First of all thanks to you too for good discussion on this topic!

Walking away = not settling.

The way you use the term "settling" to mean compromise can be described as "meeting in the middle." So, "not meeting in the middle," to the point that no compromise is reached, means not settling.

What you describe about buying on deep discount, etc, is accurate example of settling. Both sides are making concessions and a deal gets done, even though both parties would've liked individually better outcomes.

I said as much in my post. So what is your specific solution on getting others to follow suit on a topic they do not care about? It is reasonable to say that these other people would need motivation to care, before they start caring. I think you'd agree to that general point. Unfortunately (as I pointed out), the motivation is essentially out of a regular customer's control and would just be random chance as to whether big events would happen that could cause customers to care. Even then, that still doesn't solve the whale problem I mentioned, as a majority of customers might still be effectively powerless against a company's anti-consumer practices. I do appreciate the discussion with you but wondering if there's something more than just optimism behind your position.

Ok well let's assume I'm not a charismatic speaker either, so basically that means your earlier advice to just go on social media is ineffective advice. There, now we can move on :)

Your claim of accomplishing these things still lacks proof. I explained why your claim does not seem likely to turn out the way you think it does. You insist that it would turn out that way, but say you're not creative enough to think of how.

So, upon what do you base your belief that it would turn out the way you think? Answer: optimism and hope. Which in some cases may be warranted. In this case, I doubt it, given repeated behavior of DRM stores/companies already.

I do get your point though it doesn't account for streaming or other potential types of DRM that don't have room for such workarounds you mention. By the way, all the support and acceptance that DRM stores get, is how we are getting to "stream-only." Stuff like this happens incrementally and is because people have continued to compromise and compromise and compromise. This is part of why I can't get excited over Epic Fail Store. It is just adding to the DRM cacophony that has already deafened the market.

Kickstarters for games have satisfied customers with games that the businesses were otherwise refusing to make despite knowing there was customer demand for it. You might see this as evidence of your point but what it goes to illustrate is that you absolutely cannot trust these companies to give you the option of things you want.

As one of countless examples, where are the devs and pubs who cater to LAN options? People want this, it would take no effort to have in games that have online multiplayer, yet it is nearly extinct. The businesses, by and large, aren't catering to customers like me that want this.

And then when I support the small amount that do cater to customers like me, and speak out against the ones that don't, you worry about me missing out on the larger culture. Lol there's no winning.

Dude. I may have come off a little harsh, but I would need a different analogy. The one you used seems to totally contradict its own internal logic (I think there are contradictions even if that particular analogy is rephrased, too). I could go into why I think this is the case if you like, but I don't want to get too off-track.

I am glad to hear that and I think it's a little different than where I was going with it.

Let me take a different angle.

You've heard the term "dealbreaker," right? Everyone has them when it comes to interactions with other people. Granted, some dealbreakers are considered to be more justified than others, and some can be a matter of degree.

When people give in and abandon their dealbreaker in the name of compromise, it typically results in a lot of heartache when it comes to important personal issues.

For example, think of a couple where one partner wants a child, but the other does not. Or think of a relationship where one person is demanding polygamy while the other is demanding monogamy.

These are untenable situations because there is no reliable way for both actors to be happy together. Looking at the situation, it's pretty clear at least one party (the one who "gave in") is likely to be unhappy.

In compromising, one of the actors has to stop insisting on their position (even if temporarily just for the sake of that one exchange), or walk away.

In the case of DRM stores like Scheme and EFS, I say it is time to walk away :)

Thanks for that, i will give it a try.

Not sure what my desktop system is..... I am also going to install it on a laptop for co-op play. I know what the laptop is because i purchased it in October 2018
Lenovo ThinkPad T440s Ultrabook Laptop 14" i7 2.1GHz 8GB 128GB SSD Win 10 Pro

I got one for my partner, and they sent me a second one by mistake, (without charge) i have kept it in the box all this time incase they asked for it back, but nope = free laptop, YAY!

My offer to modify the file for you in case it does not work still stands. Just contact me if necessary. Good luck! :)

Thanks again

1st bit- To me walking away is settling for things to remain as they are or not caring as much as one who tries to actively change things...just my two cents. Sorry if I wrote it to sound misleading as to what I meant.

