I am pretty sure you can disable auto-updating on a per-game basis. Look at the different options available in your Game Library screen.



Agreed!

It's funny, DRM only affects people who get the game legally. It's likely that the people who steal the game will be playing it before anyone buys it legally and will never be bothered by any DRM issues.

I'd really like to see one of Steam's ardent defenders....

Actually - first - what I want to see is full financial disclosure. I find it hard to believe that all the people who pop up to sing the praises of Steam whenever this comes up do so on a strictly amateur basis. I sincerely believe that there's a certain amount of astroturfing going on here - that some number of Steam's defenders have some sort of vested interest in promoting it.

Then - I want to see someone defend the malware. That's the real issue to me. I'm not pleased with the DRM in general, but I do understand the legal issues surrounding it, so I've resigned myself to that. But that's not where it stops - Steam installs to my system (and in spite of the fact that the software is not technically my property, the system damned well is), tracks my usage and reports back to Steam. That is the very definition of spyware, which is malware. There's an entire branch of the software industry dedicated to preventing the installation of malware and to removing it when it slips past - why on earth would or should anyone voluntarily install it, and how on earth can anyone defend a company that REQUIRES you to install it?

apparently, the deals seal the deal for many, Does that mean if other DRM like SecuRom start offering cheap games & svck up to devs more would like other drms?

While I can't say I agree with killing the used games market I do have to admit if you think about it, it really is factually worse than piracy. With piracy a copy is duplicated which may result in money not being sent to the developer, which might have happened without that piracy. With used games, money is exchanged to someone that had no role in creating the game, which in real world terms is more damaging to game companies.


To be frank it shouldn't be their place to violate their customers for a place like Australia. If the Australian government wants to invade their citizens' houses to police gaming habits they should do that with their own police, not with software companies from countries with constitutions that prevent such Big Brother-like lunacy. Region locking needs to go away. It's one of the things I'll give Sony credit for. All of its recent gaming products are region free. Some companies no longer put up with China's laws. Why should they put up with Australia's? It's one thing to release censored versions in the country, but it's not their job to police people who purchase out of region versions through other means.


Wow, this is an interesting one. Talk about conspiracy theory out-of-this-world accusations. Do you really believe this? Wow. We're Valve. We're everywhere. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.

More seriously, now that I've hand waved that accusation, you are misinformed about Steam as malware. Securom? That's malware. Installs without asking, hides itself, gives no clear indication when it validates or uses install limits, and gives no clear means to uninstall. Older versions even corrupted your file system to hide itself. Steam is not like that. You are free to stop Steam from starting up with your computer. When you close it, it does not run any shady programs in the background. Yes it collects anonymous system information, but it's not as shady as you're making it sound. Adobe Reader is more intrusive than Steam. Man I hate clearing those Adobe icons from my Desktop and the pointless update program that it puts in startup. Apple Quicktime used to be just as bad. I'm not sure if it still is. Both more naggy and annoying that Steam though. The main point though comes down to...


This, this, this, this, this!

Anything more than normal disc check and I want Steam. I don't want Capcom or Ubisoft level anti-customer level DRM. I don't want Securom malware. I've heard enough horror stories about GFWL that I don't want that. Steam however I heard went out of the way to accommodate Fallout 3 modders allowing the script extender to work whereas it couldn't with other DRM systems! If the required Steam allows you to download your game any time you want that's just an added bonus. Again, simple disc check is best yes, but I'd love to optionally link it to my Steam account and if online activation is required with a third party service I want Steam!

You don't need an internet connection to play a game with steam. the interwebs is only needed to register the game and then you can play it offline to you hearts content. i got FONV on steam around x-mas and ive played it on offline mode the whole time. only time i have re-connected to steam was to get patches or DLCs.

i prefer downloading games myself. CDs always get lost or damaged. with something like steam, even if my computer (and back-up external hard drives) somehow got stolen or broken i could still re-download the game.

Funny, there's lots of us out here who feel exactly the same about Steam. If Skyrim is tied to that, there's lots of people who are seriously considering not buying the game.


