Steam's recently modified user agreement

[debufferman]

I bought the game. When I buy a game that does not require internet for single player use, then I expect to be able to play that game. With offline mode, if I didn't set my Steam account to "offline mode" before I lost internet, for whatever reason, then I can't play my games. So, in that sense, I didn't buy the game. I rented the right to play the game through Steam. Which is bull****.

Others have mentioned Impulse and other digital download places. I don't have this issue with any other company, other than Steam.

This is wrong. Period. No matter how many of you mindless, sycophantic, idiots post on here in support of Steam, their policies are wrong. If I buy a digital download from them, then I should be able to play that game, at any time.

Recently, because of bad weather conditions, I lost my internet connection for a couple of days. This is when I found out that I don't actually own MY COPY of the game. Nope. I don't. I couldn't play the game without connecting to Steam first. Which I couldn't do without any internet.

What I bought, was the right to access the game through Steam. Before Steam sells another product, they should start making the customers aware of this. Steam is not selling a digital download!!! They are selling you the right to access the game through them.

Anyone that supports or tries to defend this practice or tells others that they are "out-dated" because they think it is wrong, is just showing how much of an imbecile they are.

 

[God of Kings]

I bought the game. When I buy a game that does not require internet for single player use, then I expect to be able to play that game. With offline mode, if I didn't set my Steam account to "offline mode" before I lost internet, for whatever reason, then I can't play my games. So, in that sense, I didn't buy the game. I rented the right to play the game through Steam. Which is bull****.

Others have mentioned Impulse and other digital download places. I don't have this issue with any other company, other than Steam.

This is wrong. Period. No matter how many of you mindless, sycophantic, idiots post on here in support of Steam, their policies are wrong. If I buy a digital download from them, then I should be able to play that game, at any time.

Recently, because of bad weather conditions, I lost my internet connection for a couple of days. This is when I found out that I don't actually own MY COPY of the game. Nope. I don't. I couldn't play the game without connecting to Steam first. Which I couldn't do without any internet.

What I bought, was the right to access the game through Steam. Before Steam sells another product, they should start making the customers aware of this. Steam is not selling a digital download!!! They are selling you the right to access the game through them.

Anyone that supports or tries to defend this practice or tells others that they are "out-dated" because they think it is wrong, is just showing how much of an imbecile they are.

I must agree. Steam should be optional for Civ V. It is creating more problems than it solves. Regarding the ads, I have no interest in most games advertised there (in fact, I strongly oppose FPSes and WRPGs on principle (and they do not interest me at all) and most games advertised there are of those two genres; Civ V is often the most popular or second most popular non-FPS non-WRPG Steam game). Bandwidth is at a premium in Canada for example, which makes direct downloads rather expensive if one goes over the limit (and the limit is rather small if you enjoy watching YouTube even). I love to keep physical copies, since I love to collect stuff. I want to play Civ V without any prior Internet connection without the need to create a virtual drive or a partition. Unfortunately, it means that I have to get a Mac and get it through the App Store (and yes, even the App Store sometimes has discounts for Civ V), which fortunately has 100% offline Civ V (so even if Apple goes out of business, players can still play Civ V).

What if Valve goes out of business (it can happen, but not too soon)? It means that those who play Civ V on Windows would be forced to get a Mac to get their Civ V fix.

I will take Apple's policies over Valve's policies on any given day. Steam makes me steaming angry that I loathe Steam with a steaming passion. Steam lovers, I am only asking to make Civ V Steam-optional. You can have your Steam version, I will get the App Store version.

 

[Yalish]

...No matter how many of you mindless, sycophantic, idiots post on here in support of Steam, their policies are wrong...Anyone that supports or tries to defend this practice or tells others that they are "out-dated" because they think it is wrong, is just showing how much of an imbecile they are.

There's no need for personal insults over what amounts to a difference of opinions. Pull your head in.

I think you're wrong, but that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. What you're not entitled to is calling me a sycophantic idiot because I happen to disagree with you.

 

[debufferman]

There's no need for personal insults over what amounts to a difference of opinions. Pull your head in.

If someone told me that their opinion is "the world is not round, but flat." Then I would tell that person they are an idiot. Everyone may be entitled to an opinion, but they are not entitled to having their opinion respected.

