Round 4 of Would you use Steam for Rebirth thread

[DrATty]

what if I move country?

I have, I used steam back home, now I am studying in England and still use Steam - and can access all the games I bought back home and in the UK

I think Russia and.Japan have specific terms concerning the country a player's games are available in. It's similar to the regional coding of DVDs.
Whatever, the condition won't affect many, but it's there.

[NUKLEAR-SLUG]

Your "impartiality" has so far manifested in the form of conspiracy theories that Valve is buying up the stock of every company which openly agreed to enter a distribution arrangement using Steam for some mass video game takeover

Actually I believe that was Mr Howlands current conspiracy-of-the-week.

Even though, on a second thought, technical issues are not existing either if you get a good workaround for it, do they? There are workarounds for everything and as long as we can play the game it does not matter how customer friendly and convenient they are, do we?

Actually it does matter.

PC's are not cookie-cutter platforms and if you plan to run one you should expect a certain degree of having to resort to 'workarounds'. There's a tech forum for exactly that reason to help people 'workaround' whatever issue they may be having be it tweaking registry settings, graphic card configurations or removing whatever conflicting programs they have running. You don't bring that up as an issue though do you?

Now if the workaround required to get you up and running is unduly arduous, for example having to trek your machine 50 miles every week to get to a net connection for an update then yes, you're well into the territory where customer friendliness and convenience are at odds. An Ubisoft style always-on requirement for singleplayer which shuts down your game if you even lose connectivity for a moment would be right up there for that.

On Steam you have to verify your license every time you install your game, even if it is from a backup. (This is by the way also a not fully correct position in the poll because their is no way to just activate a game once and play the game forever. You have to activate the game again and again every time you install it or whenever Steam asks for it.

How often do you reinstall a game to even make that a point worth considering? And if I do lose my GoG installer are they just going to send me a new copy or am I going to have to log back into my account that you reckon I'm not 'bound' to? Because unless they're just going to pop one in the post for you then you're just as bound to your GoG account to get a new copy of your game as a Steam user is bound to theirs.

This is also all I expect form digital distribution, the distribution only, not that the purchased software remains under control of the content provider.

You didn't purchase the software, you purchased a limited license to use the software.

[quase]

You didn't purchase the software, you purchased a limited license to use the software.

You can repeat what is written in the EULA by the publishers as often as you want, but that does not make it legally more valid. This has never been proven in a court and is as far as I am aware a legal wasteland at best.
Fact is, I bought a usage right to the game and own it. With the principle of exhaustion after first bringing a game into the market, the publisher/ developer loses every ownership right on this particular copy of the game. It is my copy and I can do whatever I want with it! I do however not have the right to create further commercial copies from my copy and bring them into the market, but this is basically one of the only limitations there are with a copy of any game.

The problem that nobody has ever asked behind these EULA is that they never effected the people as long as they could not have been enforced before account binding systems. The publishers would have to sue every single person that violated their EULA to do something against it. The fact that the publishers nowadays twisted the burden of proof with their power of enforcement through account binding, makes the situation even worse.
So even though, the protection of the customer rights is violated, I do not have the money to sue a company in the USA and I can not sue them here in Germany as long as they have no legal seat here.
Apart from this our judicial system works a bit different in Germany because a lawsuit is handled separately every time it is brought to the court. There is not really a system of precedence cases in the German law, so even if I win my case against Steam or Deep Silver, every other user will have to fight them again for the same reasons if they want to maintain their rights. The German law system does also not allow class-action lawsuits, every single legal person has to make their own claim at the court.

How often do you reinstall a game to even make that a point worth considering? And if I do lose my GoG installer are they just going to send me a new copy or am I going to have to log back into my account that you reckon I'm not 'bound' to? Because unless they're just going to pop one in the post for you then you're just as bound to your GoG account to get a new copy of your game as a Steam user is bound to theirs.

Well quite often to be honest. I only have small harddrives, so I uninstall games regularly every few month, just to come back a month later. Maybe I justed needed temporary space for a demo I wanted to play, so I uninstall a big game and reinstall it a week later when I am done with the demo.

If you lose your GOG installer, it is your problem. It is like arguing that you lose your account information for Steam. In the end I can never influence what is going on at Steam, so with the offline-installer from GOG I remain independent as long as it was not my own fault for losing the installer.

[rusky]

You didn't purchase the software, you purchased a limited license to use the software.

Which funnily enough has not changed AT ALL over the last 10-20 years, it's just that people are so bummed out that they're actually being "forced" to adhere to the agreements they agreed to for the last decade.

[Jumee]

what if I move country?