I tried to think up some kind of cool expansion of the acronym to fit my opinion of it, but suffice it to say it means more freedom to play your game without being told you have to jump through a bunch of hoops first. (it actually stands for Games For Windows Live though)

Honestly, I don't see why people grovel on the ground in worship of Steam, yet flame GFWL. Steam is *MORE* intrusive than GFWL simply because you CANNOT PLAY unless you let Steam run. GFWL can be utterly and completely uninstalled from the system and the games associated with it will play as though nothing is wrong. But of course, Microsoft = Evil, Valve = God, hence the ass-backward groveling at the feet of the non-Microsoft company.

In spite of your cutely exaggerated recast, it's a valid question. I'll make the point very simple for you - companies pay individuals to promote them online. That's neither new nor novel nor a "conspiracy theory." It's marketing. For instance, I have an old friend (in the online sense) who works for a film studio, in promotions. The biggest part of her particular position is posting positive comments on their films on message boards. That's what she's paid to do.

I'm not necessarily asserting that any of those who rush to promote Steam are in the same position - I just wonder every time I see it happen. I'll guarantee you that Steam has some sort of arrangement in place for promotion of their service on message boards. That's just business - to not do so would be unsound.


So the best you can come up with is that Steam is not as invasive as a couple of other things? Things that you're not required to install anyway, and that I in fact don't have installed on my system precisely because I'm not required to, so, as necessary, I use non-invasive alternatives?

That really doesn't address my point. It's malware, and I'm REQUIRED to install it in order to run games that use it. I don't rightly care if there's other malware that's worse, and I really don't see how that's pertinent. Shooting you in the head would be worse than stabbing you in the stomach, but that certainly wouldn't make stabbing you in the stomach acceptable.

It's really very simple. I don't want malware on my computer, and I really couldn't care less if it's nominally a bit less invasive than other malware. I don't want it AT ALL.

They need to do a DRM check - fine. But they should be PROHIBITED from requiring me to install their app on my system. I should not be required to install spyware just to do a DRM check on my purchased software. There's absolutely no reason for it - their spyware is not necessary to do the DRM check, and since it's not necessary, they should not be allowed to force me to install it. Period.

It's not malware at all. If it were malware it would actively fight your starting it up and it would run in the background all the time without your consent. It does neither.

It's more akin to iTunes.

If you want to call it bloated fine, but it's not malware.

Can you play a Steam game with their app entirely disabled?

No, but that doesn't make it malware. At worst it makes it bloatware. You can however play with no internet connection after activating. You can also make shortcuts to launch games from the desktop or start menu. I'm not saying it's better than no Internet DRM, but I am defending it from the malware accusation.

I kind of wonder if Sony could have gotten away with it if they had just offered really good sales.

Nope. You can't even firewall it to keep it off the internet, or it brands you a thief and shuts down access to your library. Nice eh?

No - that DOES make it malware. It runs in the background without my consent.

And to head off the expected response - consent is voluntary. If it's extorted, then it's not consent by any legal standard.

My only "consent" regarding a Steam game is whether or not I consent to buying it at all.


Digital serfdom.

Anyone who considers Steam Spyware or Malware obviously knows nothing about the service. By far the best way to purchase PC games bar none. If it's not on Steam I don't purchase the game unless it's something major like Starcraft.

I never knew that... no not nice
But if you didn't want it to be connected to the internet you would simply start it in offline mode which is easier anyway.


I don't know about extortion, that might be using it a little loosely, when you buy a game that requires steam you are consenting to installing it because the game requires it to run.

Will the retail box contain language that lets you know that you need Steam?

What about instructions for running off-line?

AS creed brotherhood DRM failed miserably, first of all, the game was sold as an " online game" i mean why on earth would they do that, why do i need to be connected to the internet to play a single player game its very very stupid, but ok we menage somehow and i hope they learned their lesson, now i dun mind protection like that on game that is actually based to be online but for a single player game rly? Plus some people may have internet with limit for example like 30 gb limit or less they do not wana be connected to the net 24/7 cuz they dun wana waste their limit so why force people to be conected online to play a single player game, i hope Skyrim will not have that

Yes. But you can't roll back your install to one of the intermediate patches (if, for example, the current patch broke something. Or if you need an earlier patch for the mod you're running. Or if you want to use an earlier patch for temporarily unlocked content.)

