DRM Tolerance

Suho1004 said:

I also didn't vote, because my opinion is a bit complicated. I guess you could say that my opinion is: I'll accept whatever DRM scheme Civ uses as long as it is within reason. This will probably infuriate some people here, but there you have it. DRM does not exist in a vacuum for me, and I'm more willing to make concessions for Civ than I would be for just about any other game.

Click to expand...

Um, that's what the poll is about. What do you consider "within reason"? Is a CD check within reason? Is holding a gun to your head within reason? If it depends on the product, then I could see why you felt unable to explain your choice.

qwerty25 said:

You know, you didn't need the first option, everyone is going accept no drm.

Click to expand...

As the results are showing already, you've misjudged the audience.

TheDS said:

As the results are showing already, you've misjudged the audience.

Click to expand...

Not really, since I find it hard to believe that any user would object to a game having no DRM. Also the poll can easely be read as 'what is the most intrusive form of DRM that you still find acceptable', which prompts users to vote for one single option rather than voting for each and every one of the options up and including the most intrusive form of DRM.

Shurdus said:

While I understand the love for Impulse I do not get the negativity that you seem to display towards steam. Basically steam does what impulse does, except that impulse needs to be ran for updating only and not in order to play a game. Steam needs to run in the background in order to play a game, but the differences one may be concerned about end there imo.

That being said, you seem to post on a regular basis both here and on the emelental forum, so you seem to have access to the internet on a regular basis. If so, then the one thing that might make steam slightly annoying - that is that it logs in when you run a game - makes it moot since you are connected to teh interwebz anyway. From there on end it makes the anti-steam sentiments a matter of principle and not pragmatism.

I can see principles as being a good thing, up to the point where it does not interfere with pragmatism. Once principles hinder being rational about things like allowing steam when using steam is not really an issue to begin with, then it boggles my mind that one finds impulse good and steam intrusive. I just cannot grasp that.

Click to expand...

I realize that this is directed at another, but felt like I might chip in with my two cents.

How can you claim that a programme that only serves to update and one-time register the game once is basically the same to a programme that requires constant supervision of the game in question? So no, Steam and Impulse are nothing alike. They're both part of the same process and try to achieve the same goal, but they do so is dramatically different ways.

You seem to be trying to question his right to hold his position in your middle paragraph, so I'll leave that for him.

Principles are secondary to pragmatism? I don't think you've fully thought that through, because the natural culmination of that argument would generate a society substantially different to what we have today, which I doubt you, or many people, would be comfortable in.

It is a good poll though, and I'll be keeping an eye on the results. Also, I did interpret the poll as "What is the most intrusive form of DRM that you still find acceptable", and went as far as Impulse.

Veneke said:

I realize that this is directed at another, but felt like I might chip in with my two cents.

How can you claim that a programme that only serves to update and one-time register the game once is basically the same to a programme that requires constant supervision of the game in question? So no, Steam and Impulse are nothing alike. They're both part of the same process and try to achieve the same goal, but they do so is dramatically different ways.

Click to expand...

How so? Steam runs in the background, in offline mode if you have no access to the internet. If you do, it connects and then runs silently in the background. Impulse does not need to run in the background.

Maybe steam does slightly different things too, but what users need to know is that steam needs to run when the game runs, impulse does not. It is not a dramatic difference in my book, but anyone can feel free to feel different. To me as a user, all that matters is that steam runs in the background and impulse needs not do this. That is all I ever notice in difference, and if that is all I ever notice from the whole steam platform, I'd say that for the end user like me who is as pragmatic as I am it hardly matters if one uses impulse or steam, especially if one has access to the internet on a daily basis.

Veneke said:

You seem to be trying to question his right to hold his position in your middle paragraph, so I'll leave that for him.

Principles are secondary to pragmatism? I don't think you've fully thought that through, because the natural culmination of that argument would generate a society substantially different to what we have today, which I doubt you, or many people, would be comfortable in.

Click to expand...