2nd Bit- Imo all you need is a few people making a "loud squeak" on social media and the YT "e-celebs" and MSM sites picking it up to push companies more to your way of how you want things to be done. Outrage mobs have proven this works time and again for their causes, so it should(in theory) likely work for ours as well.

And nope it's just i'm on the more optimistic end of the realism spectrum, as it were. I'm also trying to find a silver lining in all this as well.

Big recent example of GOOD change in game development: Ion Fury walked back some of it's changes due to people pushing for it via reviews and social media posts(and youtubers talking about it).

See? Change one wants IS possible. :)

3rd Bit- See my example in bold in the 2nd bit of my reply. Change is possible using these methods.

As an old saying goes(more or less) "Be the change you want to see happen(or make it happen)".

(Also you can praise those doing such on social media or at least leave a uprate/comment on the sites you use in support of such...every little bit helps, as you said(for other things like being against DRM). :)

4th Bit- Hackers/etc and insiders could leak game data perhaps? While not legal it is a possibility(people do it with movie screener copies all the time). I'd have to check and verify it's possible with more tech minded people to be 100% sure, though.

As for the incremental changes......there are niche and indie markets that still cater to everyone's tastes, and some games drop on DRM-free stores from time to time. Also I believe the market is like a pendulum and will swing another way given time.

(People could raise enough of a stink on social media that a new sub markety of drm free games comes about...who knows?)

5th Bit- If there's enough customer demand things are made.....a few people isn't enough of a demand(to some devs) to risk the money/time to cater to them. For those there are modders(who do such out of passion for such and the like) and also people can make their own games if they want to take the time to learn the skills needed. Heck, many game companies of yore started that way.

As for LAN: Same as above....not enough interest to be profitable for most devs & also many use the net to play games nowadays(Can't a sort of LAN be setup with multiple PCs using a router in the dame home and a local server over the internet?).

6th Bit- I still wonder if it's not just the fallacies in the analogy I used but also your not wanting to accept any truth behind them due to your own stances and biases/cognitive dissonance. :\

7th Bit- And I say there is a third option(for some)......be morally flexible, buy games on said sites, and use cracks if needed while buying on deep sales(to not give them much money if one chooses to not give them much support). The market will eventually swing back and if it doesn't do so or fast enough social media "outrage" can be used to "fight" for change by some.

===============================
(Also again thanks for bearing with me...it is appreciated and the talks are a welcome change from people ignoring me or just telling me basically to "f off". I hope my posting style isn't giving you too much eye strain or headache, btw.)

8 bit: why don't you use the QUOTE tags?

No problem...but would you consider using the "quote-response, quote-response" way that I do? I know you have alluded to how it helps you to break down the post to do it your way, so I'm not trying to make you uncomfortable. But imo it is much easier to read.

So, it looks like "settling" is being used to mean multiple things. When I used it in a negotiation sense, the goal was to make clear what is/isn't settling, as walking away from a deal is literally the opposite of settling/making a deal.

You seem to be using it regardless of that to also mean more generally "accepting" a situation in a sense. And I do get what you are saying, though I disagree.

People might use similar rhetoric about all sorts of topics to say "you're just making excuses," "you're just giving up," etc (which is really just mindless peer pressure btw).

The thing is, people like me are making an educated guess to save us from wasting our breath and time. We don't "accept" the situation so much as look for better alternatives to a reality that will not likely change.

We know when to cut our losses. Same reason why I saw EFS for what it was as quickly as I did.

Okay, well thank you for admitting that your belief is based on optimism rather than some concrete example. I guess that ends your argument since you are admitting you are not able to prove it. Unfortunately, there is not currently an "outrage" inherent to DRM (I would say this is VERY much because people have compromised again and again over the years, with "reasonable" attitudes like yours speaking back against people who criticized the anti-consumer practices back then, but I digress). Do you recognize that people now simply don't care about DRM right now, or at least don't care enough to form a large group on social media?

In my earlier post, I gave examples of hypothetical things that might actually cause people to start caring about it, e.g., if a service goes down and they lose the ability to download their games in time, or if a CEO gets #metoo'd. My hypothetical examples are of things that could fuel that sort of outrage necessary for a social media campaign to succeed and a company to back down on DRM. However, my examples happen to be random events out of any normal user's control. Can you think of ANY hypothetical example to the contrary, that normal users could use to get other people who currently don't care about DRM, to start caring?