------




I understand completely that companies are annoyed the Gamestop is making $$$ off their IP, without giving them a cut. (And, given the difference between buyback prices and used sale prices, Gamestop's making a mint....)

Personally, I thought that the solution Bioware tried with Mass Effect 2 was rather elegant - a New copy came with a registration code that gave you access to several "free" DLC. If you buy the game used, those DLC cost money. They're non-required DLC, so a person buying it used isn't forced to get them - but if they find them interesting enough, Bioware will end up getting a little extra $$$ from a used game purchase.

-----

re: DRM

We do have to have some sort of copy protection (disc check, Steam, GFWL, etc). It's been shown that even with really nifty indie games (people like nifty things, they tend to not have "Evil Corporation" thoughts about indie groups), completely copy-protection-free releases will get pirated in crazy amounts - something that can be had "for no effort", lazy people will steal. Even minor copy protection, like a disc check? They won't. So there does have to be something.

But incredibly strong DRM? The really dedicated pirates will still get through it. The thing you have to balance is how much the DRM inconveniences legal users. (see: Ubisoft's silly DRM for an example of "gone too far")


-------

If you get right down to it, the real problem with tying offline games to Steam is that you're screwing over the people (and they do exist) who could play the game just fine, and buy it at the store or by catalog just fine, but don't have broadband. Either because they can't afford it, or they're in a place that doesn't have it. (there's more places like that in the US than you'd think - since broadband isn't being regulated like a public utility, the companies have no need or reason to build wires to less built up areas.)



So yeah.... the Steam requirement didn't stop me from getting and playing FO:NV. And it won't stop me from getting Skyrim. But I still think it's stupid. :shrug:

I am perhaps that one exception then. My gaming rig is not, and has never been, connected to the internet. I put in way too much money into my Gaming Rig to allow insane hackers destroy it. I do not game on-line, I am from the old school of sitting around the table with chips, liquor, dice, and good ole HUMAN Imagination. Anyway, it this this requires an internet connection, than I guess my Elder Scrolls adventures will end in Oblivion. Also, I do not think that DRM has ever put a dent into priacy on dang bit. I believe it has actually increased it.

DRM's aren't the answer, Skyrim would be better off not having any or just have a disk check for the 1st 3 months and then patch it out.

Is there any data to back this up?



It stopped me from buying NV. But I fear I may crumble for SK.

Then you have been brainwashed. Steam may or may not be "malware". But it is "spyware". Why is it that I live in a "free" country, yet now big brother is now able to access my computer and "check" what I am doing? If that isn't spying than what the (censored) is?! That is EXACTLY what Steam does. And they use that information to what end? To better my gaming fun? And if you think for one second that they don't sell or give away some of that information to others, than you had better wake up! They do!

I'm done.

1. I have no affiliation with Steam or any company remotely related to it and I get nothing from them financially or in kind. Sometimes I think I should ask them for it, though.

2. http://www.valvesoftware.com/privacy.html. Notice that all of the personal information is only collected if you voluntarily agree to it up-front (it's not a hidden request). Also notice that no unique, personal, or identifying information is collected without your consent. What Steam tracks without your consent are two things that are related to the development process of the software that uses Steam:

• USAGE statistics, meaning the hours and times that you play the game. This does not include anything about your hardware, your system, your location, or anything that might be personal or identifying.
  
• BUG reports which help the developers identify problems in their software.

Both of these are collected for the benefit of the developers. Your license to use the game software gives the game company the right to keep track of how and when the software is used. This isn't private or protected information because there is no way it can be used to identify you, anything you own, anything about your location, or anything about you, individually, at all. It's not illegal because it's not personal information, you don't have any "right" to keep it a secret. It's no different than any other service that grants a license, such as granting a trademark or IP right, which allows the licensor to restrict and keep track of how and when the licensed content is used. This is information that licensor's have perfectly legal and ethical rights to access.


