Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Jul 2013
J
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
J
Joined: Jul 2013
Originally Posted by AlrikFassbauer
Big mistake :

Steam *IS* DRM !

So you cannot say "Steam is DRM-free" - because Steam IS the DRM !

Since Steam = DRM, one just cannot say "DRM-free on Steam". It's like saying 1 + 1 = 3


Try to keep up, this has been explained before, even in the link I posted that you replied to. Steam is not DRM, it's a digital distributor. Steamworks is a service available to publishers on Steam, which has an optional DRM component. Look at that list of DRM free games on Steam again. I can copy any of those games to another computer that doesn't have Steam on it or an internet connection and they will run. Does that still mean they have DRM because they came from Steam?

Joined: Jun 2014
S
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by Jito463
Originally Posted by AlrikFassbauer
Steam *IS* DRM !


I think we're getting sidetracked on the DRM vs Copy-protection argument. Many people (and I'm guilty of this, too) are using the term DRM interchangeably with copy protection. Yes, Steam is technically DRM. Just as GoG's downloader is DRM, and their login service on their page is DRM.


No. You are mixing two unrelated subjects which I admit are easy to mix.

Let's clarify.

Firstly, there is authentication. I.e. a method to prove that you are you. That's the log-in service which authenticates you when you buy something in order to prevent strangers from buying stuff on your account and in order to attribute your purchases to you. That's completely fine, totally reasonable and it has nothing to do with DRM. Authentication happens at the purchase time. It's not any different than coming personally to the store and paying money. Your presence in the store authenticates that you are making the purchase.

Then there can be DRM. DRM doesn't just want a proof that you are you. Even if it knows that you are you, DRM restricts what you can do with your product. Note the difference. That's already not fine at all, because in order to implement such restrictions DRM treats you like a criminal.

So let's reiterate - authentication for purchasing is completely fine. DRM is unacceptable.

Originally Posted by Jito463
DRM simply means "Digital Rights Management"

What DRM really means (i.e. in essence) is Digital Restrictions Management. DRM attempts to control your system and restrict the way you can use your purchased product. I.e. well after you already bought it.

Originally Posted by jimnms
I can copy any of those games to another computer that doesn't have Steam on it or an internet connection and they will run. Does that still mean they have DRM because they came from Steam?


That's a "poor man" form of being DRM-free? Valve aren't some amateur company. In order to make DRM-free offerings their games have to be downloadable as explicit packages without some "copy that directory and you have a chance it won't choke if you run it elsewhere without a Steam client". That's not normal - that's like dancing around a service which doesn't attempt to be DRM-free. Even their official backup tool (which Seam offers) can't reinstall the backup without their own client and connecting to your Steam account. That's not DRM-free in my view at all.

Last edited by shmerl; 04/07/14 05:38 PM.
Joined: Apr 2013
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Apr 2013
You're not going to give an inch, are you shmerl? I get it, we all get it; you hate DRM. Can we move on with the rest of the discussion now?

Joined: Jun 2014
S
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by Jito463
You're not going to give an inch, are you shmerl? I get it, we all get it; you hate DRM. Can we move on with the rest of the discussion now?


I corrected you, because you obviously mixed up different concepts (authentication and DRM). We can disagree on whether DRM is acceptable or not, but let's use proper terms first.

Joined: Apr 2013
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Apr 2013
And I clarified that already in my previous post. I was attempting to facilitate moving the conversation forward, rather than getting bogged down in definitions. If you want to continue to argue the definitions, however, feel free. I'll just sit back and watch.

Joined: Jun 2014
A
member
Offline
member
A
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by AlrikFassbauer

Since Steam = DRM, one just cannot say "DRM-free on Steam". It's like saying 1 + 1 = 3


You made a statement. Now you have to back it up with some facts.
What about non-optional feature of steam makes it DRM?

Originally Posted by shmerl

That's a "poor man" form of being DRM-free? Valve aren't some amateur company. In order to make DRM-free offerings their games have to be downloadable as explicit packages without some "copy that directory and you have a chance it won't choke if you run it elsewhere without a Steam client". That's not normal - that's like dancing around a service which doesn't attempt to be DRM-free. Even their official backup tool (which Seam offers) can't reinstall the backup without their own client and connecting to your Steam account. That's not DRM-free in my view at all.


But that is exactly the same with GOG.com for most of their windows games. They are msi files, meaning they are using the windows installer. Just because the Steam-framework does include an installed does not mean that the game contains any form of DRM. Or if that fits your definition than msi-install-files include DRM as well. Sounds like a silly definition to me. And more important it is a meaningless definition, based an principles and not practise.

