Yes, all the "technical details" are written this way, in a sidebar, in a lower point size than the main game description, below the community block, below the metacrtitic information, in a block of information most anyone will ignore, such as the Genre (which they already know), the Release Date and so on.

It's also immediately followed by a high contrast block of information including the ESRB/PEGI rating, and bright-green on dark background info about single/multiplayer etc.

The fact that some games won't have this 3rd party DRM listed at all may in fact train you that there isn't any useful data in this block of data at all.

So ... in short my comment was not misleading, and your framing, while true, is misleading. It's definitely intended to be low-visibility.

I ... Don't really know, it seems fine to me. Well at least I always look at that bit of information before purchase, it kind of seems like common sense. Then again, the DRM could be listed in the 'features' list under rating frame.

Yeah, once you know it's there, it's something to always check.

But "Third party DRM" written in dark gray on dark gray is pretty obviously either -- selected so that you don't notice the phrase, or a complete failure of design usability that has persisted for years.

EDIT: Heck, even the choice of phrase is misleading. What about Steamworks DRM? Why don't they disclose which games have that and which games don't? Granted for some people it's a minor point, but for some people it isn't.

It's not like the page even that there's an online-only component, or account required. There's this:
"Internet Connection: Temporary broadband connection for product registration, permanent broadband connection for multiplayer. *Supported Video Cards at Time of Release:"
but it's actively misleading, as you need to be logged in to an account (not mentioned) even for single player if you want all the game features.

Obviously DRM is an anti-feature, and Steam's goal is to sell games. Anti-features don't help make the sale, but their current site design is definitely too far down the wrong direction of placating the publisher / making the sale instead of being fair to the buyer.

The web page that I purchase the game from DOES NOT LIST JOINING UBISOFT's website as a requirement. Period. End of story.

And that is a FACT. It is not there, I'm looking at it now. It does NOT list this requirement. And it also doesn't list "going to Ubisoft's website to read about the other DRM requirements".

And I got the expected response back. So can someone please tell me how to "save" a copy of this page that doesn't show this requirement as I am going to proceed to small claims court next week??? I will need to show that the page does not show joining Ubisoft's website as a requirement.

If someone (obviously no Steam fanboys) can please explain to me how to save the image of this page that doesn't show this requirement I would greatly appreciate it.

I can't seem to do a screen capture and capture the whole thing. Do two screen captures??? Think would go over in small claims court?? I think it would be better if it were "one" image to show the judge this requirement isn't listed.

I need to save it TODAY because I would bet dollars to donuts that they're going to fix it and add it in soon. I need to show that at the time I purchased it, there was no such requirement listed. So, how can one save such an image??? Because it's not really a webpage I don't think, or at least I don't see an address, as I guess it is "inside" my account and therefore not a page one can link to.

Because Steam itself is already DRM. Steamworks is just more integrated and doesn't make a difference as long as you buy on Steam. Now if you buy from another site, like Gamersgate, there it makes absolute sense to point out if a game has Steamworks or not.


And again, what makes you think this is coming from Steam / Valve, when the official publisher (in this case Ubi for Anno 2070) doesn't state anything else on their site? Is the possibility that the publishers provide those infos to Steam so far-fetched?

Not sure I qualify, but open the store in a browser in combination with screenshot / print?

It lists, as a requirement, a temporary broadband connection for registration. I have done that hundreds of times with other games, and that did NOT entail me joining their websites. It almost always was me putting in a disk code and I was perfectly fine doing that. I just do NOT want to join another damn company's website, and joining WAS NOT LISTED as a requirement.

And again, it is absurd to believe every person on the planet is supposed to already know that "temporary broad band connection for registration" equals "joining as a member another website." I guarantee you if you took a poll, the result is not going to be 99.9% (obviously not me) of the public knows that Anno 2070 requires joining Ubisoft's website in order to play.

Yes, this is what most people think, but it's false. Precisely because Valve
chooses to muddy the waters by not disclosing what games use their available DRM.

Steam is only DRM for developers that incorporate the DRM that is offered. Not all developers do. To state this more clearly: many games purchasable via the steam software / site and downloadable with the steam client will run even if the steam client is not running, even it the steam client is uninstalled from your computer.

These games are a minority, but it's very hard to clearly count them because steam doesn't tell you, and therefore you have to evaluate the runtime behavior of the games themselves, which you don't have.

I don't think that text is coming from Steam/Valve, but its definitely their choice take false advertising promotional copy and sell games with it.

Oh you're just making an idiot out of yourself by now, there are absolutely no details of the used DRM on the Store page, just it's name. Surely, the first thing you do is google what exactly does that particular's game DRM include if you don't want to be surprised. Tages can be configured to do a wide variety of things, and activation limit needs to be tied to an account, otherwise it would just not work. So yeah, the blame's on you not paying attention and not properly understanding what the store page says. It could be made more visible, sure, but the information is there.

Here is the web page that does NOT list joing Ubisoft's website as a requirement

http://store.steampowered.com/app/48240/?snr=1_4_4__804

I'm going to try using the Windows tool but I think that won't go beyond one screen and this page is longer than one page (unless one had some unbelievable screen resolution I guess).

NOPE, the snipping tool won't do the whole page. I guess I'm going to have to do it in pieces and hope that's acceptable to the small claims court.
No, you fanboys are the ones looking like idiots, and assholes, when you refuse to accept that Steam did NOT list as a necessary requirement joining another companies Website. I've purchased about 10 Steam games, and I have NEVER had to join another companies website. So I already had precedent to believe that it wasn't required, and if it is, it should be listed.

If you do a physical printout of the web page, doesn't it have a time/date stamp at the bottom along with the URL? I haven't done one in so long I honestly don't remember.

You can also contact your credit card company about this if you used a credit card to pay for the game. It would result in Valve closing down your steam account if they took action, but at this point I'd imagine you don't care too much about that. I'd assume it would block that card from being used for any purchases on steam in the future, but again, I doubt that's a concern.

Well, there's one detail "3 machine activation limit". Which on its own would be enough to make me skip a game.

Amusingly, while that text has existed, the meaning has been changed multiple times, as there was a shitstorm about how it couldn't be performance tested since putting in and out videocards exhausted the limit, and then ubisoft backpedelled and reconfigured TAGES etc.

So what does it mean specifically? not disclosed indeed.

But it is listed, as a 3rd party DRM, it's right there. When you presume, blame falls on you. And I'm hardly a Steam fanboy, there's a ton of things I dislike about Steam, but the fact that it bothers to inform you of the precise DRM a game is using (in this case Tages, which does require registration for the activation limit to work,) is actually a good thing. They could just do 'Game requires constant internet access' or something and be legally done with it. This way you can google or ask around to figure out what exactly does the DRM want you to do. But yeah, you're presuming (probably that the 3 activations limit works on the grounds of magic) and then call your presumptions Steam's fault.

Or he could ask Valve for a refund. When he properly makes his case, they will probably give him one.

Oh, yeah, good point, it DOES list a date and time.

THANK YOU.

I've already informed them that I will be taking them to small claims court, and if they ban me and block me from playing MY GAMES that I've already paid for, then they'd better get ready for further legal action. Damn shame I have a consumer rights lawyer in the family.