It's not that the Australian government is using the Steam service as law enforcement (though that is the effect, or result), it's just that Steam games can't be distributed in Australia at all except subject to the condition that they prevent users from running Steam games that are prohibited in Australia. That's like the American FDA preventing foreign food companies from selling prohibited food or drugs in US grocery stores.

Software isn't physical, like food, but the concept is the same. Prohibited content is prohibited whether it's a digital file or a manufactured pharmaceutical. Saying "this drug should be legal in the US because I'm a customer and I bought it in Cuba" is never going to work. It won't work for video games either, harmless as you might think they are.

To question whether a sovereign government has the authority to regulate the media that is imported into its borders is ... well it's not going to get you very far. I'm pretty sure anyone would recognize the authority of the Australian Government to prohibit the sale and use of certain media in their own country.



I agree with most of what you are saying in principle, but this is where you are most misguided I think. For one, you consented to use the license with terms. This is exactly why software is a license to begin with, so that they can attach terms and conditions not just to the sale, but to the use itself. By consenting to use the software license, you consent to all the terms therein contained. If you don't want to consent to those terms, then you aren't allowed to use the product. It's really that simple.

Lastly, on this point: "their spyware is not necessary to do the DRM check"...
Keep in mind that Steam isn't spying on you, it's collecting information that the developers are entitled to have about their own software, and which is in no way traceable or identifiable to you.
Steam is more than just a DRM. It has DRM, but it's a developer package, and developers use most of the tools that are a part of that package. To expect them to only use one feature of the entire package is a false hope.



1. It does not run in the background without your consent, you just consented to several things at once when you really want to seperate them out. You can't because software is a package deal. You can't pick and choose which features of the software package you want and which ones you don't want, especially when the pieces you don't want relate to the developer rights in their own code.

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion is something obtained under force, threat of violence, or coercion. The "threat" of not allowing you to play a video game is no real threat that any court would recognize and is certainly not coercion. If you don't want steam, then don't buy a steam game. Nobody has ever forced you to use the Steam product under threat of violence or harm. I understand your frustration, but you are taking the concept to an extreme level that is probably best called outrageous.

3. Consent to buy is consent to use.



I know what you mean. You have to get online, activate, then go back offline. If you don't want to do that, or can't, then you can't use the steam product. It svcks for you, but individuals in your situation must be such a minority that developers are willing to sacrifice those sales in order to protect the other development interests that Steam can help them with.



First of all, "big brother" has nothing to do with it, if you are refering to the government. If you just mean the developer is "big brother," then you're right that they have access to certain information. Second, nobody is checking to see what "you" are doing. The only information they collect is to see what their game is doing, which is perfectly legitimate. They use that information to write patches and to develop the next piece of content or software that they want to release.

It's hard to conceptualize, but it's not your information that they are gathering, it's theirs. Of course they sell it and give it away, it belongs to them to do with as they please.

The bottom line, though, is that none of this is spying on anybody because it has nothing to do with you, your information, or anything individual or unique to you.

I generally agree with this. While I think some people genuinely like Steam for whatever reasons (sales, no disk required, etc.), I do believe that Valve has a rather coordinated group of employees/cheerleaders that browse various gaming sites to promote it. And their posts are usually easy to spot: it's the typical long-winded sales/PR pitch about autopatching, friends lists, convenience, how Valve is a great company, how Steam "saved" PC gaming, and so forth. Whenever I see a poster take the time to post numerous, lengthy messages about how great Steam/Valve is (generally using the same familiar sales pitch template), I suspect that it's simply one of Steam's people carrying out their publicity job. I know that it's not always the case, but probably more often than not. Truly disinterested gamers don't tend to troll the internet in order to promote a digital distribution store/DRM system, foaming at the mouth any time someone raises questions about Steam or its merits.

Don't get me wrong, I do understand this kind of promotion as a viable business practice. It's just not very subtle, and it gets a bit tiring to see on various websites where Steam has a direct or indirect interest at stake.