Be that as it may, I was talking about DRM, and the differences to steam and impulse users for those who have access to the internet at home. I had indeed not though about the implications of my statement for society as a whole, or what would happen if any one would generalize my point of view to the extend where it would be applied outside of this context to be a universal truth. In that case my opinion might need some revision. In the topic at hand though it was perfectly fine.

Shurdus said:

How so? Steam runs in the background, in offline mode if you have no access to the internet. If you do, it connects and then runs silently in the background. Impulse does not need to run in the background.

Maybe steam does slightly different things too, but what users need to know is that steam needs to run when the game runs, impulse does not. It is not a dramatic difference in my book, but anyone can feel free to feel different. To me as a user, all that matters is that steam runs in the background and impulse needs not do this. That is all I ever notice in difference, and if that is all I ever notice from the whole steam platform, I'd say that for the end user like me who is as pragmatic as I am it hardly matters if one uses impulse or steam, especially if one has access to the internet on a daily basis.


Be that as it may, I was talking about DRM, and the differences to steam and impulse users for those who have access to the internet at home. I had indeed not though about the implications of my statement for society as a whole, or what would happen if any one would generalize my point of view to the extend where it would be applied outside of this context to be a universal truth. In that case my opinion might need some revision. In the topic at hand though it was perfectly fine.

Click to expand...

The fact that you recognize it as a difference is sufficient, whether you consider it a significant difference or not is your own choice, but your post claimed that they were alike, when in fact they are not. Your argument about end users may be valid, but you cannot possibly expect this to extend to every single person. In fact, I'd wager that a good many people are concerned what is being done on their computer, given the numerous concerns regarding privacy etc that are present in many of the Steam threads.

Edit: Sorry, forgot to reply to a question: If you cannot see the difference between a one-time activation process and the need to activate another programme every time you run the game I'm not sure what I can say to persuade you.


Read back over your post and you'll see that you brought it into the general realm which incited my reply. Here, I'll break down for you how I read it so you can see where I'm coming from.

You point out that Steam and Impulse are the same, but cite a difference which is subsequently deemed of little value (Basically steam does what impulse does, except that impulse needs to be ran for updating only and not in order to play a game.). Then you go on and argue that his argument is flawed because you have seen him on the internet (That being said, you seem to post on a regular basis both here and on the emelental forum, so you seem to have access to the internet on a regular basis.), which somehow negates his entire argument. You follow this up with a general statement on Principles vs/ Pragmatism (I can see principles as being a good thing, up to the point where it does not interfere with pragmatism.), and then continue this general field of thought citing Steam as an example (Once principles hinder being rational about things like allowing steam when using steam is not really an issue to begin with, then it boggles my mind that one finds impulse good and steam intrusive.). I can only conclude from this that your assertion that principles are secondary to pragmatism is a more general point of which Steam is merely a component. Which left me to point out that if so, there are many other implications for this line of thinking that you may not have considered.

Veneke said:

The fact that you recognize it as a difference is sufficient, whether you consider it a significant difference or not is your own choice, but your post claimed that they were alike, when in fact they are not. Your argument about end users may be valid, but you cannot possibly expect this to extend to every single person. In fact, I'd wager that a good many people are concerned what is being done on their computer, given the numerous concerns regarding privacy etc that are present in many of the Steam threads.

Edit: Sorry, forgot to reply to a question: If you cannot see the difference between a one-time activation process and the need to activate another programme every time you run the game I'm not sure what I can say to persuade you.

Click to expand...

Of course I see the difference. An end user who has access to the internet notices little difference in using steam or impulse. Steam runs in the background, impulse does not. In all earnest, for all pragmatic reasons I can see I would say that steam and impulse are alike. I can see the differences being readely apparent and annoying to those who have no acces to the intern et, but for those who do it seems to matter little to me which ever program is used.

