Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Steam Family Sharing

store.steampowered.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 123 posts

Re: Steam Family Sharing

#101

Post by asifsignupfor »

mynameisvlad wrote: post #94
anigbrowl wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what they fear second most, aside from pirates- a burgeoning used game market I'm not sure how they fear that so much. On the rare occasions when I buy videogames they're usually used ones purchased at GameStop or on eBay.

Publishers and Developers are gaining absolutely no revenue from you doing that. And that's their issue. They want everyone to buy new games, because then they get a cut of it.

Buying second hand props up the $60US/$90AUD new cost though. Without second hand (ie. Steam at the moment) the prices plummet very quickly, $5 for Just Cause 2 for example, do you think GameStop etc. would allow you to buy it new for that price?

Re: Steam Family Sharing

#102

Post by forrestthewoods »

robotresearcher wrote: post #99
forrestthewoods wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm really not being obtuse. When "loaning" digital bits the only thing that could possibly be loaned is a user license. Bits are copied, not loaned. If I "loan" you a digital game then your computer will make a copy of bits as sent by some arbitrary server possibly across the globe. You may even make a copy of different bits as your copy of the content may be for a different localization, quality setting, platform,…

You are not wrong, it's just that your point is pointless. We know bits can be copied at close to zero cost. But the value of the bits can't be realized without the token (if DRM pertains) or can't legally be realized (if a single-user license pertains). The bits without the token have almost zero value. You are loaning the ability to realize the value of the bits. You said "Loaning digital goods is a gibberish state…

I believe that the distinction between loaning digital goods and loaning a license to legally use digital goods is meaningful and important to recognize.

Re: Steam Family Sharing

#103

Post by derefr »

MartinCron wrote: post #65
duskwuff wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But note that this still doesn't allow you and a friend to play a game with each other unless you both own a copy.

Which is a pretty reasonable restriction. If you're going to both get the simultaneous value out of a game, you should probably both pay for it.

I'm kind of surprised that game companies now expect you to pay for a game twice to play through a two-player co-op campaign. Remember when local multiplayer was a thing? When you'd buy a game, and several people would sit around a TV getting "simultaneous value out of it" for the cost of that one purchase, because that was the game's value proposition to begin with?

Re: Steam Family Sharing

#104

Post by anigbrowl »

mynameisvlad wrote: post #94
anigbrowl wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what they fear second most, aside from pirates- a burgeoning used game market I'm not sure how they fear that so much. On the rare occasions when I buy videogames they're usually used ones purchased at GameStop or on eBay.

Publishers and Developers are gaining absolutely no revenue from you doing that. And that's their issue. They want everyone to buy new games, because then they get a cut of it.

I know that, what I meant was that I'm not seeing much evidence that they're deadly afraid of it. Maybe it's a mistake to judge by console games which have reasonably strong anti-piracy protection, to the point that I've never regarded the getting a fake as a serious possibility. For PC games that's much harder to enforce, but I haven't bought a PC game in years - as I don't play games much and it's a leisure activity rather than a lifestyle, I prefer ones that I can play from the couch rather than at my desk.

Re: Steam Family Sharing

#105

Post by sliverstorm »

asifsignupfor wrote: post #101
mynameisvlad wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Publishers and Developers are gaining absolutely no revenue from you doing that. And that's their issue. They want everyone to buy new games, because then they get a cut of it.

Buying second hand props up the $60US/$90AUD new cost though. Without second hand (ie. Steam at the moment) the prices plummet very quickly, $5 for Just Cause 2 for example, do you think GameStop etc. would allow you to buy it new for that price?

No, it's the other way around. Buying second hand denies profit to the publisher, which reduces units sold, which increases the price they have to charge to make any money.

Re: Steam Family Sharing

#107

Post by DrJokepu »

peterarmstrong wrote: post #93

Well, I still need 2 copies of Civ 5 to play multiplayer with my son: > CAN A FRIEND AND I SHARE A LIBRARY AND BOTH PLAY AT THE SAME TIME? > > No, a shared library may only be accessed by one user at a time. Now, I was (and still am) fine with that since it has provided so much entertainment, but for many games that would not be true...

Or (if you use Macs) you can just buy it on the Mac App Store which doesn't have such limitations so you would only need to pay for it once. The Mac App Store has other shortcomings but it proves that these very restrictive licensing terms are mostly unnecessary.

Re: Steam Family Sharing

#108

Post by DrJokepu »

MartinCron wrote: post #65
duskwuff wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But note that this still doesn't allow you and a friend to play a game with each other unless you both own a copy.

Which is a pretty reasonable restriction. If you're going to both get the simultaneous value out of a game, you should probably both pay for it.

I don't think it is a reasonable restriction at all. Besides the most devoted fans, I don't believe many families would purchase multiple licenses to a lot of games just to be able to play them simultaneously. These kinds of terms don't really increase revenue but they unnecessarily damage the experience at the same time. This is exactly the sort of stuff that makes pirating more convenient. As I've mentioned in another comment, the Mac and iOS App Stores don't really have these limitations.

Re: Steam Family Sharing

#109

Post by Sarien »

You could always share steam accounts by giving somebody your password! The only thing this does is allow you to gain your own achievements which is just Valve's way of getting you addicted to your steam account. Stop treating this like a good thing or even a service it only benefits Valve.

Re: Steam Family Sharing

#110

Post by chii »

mmanfrin wrote: post #67
tibbon wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How/why do you play on two computers at once? Seems difficult.

Purchase all my games on steam. Son/daugher/parents/cousin wants to play a game I own, but I am currently playing a different game I own. Only one person can play a game at a time, even though licenses have been purchased for both.

if you had the foresight, you could potentially just created 1 steam account per game purchase. This, in fact, solves all problems related to steam that i have.
Post reply on HN