why do people dislike Steam's "DRM"?

[Zorator]

I just don't understand how Steam is DRM. You don't own the games in the traditional sense of the word, what you are paying for is unlimited access (more or less, considering Iori's complaints) to the game through the client/network and ONLY through the client/network. You have to understand and accept that going in. To me there is a fundamental difference in the concept of ownership when dealing with digital vs. physical media and I feel like some folks unfairly characterize that as DRM in regards to Steam.

Consider for example the recent Irem arcade ports for PC. I'm not sure if they actually are, but for the sake of argument lets say they aren't true ports but just an emulator and roms in an executable. What if you bought one and wanted to use a fan made patch or bugfix. You would need to extract the rom, patch it, and recompile the executable, but you can't do that. Is that not DRM then? Because if you actually owned the game, IE the arcade PCB itself, you could (if you had the equipment) dump the rom and patch it. My point is paid digital media is never "owned" in exactly the same way as physical media, there is an inherent difference and limitation in format, and to look at it from the point of view of traditional physical ownership is incorrect.

I don't see Steam in itself as Digital Rights Management because in the context of Steam and how it works the "rights" are an illusion. You don't own the game, you merely own it on Steam. To me that's fundamentally different than selling physical media that has rights limitations written into it such as limited number of installs or the making an internal profile of your system upon initial install (as I'm sure some of you know some DRM works like this to ensure it is only installed on a certain amount of PC's, although I'm probably ignorantly glossing over some details here).

Is there something I'm misunderstanding conceptually about DRM? I am by no means a proponent of what I understand to be actual DRM, and I really don't want this thread to become "is Steam good or bad?" I'm just trying to understand why people call it DRM because most of the arguments I see for why it is DRM seem to be based in the false premise that digital media purchases can EVER be held up to the same standards as physical purchases and the concept of ownership that comes with it.

[Kaiser]

In the topic: Grown men being unable to accept reality, Steam DRM is here to stay for no one knows how long, because the mainstream already accepted, embrace it. Got a problem? Buy off GOG, buy DRM-free indie games, buy old games off Ebay and stick to them, there's always an alternative, but it always comes with a cost of not being able to have legal means to play many games that came out lately or will come out, so that's your problem.

[Ed Oscuro]

You don't own the games in the traditional sense of the word

Exactly what "sense" do you mean? Or is it just that everybody had the digital kool-aid and forgot that the essential properties of distributed media haven't changed since the days of cuneiform tablets?

I'm amenable to different conceptions of intellectual property, but let's take a moment to realize that the system in place worked (as far as it did) with a sharp distinction between rights of owning the physical media, and various uncontroversial rights which are assumed possible in that framework - and further rights of reuse which nobody in this thread have really tried to put claim to (although there is a long history of those as well). The first sale doctrine isn't exactly new.

In the topic: Grown men being unable to accept reality,

Son, I am disappoint.

[cfx]

.

[Bananamatic]

i just want to play videogames
steam lets me play videogames and doesn't restrict me while playing videogames

what else can possibly matter while wanting to play videogames

[Formless God]

my primary point that I don't want to run anyone's client or be tied to their service.

That's in a different paragraph.

Thanks for discounting my viewpoint.

What the fuck is this? You stated a wrong fact ("download it again"); I simply corrected it.

And I wouldn't.

That entire sentence was my opinion. There's no need to respond to it.

[TransatlanticFoe]

Basically, there is no justification for any form of DRM. It tries to justify its existence by accusing everyone of being filthy freeloaders and only results in limiting what you can do in the future with content YOU bought.

Steam tries to fluff it up with this "community" aspect but they can delete your account (and thus access to "your" games) without justifying it, without consulting you and without any due process whatsoever. You are entirely at their mercy. Don't like a change to the terms of service? Tough shit, you can either disconnect from the internet and stay in offline mode forever, accept the changes or lose your account.

I found it funny when everyone was crying about Origin without them realising that Steam is exactly the same - only Steam was more refined and less prone to falling over.

[Specineff]

Because the publishers' rights end where mine begin.

[Mischief Maker]

Backup your stuff in a drive, then when you move to a different machine, run the games via the client again and it will take care of all the redistributables and registry shit for you. You have to be insane to say no to such a feature.

You know what I get with my DRM-free games? Installers! I can back up my installers on a disk, then when I move to a different machine, the installer will take care of all the registry shit for me! If I have a savegame I want to keep, I back that up and dump it back in, too! And if that's not cool enough, there are some games you can buy DRM-free that don't even have installers, you just direct-dump into your hard drive!

