make steam games after 10 year drm free freeware.

[De Hollandse Ezel]

*make all devs agree that by posting a game on steam for sale that 10 years after that point... including all later added drm.

steam will release a free .exe of that game.. it will not need steam to run so will keep retrogaming alive even when steam moves to newer os.

and most games make most their profit in the first 6 months anyway
this should not disturb devs profits much.

[Boblin the Goblin]

It's isn't Steam's call because they don't own the game.

[De Hollandse Ezel]

Diposting pertama kali oleh SlowMango:

It's isn't Steam's call because they don't own the game.

they own the shop.. they can make devs agree with this to use or keep using that shop

devs would have to supply steam with a drm free version before making their listing.. and steam will not release it until 10 years later to the day. so thar even games that are delisted still become freeware for steam users.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Diposting pertama kali oleh De Hollandse Ezel:

Diposting pertama kali oleh SlowMango:

It's isn't Steam's call because they don't own the game.

they own the shop.. they can make devs agree with this to use or keep using that shop

They can't.

Outside of them just up an leaving, it wouldn't be hard to start filing unfair business practice lawsuits for trying to force developers to do something to games they have no involvement in.

[Mad Scientist]

Diposting pertama kali oleh De Hollandse Ezel:

Diposting pertama kali oleh SlowMango:

It's isn't Steam's call because they don't own the game.

they own the shop.. they can make devs agree with this to use or keep using that shop

Guess who owns all the rights to the games?

The Developers

Thus, Valve will just take their cut, but they will let the people make the product do what they want with it, as long as it's all legal and doesn't violate basic rules they have. Would I prefer no drm after so many years? Sure. Is that going to be mandatory? Nope.

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

Diposting pertama kali oleh De Hollandse Ezel:

make steam games after 10 year drm free freeware.

*make all devs agree that by posting a game on steam for sale that 10 years after that point... including all later added drm.

steam will release a free .exe of that game.. it will not need steam to run so will keep retrogaming alive even when steam moves to newer os.

and most games make most their profit in the first 6 months anyway
this should not disturb devs profits much.

Valve can not legally force this onto any game dev/pub for their titles.

[Zarineth]

Diposting pertama kali oleh De Hollandse Ezel:

Diposting pertama kali oleh SlowMango:

It's isn't Steam's call because they don't own the game.

they own the shop.. they can make devs agree with this to use or keep using that shop

Just look at GoG, many devs stay away from that platform because of their policies. Unless you want Steam to rapidly lose games, this is a really bad idea.

[Aachen]

You want Valve to provide free executables for any games older than ten years?

[De Hollandse Ezel]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Aachen:

You want Valve to provide free executables for any games older than ten years?

yes.
to presereve retrogaming.
so that games are delisted from the store and can nowhere be bought anymore can be played again.
so that games that only work on old os that steam no longer runs on can be played again.

and not "10 year old" but "10 year after listing" so a remake of a game 20 years old or a game forst sold elsewhere but only years later on steam.. still get a full 10 year of paid listing..

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Zarineth:

Diposting pertama kali oleh De Hollandse Ezel:

they own the shop.. they can make devs agree with this to use or keep using that shop

Just look at GoG, many devs stay away from that platform because of their policies. Unless you want Steam to rapidly lose games, this is a really bad idea.

Ubisoft will leave again. Not that it's a big loss but MS, EA, Rockstar and Sony would join the exodus and that would be a decisive blow to Steam.

[Start_Running]

Yeah that'd be the kind of beghhaviour that gets Steam flagged as a monopoly to be dealt with m8.

And the question is Why?
And another question is. How could it backfire?
I mean TGhe second is easy. Devs would just yank their games off the platform 9 years and 360 days in. Which just means we lose out on buying games..


And what does this accomplish? I mean really

[De Hollandse Ezel]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Zarineth:

Diposting pertama kali oleh De Hollandse Ezel:

they own the shop.. they can make devs agree with this to use or keep using that shop

Just look at GoG, many devs stay away from that platform because of their policies. Unless you want Steam to rapidly lose games, this is a really bad idea.

and I only buy at gog cause those policies.
but gog is small.. I want it to grow bigger.. but lets be real..
why..do people pay rather 30% cut to steam than 12% to epic? : number of customers/users.

steam has a dominating marketshare thats practically a monopoly.. it can do whatever it bloody pleases.. if it uses some of that pull to force free .exe for 10 year old game which is 0.01% of profit devs make on a game.. it can easely get away with that.

also
remember gog forces that .exe at release.. this one only 10 years later...

[De Hollandse Ezel]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Start_Running:

Yeah that'd be the kind of beghhaviour that gets Steam flagged as a monopoly to be dealt with m8.

And the question is Why?
And another question is. How could it backfire?
I mean TGhe second is easy. Devs would just yank their games off the platform 9 years and 360 days in. Which just means we lose out on buying games..


And what does this accomplish? I mean really

pulling would not work.
they had to supply that .exe before their listing was made.. thus even if they remove the listing.. that .exe still is going to get released.

and steam already IS a monopoly thar killed drm free retail copies. and forces 30% cuts to devs

only difference would be using that monopoly for a good cause : preving games for postity imstead of the current planned obselesance..

[Boblin the Goblin]

Diposting pertama kali oleh De Hollandse Ezel:

Diposting pertama kali oleh Zarineth:

Just look at GoG, many devs stay away from that platform because of their policies. Unless you want Steam to rapidly lose games, this is a really bad idea.

and I only buy at gog cause those policies.
but gog is small.. I want it to grow bigger.. but lets be real..
why..do people pay rather 30% cut to steam than 12% to epic? : number of customers/users.

steam has a dominating marketshare thats practically a monopoly.. it can do whatever it bloody pleases.. if it uses some of that pull to force free .exe for 10 year old game which is 0.01% of profit devs make on a game.. it can easely get away with that.

also
remember gog forces that .exe at release.. this one only 10 years later...

Here's what will happen;

Steam enacts this policy which will only affect games released after a certain date. If by some miracle developers stay, they release their game like normal.

Then, after 9 years, remove the game from the store and put it elsewhere or on their own launcher.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Diposting pertama kali oleh De Hollandse Ezel:

Diposting pertama kali oleh Start_Running:

Yeah that'd be the kind of beghhaviour that gets Steam flagged as a monopoly to be dealt with m8.

And the question is Why?
And another question is. How could it backfire?
I mean TGhe second is easy. Devs would just yank their games off the platform 9 years and 360 days in. Which just means we lose out on buying games..


And what does this accomplish? I mean really

pulling would not work.
they had to supply that .exe before their listing was made.. thus even if they remove the listing.. that .exe still is going to get released.

Yeah, legally Steam cannot force them to do that.

[Piston Smashed™]

So which 10 year old game do you want to get for free?