Valve Is Making All Their Games Free To Debian Developers

[Kivada]

No DRM should ever be agreeable.

It is when it's so transparent it mas as well not even be there and keeps my games up to date so I'm not doing it manually across dozens of sites.

[PyroDevil]

Steam is alright, if they would implement options to sell or gift games you currently own.

[PyroDevil]

That's the main reason why I like Unreal series games. While the engine source itself isn't open, you can change pretty much anything through UnrealScript (and the UnrealScript source for all of the games is open). To the point where one mod made it into a real-time strategy game!

I modded XCOM a bit, but it's a pain.

[shmerl]

Sorry, but that is ridiculous. With that argument you have to be against any online platform. They all need either a browser or a client to download the game.

I thought it's obvious. Inability to backup your games installers / packages means that if your account is closed (or the service closes down) you'll lose an ability to install (and in turn play) any of your games. Now imagine that without thinking, you bought hundreds of them there... Money lost. Here goes your "unobtrusive" DRM.

It is when it's so transparent it mas as well not even be there and keeps my games up to date so I'm not doing it manually across dozens of sites.

I'd argue that transparent DRM is even worse than one obviously standing in your way. It's like a hidden camera being more sinister than one which you can actually always see. It's because you feel too comfortable with it. While you shouldn't.

[ua=42]

Well this is good. This will allow debian people to test out a variety of games and hopefully fix any system side bugs/issues related to them.

[Kivada]

lol.
I really dont get anyone buying a game through steam, often giving the developers less money because of the steam-tax and getting 1 DRM layer on top for the change.

From all I've heard Valve takes the least out of anyone and what little they take is offset massively by the fact that you have direct access to a much larger audience that would actually want to buy your product instead of your rinkydink site that takes paypal only and nobody visits on a regular basis.

From the user perspective the DRM is virtually nonexistent. Now do stupid devs add their own DRM on top of Steam? Yes, and many people refuse to buy their games because of it because their DRM actually gets in the way of the paying user.

[mmstick]

I am yet to see a *single* person who would like Steam's DRM. You don't like it, either. You tolerate it. That's something else entirely.



Sweeping generalisations much?



That's the main reason why I like Unreal series games. While the engine source itself isn't open, you can change pretty much anything through UnrealScript (and the UnrealScript source for all of the games is open). To the point where one mod made it into a real-time strategy game!

I don't think you really understand what Steam's DRM is. I don't tolerate it but genuinely like it. There is no better DRM, and all content providers should drop their DRM and switch to using Steam's DRM only. The world would be a better place. It does what DRM is supposed to do -- prevents illegally copying games -- without enforcing harsh restrictions on the gamers (only requires that you copy your Steam folder from one PC to the next and log into your Steam account). There are no restrictions on how many times you can install your games, nor are there any restrictions that require you to be online all the time. If you were going some place that didn't have Internet, you would simply toggle Steam to offline mode. In the past, I was offline for six months but still played all of my games perfectly fine.

The only people who would dislike Steam are people that want to be able to conveniently copy games to their friends without having to pay a dime or bother with using a torrent site to get cracked games. In the event that Valve is ever to shutdown, they even have a statement that they would flip the DRM-free switch on -- not that they are going out of business any time soon.

The DRM does not limit users in any way, shape, for form, yet actually empowers the users with many useful features. If you add a non-Steam, DRM-free game to Steam, you cannot get access to any of the brilliant features such as achievements, hour tracking, a community hub, Steam cards, quickly creating UPnP-enabled servers/lobbies and broadcast that to a master server list, enables players to check in on what's happening in the server their friends are playing in while giving them a convenient 'join game' option so they don't have to ask them what server they are on, and an API for game developers to implement statistics tracking.

I'd rather be living in a world where Steam exists than a DRM-free world where it does not -- it's not worth it for a PC gamer with hundreds and hundreds of games.

[PyroDevil]

I thought it's obvious. Inability to backup your games installers / packages means that if your account is closed (or the service closes down) you'll lose an ability to install (and in turn play) any of your games. Now imagine that without thinking, you bought hundreds of them there... Money lost. Here goes your "unobtrusive" DRM.

Does something in the steam legalese cover that?

[shmerl]

How can anyone "love" DRM? It's like saying that mass surveillance and police state should be loved because it empowers people with many good features (security), while it doesn't really stand in your way much, since surveillance can be hidden.

[Kivada]

I'd rather have the source code to the games. I get bored pretty quick with games I can't change around any way I want since I have more fun hacking it than I do playing it.

And you are in such an extreme minority it's not even funny. Most people just want mod tools for games so that the community can actually whip up more game content instead of creating a bunch or new and incompatible forks of the game that have a tiny to nonexistent communities.