31–40 of 88 posts
This is part of the broader discussion on commercial platforms limiting accessibility (including software compatibility) for short-term interests. Much like social media platforms shape media on their platforms, the platforms themselves are shaped by the owner's commercial interests.
GOG is DRM-free indeed. Others like MS Store and Epic? Lol, they aren't better than Steam in regards to DRM. I prefer GOG, but it's cool that Valve are advancing Linux gaming.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea.... He goes on about how you dont own the game on steam because valve can... patch it so that it doesnt work. But then says well lets play a game on gamepass. I mean I guess that DOES solve the "patch it so that the game no longer works" problem. Just dont own anything.
The point is that when using a subscription service to access a game, like Microsoft's gamepass, you explicitly know that what you're paying for is temporary access to a game. Where as when you buy a game on many of these store fronts it doesn't seem like like you are only buying temporary access, but it is in fact what you are getting just with possibly a slightly longer timeframe.
Or is this an apples and oranges situation where microsoft doesn't "break trust" because they dont even offer you the ability to play the game.
Also I would love a example of a game that no longer works at all.
Bummer for the community but it seems like a reasonable position.
I think i disagree? you do own games on steam: just download them, and you can then launch them without the steam client. At least Paradox/Sid Meiers games work without steam, i did not test others, but i remember playing Dragon Age (the first one) and Mass effect without launching steam (basically we used steam to install those game on my PC, then disconected from my friend account account, and could play a "pirated…
Gaben saved gaming.
It's a bit strange to me to read these complaints about Steam/Valve, then have the author... switch to Microsoft Store and advocate for Game Pass?
I must admit that the Steam client is quite slow and bloated. Having used it for many years, I often avoid launching it. Epic has replicated these same issues. Consequently, I end up using GOG instead.
Interestingly, the Epic store is not, or rather it is but it uses Unreal to render it (or at least the Slate UI component of it). On my laptop it uses the discrete GPU to render instead of the integrated one, which has an impact on power use and battery life.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I have a bunch of free games on the Epic store, because they were giving them out. I still buy them on Steam because the Epic launcher is just so awful.
But why? What specifically is awful about it compared to Steam?
Epic: Basic library management, No user reviews system, Missing social features like forums, No mod support integration, Inconsistent cloud save functionality, Aggressive exclusive deals that remove games from other platforms, Perceived as "buying" market share rather than earning it, Heavy reliance on free games to attract users, Slower, less responsive launcher, More frequent bugs and crashes, Limited offline functionality Fewer accessibility options, No linux support and aggressive stance against free software in general.
It's a bit strange to me to read these complaints about Steam/Valve, then have the author... switch to Microsoft Store and advocate for Game Pass?
"DRM means you don't own the product, and you'll eventually lose acces to it. Therefore, subscription based gaming plans are a preferred option, as they don't attempt to deceive you into thinking you're buying an ownable game, often with a real, ownable game price tag. The subscription starts at a given date, has a defined expiration date that depends on the offering you choose, and provides a clearer statement of non-ownership of games."
Personally I get the point, but this take is missing lots of important details that should've been considered before making such an impactful decision:
- Think, for instance, of some of the policies that are already present in some services, such as restrictions for offline play.
- And how much this opinion actually benefits videogame lobbies that are looking into pushing game-as-a-service practices that, very coincidentally, we're attempting to fight against in Europe with initiatives like "Stop Killing Games".
In fact, this message, at this time, could have counterproductive consequences for the non DRM market and overall customer rights exactly because of the surrounding situation.
>Because the Steam client patches itself and because Valve was lying about contingency plans, their DRM prevents running Windows 98-era games on original hardware.
What about Linux? Steam has supported Linux since 2013, and is notably the only big store that does. Personally, I don't even see the other stores as competition since they don't even let you install them from my OS.