Although I am fine with DRMs, I am very allergic to third party launchers and the requirement to make accounts. I am on STEAM. I only want my Steam launcher, thank you very much.

So, even if the game developers get to keep their launcher and account registration requirements, make it optional for costumers. Games should work on Steam with no strings attached.

Because we buy the games on STEAM. Not on EA store, not on Origin, or Epic Games. Steam.

[lukaself]

Tito Shivan a écrit :

lukaself a écrit :

TL, DR: The point is that the actions of some companies have ripple effects on Valve's bottom line by affecting the sales of similar products. Of course they'll intervene when needed, they just take care not to make it a habit.

And in regards these games turns out having them on Steam, even with these launchers, was the service a large ammount of people wanted from Steam.

Tito Shivan a écrit :

In regards third party launchers you may be overestimating the size of those 'ripples'.

Valve does care about them since they act on them, like shown with that example about Early Access. In practice, one notorious failure to finish the game they started is enough to cast doubt on other Early Access titles in the minds of customers hence reducing prospective profits for Valve. That's why they strongly insist now that Early Access isn't meant to fund your game and that if you don't have funding secured, you shouldn't use it. It's for their partners benefit as well as their own.

They acted on sex games, they acted on IA and, yes, they acted on launchers by framing them in strict rules about content and monetization. They're not so hands-off as the general public believe, they're just good at striking a balance between their interests and the ones of their customers and partners. If something is found to have a negative effect on their revenue, they will ban it as necessary and if that pisses some publishers off... well, they have amply demonstrated what happens when they try to leave.

Valve's service got valuable for consumers because they have enough leverage to rein in the counter-productive velleities of most publishers and developers. Why do you think those publishers tried to make it on their own if they were happy with how Steam does business with them?

I find the claim that people want launchers frankly doubtful. Launchers are a point of failure and a liability. When they fail to provide additional services and are just there for the sake of data collection and in an attempt to bring some people to their own ♥♥♥♥♥♥ stores like the 2k launcher for instance, they never miss to cause a diminution of the review score which has ripple effects upon other games from that publisher and sometimes other games from other publishers due to consumers equating them with an annoyance.

Another thing Valve warned about is putting hurdles between your customer and the game, and launcher as well as third party DRM definitely qualifies as such, even if some will accept them begrudgingly, most people do not like that very much.

[Amaterasu]

davidb11 a écrit :

Garbage a écrit :

DRM doesn't solve the problem.

I do understand that, but it's also the reason why DRM was invented.
I don't see it changing honestly.
Until piracy is eliminated.
Which can't happen.
And shouldn't happen.

At least Denuvo is best when it's properly installed and not like Arkham City.

DRM was invented in the 1980s. software piracy as we know it today didn't become a thing until very close to the year 2000. it was never about piracy, it was about product control. the only reason why these companies point the finger at piracy is because it's a sweet little lie, ubisoft for example has proven what I have said time and time in the past about video game companies, it's not about the money, it's about taking any shred of control from the user. they don't want you to own your game, they want to be able to take away your access at any point they desire. they want to dictate what you can and cannot do with your copy.

this is the reason DRM exists, if it was truly about piracy and not control, these companies wouldn't be in bed with denuvo, nor would they be trying to start their own subscription services with their own launchers that allow you to merely rent their games.

[lsdninja]

sungoddess14 a écrit :

software piracy as we know it today didn't become a thing until very close to the year 2000.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ockNRSt3Nsk

[lukaself]

lsdninja a écrit :

sungoddess14 a écrit :

software piracy as we know it today didn't become a thing until very close to the year 2000.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ockNRSt3Nsk

They did not say it did not exist, but without the means to share software massively as it began with Napster in 1999. Software piracy went largely ignored by corporations until that time.

[Tito Shivan]

lukaself a écrit :

Valve's service got valuable for consumers because they have enough leverage to rein in the counter-productive velleities of most publishers and developers. Why do you think those publishers tried to make it on their own if they were happy with how Steam does business with them?

30% extra revenue?
Total control of their microtransactions enviroment and revenue?

Mind #2 is oficially what made EA pull Battlefield 3 off Steam and make it an Origin Exclusive.

[Amaterasu]

lsdninja a écrit :

sungoddess14 a écrit :

software piracy as we know it today didn't become a thing until very close to the year 2000.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ockNRSt3Nsk

I never said that piracy didn't exist in the 1980s. I said that piracy as we know it today didn't exist in the 1980s. piracy in the 1980s took place in an era where the internet as we know it today simply did not exist. it was a time where piracy was more or less making a literal physical copy and sending it via snail mail.

it wasn't until napster came around in 1999 that piracy as we know it now came into existence. the form of piracy that doesn't take someone that knows what they're doing to commit it. even back in 2010, my niece who was three years old at the time could've shared copyrighted material, but I wouldn't have been able to do the same back when I was her age.

not to mention pc was ignored largely by video game publishers because and most people seem to not remember this, but the idea of the pc being a viable gaming platform is a relatively recent idea. at the earliest, I was in high school at the time. at the latest, I was already in my 20s. yes, there were pc games back before then, but they were mostly simulators, rts, point and click adventure games, and the occasional fps or sports game.

back before then, PCs were seen as office equipment or school equipment. they weren't seen as a multimedia box or as a gaming platform. they were also dreadfully expensive, back then a run of the mill office pc would cost you over 1000 dollars.

but even after the introduction of napster, only the RIAA and MPAA got fussy about the whole piracy angle and spent years fighting it. then again, they both went after anything new. even cassette tapes were attacked at one time because they were afraid it would make piracy easy and you know what happened? cassette tapes got adopted as the standard medium for music.