Last edited by Apocalypse; 04/07/14 06:11 PM.
Joined: Jun 2014
S
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by Jito463
And I clarified that already in my previous post. I was attempting to facilitate moving the conversation forward, rather than getting bogged down in definitions. If you want to continue to argue the definitions, however, feel free. I'll just sit back and watch.


To move the conversation forward, there should be some clear understanding what is being discussed. Confusion sets it backwards. That's why distinguishing DRM and authentication was important to highlight.

Originally Posted by Apocalypse
But that is exactly the same with GOG.com for most of their windows games. They are msi files, meaning they are using the windows installer. Just because the Steam-framework does include an installed does not mean that the game contains any form of DRM.


GOG allows you to download explicitly, and you can back up that download. GOG guarantees that you can later use it without relying on GOG service and your account being active. You don't even need to run the installer if you don't want to - you can simply unpack it with innoextract (that's what I do for DOSbox and ScummVM games anyway, when playing them on Linux - there is no point to run any installers for them).

Steam doesn't do it. You have to #1: copy / archive the downloaded result (i.e. Steam doesn't care to provide you with a downloadable tarball / installer), and #2: you have to do /roll to guess whether that copy will work without the client. In some cases it can, in others not really. Steam doesn't inform you about it when you make your purchase. And #3 - their official backup tool is totally DRMed.

As I said - they aren't amateurs. If they cared, they could make this process DRM-free proper (like Humble Bundle do - they also have a mixture of DRM-free and DRMed offerings). Yet they obviously don't care, so I prefer to support distributors who treat their users normally and don't proliferate DRM in general.

Last edited by shmerl; 04/07/14 06:31 PM.
Joined: Jul 2014
G
stranger
Offline
stranger
G
Joined: Jul 2014
Some people are pathologically incapable of imagining the consequences of things that happen around them. You can tell them all about global warming, or drug-resistant bacteria, or NSA breaking every law imaginable. They don't care. Because right now none of that bites them in the ass, and they are incapable of imagining what will (inevitably) happen when it does.

PSN being hacked didn't teach them anything about centralized gaming services.

Sim City 5 didn't teach them anything about DRM.

Target breach didn't make them aware of the deficiencies in the credit card system.

Trying to reason with oblivious people who don't give a damn about anything beyond their immediate gratification is largely a waste of time. To them, everything is a matter of definition, everything they don't like is subjective and requires infinite amount of proof.

However, what you can do is state you position. No amount of fanboy crap can shake that.

Here is my position. I will not buy this game in any format that requires connecting to Steam.

If there is a Steam-free boxed version that can offer me that, I will gladly buy it. It sounds like D:OS is the kind of game that would justify acquiring collector's edition.

If there is no such boxed version, I will wait for GOG.

Joined: Apr 2013
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Apr 2013
Originally Posted by Gambler
Some people are pathologically incapable of imagining the consequences of things that happen around them.


Or, you know, we just don't spend our lives worrying about worst-case scenarios.

Originally Posted by Gambler
Here is my position. I will not buy this game in any format that requires connecting to Steam.

If there is a Steam-free boxed version that can offer me that, I will gladly buy it. It sounds like D:OS is the kind of game that would justify acquiring collector's edition.

If there is no such boxed version, I will wait for GOG.


See, that's all you needed to say.

Joined: Jun 2014
S
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by Jito463
Or, you know, we just don't spend our lives worrying about worst-case scenarios.


When someone knows that using services and products with DRM contributes to its proliferation but they still use them, it means simply what Gamlber said. I.e. the lack of care about it (or feeling of responsibility to put it differently).

Last edited by shmerl; 04/07/14 08:05 PM.
Joined: Apr 2013
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Apr 2013
Originally Posted by shmerl
Originally Posted by Jito463
Or, you know, we just don't spend our lives worrying about worst-case scenarios.


When someone knows that using services and products with DRM contributes to its proliferation but they still use them, it means simply what Gamlber said. I.e. the lack of care about it (or feeling of responsibility to put it differently).


Would you give it a rest, for crying out loud. The whole world doesn't see DRM as "the devil". Get over it.

Joined: Jun 2014
S
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by Jito463
Would you give it a rest, for crying out loud. The whole world doesn't see DRM as "the devil". Get over it.

That there are those who don't care isn't news. As well as that there are those who rationalize it for themselves.

The bottom line, DRM is bad from whatever angle you'll look at it (ethical and pragmatical), and those who insist on its usage are compared to Lysenkoists.