I have, I used steam back home, now I am studying in England and still use Steam - and can access all the games I bought back home and in the UK

I think Russia and.Japan have specific terms concerning the country a player's games are available in. It's similar to the regional coding of DVDs.
Whatever, the condition won't affect many, but it's there.

but I am from Russia :/

Quase about DRM:

someone here has told (NOTE: I have not bothered to test if it is actually true so I do not claim that it is) that there are games on Steam that do not require Steam running and have no DRM and so made an assumption that DRM and "turn steam on to play" requirement is actually publishers choice not Steams. But again this is just a claim someone made and I did not test - so it is on the same level of plausibility as all the "what-ifs?"

[quase]

@Jumee. It is indeed a decision of the publisher to use the level of DRM. I have bought some independent titles over Steam. Eufloria or Gratuitous Space Battles for example work without running the Steam client in the background and without the need to lock into your account.

However you still do not have a separate offline installer and need to have the Steam client at least one time on your system. If Steam would, like GOG.com, allow the download of such an offline installer through the web-interface rather than the horrible client, I would have no objection at all with the platform.

[Jumee]

@Jumee. It is indeed a decision of the publisher to use the level of DRM. I have bought some independent titles over Steam. Eufloria or Gratuitous Space Battles for example work without running the Steam client in the background and without the need to lock into your account.

However you still do not have a separate offline installer and need to have the Steam client at least one time on your system. If Steam would, like GOG.com, allow the download of such an offline installer through the web-interface rather than the horrible client, I would have no objection at all with the platform.

huh, so it is true well you can always install the game -> uninstal steam (of course assuming its one of those few games that do not require it to run) and pretend you never had it installed

edit: I am surprised that it is not Steam's requirement though (keep me running to play) because, well, I always though that it was (never had one of those titles that do not require it to run)

[Rabiator der II.]

I would just rather you refrain from including me in your terms of 'we', as I hold no opinion of yours.

You hold that you will be playing and replaying this game for a long enough time in the future that you express concern over potential economic failure of a system like Steam, even assuming they don't remove authentication, relevant quote by Gabe Newell:

If you right click on a game in Steam, you'll see that you can back up the files yourself. Unless there was some situation I don't understand, we would presumably disable authentication before any event that would preclude the authentication servers from being available.

We've tested disabling authentication and it works.

You are obviously assuming that Valve will always remain the customer-friendly company that it is today. But that is something I consider shortsighted.

As the most likely bad scenario, Valve could be acquired by another company that cares less about maintaining a good reputation among gamers. Buyouts are not exactly a rare event in the business world, even with multi-billion companies.

And if the buyer is a company with the attitude of, say, Ubisoft, you may see the customer friendly attitude of Valve eroding fast.

[Slashman]

...Slashman for example who continues to deny any argumentation against Steam apart from technical hardware issues.

Actually, what I deny is the pertinence of an argument that is based on nothing but speculation with no tangible proof of any kind behind it. I don't deny it because it's completely outside the realm of possibility, I just don't think it serves any purpose in the fight to make Egosoft/Deepsilver reconsider a Steam-free version of the game.

For the purpose of this discussion, arguments like those hold little value beyond the individual because you can't hold up any examples of Steam doing anything you are accusing it of doing.

Wild and unsubstantiated claims simply don't move me and I doubt they will move Egosoft or Deepsilver to action. In the end, you're hurting your own agenda by accusing the company you claim to love and want to support of selling out to something you can't, in any form or fashion, prove is doing anything wrong (Well apart from offering the game in a format you personally don't like).

[NUKLEAR-SLUG]

You can repeat what is written in the EULA by the publishers as often as you want, but that does not make it legally more valid. This has never been proven in a court and is as far as I am aware a legal wasteland at best.

Nor does it make it invalid.

While there may not be a definitive case for precedent yet in the European courts for example there have been plenty of cases where EULAs have been upheld and found to be contractually binding as well as cases where the reverse was true. Current computer law definition last I heard was that EULAs should be considered binding unless you can get a court to rule otherwise.

Fact is, as you say, you bought a usage right to the game. but that's all you bought. You don't "own" anything other than the media substrate it came on and the pretty packaging that came wrapped around it.

The problem that nobody has ever asked behind these EULA is that they never effected the people as long as they could not have been enforced before account binding systems. The publishers would have to sue every single person that violated their EULA to do something against it. The fact that the publishers nowadays twisted the burden of proof with their power of enforcement through account binding, makes the situation even worse.

Which is the crux of the problem. That it would be financially suicidal to attempt to sue every person that violated a EULA does not in any way magically absolve you of your contractual obligations. You 'signed' a contract when you agree to the EULA therefore you're contractually obligated by the terms you agreed to.

If you don't wish to be contractually bound then don't enter into contracts.

edit: I am surprised that it is not Steam's requirement though (keep me running to play) because, well, I always though that it was (never had one of those titles that do not require it to run)

It's never been a requirement of Steam to keep it running. Steam provides a service with varying options available for handling a game, the individual publisher makes the decision as to which of those options to take advantage of.

