I like to reward people for giving me fun. But hey, apparently I'm weird.

Or for one of the German anti-video games politician to actually have a clue on how technology and Steam works.

yeah, i do.

i try to minimize the amount of programms i run that get internet access to those i really want to do something that inherently needs a connection.

application: buhuhu, there's a new version of me. please, i want to be up to date.
i: go fuck yourself. you aren't even supposed to know that you're not the latest version.

well, i do make exceptions for security critical applications that need updates all the time(anti virus).

no singleplayer game will get internet access if i can prohibit it and i won't install some organize, chat, social foobar client bullshit either for such.

recently i had a rather hard time deciding if i could put up with GFWL for dark souls. the main reasons to do it were that microsoft anyways could "own my soul" as i'm running windows and that dark souls actually is kind of a multiplayer game and i was interested in that aspect of it.

I like that too. So if i pirate a game(not pirating anymore but if...) because it requires a service i don't use i will buy their drm-free games 2 times or 3 times or more to reward them.

Our courts get their technical expertise from these guys. They know how it works.

Our politicians however .... Well. At least we have the Pirate Party!

Nah, I like it and I think that Steam provides a very convenient service.
I'd like to see a client revamp though - it could be a lot better.

I don't number thieves among my friends. The SSA also leaves anyone open to account closure regardless if they share them or not, so why abstain from doing it?
Some people may not be comfortable with it or wouldn't benefit from it, I however regard this as one of Steam's most beneficial features.

So your only comment on the difference between joining Steam and leaving Steam is that you don't see why you'd ever want to leave Steam? Is it now that I'm supposed to say "I rest my case"?

More seriously: AFAIK, using Steam necessitates you (as a user of said service) to agree on the at all times current license agreement - adjusted by local laws/regulations. If you disagree, Steam is under no obligations to allow you continued use of their service. Thus, while you may see no reason to leave Steam as it is today, you are at the mercy of Steam, within the boundaries of legislation.

That's nothing to worry about if you expect to Steam to be reasonable and fair to their customers (as long as it doesn't hurt their business), but there's nothing you can do if they don't fulfill your expectations. The recent change in license agreement, while unable to hold up in court (or so I've been told), do say something about how Steam would like to treat their customers, though.

Looking back on the multiple fits you've thrown over the "CDPR witch hunt", I'd expect you to feel less than happy about Valve's way of doing business - well, not really, I expect you to continue your crusade against CDPR, while defending Steam/Valve to your last breath.. that's ok - it goes well with your fascination with blow and hookers.. =P
Huh.. and here I thought it was the developers that created the games and the publishers, well, just published them.. about time I was set straight in that matter, me being a developer and all - thank you.

Ah, we haven't had a "let's moan about Steam because it's PURE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVIL" thread in a while. Honestly, I'm at the stage where I don't care, in the unlikely event that Steam shuts down (and with the massive cash printer they call Dota 2 on the horizon, I don't see this happening within the next decade) I'll just pirate all my games.

Also, I'd like to hear MichaelPalin's opinion on Gamersgate, they don't sell DRM free games by his definition of the word.

I might of course be wrong, but the only ones here talking about Steam being evil are those "defending" Steam by trying to put words in the mouths of those more critical to Steam. It's called straw man argumentation if I remember correctly..

While I am exaggerating a bit, I think you'll find that most of the people who dislike Steam consider it a negitive influence on PC gaming and that if it collapses PC gaming would be better. They would almost certainly be wrong, since it'll probably result in PC gaming collapsing with it unless someone somehow manages to take over its market share in the mean time (which, with Dota 2 on the horizon, I don't think is ever going to happen).

There's actually a fair number of posts on this forum where people do say that, just not in this particular thread :)

meh, STEAM has grown on me. What I avoid are those games that come with thirdparty DRM. CAn you belive it? They are putting DRM on the DRM nowadays! So I always check and if a STEAM game needs, like, UPLAY or something I go "nonononononononothanksbutnononononononono..."

Much better - now there's actually something to discuss =)
(aside from the definition of evil and any potential ties with the judean religions etc - which could be interesting in it self, but wouldn't really make much of a difference in peoples' opinion of Steam)

What do you base your assumption (PC gaming collapsing along with Steam) on? Or, to be more specific, what do you think will disappear if Steam falls?

The way I see it, Steam is little more than a service aimed at simplifying certain aspects related to gaming, which while beinmg helpful to some is neither a necessary part in game cevelopment nor game distribution. There are several other DDs out there that will happily try to gain some of the lost market shares after Steam, but games will be sold in the meantime - just like before Steam.

I don't really see how anything less than both Nvidia and ATI suddenly refusing to support anything more demanding than standard office applications graphicswise, to make PC gaming collapse - and even then it'd only be a matter of time before someone else swooped in to pick up the pieces. And making electronic/digital gaming collapse? Won't happen.

The world's too big and the potential revenues too tempting for these things to disappear/collapse. The far more realistic danger is that a large enough part of the gaming industry settles for something that holds back the future development of gaming, so that the few alternatives don't gain enough traction to be inovative successfully in a financial sense. It wouldn't make anything collapse, but it'd take much of the fun out it (not that we'd stop gaming, though, they know how to make a crappy game like FarmVille addictive).

So, my "view" on Steam is simply that I don't want to settle for it, as long as there are alternatives. Which there are.