[JD FROM HELL]

How many copies of Morrowind were pirated? Or Oblivion? Or Fallout 3?
We cannot state that a publisher has to use DRM as we do not have the closely-guarded facts about piracy.

"Piracy" when used as a reason for DRM is about as ethereal as an argument can be. We are given no real information other than a promise that the evil boogey man is being thwarted. This argument only holds sway if we assume that it is accurate. We know that pirates are not thwarted as evidenced by the fact that every form of DRM ever created has been cracked (usually within days) and we aren't even positive that pirates are the evil boogey men since we are never provided with any hard data that shows that what pirates do actually hurts us (they obviously hurt the publisher, no argument there).


EDIT: After re-reading my post I figured I should clarify that I am in no way defending piracy. It is an illegal practice that prevents people from being compensated for their work. However, my point still remains, we (the consumers) have not been shown that preventing piracy benefits us enough to warrant the inconveniences that we are forced to suffer (that pirates can easily avoid).

That is like saying people are going to shoplift from stores so why bother with cameras, security, or any actions to try and lessen the shoplifting. In the end, we the honest consumers end up paying for the actions of thieves. Companies, no mater what they sell have a responsibility to protect their products/investments/assets from thieves to the best of their ability.

[SUck MYdIck]

... is a myth. You are still required to "check in" to the Steam Servers at random intervals as well as have updates pushed out (even if you turn off the auto-updater). It is pretty obvious that everyone who recommends "Offline Mode" has never used it.

One has to wonder how could Steam in offline mode which means it doesn't access the internet at all ever find out there was an update to apply to your game.


Answer : you didn't keep Steam in offline mode at all, you put it back to online.


PS : the option "Do not save credentials in this computer, warning this option is incompatible with offline mode" in the Steam options should not be checked on.

[Scared humanity]

That is like saying people are going to shoplift from stores so why bother with cameras, security, or any actions to try and lessen the shoplifting. In the end, we the honest consumers end up paying for the actions of thieves. Companies, no mater what they sell have a responsibility to protect their products/investments/assets from thieves to the best of their ability.

Not quite. DRM is not anologous to security cameras (or even a security guard).

For an equitable comparison, your local quickie-mart would need to have full body pat downs and those new fancy full body X-Ray scanners.

Do publishers need to take steps to protect their products? Of course. Do they need to implement very invasive and unpleasant measures that fail to prevent what they claim it will prevent? No.

One has to wonder how could Steam in offline mode which means it doesn't access the internet at all ever find out there was an update to apply to your game.


Answer : you didn't keep Steam in offline mode at all, you put it back to online.


PS : the option "Do not save credentials in this computer, warning this option is incompatible with offline mode" in the Steam options should not be checked on.

Incorrect. Steam will still check online regardless of the settings you choose. It will also automatically revert all of your settings and turn Steam back onto Online mode when Steam updates itself (which it will always do regardless of your Offline preference).

[Mandi Norton]

That is like saying people are going to shoplift from stores so why bother with cameras, security, or any actions to try and lessen the shoplifting. In the end, we the honest consumers end up paying for the actions of thieves. Companies, no mater what they sell have a responsibility to protect their products/investments/assets from thieves to the best of their ability.

But at what point does protecting their assets cross a line? Following the shoplifting example... sure, cameras and security are one thing, but what if a store assigns people to follow customers around the store, in order to make sure they're not going to shoplift anything (and I mean from the moment a customer walks in, not once employees suspect something)? What if a store frisks everyone leaving a store to make sure they dont have anything shoved in their pockets?

[R.I.p MOmmy]

But at what point does protecting their assets cross a line? Following the shoplifting example... sure, cameras and security are one thing, but what if a store assigns people to follow customers around the store, in order to make sure they're not going to shoplift anything (and I mean from the moment a customer walks in, not once employees suspect something)? What if a store frisks everyone leaving a store to make sure they dont have anything shoved in their pockets?

Example is flawd because they do this and its not crossing the line at all.. I do this and 90% of the time I catch them doing it. the rest I find open items in their wake. Then again I know what im looking for. People who dont shower is one big thing. Drunks/high people Poor people (in know im targeting poor people) but shoplifting is still bad it raises the prices on items and they will continue to steal from you till they get cought. then again my store was robbed 4 times in 2 weeks so yeah we are allowed to do this stuff as its a high crime area. If you work retail at all you know they follow certain types of people around. Pay attention when you are around employees chances are they might be following someon especialy when you are around or near someon acting off.

