While I agree the remote saving is kinda bad but good at the same time. You pretty much can't use steam offline anyway right? so why not save some space by having it saved on their servers, but I would prefer to have the option to save locally or even locally and remotley.

I don't mind online authentication for online games like Quake 3 or whatever. But as I said before, I knew I was going to be without the internet for awhile so I wanted to buy Bioshock ( a single player game ) but had heard that I needed an internet connection to install it.

How fucked is that?

Anyways, I've never been a fan of steam, but that's from my early impressions of it. I haven't tried it for a year or so but I think I see the direction their going in and feel that it might not be so bad.

How many of us have gone through different messenging programs (ie IRC, xFire, etc) to hook up together? Then voice messenging like Teamspeak and the like?

How many times have you reconfigured BF1943 controls or your favourite configs for Wolfenstien Enemy Territory when visiting your friends house and spent an hour tweaking your settings before actually playing?

When you look at the allegedly 'free' SDK that Valve announced and/or provided a several weeks ago you can get an idea of what their aiming for. And it not might not be that bad if it becomes a standard that isn't abused.

That kind of technology takes a lot of work to develop and ontop of that, much more to get marketplace acceptance.

There will always be parts of it that people don't like, such as DRM and interface issues and money. But maybe a good online standard gaming 'cloud' might not be a bad idea.

The alternative is using a million different 'customized' one-shot wanna be Steams.

I wouldn't mind a catch-all standard way to integrate many of the aspects of online gaming (I like qtracker, some like ASE). But I can see the drawbacks of having a monopoly on everthing.

Do we stay as a chaotic but free and sometimes frustrating soup of seperate tools all trying to do the same thing or do we try and accept a standard that makes things easier but yet less flexible and controlled by one corporation? Where do we trade off our freedom for convenience?

OK >U your right, we are all wrong. your amazing control of the English language and debating skills makes you a god of all message boards and forums.

I'm done feeding your over-sized ego. you can go to bed now.

edit, lagged double post

This comment was edited on May 30, 00:51.

Sure if we're talking about hardcore crackers and such, however Steam effectively shuts the general PC user from pirating the game easily.

I don't know what planet you are from but here on Earth our Internet has this search engine called Google that even a moron like you can use to search for cracks for Steam by simply typing in something like "Steam crack download". Your notion that DRM still prevents the casual or general user from piracy is an anachronism because the Internet has obliterated the former barriers to entry.

This comment was edited on May 30, 00:52.

Regarding your claim of Steam's ability to prevent unauthorized use and distribution, actually Steam is less effective than other DRM systems at that because it is uniform. Since Steam's DRM is built into its client software and is uniform for all games on Steam, simply cracking the client itself cracks all of the games so they can be played without authenticating. So, the pirates actually love Steam because it provides virtually a one-stop shop for all of their free gaming needs.

Sure if we're talking about hardcore crackers and such, however Steam effectively shuts the general PC user from pirating the game easily. Forcing them to look in the more shady areas of the internet or paying for the game through an easy interface. most people choose the latter.

One day after its retail release, the game is already cracked

Wow, that was pretty quick. It's almost as if the crackers are game industry insiders who do this to cutdown on customer service requests and complaints concerning the DRM in games.

This comment was edited on May 30, 00:27.

Valve seems to be making the biggest effort of any company to make PC gaming more accessible.

You mean restrictive.

your just as guilty when it comes to reading, since your bold statement just plays into my point exactly.

You're obviously an idiot in addition to being a DRM apologist and not just because you don't know the difference between "your" and "you're". Your supposed point that people only complain because they're pirates is bullshit. The pirates actually don't complain because they don't need to. DRM schemes and copyright laws simply don't bother them because they still get what they want for free regardless.

I have to agree with Riley here. Pirates don't care about DRM because it doesn't affect them. If DRM actually worked, then Trashy's claim might actually have legs but unfortunately, it doesn't work.

Take Mass Effect, for example. One day after its retail release, the game is already cracked and pirates can play it without ever needing to activate it. They can rest assured in the fact that they will be able play the game 10 years from now and install it as many times as they want. They can upgrade their system and not have to worry about the game no longer working. Legitimate customers? Not so lucky. They should be asking why they have to put up with extra hassles for the sake of a copy-protection that doesn't even work.

Valve seems to be making the biggest effort of any company to make PC gaming more accessible.

>U
You must not read much then because his post is the usual bullshit smear seen from the RIAA and MPAA lobbies and their apologists.


LOL and your just as guilty when it comes to reading, since your bold statement just plays into my point exactly.

That post is the most accurate and concise explanation of all the DRM/privacy bullsh*t that clogs up the internet that I've ever read.

You must not read much then because his post is the usual bullshit smear seen from the RIAA and MPAA lobbies and their apologists.


This comment was edited on May 29, 23:55.

When you guys mention, privacy issues or DRM it's just a cover / easy excuse for what really bugs you and that is you can't steal the game easily.

That's the exact same specious reasoning and obfuscation that the RIAA and MPAA use to demonize and smear those who oppose their draconian copyright legislation. The real reason that people oppose draconian copyright legislation like the DMCA and DRM schemes like SecuROM and Steam is because they value personal freedom, consumer rights, and control over the content they purchase. The so-called pirates don't give a damn about either such laws or DRM schemes because they are already flouting the law and DRM doesn't stop them from getting what they want for free.

Regarding your claim of Steam's ability to prevent unauthorized use and distribution, actually Steam is less effective than other DRM systems at that because it is uniform. Since Steam's DRM is built into its client software and is uniform for all games on Steam, simply cracking the client itself cracks all of the games so they can be played without authenticating. So, the pirates actually love Steam because it provides virtually a one-stop shop for all of their free gaming needs.

This comment was edited on May 29, 23:58.

I won't be surprised to see some type of disclaimer that allows them to do literally anything they want with your demographic information. Unless they've already claimed that.

@ Trashy

That post is the most accurate and concise explanation of all the DRM/privacy bullsh*t that clogs up the internet that I've ever read. Props to you.

For the record, I buy my games and music and I STILL don't like DRM because I am a control freak myself. But I don't rant in the forums about it, and the people who do are, I'm confident, 90% of the time just bitter that they can't steal it.

The only reason why people are bitter over anything relating to Steam is that it actually forces people to actually buy the games.

When you guys mention, privacy issues or DRM it's just a cover / easy excuse for what really bugs you and that is you can't steal games easily.

I would complain about steam if I had to buy the game each time I got a new computer or re-installed the OS, but seeing how I can re-install the game over and over and even on different computers the point is moot. This save feature will be welcomed in my opinion.

This comment was edited on May 29, 23:33.

I don't like this remote save game idea. I don't like control being taken away further from me.

What if it allows you to do both? There's not exactly much you can glean from this that crosses out either possibility. I love the idea for remote storage of config and controls, though.

If I were implementing such a system, I wouldn't even touch the engine, and just have Steam handle uploading/downloading of the config.cfg and other associated files. There's not many advantages to some deep hook within the engine.

This comment was edited on May 29, 23:24.

Control Freak!

I don't like this remote save game idea. I don't like control being taken away further from me.