Some choose all the options and even a secondary DRM on top of Steams authentication system, some take the other route and merely opt for distribution/updates.

[quase]

@Slashman
So in a roundabout way you say, the publisher is right because they say so in their own EULA and I am wrong because I am living in a fantasy world when I am talking about the legal situations I see with Steam and other similar systems?

So you imply that I have to proof that the publisher is wrong with their EULA because they say they are right and actually have the power to enforce it, without having to go through the hassle of a lawsuit against me first. Some kind of preventive self justice maybe, where every customer is guilty until proven innocent. This is what I mean by twisting the burden of proof. It is definitely wrong to put the weaker legal person (me as a single customer) in a position to make the claims against a whole company or even three companies in case of Rebirth.

I actually see no reason why Egosoft/ Deep Silver will ever listen to any argument I make because I think they see their economical benefit in the platform Steam as more important than the protection of customer rights. An understandable economical position, although still pretty shortsighted in my opinion and a dangerous way for us as the customers.
So after all, I could not care less about how my arguments are working on Egosoft/ Deep Silver. My argumentation is emotionally biased with the purpose of influencing the individual reader/user and to convince them or at least make them think about the system I oppose. Maybe you have not noticed, but believe to ridicule my exaggerated examples a few pages back would have hurt my cause, but these exaggerations do pretty much serve their purpose. They will provoke reactions that on the other hand will make the people think about what really is behind these "manic thoughts".
If I can one or two people make aware of the situation about account binding and the implications of the software markets, maybe even influence them from further supporting this kind of market, I am more than pleased.

[Jumee]

edit: I am surprised that it is not Steam's requirement though (keep me running to play) because, well, I always though that it was (never had one of those titles that do not require it to run)

It's never been a requirement of Steam to keep it running. Steam provides a service with varying options available for handling a game, the individual publisher makes the decision as to which of those options to take advantage of.

Some choose all the options and even a secondary DRM on top of Steams authentication system, some take the other route and merely opt for distribution/updates.

than this reminds me of a name of a song "know your enemy" - if it is the publisher who chooses to make having steam turned on a requirement - than how it is steams fault?

[quase]

Fact is, as you say, you bought a usage right to the game. but that's all you bought. You don't "own" anything other than the media substrate it came on and the pretty packaging that came wrapped around it.

You do not seem understand the difference between ownership and copyright, do you?
Of course I own the license and so do I inherit different rights what I can do with it. Fact is, as soon as I bought the license, the ownership of the original rights holder exceeds (principle of exhaustion). They still have the copyright of course, but this one license and whatever is done with it, is no longer part of their business. With account binding though, they remain in control of the license and thus still own it. It is the same as if I rented the license from them, only for the usual full price of course. This is the fundamental problem with the way account binding is done through Steam.

[NUKLEAR-SLUG]

than this reminds me of a name of a song "know your enemy" - if it is the publisher who chooses to make having steam turned on a requirement - than how it is steams fault?

Indeed, but why let something inconvenient like the facts get in the way of a good lynching?

[Slashman]

Sorry quase, I apologize for thinking you were actually trying for a Steam-free version of Rebirth.

What you're actually aiming for is a smear-campaign against Steam:

So after all, I could not care less about how my arguments are working on Egosoft/ Deep Silver. My argumentation is emotionally biased with the purpose of influencing the individual reader/user and to convince them or at least make them think about the system I oppose.

Have at it. Just be prepared to have those arguments refuted and highlighted for what they are when you use them.

[Stars_InTheirEyes]

Makes me laugh at (no one in particular) the people who say "I'd never use steam for rebirth. I hate it! Rage, rage, etc".

Guarantee half of them will get steam if they have no other choice.

[quase]

Mmm, yes Slash, indeed I do aim against Steam, as always.

I gave up for a Steam-free version of Rebirth the day Albion Prelude came out with Steam-binding in the retail DVD version, but I thought this was clear when I left this thread at this point. That and the "no-Steam" executable showed me that there is no hope they will abandon Steam.

Now I am only here for the sake of discussion which I really enjoy and with the small glimpse of hope. Thanks for it people in this discussion. Get it going! I watched this thread silently for quite some time, but the bias towards Steam done by only a few people here was shocking. You Steam supporters were far too vocal and I felt the need to step in and show the platform in the "right" light again.

Just to make this clear again. If my posts prevent some of the nay-sayers from buying the game with Steam, my job is done. I for one can assure you that I stick to my claims and won't buy the game with Steam.

Compare it to the people who 1-star down-vote games on Amazon because of Steam-binding or other draconian DRM measures, although they never bought the game. Totally justified of them to do so if you ask me and I sometimes do so too. Customers need to be aware!

[rusky]

Mmm, yes Slash, indeed I do aim against Steam, as always.

