Is the Steam DRM just a one-time verification check? Or is it much more?

[tom2050]

It still amazes me how some are so pro-DRM. I could see some here arguing that a required internet connection is good for society, the economy and the environment (as some have pointed out already).

They must have been brainwashed by their governments or something, as I have pointed out a perfect alternative which would still use Steam; and works almost exactly the same way, but does not require an internet connection; and which has been used successfully; in which a vast majority of users approved (even over Steam-required internet). Someone tried to say it wasn't the same, even though it is exactly the same; just the requirement of internet is only needed to download patches with an account on Steam.

This gives consumer choice to use internet or to not use it, to get a patch; they are not forced to by the company. This is the principle why people disagree; because we do think companies should do what they can be battle the over-growing problem of PC Game Re-sale that is causing tremendous havoc.

If you approve of Steam-required internet, then you must approve of Ubisoft required constant-internet. If steam threw out there that it is required you ride your bike for an hour to play the game, some would say it is the greatest thing ever.

 

[Sterf]

It still amazes me how some are so pro-DRM. I could see some here arguing that a required internet connection is good for society, the economy and the environment (as some have pointed out already).

They must have been brainwashed by their governments or something, as I have pointed out a perfect alternative which would still use Steam; and works almost exactly the same way, but does not require an internet connection; and which has been used successfully; in which a vast majority of users approved (even over Steam-required internet).

If you approve of Steam-required internet, then you must approve of Ubisoft required constant-internet. If steam through out there that it is required you ride your bike for an hour to play the game, some would say it is the greatest thing ever.

It's not pro-DRM at all, it's that in a world where invasive DRM's were getting the upperhand steam comes along with it's non-invasive DRM and all the features that have been summed up a thousand times before you'll ignore again that actually give more worth to the game instead of taking away like any other. And saying that if you support Steam's one time online-activation you support horrible DRM schemes like ubisofts must-constantly-be-online DRM is such a leap of logic I just don't know what to say.

I just bought a game on steam to support them just to spite you. Talking to some people here is really like talking to a brick wall. None of it gets through.

 

[tom2050]

It's not pro-DRM at all, it's that in a world where invasive DRM's were getting the upperhand steam comes along with it's non-invasive DRM and all the features that have been summed up a thousand times before you'll ignore again that actually give more worth to the game instead of taking away like any other. And saying that if you support Steam's one time online-activation you support horrible DRM schemes like ubisofts must-constantly-be-online DRM is such a leap of logic I just don't know what to say.

I just bought a game on steam to support them just to spite you. Talking to some people here is really like talking to a brick wall. None of it gets through.

Again, it's simply to make it so you can play the game out of the box. Consumer decides if they wish to patch their game or not through Steam, in which they sign up and put their game info in.

Do you understand that concept, it is very simple, is much more consumer friendly, and does the exact same thing as what they have now. It has also been used and is successful on all accounts, and is applauded by vast majority because it is consumer friendly.

You must be pro-internet required DRM with a reply like that.

 

[Sterf]

Again, it's simply to make it so you can play the game out of the box. Consumer decides if they wish to patch their game or not through Steam, in which they sign up and put their game info in.

Do you understand that concept, it is very simple, is much more consumer friendly, and does the exact same thing as what they have now. It has also been used and is successful on all accounts, and is applauded by vast majority because it is consumer friendly.

You must be pro-internet required DRM with a reply like that.

What? So basically let people decide if they want copy protection or not? Not to offend you, but that's ... not the cleverest argument I've read against steam.

Or do you mean making a seperate boxed version where there's no steam but another DRM scheme they'd have to develop/pay for? That wouldn't actually be possible since steamworks is integrated into the game for multiplayer and other features, which are to be honest pretty great to anyone except some diehard brickheads.

And if a one time activation through internet means I'm pro-internet required drm, then I guess I am. Ubisofts model where it constantly checks for connection / downloads / monitors is something I quite strongly oppose though.