To me it seems the disliking of steam if largely based on some fear of what steam might and might not do, and the paranoia this seems to cause in people. For all I care valve posts every single statistic they can find about me on a national newspaper. Whatever they may find, I am sure a lot of people will shrug it off and go 'hey, I am like that Average Joe too!' I am realistic enough to realise no one cares about what I do and do not do on my pc.

Veneke said:

Read back over your post and you'll see that you brought it into the general realm which incited my reply. Here, I'll break down for you how I read it so you can see where I'm coming from.

You point out that Steam and Impulse are the same, but cite a difference which is subsequently deemed of little value (Basically steam does what impulse does, except that impulse needs to be ran for updating only and not in order to play a game.). Then you go on and argue that his argument is flawed because you have seen him on the internet (That being said, you seem to post on a regular basis both here and on the emelental forum, so you seem to have access to the internet on a regular basis.), which somehow negates his entire argument. You follow this up with a general statement on Principles vs/ Pragmatism (I can see principles as being a good thing, up to the point where it does not interfere with pragmatism.), and then continue this general field of thought citing Steam as an example (Once principles hinder being rational about things like allowing steam when using steam is not really an issue to begin with, then it boggles my mind that one finds impulse good and steam intrusive.). I can only conclude from this that your assertion that principles are secondary to pragmatism is a more general point of which Steam is merely a component. Which left me to point out that if so, there are many other implications for this line of thinking that you may not have considered.

Click to expand...

Touché. I may have worded it poorly, but I still meant to say that in this context I felt that my sentiments of pragmatism and principles were appropriate - or at least they reflected my point of view correctly.

With a constant and always ready access to the internet then yes, the differences are lessened, but they are nonetheless real and tangible.

I will admit that a lot of the anti-Steam comments on these boards relate to that point, and that's why I mentioned it. I'd wager that if somebody, or some organization, wanted information on you, they probably have less obvious and more effective ways of gathering it. Though what exactly they'd find on most peoples computers that would be worthwhile I have no idea either. Then again, we're not the ones who would be gathering it, and they would, so they must see some need for it.

I use Steam myself, and my problems with it stem from it's technical failures and the extra hassle involved, that results in no real gain that I can see, as opposed to these privacy arguments.

Shurdus said:

Not really, since I find it hard to believe that any user would object to a game having no DRM. Also the poll can easely be read as 'what is the most intrusive form of DRM that you still find acceptable', which prompts users to vote for one single option rather than voting for each and every one of the options up and including the most intrusive form of DRM.

Click to expand...

I apologize for the confusion, then. Actually, my initial intention was a single-choice poll, "What is the most intrusive form of DRM you find acceptable?" But then I realized that, in doing so, I make an implication of actual severity in my list. There are people (including myself) who find CD-checks to be "too intrusive," for reasons I won't bother going into in this thread. But if I voted on one below it, it is "assumed" that I've already stated that CD-checks are acceptable.

I realized this might be a bit tricky, so I changed the wording "What is acceptable? Pick one or more options" in the hope that most people would notice it before voting.

As an aside, there are people who find "No DRM" unacceptable, who may have actual experience working in the field as a developer or publisher. And I think they should be allowed to voice their opinion in this poll. They feel that it is necessary, and I think not including the ability to agree with its necessity is wrong. Just because other users don't understand their point of view does not invalidate it.

Shurdus said:

To me it seems the disliking of steam if largely based on some fear of what steam might and might not do, and the paranoia this seems to cause in people. For all I care valve posts every single statistic they can find about me on a national newspaper. Whatever they may find, I am sure a lot of people will shrug it off and go 'hey, I am like that Average Joe too!' I am realistic enough to realise no one cares about what I do and do not do on my pc.

Click to expand...

Until your insurance company raises your fee because the have determined that you are at a higher risk level due to playing a lot of games. You may be that loose with your private information. Others may value there privacy a bit more. This might not currently be an issue with steam now, but it could become an issue with steam in the future. You simply do not know what data the steam client is collecting and phoning home every time it goes online.

arstal said:

I've never been tolerant of DRM, not until Gamersgate/Impulse did I find a commercial service that made me not want to crack my titles.