Last edited by shmerl; 04/07/14 09:23 PM.
Joined: Apr 2013
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Apr 2013
Anyone else wanna jump in and deal with Chicken Little for a while? I'm tired and have to work tonight.

Joined: Jun 2014
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by Gambler
Some people are pathologically incapable of imagining the consequences of things that happen around them. You can tell them all about global warming, or drug-resistant bacteria, or NSA breaking every law imaginable. They don't care. Because right now none of that bites them in the ass

Well said, my friend.

@shmerl and @Gambler: +1 to your arguments. I can't think of any more obvious ones that could conclude this discussion.

Certainly there are some minor similarities between Steam and GoG as of now, but it's apparent that there are some issues with Steam (mainly compromising PC security), that aren't (because they can't logically) be addressed. That's my 0,02$


Seek your own truth. Always.
Joined: Nov 2003
member
Offline
member
Joined: Nov 2003
Originally Posted by jimnms
Like it or not, without Steam, PC gaming would have died out or we would still be plagued by things like the Sony root kit, Starforce, SecuROM, disk checks and GFWL.
What utter tosh.

PC gaming has never been in danger and while media check systems like SecuROM and Starforce had in-your-face downsides (lower framerates, slower game startup), none of them could result in you being blocked from content you paid for due to reasons outside your control. Keep the discs safe, and you'd be OK.

Online systems (SecuROM Online, GFWL, Steam) mean you *can* lose access to content due to server downtime, connection outages or publisher closure (as has happened several times with DRMed music services). In the case of systems like Steam where multiple games are linked to a single account, hundreds or even thousands of dollars of past purchases can be vaped at Valve's whim.
Originally Posted by jimnms
...they offer an optional, non intrusive DRM to publishers as part of that service.
Steam's DRM is not optional from the user's perspective and it involves a check every time a game is started. That makes it stricter than activate-on-install services (SecuROM Online or GFWL) - only the always-online DRM employed by companies like Blizzard (and Ubisoft formerly) can be arguably worse.
Originally Posted by Jito463
Yes, Steam is technically DRM. Just as GoG's downloader is DRM, and their login service on their page is DRM. GoG Galaxy will also be DRM. DRM simply means "Digital Rights Management", so that term can classify any number of systems. The question is whether it will have copy protection. I think though, for the sake of this argument, we can accept the term DRM in lieu of the term copy protection.
I'm not sure how GOG's downloader can be described as DRM when no-one has to use it (and the same argument should apply with GOG Galaxy). The installers you download from GOG perform no authentication checks, have no restrictions and be used as often as you want. You can even delete your GOG account and the installers will still work (I run them on an offline PC with no network connectivity) - the only downside of closing a GOG account is loss of access to any updates.

In comparison, any backups you make using Steam will (aside from the minority of games that don't use Steamworks) require authentication with a valid Steam account before they will work. So if Valve disable your account (and tens of thousands of examples can be found online of this), you have no way to retrieve your paid-for content.

Copy protection though is not really what DRM is about (even Steam allows multiple installs, it just limits users to running one game at any time) or preventing "piracy" but about blocking the (legal) second-hand games trade, collecting information on users (which can be good for developers in debugging games, but Steam can build a detailed profile of customer gaming habits for sale to third parties) and having the ability to close down older games in order to push players to newer ones.
Originally Posted by Apocalypse
But that is exactly the same with GOG.com for most of their windows games. They are msi files, meaning they are using the windows installer...
GOG have never used .msi files, they use their own installer. You might be thinking about the HumbleBundle or IndieRoyale offerings which sometimes used .msi (not that I see any problem with it) or .zip files as well as standalone .exe installers.
Originally Posted by Jito463
Or, you know, we just don't spend our lives worrying about worst-case scenarios.
Given the increasing number of high profile data breaches, that's an increasingly risky - and even irresponsible - viewpoint. Today's "worst-case" is increasingly becoming tomorrow's reality - whether applied to data collection, DRM-abuse or service compromise.
Originally Posted by shmerl
When someone knows that using services and products with DRM contributes to its proliferation but they still use them, it means simply what Gamlber said. I.e. the lack of care about it (or feeling of responsibility to put it differently).
A very valid point - Valve gets away with atrocious customer service because it can rely on the majority of its userbase to be so heavily locked-in that they can't envisage going anywhere else. If no-one bought a game with Steamworks, GFWL or similar services, software publishers would be jumping over themselves to offer DRM-free alternatives like GOG, DotEmu or Fireflower. There's no easy solution though, aside from waiting for the day when Steam suffers a truly catastrophic compromise, requiring them to take their system offline for an extended period.