 

[tom2050]

What? So basically let people decide if they want copy protection or not? Not to offend you, but that's ... not the cleverest argument I've read against steam.

Or do you mean making a seperate boxed version where there's no steam but another DRM scheme they'd have to develop/pay for? That wouldn't actually be possible since steamworks is integrated into the game for multiplayer and other features, which are to be honest pretty great to anyone except some diehard brickheads.

And if a one time activation through internet means I'm pro-internet required drm, then I guess I am. Ubisofts model where it constantly checks for connection / downloads / monitors is something I quite strongly oppose though.

It was called Impulse, similar to Steam... no one ever said you let people decide if they want DRM or not.

Impulse, you buy the game, but in order to ever ever patch the game, you need to sign on with your game info and patch it through the Impulse system.

The same is with Steam, but only difference is, you must sign on in order to install it and get your patches.

Other than that, it is exactly the same thing. Do you seriously think the game won't get cracked by pirates either way. That is not the point. The point of Steam and DRM is to stop resale, devs in many interviews here and there have stated this themselves, do a google search.

War is against you, the consumer, because they feel one day you might want to sell an old game you have.

It does work, because Impulse worked. Requiring to be online to run the game the first time doesn't stop piracy. The requirement to update the game via the Impulse/Steam system is the biggest incentive to purchase the game (instead of having a bugged game). Then people feel fine signing up more than they do being forced to.

I tell you this, because the Stardock forums had huge threads about this very thing. Of course, some thought Stardock was making buggy games on purpose and letting them ride out with tons of little patches to also coerce people to patch them and thus sign up.

 

[PieceOfMind]

This is, indeed, true. Steam will be used with Civ V and you will have to run it when you play the game, but it won't prevent you from playing mods - we're not interested in limiting you guys. We are using the system to get you guys to connect together and find content easily, to have updates conveniently, to have a system that doesn't require a DVD... Steam is all of those things.

Ah, 2K Elizabeth has graced us with her presence in the civ5 forum now.

I don't want to be too cynical but I find it interesting to note that you now need to "sell" Steam in order to "sell" civ5. Makes sense really, considering Steam-exclusivity is the biggest reason many are "threatening" not to buy the game. The problem arises with people who want to be "sold" civ5 but not "sold" Steam. That is a difficult task ahead of you.

It's nice to know Steam isn't going to be meddling with our permissions to use mods. Glad you were able to confirm that for us.

If you approve of Steam-required internet, then you must approve of Ubisoft required constant-internet. If steam threw out there that it is required you ride your bike for an hour to play the game, some would say it is the greatest thing ever.

That's a good idea. It would get a lot of gamers out in the fresh air (unless you implied exercise bike) and make them get some exercise. How can anyone be against making the world fitter and healthier? It has been clinically proven that exercise helps to reduce stress so we'd also see fewer people getting angry on internet forums. We'd also see fewer stress-related injuries (RSI). We have to live with the reality that games companies are going to use some form of DRM so we may as well go with the most beneficial one.
I usually ride a bike for at least an hour a day and think it's great. That's why I think it's good if 2K decide to force this 1hr-ride upon everyone else. They also enjoy the awesome benefits of being outside like seeing cute dogs being walked by attractive people lol and getting to make pleasant greetings with passers by. The features that come with riding a bike would benefit the whole civ community. Why does everyone "hate" on the idea when it's such a good thing?
The only conceivable downside of such a scheme would be for people who can't afford a bike. But really, if you can afford a computer and an expensive video game then you can afford a bike.


Possibly my most satirical post ever.

 

[arstal]

It's not pro-DRM at all, it's that in a world where invasive DRM's were getting the upperhand steam comes along with it's non-invasive DRM and all the features that have been summed up a thousand times before you'll ignore again that actually give more worth to the game instead of taking away like any other. And saying that if you support Steam's one time online-activation you support horrible DRM schemes like ubisofts must-constantly-be-online DRM is such a leap of logic I just don't know what to say.