You'd have to be insane to think you need the steam client to do this simple task for you. Kids these days don't know how to specify an install location or something. I tell you, steam customers are turning into just as much a cult as Apple customers.

[Formless God]

I never said you can't do that the normal way.
I'm merely pointing out that there's no need to redownload anything, and there's no need to even reinstall if the games are stored on something like a portable drive.

Everybody needs to calm their tits.

[Ghegs]

they can delete your account (and thus access to "your" games) without justifying it, without consulting you and without any due process whatsoever.

Can you actually point at a single case where a user's account was deleted outright without justification, where the user in question wasn't involved in piracy, payment fraud, or any of the other activities that would warrant an account's suspension? Notice that even those would result in the account's suspension rather than straight deletion.

Their TOS does have the line

Valve may cancel your Account or any particular Subscription(s) at any time

but it's followed by

in the event that (a) Valve ceases providing such Subscriptions to similarly situated Subscribers generally, or (b) you breach any terms of this Agreement (including any Subscription Terms or Rules of Use).

So, basically, don't do stupid shit and you're fine.

And if you're worried about Valve deciding they're going to shut the service down and you'll lose access to the games...well, that's on the same level as worrying about your house catching fire and losing your physical games that way. Could technically happen, probably and hopefully not.

You know what I get with my DRM-free games? Installers! I can back up my installers on a disk, then when I move to a different machine, the installer will take care of all the registry shit for me! If I have a savegame I want to keep, I back that up and dump it back in, too! And if that's not cool enough, there are some games you can buy DRM-free that don't even have installers, you just direct-dump into your hard drive!

I actually had all my GOG installers along with all the extra stuff backed up in an external drive. But it got really tiresome to do that manually at some point (I have bought over 100 games there), especially when GOG updates their files or adds a patch or bonus content or something. Having all that handled automatically is pretty sweet. I do still keep some of the more important installers backed up, but I have better things to do with my time than upkeeping a 1:1 mirrored copy of all my installers.

[drauch]

Uh... I think worrying about a major company shutting down or going bankrupt is a little different than a freak accident. Shit happens all the time. Granted, Twinkies are back, but remember the devastation? You've got home/renter's insurance or whatever to help recoup your losses. Plus, a large factor depends on where you live, if you aren't an idiot and smoke in your home/leave the oven on, or take certain preventive actions. Dunno, big difference in my eyes. Companies don't last forever, and last time I checked, a lot of us have been playing games our entire lives and will probably be playing them quite a bit longer.

[drauch]

Do you seriously believe that?

Already there are plenty of problems just supporting games on relatively open personal computer plaforms due to shifting targets - but at least you can stock parts and many things are still interchangeable, and formats are pretty clean and open. After 10 years, nobody is hounding people for improving and supporting old games. In fact, that work has often gone towards new sales of old games (MAME, hello).

Kind of a vague joke on my part. I'm not aware of any current/last gen games that are just completely unplayable at launch, hence why the "5 GB day one update" is kinda ludicrous for a game to be playable in the future as long as you have working hardware and software.

[TransatlanticFoe]

So, basically, don't do stupid shit and you're fine.

And if your account is compromised, someone uses it for frauduent purposes? Doesn't even have to be your fault (i.e. compromised in spite of having a decent password). Right there in their terms of service it says they can just go ahead and delete it.

So many drawbacks to Steam and other DRM with precisely zero benefits, other than the anti-piracy fallacy.

[Ghegs]

Shit happens all the time.

You're right, other than an isolated fire burning down your house there's natural disasters like earthquakes and floods and I know several members of these forums have had their games flat-out stolen. Having insurance won't help in re-acquiring that rare, out of print mint CIB [game name], which will probably be more expensive now than it was when you originally bought it.

Point being, your physical games are susceptible to some things, while Steam's games are susceptible to others. Have a bit of both and you're almost certain to always have something left to play, no matter what happens.

Twinkies are back, but remember the devastation?

Not living in a country where they were ever available in the first place, my soul has been spared the horrors other have witnessed.

[Bananamatic]

with precisely zero benefits

steam overlay(quick wank during respawn time and loading screens)
payment options that don't require a bank account or a credit card
quick screenshots+uploading
social bullshit to stalk friends in multiplayer games and call them out on their shit taste

it's good dude

[drauch]

Right, but with disasters and theft you can at least have some of it replaced, and it only happens to a select number of unfortunate individuals. Digital shit goes sour? Everyone gets hosed.

If I buy something I want to actually own it. I want to be able to store it wherever I please, do what I want with it, sell it, shit on it, whatever. I don't see how anyone that plays and collects older, physical games could be fine with that.