There is a distinction between "a few people making a loud squeak" and "an outrage mob." To get the numbers for the "outrage mob," you need to explain what would happen to get them to care in the first place. I know the few people making the loud squeak are outraged. But on its own that does not cause anything to change. Leaving aside the obvious reality that the gaming media will take a "pro-gaming industry spin" as much as they possibly can, in order for DRM-free to be a story, enough readers (of that media) need to have interest in the topic. Otherwise, why would the gaming media run the story, if its readers don't care and it is contrary to the game industry narrative?

Oh ffs that's nothing in comparison to DRM, and weren't you in that topic arguing in favor of the "moderate" position that "it was only one item in the game and an area the user's not even supposed to access?"

The big recent examples of GOOD change are big games like Vampyr, Diablo, and Warcraft 1&2 available here DRM-free. Link me to the famous Youtubers who demanded this change and caused it to happen.

There are other games people have been asking for here for over half a decade. But their DRM-loving devs/pubs couldn't care less. It is effectively out of the consumer's control to any meaningful degree.

This really grates, because again I am not "doing nothing" as you continue to imply. I have already explained I am doing what I can, in my limited power as a consumer, to support DRM-free gaming. So enough of that, please.

Let's address a related point: the way the DRM got so bad is because it occurred incrementally over time instead of all at once. When the Xbox One was originally pitched, it overshot their expectation of what they thought consumers would accept. Everyone, even most of the shill gaming media, quickly started backtracking from those original hyper-DRM plans. Along the same lines, Scheme as it is now would not have been accepted back in, say, 1998.

Now, one could try to argue that positive improvements towards DRM-free are also something that have to occur incrementally to work. The problem is, there is a lot more "power" on the other side of things pushing for DRM-exclusivity forever. The increments can't naturally take the same amount of time. Steps towards DRM-free have been much slower than towards more DRM. And barring random events outside consumer control, it looks to remain that way.

What if you're wrong? Your optimism is the "self satisfaction" that you accuse users like me of. Your belief flies in the face of over a decade and a half of game industry practices. When does the "swing back" get to happen, and, more importantly, how? Observation of multiple generations of gaming reveals that the PC gaming market is not like a pendulum so much as it is like Pandora's box.

True! Now please apply this same exact reasoning to your other claim that "a few people can make a loud squeak on social media."

Nice snipe, but the point of an analogy is to create a comparison to better illustrate a position. If the analogy is mis-phrased to the point it does not make any logical sense on its own terms even, it needs to be re-phrased. Let's leave the analogy aside for a moment. What was the original point you were trying to make by using it? Obviously I have not shied away from responding to you in this topic, and many others...

First, it's really not a matter of "morality." We are talking about consumer preferences. My stated consumer preferences sure seem to rankle you though, which is odd considering you are in favor of DRM-free games too.

I will be generous with the timeframe and say Scheme has had a virtual monopoly on the PC gaming market for a decade. Again, where is the swing back, where is the change? Not enough people care. Since you admitted your belief (that a vocal minority can go on social media and get a necessary amount of people to care) is based on nothing but optimism, we don't really have more to discuss on this topic.

Here is how it doesn't work: when not enough other people care about your cause.

What specifically do you do to get other people to care? You are not answering the question.

What makes the Youtube e-celeb care in the first place?

You need them on board and right now they couldn't care less.

And by the way, they also have more incentive to remain sided with the companies.

No, I am saying it is vastly harder to get a DRMed game to go DRM-free than to censor/uncensor a game. Why do you think this is? It is because censorship (and anti-censorship) is a common thing that people care about and thus sparks their outrage one way or another. DRM does not spark their outrage, at least not in meaningful enough numbers. Hence why the consumer who cares about it, is virtually powerless. You said earlier devs don't put in LAN because not enough people care. That means that the vocal minority customer who does care about LAN, is virtually powerless. How are you not seeing that this is the same phenomenon on a larger scale, with the topic of DRM?

What are the magic words then? You sure seem certain of your claim right up until it is time to substantiate it.