I just bought a game on steam to support them just to spite you. Talking to some people here is really like talking to a brick wall. None of it gets through.

That just proves that Valve brainwashed some of you guys into believing it's non-invasive, when any DRM scheme that persists after install can brick your game at any time.

Sure, there are some nice features to Steam, but for a singleplayer game, I won't accept a DRM scheme that is not install-only, and Steam isn't.

I consider GOO/Impulse to be acceptable.

 

[Sterf]

That just proves that Valve brainwashed some of you guys into believing it's non-invasive, when any DRM scheme that persists after install can brick your game at any time.

Sure, there are some nice features to Steam, but for a singleplayer game, I won't accept a DRM scheme that is not install-only, and Steam isn't.

I consider GOO/Impulse to be install-only.

To be honest, I don't give a rat's ass if you or anyone else don't buy it. The reason some of the steam users here are so vehemently defending it is because of all the mis-information and completely false rumors that are quite frankly pretty infuriating. I'm guessing those defending are probably just fueling your paranoid feelings since, well, that's how paranoia works. But hey, sometimes you just can't help but try to rectify things if something pretty damn innocent is painted as an evil scheme by corporate overlords (who eat babies).

I'll go pretty happy through life playing Civ V without any hassle, while you people are still raging on about all the 'brainwashing' and evil overlords watching our every move or whatever you people decided to believe, or decide to believe in the future. In the end I don't really care.

 

[arstal]

Actually, no- we'll play games from companies that treat us better then 2k is treating us.
I can name two games in the same genre as Civ, releasing around the same as Civ, from quality developers and legitimate budgets, that have non-intrusive DRM.

Elemental
Victoria II

I was going to get Elemental anyway, but 2k's decision to force an intrusive DRM on Civ V means I'll just put that money on Vicky II instead.

The reason we even have DRM is that gamers don't have the sense to refuse to purchase products with it. If every gamer didn't buy DRM-ed up games, we'd rapidly see the end of DRM.
Consumer rights are only as strong as the consumers willpower to say no to things that are wrong.

 

[Greybriar]

All about Steam's DRM, straight from the horse's mouth:

DRM

Steamworks Digital Rights Management wraps your game's compiled executable and checks to make sure that it is running under an authenticated instance of Steam. This DRM solution is the same as the one used to protect games like Half-Life 2 and Counter-Strike: Source. Steamworks DRM has been heavily road-tested and is customer-friendly.

In addition to DRM solutions, Steamworks also offers protection for game through day one release by shipping encrypted media to stores worldwide. There's no worry that your game will leak early from the manufacturing path, because your game stays encrypted until the moment you decide to release it. This protection can be added to your game simply by handing us finished bits or a gold master.

CEG Overview

How It works

The Steamworks CEG system generates a custom binary for each customer. When you link your application with the Steamworks CEG, we provide you with several tools that you use to generate metadata about your executable file. This metadata is stored on the Steam 3 DRMS Server. When a user installs your game, the DRMS server collects information from the customer's computer that uniquely identifies it. The collected information is used in combination with the metadata regarding your executable file to generate a custom binary, that checks that it is running on the user's computer. If the user changes the configuration of their computer such that the CEG checks would fail to identify the computer, the CEG system will automatically generate a new executable file for the user, and update their game installation. These checks occur whenever your game is run, regardless of whether the computer is connected to the Internet or not. In addition to examining the user's computer, the CEG system will detect tampering with the executable file, and will conceal its workings from reverse engineering.

 

[arstal]

Ubi says their DRM is customer-friendly also.

Fact is- for a singleplayer game, any DRM that has to run when I play the game is unfriendly. I'll accept installation and patch DRM, but not play DRM.

I'll accept Steam DRM for multiplayer-only games though- where not being able to go online makes the game useless, so an online check is more reasonable.

 

[Sterf]

Ubi says their DRM is customer-friendly also.

Fact is- for a singleplayer game, any DRM that has to run when I play the game is unfriendly. I'll accept installation and patch DRM, but not play DRM.