[Cagar]

i just want to play videogames
steam lets me play videogames and doesn't restrict me while playing videogames

what else can possibly matter while wanting to play videogames

with precisely zero benefits

steam overlay(quick wank during respawn time and loading screens)
payment options that don't require a bank account or a credit card
quick screenshots+uploading
social bullshit to stalk friends in multiplayer games and call them out on their shit taste

it's good dude

Bananamatic's posts in this thread sum up the whole mess.
Grown men whining about the new house rules where you can't smoke by the window anymore, and are forced to go outside. Instead of accepting and trying it, they forget all benefits and what might come of the new 'go outside' mentality, they just cry and whine, and try to make up the most absurd and paranoid excuses as to why smoking by the window is actually better. "I could slip while walking outside, and at best, die because of it even before the smoking itself kills me!!"

Seriously now people.
1. Download steam and create an account
2. Buy games at hilariously cheap prices
3. Play them
4. Enjoy the extra features of the overlay while at it (chat with friends, browse the net?)
5. Upload screenshots, review games, see user-reviews right under the "Purchase" button
6. Just enjoy the fact that someone offers to keep track of your game purchases, updates and gives news about them automatically, you will always have them with you even on new systems.

I truly think that the only people who hate steam, don't even care about video-games in general these days. Steam is the best thing that has ever happened to PC-gaming, and I've yet to see an argument against steam that's not far-fetched from reality.

This picture is a perfect example of the amazing logic of DRM-haters:

Obligatory xkcd:

Truly, the only reason why I too buy or do not buy games, is to be or not to be a criminal.
A thing called "supporting developers" doesn't even exist! It's all matter of privacy and criminalism!

tl:dr this whole post: DRM-haters, pull your head out of your ass and start actually thinking about things that matter, I think one could call it "rational thinking" . There's higher chance of your physical game collections getting broken, stolen, burned or incompatible with new systems than valve shutting down their service or disabling your account.

EDIT: Oh wow I just noticed that the stickman in the picture wears a fedora. Fits it well

EDIT2: Also highlighted the word "could". That's right, you COULD lose your collection. So why not ensure that you become criminal straight away by pirating the games?

[brentsg]

I saw someone above mention iTunes music too. At least in my country, iTunes music has been DRM free for many years.

[Friendly]

Right, but with disasters and theft you can at least have some of it replaced, and it only happens to a select number of unfortunate individuals. Digital shit goes sour? Everyone gets hosed.

If I buy something I want to actually own it. I want to be able to store it wherever I please, do what I want with it, sell it, shit on it, whatever. I don't see how anyone that plays and collects older, physical games could be fine with that.

Precisely. DRM is really a euphemism for property rights removal.

[Cagar]

I don't see how anyone that plays and collects older, physical games could be fine with that.

I don't see how steam prevents playing and collecting older, physical games

[drauch]

I don't see how anyone that plays and collects older, physical games could be fine with that.

I don't see how steam prevents playing and collecting older, physical games

I don't either, which is why I didn't write anything like that.

[Ed Oscuro]

I don't mind the use of mild, short-term DRM techniques to temporarily raise the difficulty of piracy. The most radical "information wants to be free" activists aren't showing in this thread, so at least half of the arguments against the DRM-skeptical position are packed with straw. Good Old Games is definitely very consumer-friendly, but I wouldn't have any concerns about Steam if there was something more concrete to their promise to remove DRM. As it is, Steam's DRM is very rarely problematic for me to buy - but it's entirely reasonable to expect that there is some provision to save progress.

DRM and digital distribution are two different things - at the same time, as I said earlier, the actual ethical and moral considerations (i.e. good to society) of transferring information are really the same. It makes no difference if you are buying something on a clay tablet, or papyrus, or a digital download, in terms of the seller's right to pursue new distribution channels - or the buyer's right to preserve and back up their own copy.

The "well, there's always acts of god" argument is totally inane. We could spend all day enumerating things that can kill people without scratching the surface - but here we are, life's still flourishing against the odds. Data is a slightly different kind of thing than a lifeform, but there is an aspect of both rooted in something like an idea - good ideas need work to keep going. But even if you think that all life is doomed to die out eventually, I don't see anybody here volunteering to forego bathing, eating, breathing, and so on because of some belief it's ultimately futile. Even if you feel that it's hopeless, there's still a reasonable postmodern position that holds that there is value in living what time you have allotted to you as well as possible. So it goes for digital rights management: Why hurry to make things worse than they are? It makes no sense at all.