Thing is what is considerd intrusive? The law says this. You say that. The company says its protecting its inteectual property.

People are asking them to do the impossible. Find a way that works and that hackers can't fight against it and make it so its easy to fight back piracy. Its almost impossible goal. But they do what they have to what they think will work DRM and what not etc etc are their ways of trying. Cookies are more intrusive than these things cookies can track every keystroke you do. report what sites you visit for how long and gather other information etc etc.

[Breautiful]

online regardless of the settings you choose. It will also automatically revert all of your settings and turn Steam back onto Online mode when Steam updates itself (which it will always do regardless of your Offline preference).

That's not true. I checked for myself.

I haven't updated Counter-Strike Source for a while and I know there are a few updates available for it, so I launched Steam in offline mode and watched my network monitor at the same time. Steam didn't try to connect to anything, it was 100% offline.

I could still play Counter-Strike without any issues and Steam didn't try to update. I'm still in offline mode and the only network traffic is me browsing these forums.


I don't know where the hell you are getting your information from but I suggest you use more reliable sources next time

[Mike Plumley]

Not quite. DRM is not anologous to security cameras (or even a security guard).

For an equitable comparison, your local quickie-mart would need to have full body pat downs and those new fancy full body X-Ray scanners.

Do publishers need to take steps to protect their products? Of course. Do they need to implement very invasive and unpleasant measures that fail to prevent what they claim it will prevent? No.

I have never had anyone from a game company show up at my door and pat me down. That said, if the local quickie mart (mine is 100 miles away btw) believes I stole something they sure do have a legal right to have me patted down after calling the police. I hardly think comparing DRM to a personal pat down is reasonable. I've never had the first problem with any DRM on any game and I've played a lot of them. I do wish more people who pirate games could be caught and prosecuted however.

Incorrect. Steam will still check online regardless of the settings you choose. It will also automatically revert all of your settings and turn Steam back onto Online mode when Steam updates itself (which it will always do regardless of your Offline preference).

I live in an area where many of my neighbors have no internet. Some of them enjoy sitting out in the woods and playing their games while the generator is running. Some of them bring their pc to my home once or twice a year and use my internet to download games from steam and to get available patches. They then take their pc out into the woods and play their steam games offline for months and months without going online because they can't. They have no problem doing this. :shrug: In fact, when HL:2 was released, I only had dialup connections (only thing available at the time) and after spending a couple of days downloading steam I never went back online at all and had no problem.

But at what point does protecting their assets cross a line? Following the shoplifting example... sure, cameras and security are one thing, but what if a store assigns people to follow customers around the store, in order to make sure they're not going to shoplift anything (and I mean from the moment a customer walks in, not once employees suspect something)? What if a store frisks everyone leaving a store to make sure they dont have anything shoved in their pockets?

Stores do assign people to follow customers around, they just pretend to be shopping too. Has a game company ever frisked you personally? And I would have no problem with a store checking my items against my reciept at the door. In fact Sam's Club compares my items to my receipt at the door always. Should that offend me? It sure doesn't.

[Isabell Hoffmann]

That's not true. I checked for myself.

I haven't updated Counter-Strike Source for a while and I know there are a few updates available for it, so I launched Steam in offline mode and watched my network monitor at the same time. Steam didn't try to connect to anything, it was 100% offline.

I could still play Counter-Strike without any issues and Steam didn't try to update. I'm still in offline mode and the only network traffic is me browsing these forums.


I don't know where the hell you are getting your information from but I suggest you use more reliable sources next time

I am getting my information from my own current experience with Steam. In order to prevent it from trying to update itself or my offline games (at what appear to be programmed intervals) I have to prevent it from running at all. If I leave Steam running it will update itself and my games when it feels like it, without regard for "Offline" status.

[Bryanna Vacchiano]

I am getting my information from my own current experience with Steam. In order to prevent it from trying to update itself or my offline games (at what appear to be programmed intervals) I have to prevent it from running at all. If I leave Steam running it will update itself and my games when it feels like it, without regard for "Offline" status.

Judging by the fact that millions of people use Steam without any issues I'd have to guess that the problem is on your end.