Joined: Jun 2014
A
member
Offline
member
A
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by Stargazer

Originally Posted by Apocalypse
But that is exactly the same with GOG.com for most of their windows games. They are msi files, meaning they are using the windows installer...
GOG have never used .msi files, they use their own installer. You might be thinking about the HumbleBundle or IndieRoyale offerings which sometimes used .msi (not that I see any problem with it) or .zip files as well as standalone .exe installers.


I just checked, you are right, I was wrong on that, good catch. And I donエt see a problem with it either, because I think the risk that microsoft starts blocking installs for no apparent reason is very unlikely. Even less likely than Valve going at of business. Though for valve going out of business there are already third party steam-clients that allow installation of your ... uhm .. backups. Which makes the claim that you are at risk of losing your steam library as well not a very likely scenario, even more so with the DRM-Free games on steam. Well, at least if you keep your own backups, which to be totally honest I bet no one has.

Originally Posted by Jito463
Originally Posted by shmerl
Originally Posted by Jito463
Or, you know, we just don't spend our lives worrying about worst-case scenarios.


When someone knows that using services and products with DRM contributes to its proliferation but they still use them, it means simply what Gamlber said. I.e. the lack of care about it (or feeling of responsibility to put it differently).


Would you give it a rest, for crying out loud. The whole world doesn't see DRM as "the devil". Get over it.


Which would be exactly his point. ;-)

Last edited by Apocalypse; 05/07/14 04:03 AM.
Joined: Nov 2003
member
Offline
member
Joined: Nov 2003
Originally Posted by Apocalypse
...I think the risk that microsoft starts blocking installs for no apparent reason is very unlikely.
.msi files are standalone installers which do not need network access so I cannot see how Microsoft could block them even if it wanted to. Again, might you be confusing web-installers (examlple for DX9) which scan a system and trigger a second download with redistributables (example for DX9) which don't?
Originally Posted by Apocalypse
...Even less likely than Valve going at of business.
I'd agree that the prospect of Steam going out of business is not likely (short of the catastrophic security compromise scenario mentioned above). But that's because Valve can start imposing fees (per year or per month) to keep accounts open instead (with 65 million accounts, a $10/month fee could pull in an extra $6.2 billion annual income even if only 80% of users sign up).
Originally Posted by Apocalypse
...there are already third party steam-clients that allow installation of your ... uhm .. backups.
Good luck with that - a online search showed many sites claiming to offer such software just redirected to third party downloads where you had to complete a "survey" first. And one which did provide a download with these malware scan results.

Last edited by Stargazer; 05/07/14 05:44 PM.
Joined: Apr 2013
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Apr 2013
Originally Posted by Stargazer
But that's because Valve can start imposing fees (per year or per month) to keep accounts open instead (with 65 million accounts, a $10/month fee could pull in an extra $6.2 billion annual income even if only 80% of users sign up).


Oh, come on. Do you honestly believe that's even a possibility, much less a probability? Exactly what would they be charging for? Access to our already purchased content? Access to the Steam Store? Neither of those are even remotely likely. The former would lead to lawsuits, and the latter would lead to people abandoning Steam in droves.

I'm honestly intrigued what you think they would be charging for.

Joined: Jun 2014
A
member
Offline
member
A
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by Stargazer
Originally Posted by Apocalypse
...I think the risk that microsoft starts blocking installs for no apparent reason is very unlikely.
.msi files are standalone installers which do not need network access so I cannot see how Microsoft could block them even if it wanted to.


Windows Installer is as far as I know a framework that is part of the windows installation and as such microsoft can change functionality of the framework as they please, including verification against unwanted software. Theoretically this could come with any windows update. Right now there is no online verification of msi-files, but the possibility is there.
That is different with stand-alone installers, which Windows Installer is not. At the same time 3rd party solution would be very likely in such a case, which makes it even less likely.

Joined: Jul 2014
M
stranger
Offline
stranger
M
Joined: Jul 2014

Looking at the last two sentences in part A of the Steam Subscriber Agreement:

----
The Software is licensed, not sold. Your license confers no title or ownership in the Software. To make use of the Software, you must have a Steam Account and you may be required to be running the Steam client and maintaining a connection to the Internet.
----

Read that multiple times and it seems that termination of a Steam account not only locks one out of downloads but also strips your license to legally use anything previously downloaded...DRM free or not.

Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5