Click to expand...

Exactly the way I feel. Impulse, Gamersgate, GoG and (why not?) Steam, changed everything. No more cracks, no more CD's that get lost, dusty and scratched, ability to play anywhere, download anywhere, etc.

Shurdus said:

To me it seems the disliking of steam if largely based on some fear of what steam might and might not do, and the paranoia this seems to cause in people. For all I care valve posts every single statistic they can find about me on a national newspaper. Whatever they may find, I am sure a lot of people will shrug it off and go 'hey, I am like that Average Joe too!' I am realistic enough to realise no one cares about what I do and do not do on my pc.

Click to expand...

It is more about the concept and not really about particular examples. You can't take individuals to prove things that are broad in concept.
I'm not saying that some people aren't paranoid, but in most cases not wanting to have your privacy invaded is a more general concept of liberty and most of all it is a defense mechanism of your civil rights. When you start to not care about invasions of your privacy, where does it stop? In other words not wanting companies to know everything you do is pretty much defending civil rights and liberties. Again, where would it stop if we don't care?

Trias said:

Until your insurance company raises your fee because the have determined that you are at a higher risk level due to playing a lot of games. You may be that loose with your private information. Others may value there privacy a bit more. This might not currently be an issue with steam now, but it could become an issue with steam in the future. You simply do not know what data the steam client is collecting and phoning home every time it goes online.

Click to expand...

Please don't argue about Steam in this thread, it's supposed to be a neutral ground. Check Steam's Privacy Policy if you have any questions about the data it does and does not collect, or post in one of the billion "I Hate Steam" or "I Love Steam" threads.

Trias said:

Until your insurance company raises your fee because the have determined that you are at a higher risk level due to playing a lot of games. You may be that loose with your private information. Others may value there privacy a bit more. This might not currently be an issue with steam now, but it could become an issue with steam in the future. You simply do not know what data the steam client is collecting and phoning home every time it goes online.

Click to expand...

Steam is open about this, basically it is what you pay and how long and they distribute this info to gaming complanies they have contracts with. They do make it anonymous though. Also steam collects info about my system so that they can assess what system the average user has. Neither of this is something I want to keep a huge secret.

And when you go on about insurance companies and everything, let me put it this way. As it is right now gaming is a non-issue to insurance companies. If anything, using the internet is more of a factor to those companies, and in the western world most people use the internet. Then maybe they will turn their attention towards people who will trade stock and such online, and maybe, just maybe, when gaming becomes an issue that interests insurance companies, then they might increase your fees by a whopping few euro's each year.

Most likely though this is just paranoid talk. At the very least it has no grounding in reality right now, and when it does I will not give up gaming for this. Every hobby costs money. It is not a real concern for those who buy Civ5, so it is no real concern in order to not use steam. If worst comes to worst, you can always drop steam and that insurance company.

To say that you are better of by not using steam because of some concerns that the future might or might not bring is something that does not worry me the least. If anything you are far more likely to get some embolism of infacts from sitting still for long ends than that anything bad happens in terms of identy theft caused by steam.

Shurdus said:

Steam is open about this, basically it is what you pay and how long and they distribute this info to gaming complanies they have contracts with. They do make it anonymous though. Also steam collects info about my system so that they can assess what system the average user has. Neither of this is something I want to keep a huge secret.

And when you go on about insurance companies and everything, let me put it this way. As it is right now gaming is a non-issue to insurance companies. If anything, using the internet is more of a factor to those companies, and in the western world most people use the internet. Then maybe they will turn their attention towards people who will trade stock and such online, and maybe, just maybe, when gaming becomes an issue that interests insurance companies, then they might increase your fees by a whopping few euro's each year.

Most likely though this is just paranoid talk. At the very least it has no grounding in reality right now, and when it does I will not give up gaming for this. Every hobby costs money. It is not a real concern for those who buy Civ5, so it is no real concern in order to not use steam. If worst comes to worst, you can always drop steam and that insurance company.