[sam westover]

Do you have proof that this system does not work at all?

If you pay attention in stores as you walk around them you will see employees following people (not all the time thoug). If you work in retail you will end up doing this yourself.

[Jon O]

Judging by the fact that millions of people use Steam without any issues I'd have to guess that the problem is on your end.

Judging by the fact that many people complain about issues with Steam I'd have to guess that your dismissal of my point is actually an acknowledgement of its accuracy.

Steam works great for some people and is a nightmare for others.

The fact remains that there is no good reason to require it since it does not work for everyone and fails completely at preventing piracy.

Stores do assign people to follow customers around, they just pretend to be shopping too. Has a game company ever frisked you personally? And I would have no problem with a store checking my items against my reciept at the door. In fact Sam's Club compares my items to my receipt at the door always. Should that offend me? It sure doesn't.

Those stores with fake shoppers are doing so in a non-invasive way and actually succeed at preventing theft. As for Sam's Club, their policy is to check any item that is not in a bag. Game Publishers are checking every single item purchased by every single customer every single time they use the product at home. Sam's Club checks known risks, Game Publishers assume all customers are theives. Which one is more reasonable?

[Shelby McDonald]

Judging by the fact that many people complain about issues with Steam I'd have to guess that your dismissal of my point is actually an acknowledgement of its accuracy.

30+ million Steam users. 35 thousand posts in the support section on the Steam forums. That's about 0.1%

Now let's say that only 1/4 people who have had problems with Steam post on the forums (I think that's a reasonable assumption), that's still less than 0.5%

Don't try to tell me that many people have problems with Steam

[Markie Mark]

Judging by the fact that many people complain about issues with Steam I'd have to guess that your dismissal of my point is actually an acknowledgement of its accuracy.

Steam works great for some people and is a nightmare for others.

The fact remains that there is no good reason to require it since it does not work for everyone and fails completely at preventing piracy.



Those stores with fake shoppers are doing so in a non-invasive way and actually succeed at preventing theft. As for Sam's Club, their policy is to check any item that is not in a bag. Game Publishers are checking every single item purchased by every single customer every single time they use the product at home. Sam's Club checks known risks, Game Publishers assume all customers are theives. Which one is more reasonable?

Both. But alot of those people following customers are not hiding they are in normal work cloths for that store.

This is the internet my boy. Alot of people have stolen or thought about it or have even illegaly downloaded somthing without knowing it.

I think in a differnt way than you. I go by cold hard facts. You buy their software (not litteraly you actualy are buying the right to use it) Its extremly hard to track people on the internet. How do you solve this problem? Track everybody who buys your product its not effecient it may not work all the time but it works to some degree.

@ Exorince

Cut that number by about 25% to compensate for alternate acounts some people have alot of alts. They also count people they have banned as the account is still semi active.

[Jack Bryan]

30+ million Steam users. 35 thousand posts in the support section on the Steam forums. That's about 0.001%

Now let's say that only 1/4 people who have had problems with Steam post on the forums (I think that's a reasonable assumption), that's still less than 0.005%

Don't try to tell me that many people have problems with Steam

You are suggesting that people who complain are irrelevant because they make up a relatively small portion of the total base? You also assume that everyone who is experiencing these problems even knows that it is a problem, or is bothered by it. Anyone with a rudimentary understanding of computer support knows that the vast majority of problems are never reported because they either don't cause enough anguish for the end user to bother, or the end user does not understand that a problem has occurred.

[Nana Samboy]

Judging by the fact that many people complain about issues with Steam I'd have to guess that your dismissal of my point is actually an acknowledgement of its accuracy.

Steam works great for some people and is a nightmare for others.

The fact remains that there is no good reason to require it since it does not work for everyone and fails completely at preventing piracy.



Those stores with fake shoppers are doing so in a non-invasive way and actually succeed at preventing theft. As for Sam's Club, their policy is to check any item that is not in a bag. Game Publishers are checking every single item purchased by every single customer every single time they use the product at home. Sam's Club checks known risks, Game Publishers assume all customers are theives. Which one is more reasonable?

I don't know what your Sam's Club does but mine counts all items no matter if they are in a bag or not at the door. There isn't much difference. So how is DRM so invasive? Does it look at your pictures? Is it more intrusive than your browser?