I'll accept Steam DRM for multiplayer-only games though- where not being able to go online makes the game useless, so an online check is more reasonable.

Ok, well you're out of luck since it's already been implemented. I guess you just can't play the game. No reason to go on about it I guess, and cut your losses. Don't see any good reason to go on about it really. Other than to argue for no good reason.

 

[ArcadicGamer]

That just proves that Valve brainwashed some of you guys into believing it's non-invasive, when any DRM scheme that persists after install can brick your game at any time.

Sure, there are some nice features to Steam, but for a singleplayer game, I won't accept a DRM scheme that is not install-only, and Steam isn't.

I consider GOO/Impulse to be acceptable.

So Impulse, something that is nearly identical in implementation and use, is ok. STEAM on the other hand is evil for the same exact methods. Not to mention for SINS, after a month of being in Impulse's offline mode, i had to connect online to play my game again. Sounds perfectly reasonable; your opinion.

 

[PieceOfMind]

So Impulse, something that is nearly identical in implementation and use, is ok. STEAM on the other hand is evil for the same exact methods. Not to mention for SINS, after a month of being in Impulse's offline mode, i had to connect online to play my game again. Sounds perfectly reasonable; your opinion.

Strawman...?

Show me where arstal said Steam is evil? I think you could be more effective in your argument if you didn't put (implied) exaggerated words in his mouth.

 

[ArcadicGamer]

Strawman...?

Show me where arstal said Steam is evil? I think you could be more effective in your argument if you didn't put (implied) exaggerated words in his mouth.

Read the first quoted line again. There's plenty of implied evil when you refer to a product as something that bricks games for no reason.

Sure, evil isn't the right word. I'd like to know why he thinks STEAM is more intrusive than other DRM that is similar to something he has said he uses.

 

[PieceOfMind]

What does 'bricks' mean then? I just assumed bricks a game for no reason could mean that if Steam crashes then the game crashes. Over the past couple of days of trying out Steam, I have noticed at least several occasions where the entire Steam client has become unresponsive. Admittedly it was not while playing a game but rather while navigating its tabs, initiating/pausing downloads of demos and videos etc. My impressions are that the Steam client could be made more stable. In other words, it's far from perfect. A positive IMO (just so I can maintain that I'm trying to be balanced!) is that the way the Steam client organises its tabs, menus and functions is fairly logical/intuitive.

 

[HamTard]

What does 'bricks' mean then? I just assumed bricks a game for no reason could mean that if Steam crashes then the game crashes. Over the past couple of days of trying out Steam, I have noticed at least several occasions where the entire Steam client has become unresponsive. Admittedly it was not while playing a game but rather while navigating its tabs, initiating/pausing downloads of demos and videos etc. My impressions are that the Steam client could be made more stable. In other words, it's far from perfect. A positive IMO (just so I can maintain that I'm trying to be balanced!) is that the way the Steam client organises its tabs, menus and functions is fairly logical/intuitive.

They only recently updated the Steam client to run on a webkit engine a few weeks ago, to prepare for the Mac OSX launch. It's bound to suffer some growing pains as they work on optimizing and polishing the new client engine.

 

[PieceOfMind]

"Growing pains"?
So whenever Steam is undergoing some sort of significant change I should just excuse problems with running my games due to growing pains?

I appreciate you're being level-headed HamTard and are only trying to help but honestly your post reads to me almost exactly as marketing speak. I understand it's impossible to make complex software bug free and I can live with that reality. Excuses for it doesn't change my mind that it's a nuisance however.

 

[scrlk]

Face it: the era of the CD key is dead. Keygens are on the Internet days or weeks after release. This means that the dev loses money = no more games. Steam removes CD keys (though you can still activate a game with them) thus removing a large hole in the system.

 

[need my speed]

And Steam gets cracked the same day...What's the difference?

The point of Steam is, as many others have stated, to stop reselling. Pirates will crack any and every game they want, so DRM to hamper them is useless.