People are still interested in the Ancient Egyptians (or at least their ruling classes...) because they actually gave a toss about preserving some aspects of their culture. Today, we have every benefit over them in terms of what we can do with technology and backup, but we're stuck in this mentality that everybody is just along for the ride and nobody really has a unique claim to their own history (which is what you lose when you can't go back and revisit part of your past). Only the efforts of archivists (and, as necessary, hax0rz) are going to preserve our culture.

At best people aren't thinking about these things. At worst, they're being utterly selfish (while still being confused about what benefits they get - none, really) or dismissive of the culture they are in. What's the point of paying for something and supporting it as an enterprise if you think that it's not worth saving for the future? I don't think anybody who has made the "rental" argument actually believes that the world would be a better place if the only way to play classic arcade games was via a dwindling stock of original boards, for example.

[ED-057]

I just don't understand how Steam is DRM. You don't own the games

Well done, you answered your own question.

Valve maintains control over what you "bought." That is the textbook definition of DRM.

[Cagar]

(while still being confused about what benefits they get - none, really)

If this implication

I don't see how anyone that plays and collects older, physical games could be fine with that.

I don't see how steam prevents playing and collecting older, physical games

I don't either, which is why I didn't write anything like that.

You sort of implied that the same kind of people hate DRM though.

At best people aren't thinking about these things. At worst, they're being utterly selfish (while still being confused about what benefits they get - none, really) or dismissive of the culture they are in. What's the point of paying for something and supporting it as an enterprise if you think that it's not worth saving for the future?

This at least once again confirmed how impossible this whole subject is to discuss.
Skeptics, please consider taking the earplugs off for a second and try thinking inside the box for once.

EDIT:
Hey let's try this, anti-DRM guys:
Actually create an account for steam and use it for a few months. Be sure to at least try all of its' features, buy a few cheap games on it and stuff. Could be an eye-opening experiment

[Eno]

Skeptics, please consider taking the earplugs off for a second and try thinking inside the box for once.

But the lack of a box is exactly the problem for them.
sorry, I just couldn't resist

[Artemio]

I've always considered digital media with drm rentals. I call them that all the time. It makes the case pretty clear, and you can see why people like it and why some of us don't.

Some people value their rights over easiness, and others rather be comfortable and not worry about being able to play the media in the long term.

Some of us prefer to have control, but it is clear we are less.

Having control implies work, I rather have a PCB I can repair than depending on others to port emulators for it over the years across systems. And to make things clear, I do contribute to MAME whenever I can.

Steam is the same, games won't be ported forever. Not all of them, or is just a matter of time.

The lapse of an agreement can end, and the game might be removed. Just as with Netflix or xbla, where the licence ends.

I'd rather have the media and it be my responsibility, than being comfortable in the short term.

[drauch]

EDIT:
Hey let's try this, anti-DRM guys:
Actually create an account for steam and use it for a few months. Be sure to at least try all of its' features, buy a few cheap games on it and stuff. Could be an eye-opening experiment

I've been using Steam since its debut. I'm not anti-Steam; I'm anti-DRM. I use it due to sheer convenience for a select few titles with multiplayer, so I'm not that opposed to it.

I don't see what's so unreasonable about being anti-DRM. You're being more defensive (and more of an asshole) than anyone who stands against it, yet it clearly doesn't affect you. Your "grown men" analogy is RegalSin worthy. Just drop it.

[CKR]

Steam pros and cons

Pros:
Cheap games
More developers developing for PC
Automatic updates
Achievements, trading cards, community discussions, online leaderboards, etc.
Curated store
No physical media

Cons:
Lack of ownership
Lack of clarity on the drm removal if steam goes bust
Curated store (games you may want now could be in greenlight process)
No physical media

For me the pros outweigh the cons. Every platform holder goes through what I'd call a period of extreme arrogance, such as Sony not wanting 2d games on their platforms during the Playstation 1 era. I'm cautiously optimistic that Valve won't hurt their gamer credibility.

I'm more concerned about the Microsoft and Sony not supporting their digital titles. How long until the leaderboard, dlc, and updates for the 360 and PS3 are no longer available. I'd wager Steam will outlast Xbox Live and the Playstation network on the Xbox 360 and PS3. That is why I recently built a PC for the next generation.

[ZellSF]

Lack of clarity on the drm removal if steam goes bust

I think that's pretty clear, in that situation:

A: Valve is probably bankrupt and have no reason to care about their customers so why would they remove DRM for them?
B: There's just no way in hell Valve has convinced every publisher they work with to eventually release DRM-free copies of their games.

And that's really my main concern with Valve's DRM. In the future I might not be able to play my favorite games, and no Valve is not too big to fail.

Only thing that makes it acceptable is that all Steam's games are easily crackable, but the best defence for Steam's DRM being that it doesn't work is very worrying. They might fix it one day.