I already explained that even though the self is a perfectly valid reason to have beliefs, I care about DRM-free gaming so there is an option for other people to have it as a purchasing option too.

And this is where you "fail"(read on I explain this more in a bit), imo....you are laying down your "arms" before the battle has even begun and giving me reasons why it cannot work or might not work, instead of being more optimistic and looking at the past successes others have had as a guiding light/example to give one hope.

Youtube "e-celebs" often side with the underdogs and those with good causes...there are many who champion such causes and get good reach/have a large userbase to spread such messages to....and many of them also dislike big business's worse practices(so on that you and they can often be in alignment).


The difference between lan gameplay being put in games and getting drm OUT of games is that anti-drm people are more passionate and seem to want it more and in larger numbers(from what i've seen). That alone is a good start.



If I was more motivated and less afraid(those who try to do such must thrust themselves into the public eye for all to scrutinize unless they act through a mediator/middleman of some sort) I might attempt such for my favorite causes more than I do.

I admit I don't follow my advice as much as I should, and on that we can agree.

Agreed, and I think people should be able to be more flexible and enjoy games even with DRM if they want and not let it impeded their enjoyment of an otherwise fun game/other piece of media due to such beliefs.

At least we both agree drm doesn't solve much of anything, eh? At least we can agree on that if not much else. :)

Having hope doesn't change the reality that the "battle," so to speak, was decidedly lost a decade and a half ago.

Back then, moderate, flexible, self-control-deficient users decided they wanted to open the Pandora's box that was Scheme client for gaming. Elsewhere in the gaming world, online requirements became more widespread, such as for multiplayer. Then a bit later, Horse Armor came out and was successful. You're not realizing what absolutely brutal blows these events landed to DRM-free gaming and how the effects of each have become increasingly worse:

Client requirements, online-only modes, and DLC now evolving into microtransactions (built into games and requiring online even for what would be singleplayer), have all grown exponentially worse in the last decade and a half. Unless the big companies overshoot their estimation of how much people will accept this stuff, by implementing too much too fast (like original Xbox One plans that sparked outrage), these bad practices will keep rolling out incrementally.

Also, I will help answer the question that you don't want to: there are currently ZERO big Youtubers who take an actively DRM-free stance. If you have the magic words that would convince them to try and start a new "battle" to try and undo decade+ of DRM, by all means please share them.

While there may be more customers who insist on DRM-free-only than on LAN modes, both type of customers are still a vast minority and thus the companies won't cater to either LAN gamers or DRM-free-only gamers. When these gamers then go on to hold their nose and buy DRMed games at discount, it compounds the problem, because the companies can (rightly) say "you didn't care enough about DRM-free to not buy this game, so why should we go DRM-free? You'll buy it anyway even with the DRM." It totally undercuts whatever hopeful underdog message you were trying to preach.

Also, you may be interested to know I admit I am guilty of a similar practice in that I am totally against Galaxy requirements for multiplayer, but have nonetheless bought games that have it (because I wanted to play singleplayer). The distinction is, I am admitting that my action in doing so went directly against my belief and probably did harm to my stance in the market. I am not making excuses for my own, or any dev/pub's, "bad" behavior so to speak.

Indeed, hear hear! :)

I personally think the battle is still ongoing and can possibly be won in part or in whole with enough effort of the proper type.

As for youtubers....there might be not many anti-drm ONLY advocates but some do dislike some of the more corporate practices of steam/epic/etc. TheQuartering might be one, for instance.


It only takes a small handful to start a movement online....many many news stories have proven this time and again.

Also it's good to admit one does things they rally against or dislike, but I cannot say that a few extra people byuying steam/etc games make the situation any worse, or a few not buying makes it much better.


Now that's the spirit.

Look at those embedded quotes for ultra readability! Now that's the spirit :)

Tbf i'm only doing it for you to be nice(mainly because you debate and don't stoop to name calling or low rating and leaving like others do).....it's too much work to do it for everyone's long posts. :)

wouldn't you love to just kick him the nuts one time? :P

and am I the only one who keeps hearing his posts being read back in the voice of HAL 9000?

Who's been peeing in your frosted flakes? We're having a nice debate here and you come in to stir sh*t.

As you and others told me: Go back to 4chan/8chan. :p