Come on seriously now, so basically you say that there is no activation just because it's "hidden" ? That's an argument very similar to the one used by Ubisoft : "There is no DRM in Assassin Creed 2 ... it's just that it's an "online" game"

Just because the activation is hidden doesn't mean it's not there, try changing your hardware and you will see if there is no activation.

Oh no? You continue to assert that Steam games don't need activation. Steam has a backup facility, but the backups can only be installed with Steam on the computer AND an internet connection.

Gersen sums it up well. Just because it doesn't call it an activation doesn't mean it isn't.

I'm gonna come out and say it, I'm beginning to think that Eclipse is a troll.

Of course they could improve... and they could improve very easily, they could just remove the DRM part one or two years after the game is released. I don't ask them to release brand new games DRM-free (even if that would be great) just to remove it after some time.

I have no problem with it since that's where I buy my games unless they're on GOG. I don't really have the space to buy physical copies for PC games.

Steam requires regularly signing on regardless of whether you have configured offline mode or not - how much checking did you make before posting?
Of course there is a choice - you're posting on one. ;) There are other publishers producing DRM-free content (e.g. Shrapnel Games, Basilisk Games, Paradox mostly) so supporting them is the best option. If a publisher refuses to release without DRM, then I'd be happy to see them leave the market - or go broke.
That's their choice - but consoles have their limits. The controllers limit the type of games that can be played (RTS's become a problem) and the limited storage restricts patching and mods/DLCs.
If it wasn't for people caving in to DRM (which you clearly admit to) then publishers would see DRM-free as the only profitable option and release in droves.

I haven't read through this 11 page thread, so I apologize if this has been stated before. Has the point that this site is dedicated to selling old, mostly out-of-print games been raised yet?

I have no understanding of the inner workings of Good old Games or their relationships to developers and publishers, so this is all conjecture - I believe the fact that GoG sells old games is a fundamental reason they can get away offering a DRM-free service.

Think of it this way; these games aren't being sold anymore. So a service that offers publishers the chance to make more money from their old games, without any form of copy protection, is a pretty worthwhile venture - there's no expenditure - the game's already been made - so any sales are, more or less, pure profit. Some people are likely going to take advantage of the lack of DRM, but those same people would just find a way to download it regardless; but there are people who would pay for old games, if given the ability to - such as this community - and this site allows publishers to target these customers.

Now Steam sells new releases. I imagine that publishers would want a bit more reassurance in order to distribute their new products through this medium; especially as the budgets for modern games become greater, and piracy runs rampant on the platform, it's understandable that Steam has got a form of DRM - if a site like GoG existed for new releases, it would suddenly become a lot easier to pirate new games (because without DRM, the installer would just have to be shared). I don't know how many publishers would support such a platform. I wouldn't.

Now whilst I don't particularly like DRM, I firmly believe Steam's DRM is more or less one of the best implementations of DRM, because it actually provides benefits to users - the Steam Community, friends and chat, make the whole program feel like a cohesive platform. It handles downloading updates and patches for me, and give me a central location to launch all games, Steam or not.

I've grown to prefer Steam to DVDs; because you don't need to have the disc in the drive to play. Further, by having Steam on my secondary hard drive, I don't even have to reinstall any games after a format; all my saves and configurations are saved locally or on the Steam cloud, and ready to rock as soon as I've installed Windows.

As for people bringing up the issue of Internet connectivity, unlike Ubisoft's DRM (which is invasive, and doesn't add any worthwhile features) that mandates constant Internet connection, Steam doesn't require constant internet connection - and it won't boot you out of your game the second your net drops. I would like to see Offline mode improved.

People saying 'well what if I want to install on another computer?', well yes, you do need an Internet connection, but it's relatively easy to copy the gcfs (for orange box source engine games and older) or files from the common directory inside steamapps. You can run Steam off an external harddrive, and take it from computer to computer (though upon plugging it into a new computer, you'll be prompted to log in to your account).

And as for the dependency on Steam servers, yes, that is a legitimate concern. I remember reading Valve have a patch they can release which unlocks Steam games - it was quite vague, and I'm not sure if this applies to only Valve/Source games, or all games on the platform.

tl;dr: Yes, Steam is DRM. It's still the most preferable implementation of DRM, because it strikes a balance between giving publishers confidence to release their products on the platform, and gives the user-base worthwhile features. Of course, I prefer GoG, but I reckon it's highly unlikely a truly DRM-free DD service will become available for new releases, and in the interim, Steam is probably the best choice.

awesome post BrettJay, kudos. Now I hope the whole situation looks a bit brighter.... I'm off this thread as people continuing to argue how Steam is the source of all the evils isn't going to change idea even after very long and informative posts like your one.