I gave up for a Steam-free version of Rebirth the day Albion Prelude came out with Steam-binding in the retail DVD version, but I thought this was clear when I left this thread at this point. That and the "no-Steam" executable showed me that there is no hope they will abandon Steam.

Now I am only here for the sake of discussion which I really enjoy and with the small glimpse of hope. Thanks for it people. I watched this thread silently for quite some time, but the bias towards Steam done by only a few people here was shocking. You Steam supporters were far too vocal and I felt the need to step in and show the platform in the "right" light again.

Someone should just put this post of yours on the first page of this thread so people can avoid discussing this further with you then. There is no point in bringing arguments to the table when one's mind is so decidedly made up, thus making this whole thread just an effort in futility.

[angrytigerp]

You Steam supporters were far too vocal and I felt the need to step in and show the platform in the "right" light again. Twisted Evil

Just to make this clear again. If my posts prevent some of the nay-sayers from buying the game with Steam, my job is done. I for one can assure you that I stick to my claims and won't buy the game with Steam.

You're free to attempt to convince other people that Steam has enough faults to warrant convincing others not to use it. Likewise, others are free to convince other people that Steam is worth whatever faults it has.

However, please give up any claims of impartiality or acting in the common interest if you're going to go from pointing out Steam's flaws and letting others decide for themselves to actively berating and belittling people for being "stupid" enough to use Steam.

While I advocate for Steam, and I am certainly within my rights to, I have at no point done what you do and claimed that others should never use Steam, and to do so is somehow personally offensive. I say what I like about Steam, acknowledge its faults repeatedly (bad for people with poor connections, a very small percentage of technical issues that can't be troubleshot quickly, etc.), but also am open to the fact that some people choose not to use Steam because they feel it's unethical. That is their prerogative. I am not going to say "stupid people not using Steam, they made such a terrible decision, I'm only trying to make them make the right decision." You don't get it, there is no right or wrong answer, that's how a market works.

You never acknowledge any of Steam's positive points (or points that may be positive for others, e.g. "OH I DON'T USE SOCIAL FEATURES SO THAT'S A STUPID FEATURE"), and are unable to make the intellectual leap necessary to realize that some people choose to use Steam, and that doing so doesn't instantly make them idiot consumers. They are trusting in a new platform. If Valve ever does go belly-up and your doomsday prediction that they don't release authentication comes true, then and only then you are free to demean and belittle those who trusted Steam. Until then, the service runs without fault for many satisfied millions, dozens of game companies including many top-tier AAA studios trust it to distribute their software, and there is no sign whatsoever of Valve being in dire straits any time soon.

You claim to be showing Steam in the 'right' light, yet I don't think I have yet seen an active Steam supporter in the thread (e.g. not just posting one post about "I use it, it's fine, don't understand the problems" because they haven't followed the discussion at all) who doesn't at some point acknowledge the issues. Slash did a few pages ago, I just did (and did probably a dozen+ pages ago), we all are open-minded enough to say "We like Steam, here is why, here is why you might disagree, make up your mind." This is the "right" light, as it doesn't assume anything on the part of the neutral parties we are attempting to convince of Steam's viability. You, on the other hand, make posts saying "Steam is bad because of all these bad things, you are an idiot if you use it and there's no justification for doing so".

[quase]

The difference between the people that have no problem with Steam and those that do is that the people who like Steam, are not losing anything. If you do not want Steam, you do not play this game. It is like Egosoft would announce the game to be on the Wii exclusively (which I would actually prefer rather than Steam). It is easier to talk if you already have all you want and need, and can just be happy waiting for a game that others may never be playing.

Excuse me that I will not comprehend your point of view on the advantages of Steam if there are none for me or if these advantages seem more than insignificant for a single player game like Rebirth. All advantages one can put on the table are simply for the publisher/ developer. There is just nothing a customer of a single player offline game could need. If you want to use Steam crossover game chats for example while playing Rebirth, well let the Steam client run in the background. There is still no need to have Rebirth bound to Steam for you to use other Steam features while Rebirth was not on Steam? Why force these features on everybody just that you can have a very minor gain in convenience that you can have with the simplest steps yourself without having everyone else to use it?

"We like Steam, here is why, here is why you might disagree, make up your mind." I actually fail to see the "here is why you may disagree" part and this is why I came back to this thread. The whole debate was single sided, favouring the advantages of Steam. All I hear again and again is, "We like Steam, we want Steam to be the one and only digital distribution platform, Egosoft/ Deep Silver has chosen to use Steam, Steam is the unchallenged superior distribution platform, you are a minority, deal with it and shut up." Just see me as the hardliner opposition to stay against your total domination of Steam supporters.

You want a real advantage of Steam? They offer the best ways to pay your purchase (all kinds of payment methods). Although this is of course only relevant if you buy the game through digital distribution, not as a retail copy.