[stephanie eastwood]

I am getting my information from my own current experience with Steam. In order to prevent it from trying to update itself or my offline games (at what appear to be programmed intervals) I have to prevent it from running at all. If I leave Steam running it will update itself and my games when it feels like it, without regard for "Offline" status.

This looks a lot like you put your friend and messaging presence to the "offline" mode (aka, all your friends see you offline and you cannot see their status) and NOT that you put the whole Steam in offline mode.

To do it right, go in the Steam menu and select the "Go Offline" line right under the "Switch user" line.

[Daniel Brown]

I don't know what your Sam's Club does but mine counts all items no matter if they are in a bag or not at the door. There isn't much difference. So how is DRM so invasive? Does it look at your pictures? Is it more intrusive than your browser?

It violated me then put me in the basment.... oh god *crys*

[Soku Nyorah]

You are suggesting that people who complain are irrelevant because they make up a relatively small portion of the total base? You also assume that everyone who is experiencing these problems even knows that it is a problem, or is bothered by it. Anyone with a rudimentary understanding of computer support knows that the vast majority of problems are never reported because they either don't cause enough anguish for the end user to bother, or the end user does not understand that a problem has occurred.

No, I'm saying that there are always someone who complains and Steam has an exceptionally 'happy' userbase compared to most gaming-related-software. Those people shouldn't be ignored, but you shouldn't base your opinion on the software on the complaints of a really small minority.

Also, from my experience in customer support, I can safely say that about 80% of all 'problems' people are having... are user errors.

[jesse villaneda]

I don't know what your Sam's Club does but mine counts all items no matter if they are in a bag or not at the door. There isn't much difference. So how is DRM so invasive? Does it look at your pictures? Is it more intrusive than your browser?

If your Sam's Club is counting every single item then they probably have a good reason to veer so far from the national corporate policy (they may have a very high theft rate at that store).


Using Steam as an example (and granted, Steam is probably the tamest example for an online DRM), as they have no probable cause to assume that you are stealing their software they are performing an unreasonable search whenever they send a request for authentication to your Steam Client. This unreasonable search violates a normal expectation of privacy and is therefore infringing upon your inherent natural rights. Anything that tends to infringe is invasive by definition.

Other DRMs are much more clear cut in their invasiveness (preventing CD/DVD drives from operating, sending personally-identifiable information over the internet, requiring constant internet connections, etc.), but that does not let Steam off the hook. The fact that you have to install it is already an inconvenience, but the fact that you have to install it because they are accusing you of being a software pirate is completely unreasonable.

[kirsty williams]

Using Steam as an example (and granted, Steam is probably the tamest example for an online DRM), as they have no probable cause to assume that you are stealing their software they are performing an unreasonable search whenever they send a request for authentication to your Steam Client. This unreasonable search violates a normal expectation of privacy and is therefore infringing upon your inherent natural rights. Anything that tends to infringe is invasive by definition.

That's ridiculous

Why on earth would you think that the process Steam uses to authenticate your purchases is in violation of your privacy? That doesn't make any sense at all. You're exchanging data with the Steam servers. The data is your account information and the request key from the application you're trying to launch. That's pretty standard in all applications that tie your purchases to an account.


It sounds to me like you're TRYING to hate Steam. Why?

[teeny]

30+ million Steam users. 35 thousand posts in the support section on the Steam forums. That's about 0.1%

Now let's say that only 1/4 people who have had problems with Steam post on the forums (I think that's a reasonable assumption), that's still less than 0.5%

Don't try to tell me that many people have problems with Steam

30 million + users, or 30 million user accounts? Big difference right there. I've read on other forums how many users get at least 2 accounts, one for "gifting', one to actually play the games, as a way to circumvent the account lockouts which occur when the purchase of the game doesn't go through for whatever reason (insufficient funds, non response from bank, etc...).

35 thousand posts in the Steam forums. . Is that the Help and Tips forum, the one that is subtitled "users helping other users"?
What about the users who don't use the forum and go straight to Steam's support team?
Are you assuming 1 thread = 1 user? What about users who do not start threads, just add to ones that relate to their problem?
Or what about the users who say "not worth it" and never post or complain, just tack it to "lesson learned and never again"?