Releasing new games digitally without any form of protection is not going to happen. If you want to play new PC games, Steam is probably the best ways to do so, if not, stuck only with GOG, your loss.
CD Projekt, that owns GOG and is the company of the very creators of GOG, will surely use DRMs for their new games like The Witcher 2, and will sell them on Steam. They're anti DRMs because with old games they can

Wows how old are you 14?
By the way Gotcha & I don’t believe you’re old enough to know what a 5.25" floppy is...

Companies don’t use DRM because of rampant piracy, they use it to control you and me because pirates get around it every time but you and I have to deal with it so why spend $$ on a game that you can't play or own? Oh and love the “your a pirate” if you don’t agree with me LOL! That’s real old and childish. Unlike you I can produce a picture if all the games I have bought over the counter, and all the games I am unable to use or play now because of DRM. Some are $50 coasters now because of the DRM your so in love with.

If PC gamers stop buying DRM & other forms of it SecurSteam it wouldn’t be as bad as it is today. Real PC Gamers have boycotted all forms of DRM.

GoG.com does not use DRM if it had DRM on it you could not copy it to a disc, or you would have to enter a key code, or connect to activate them, or phone home every time you play them, or phone home every few minutes as you play them etc, etc, etc... again sorry you don’t seem to know what DRM is really.

If they do go to Console someone else will pick up where they left off for PC Games and will know not to use DRM or should I say all the crap that you like in DRM.

Welcome, all, to the wonderful world of FlyByU 'logic'. It doesn't get any more sensible. May I recommend giving him the Anjohl treatment and just talking around him?

LOL again above and beyond the youth of the day

Or I just find your complete lack of logic and ridiculous "Anyone who buys in to anything I don't like is an ENEMY OF THE STATE!" nonsense tiresome and pointless. But rather than actually come forth with actual information, you'd rather cue up cute little pet names for systems and fear mongering nonsense.

Umm no you can't. If the client has not checked in for some time it will force you to connect to play anything even SP games. Sorry your wrong again. Because you don’t understand something doesn’t mean its nonsense or pointless.

You and people like you are the whole reason we have DRM in it present form. It's because you decided it was needed to keep PC games coming which is totally absurd thinking because we will always have someone making PC games with or without DRM.

I prefer not to have all the headaches that come with DRM so I choose GoG.com over it and any game I might like that comes without it. There is no fear mongering its just reality when you grow up you will see it.

Just ignore him and that's it like we do/did with other users around here.

I don't know let's say around 10 or 20 times in every DRM related threads but apart from that you can say it's not raised that often. :-)


More seriously, that was a nice and long post but nothing really new that hasn't been mentioned in the previous 11 pages.

Yes Steam is not the worse DRM out there and yes it try hard to hide it with some "feature", I think most agree with that.

The things (once again that have also been mentioned multiples times in the previous pages) that some peoples have against Steam or any other DRM using DD (non exaustive) being :

- It has region restrictions, it's nice if you live in US, and Steam is one of the few who enforce region restriction no only on it's shop but also on retail and gifted games (apparently only in Japan for now but who knows for how long)

- All you games are linked to a single account, lose you account you lose all your games. Will you ever lose your account ? maybe not but still it's a lot riskier than losing a single game CD.

- The Steam EULA gives them the power to change their conditions anytime they want, if tomorrow Steam decide that buying... excuse me I mean "subscribing" to a game, only gives you the right to download it for one month... they can and they can do it for any games you already bought. (Once again never said that they will just that they can)

- Steam starts to no longer be just "an option" but starts becoming the only possible means of obtaining some games, want to buy Fallout 3.1 (New Vegas) or other upcoming big budget release without going through Steam ? you cant. Even if you buy it from another DD you will be forced to download it and play through Steam.

- Not a single warranty what will ever happen in case Steam goes down ? Yes I heard too about the "magic patch" (even though I don't know how they could legally pull this stunt) but not a single mention of this patch in the EULA. The only thing we have is to hope that it would be released.

What does age have to do with anything? I'm 34 years old and I couldn't give a rat's rear end about the theoretical 'non-permanent' nature of the games I buy on Steam because most of them I buy at significantly discounted prices. Honestly, with age you are more likely to shrug off concerns of 'ownership' when it comes to something as trivial, yes trivial as a video game.

If you want to have a principled stand against DRM, fine. People have all kinds of principled stands in life ranging from the political to the religious to... well... video games. But don't pretend it has anything to do with age or wisdom or whatever.