Posted February 17, 2022
low rated
vv221: I don’t think there is anything "grey" on this topic. There are people who are OK with DRM and vendor lock-in schemes, and people who are not. The division is really clear cut.
Of course it’s getting a bit messy because of people who partake happily in vendor lock-in and other forms of DRM but still pretend to be "against DRM" (spoiler: they’re not). These are the « it’s not DRM if it’s only for multiplayer » and « it’s OK if it’s only the Steam client » crowd, and they are the only ones who can speak about « DRM-free games on Steam » without seeing the obvious issues with this.
Nope, you miss the point. DRM is software designed specifically to stop stop illegal copying and to ensure the software is use only by the user with the license. A client for downloading is not DRM, neither is online gating. I am not saying they are better or acceptable, simply that stating a term DRM and labelling that to everything simply allows people to wriggle out of hard issues. It is control over your product that is the overriding issue here, and DRM is only one part of this. You could (and I often do) argue that clients are worse than DRM as DRM can be bypassed and removed, whereas the mentality which comes from using clients (i.e. being unable to organise your own saves, or patch your own product etc.) is not as easily countered, and its been that way since steam started and is thoroughly embedded in the psyche of gamers now, no gaming without a client.Of course it’s getting a bit messy because of people who partake happily in vendor lock-in and other forms of DRM but still pretend to be "against DRM" (spoiler: they’re not). These are the « it’s not DRM if it’s only for multiplayer » and « it’s OK if it’s only the Steam client » crowd, and they are the only ones who can speak about « DRM-free games on Steam » without seeing the obvious issues with this.