[Steven Nicholson]

30 million + users, or 30 million user accounts? Big difference right there. I've read on other forums how many users get at least 2 accounts, one for "gifting', one to actually play the games, as a way to circumvent the account lockouts which occur when the purchase of the game doesn't go through for whatever reason (insufficient funds, non response from bank, etc...).

There are over 30 million active user accounts on Steam, that is to say accounts that have been used in the past 30 days.

There is no way of knowing how many of those are secondary accounts.

35 thousand posts in the Steam forums. . Is that the Help and Tips forum, the one that is subtitled "users helping other users"?
What about the users who don't use the forum and go straight to Steam's support team?
Are you assuming 1 thread = 1 user? What about users who do not start threads, just add to ones that relate to their problem?
Or what about the users who say "not worth it" and never post or complain, just tack it to "lesson learned and never again"?

The Help and Tips forum is the support forum for Steam. Obviously I don't have any information on how many people go straight to Steam support, but a lot of the solutions on the support pages link to threads on the support forum.

I'm by no means saying that my numbers are completely accurate, but I think they do give you a fairly realistic view of the numbers of people having trouble with Steam. :huh:


You also seem to have missed the fact that I multiplied the number of threads in the support forum by 4 to account for the people who don't post, go straight to support or complain elsewhere. I THINK that's a nice approximation since the Steam forums are the place most people go to for support for Steam.


Now you just tell me if you think I'm being unreasonable. This is all just guesswork.

[Nany Smith]

I don't know what your Sam's Club does but mine counts all items no matter if they are in a bag or not at the door. There isn't much difference. So how is DRM so invasive? Does it look at your pictures? Is it more intrusive than your browser?

Let me give you another perspective, following the Sam's Club example.
Say you go to Sam's Club to buy, I don't know, toothpaste. So you go to Sam's Club, you buy toothpaste, and as you leave, the person at the exit checks your bag and receipt.

Now, you don't like being checked at the door. What do you do? You can go to the regular supermarket, buy your toothpaste, and I am yet to go into a regular supermarket where my bags were checked on my way out after I paid for my merchandise. May be that my toothpaste costs more at the regular supermarket, but I am willing to pay more to avoid the annoyance of the exit check and the inconvenience of the extremely long lines.

I can't do that with Steam.

Another example: I may go to Sam's Club to buy an HD TV because I can save, I don't know, $200.00. Ok, maybe I am willing to go through the long lines, and get checked out at the exit to save $200... but that is only once... there's no third party checking if I paid for the TV every time I turn it on.

[Chloe Yarnall]

There are over 30 million active user accounts on Steam, that is to say accounts that have been used in the past 30 days.

There is no way of knowing how many of those are secondary accounts.
The Help and Tips forum is the support forum for Steam. Obviously I don't have any information on how many people go straight to Steam support, but a lot of the solutions on the support pages link to threads on the support forum.

That is all I am saying, that no one really knows. The active account numbers, these are numbers thrown out there by Valve, but no one outside Valve would know if they are even close to being accurate. It wouldn't be the first time Forbes wrote an article praising a company, posting numbers obtained from the company's PR, to see the company crumble into oblivion the next couple years. The forum number don't give you an accurate representation either.

[Euan]

I am getting my information from my own current experience with Steam. In order to prevent it from trying to update itself or my offline games (at what appear to be programmed intervals) I have to prevent it from running at all. If I leave Steam running it will update itself and my games when it feels like it, without regard for "Offline" status.

Judging by the fact that millions of people use Steam without any issues I'd have to guess that the problem is on your end.

Its only natural that when we don't like something we exaggerate the problems we have with it, to justify to ourselves and others our decision for not liking it.
I'll admit that I have done this.

I'm getting the game through Steam, Pre-loading and all that is very tempting, I don't care whether it has to be activated though Steam or not.
But the arguments against this are so bad, I start to care.
I did a little research and New Vegas sold over 5 million copies, just a little more than Fallout 3s 4.7 million. How is Steam activation hurting sales?
Steam is convenient to most people, who can't or have trouble getting to a Store. When I used to live with my parents, there was no game store in town, yeah sure there was a department store that sold crappy wii games(I like the wii and all, but these games svcked).
Then less than two years ago a tech store appeared, but you had to order most games.(of course the internets still shotty, butt leave the download on overnight and your all set).