To say that you are better of by not using steam because of some concerns that the future might or might not bring is something that does not worry me the least. If anything you are far more likely to get some embolism of infacts from sitting still for long ends than that anything bad happens in terms of identy theft caused by steam.

Click to expand...

Please don't argue about Steam in this thread. The last thing I want is for it to go: Civil discussion, insults, flame war. That isn't what this thread is about.

kayapo said:

Exactly the way I feel. Impulse, Gamersgate, GoG and (why not?) Steam, changed everything. No more cracks, no more CD's that get lost, dusty and scratched, ability to play anywhere, download anywhere, etc.



It is more about the concept and not really about particular examples. You can't take individuals to prove things that are broad in concept.
I'm not saying that some people aren't paranoid, but in most cases not wanting to have your privacy invaded is a more general concept of liberty and most of all it is a defense mechanism of your civil rights. When you start to not care about invasions of your privacy, where does it stop? In other words not wanting companies to know everything you do is pretty much defending civil rights and liberties. Again, where would it stop if we don't care?

Click to expand...

You and steam strike a deal: you use steam and are subject to their policy, and in return you benefit from the service they provide. In this sense steam is a buisness like anything else. Your tv cable company works like this, your insurance companies, your dentist, the wallmart, everything. Your liberties lie in wether or not you accept the terms and services.

Let us not get carried away by pretending steam is a major invasion of one's rights. Sure steam has a policy and terms of agreement, but every buisness has those. When you buy at a warehouse, you implicitly state that you agree with their return policy. This is not any invasion of any right, just an agreement.

This invasion of privacy stops where I want it to stop because I do not accept any invasion of my privacy that I care about. Steam collects data of my gaming habits, and I am not very private about that.

Vordrax said:

Please don't argue about Steam in this thread. The last thing I want is for it to go: Civil discussion, insults, flame war. That isn't what this thread is about.

Click to expand...

my bad.

Shurdus said:

my bad.

Click to expand...

It's no big deal, there's just a million threads already on that specific subject. Mainly what I want here is for people to be able to talk about their feelings and perceptions on DRM and its various types without feeling like they need to justify it to other people. EDIT: I like your avatar, by the way.

I find CD check acceptable. I don't lose CD's very often, and it doesn't bug me very much.

I put Impulse in the same category as Steam. Yes, in theory they are different, but the requirement of using them for patching makes them effectively the same. Let me cite one recent example, Demigod was unplayable till patched.

warpstorm said:

I put Impulse in the same category as Steam. Yes, in theory they are different, but the requirement of using them for patching makes them effectively the same. Let me cite one recent example, Demigod was unplayable till patched.

Click to expand...

I clarified the way I did because, for the most part, you cannot run a Steam game outside of Steam. The Impulse service (if I remember correctly) is not required to be running in order to play a game purchased from it. Therefore, I filed it under "One-Time Registration" (since you cannot actually download it from Impulse without having purchased it, nor patch it.)

Shurdus said:

You and steam strike a deal: you use steam and are subject to their policy, and in return you benefit from the service they provide. In this sense steam is a buisness like anything else. Your tv cable company works like this, your insurance companies, your dentist, the wallmart, everything. Your liberties lie in wether or not you accept the terms and services.

Let us not get carried away by pretending steam is a major invasion of one's rights. Sure steam has a policy and terms of agreement, but every buisness has those. When you buy at a warehouse, you implicitly state that you agree with their return policy. This is not any invasion of any right, just an agreement.

This invasion of privacy stops where I want it to stop because I do not accept any invasion of my privacy that I care about. Steam collects data of my gaming habits, and I am not very private about that.

Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about Steam. If you are not going to bother reading and understanding posts, you really shouldn't bother quoting and responding to them.

My argument was about the general idea that people are usually against having their privacy invaded and the post you argued that you don't care about your own privacy because nobody cares about you, etc.