I remember when the mp3 format the new devil on the block that had to be slain because of the boogeyman of piracy that kept being brought up. any guesses as to what the standard for media playback became not long after that?

these days, the RIAA and MPAA are doing a hands off approach to the whole piracy thing and are enjoying record profits.

but to swing back to the video game angle, pc gaming didn't really become a major thing until steam came around and even then, it wasn't until it started expanding to selling third-party titles that the gaming paradigm started to shift in a way that made pc look viable. conveniently, around the same time, planned obsolescence type DRMs started to show up, things like starforce, securom, and gfwl. now, I'm a believer in coincidence, but the last 20 years of the video game industry's actions have taught me one thing. this was absolutely no coincidence, this was intentional.

I've been watching the video game industry closely since I was a junior in high school, I was one of the people who spoke out against on-disc dlc, I was one of the people who spoke out against dlc in general, I was one of the people who spoke out against microtransactions. every time, people defended this sort of thing, and every time, I ended up being right. because the idea isn't to give you, the player a good product. the idea is to manipulate and exert control over you.

trust me, back in the 2010s, I said that if video game publishers had their way, they would be able to legally remove your access to a product that you purchased without any recompense and by gods, ubisoft and ea are literally trying to do just that.

[[?]legit]

Bassilth a écrit :

I am not going to read all 5 pages, so here is my independent opinion:

I agree. They are on a store platform that brings them millions of costumers, an exposure that they will get nowhere else, tools that help them manage their games. All this comes (or should come) with rules. Like...

If you sell on Steam, then you obviously should not force the Steam costumers to install a rival's launcher and register an account on a rival's website. The costumers should be given the option to opt out of third party launchers for convenience. I would buy way more games if I did not need to make an account or install their launcher while I purchase on Steam. STEAM, for goodness sake. I would buy the entire Assassin's Creed franchise games, just one example.

Although I am fine with DRMs, I am very allergic to third party launchers and the requirement to make accounts. I am on STEAM. I only want my Steam launcher, thank you very much.

So, even if the game developers get to keep their launcher and account registration requirements, make it optional for costumers. Games should work on Steam with no strings attached.

Because we buy the games on STEAM. Not on EA store, not on Origin, or Epic Games. Steam.

Great points. I agree.

[Crashed]

Garbage a écrit :

Nx Machina a écrit :

Developers call as they are the ones who created the 3rd party games you only have a licence for and 3rd party clients like Ubisoft Connect (Uplay no longer exists), validate you have the licence to play the game on Steam.

As for Denuvo etc, do you have locks on your external doors and windows at home? If the answer is yes it is because you are protecting your property in the same way they are protecting their game from those who would simply not pay and play for free.

I'm calling for further restrictions on publisher malice towards consumers.

Did you truly try to sell me that false equivalence? It's more akin to punishing innocent parties for the actions of guilty parties brought about by fearmongering sold to publishers.

Stop arguing against your best interests.

How have you personally been harmed? This "Service Problem" statement has the same amount of legal weight as that Microsoft employee who claimed Windows 10 was the last version.

[Crashed]

sungoddess14 a écrit :

these days, the RIAA and MPAA are doing a hands off approach to the whole piracy thing and are enjoying record profits.

Tell that to operators of pirate websites who get sued. By no means have those organizations stopped antipiracy efforts; they go after the distributors.

[.]

Crashed a écrit :

sungoddess14 a écrit :

these days, the RIAA and MPAA are doing a hands off approach to the whole piracy thing and are enjoying record profits.

Tell that to operators of pirate websites who get sued. By no means have those organizations stopped antipiracy efforts; they go after the distributors.

And there's the solution, right there: don't punish the paying consumers, but to the people uploading and providing hosting for content they do not own.

Bam, we're making progress on this discussion today.

[Satoru]

Just don't buy them if you don't want them

Why are YOU trying to punish ACTUAL paying customers because you have a total irrational fear of 3rd party launcheres

[lsdninja]

Satoru a écrit :

Just don't buy them if you don't want them

Why are YOU trying to punish ACTUAL paying customers because you have a total irrational fear of 3rd party launcheres

1st party launchers*

;)

[Crashed]

Garbage a écrit :

Crashed a écrit :

Tell that to operators of pirate websites who get sued. By no means have those organizations stopped antipiracy efforts; they go after the distributors.

And there's the solution, right there: don't punish the paying consumers, but to the people uploading and providing hosting for content they do not own.

Bam, we're making progress on this discussion today.

Movies have DRM on them which increases the penalties for pirating. PC games with DRM mean you have to take risks on your software and data to install bypasses, which also violate Steam TOS - https://help.steampowered.com/en/faqs/view/4F62-35F9-F395-5C23

Piracy or Hacking

This includes using an unauthorized ("hacked") Steam client to access Steam, attempting to register fake CD Keys or attempting to register a CD Key which has been published on the internet.

[.]

Satoru a écrit :

Just don't buy them if you don't want them

Why are YOU trying to punish ACTUAL paying customers because you have a total irrational fear of 3rd party launcheres

I'm not. I'm saying publishers should be forced to abandon malicious DRM measures to give you the better performing game and to save their money from being spent on snake oil salesmen.