There is a right and wrong in this case. Selling a digital download that isn't really a digital download is wrong. Regardless if they are using some technicality to skirt legality, it is wrong morally and ethically. For anyone to defend this action is insulting to me. So if you feel there is no need for insults, then remind that to the idiots that have their heads up Steam's arse so far, that they would use nonsense and deception to defend wrong practices.

I think you're wrong, but that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. What you're not entitled to is calling me an sycophantic idiot because I happen to disagree with you.

Actually, I'm not wrong. The fact that you think I am, and the posts that you made defending this practice by Steam, show that I was dead-on in calling you such. If you don't like it, tough. If you act like a moron defending something that is so obviously wrong, then you will be called out on it.

 

[debufferman]

As someone else pointed out, if Steam went out of business or for any other reason became unavailable abruptly, we would no longer be able to play the game. Why is that? Because Steam did not sell us a digital download of a game. They sold us the right to access the game through them.

If I truly bought the game, I would not need to ever access Steam again, to play the game. Purely an issue of right or wrong, not opinion. Of course, some morons will attempt to make it an opinion because they know they are wrong, in which case, those of us that aren't "politically correct," will call them out on it.

Personally, I will never buy another product through Steam as long as this practice is in use. There are other companies that offer digital downloads without strings attached. If all else fails, I'll read a book, go fishing, go swimming, call a friend, or anything else, before I ever purchase another game through or associated with, Steam.

 

[Yalish]

If someone told me that their opinion is "the world is not round, but flat." Then I would tell that person they are an idiot.

This is entirely different. The world being round or flat is not a matter of opinion, it's an objectively verifiable fact. Yes, the world is round (or an oblate spheroid, really).

What we're discussing is a matter of personal opinion. I personally do not have any objection to the nature of the agreement I have with Valve via their steam service to play the titles I license from them. I read it and I agreed to it precisely because I had no issues with its terms. You obviously do, and this is a difference of opinion.

There is a right and wrong in this case. Selling a digital download that isn't really a digital download is wrong. Regardless if they are using some technicality to skirt legality, it is wrong morally and ethically.

I was perfectly aware of the terms when I purchased and I agreed to them because I happen to find them acceptable. I see no ethical or moral wrong here.

Actually, I'm not wrong. The fact that you think I am, and the posts that you made defending this practice by Steam, show that I was dead-on in calling you such. If you don't like it, tough. If you act like a moron defending something that is so obviously wrong, then you will be called out on it.

Perhaps I misspoke to say you're wrong. Your view is certainly valid from your respective, and you feel you have valid grievances. I wish you luck in having them addressed or obtaining games from other sources.

However, take a step back and realize that not every discussion on the internet has to devolve into name calling.

 

[Yalish]

As someone else pointed out, if Steam went out of business or for any other reason became unavailable abruptly, we would no longer be able to play the game. Why is that? Because Steam did not sell us a digital download of a game. They sold us the right to access the game through them.

Gabe Newall, CEO of Valve has stated that in the unlikely event steam were to go out of business, they would release a final patch to steam removing the requirement for it to communicate with their servers. You would get to keep all your games, but it's obviously easier to just make wild claims without actually looking into their validity, right?

 

[debufferman]

This is entirely different. The world being round or flat is not a matter of opinion, it's an objectively verifiable fact. Yes, the world is round (or an oblate spheroid, really).

What we're discussing is a matter of personal opinion. I personally do not have any objection to the nature of the agreement I have with Valve via their steam service to play the titles I license from them. I read it and I agreed to it precisely because I had no issues with its terms. You obviously do, and this is a difference of opinion.

Hence why you are called an idiot. It is morally and ethically wrong to sell someone something, and then not relinquish your end of the bargain. The fact that you don't think so and continue to call it my opinion, shows the incredible lack of, either integrity or intelligence on your part, or possibly both.

I was perfectly aware of the terms when I purchased and I agreed to them because I happen to find them acceptable. I see no ethical or moral wrong here.

Refer to previous statement.

However, take a step back and realize that not every discussion on the internet has to devolve into name calling.

You are right on this point. It doesn't. So when you stop acting like a sycophantic, idiot that is in love with Steam and prepared to defend Steam no matter what, then I'll stop calling you one. Easy enough to solve. You don't want to be insulted, yet you insult every decent, intelligent person, with your defense of something indefensible.

Good luck to you in your life dishonesty and stupidity. This conversation is over as far as I'm concerned. Your mommy and daddy should have taught you right from wrong. It isn't my job.

Gabe Newall, CEO of Valve has stated that in the unlikely event steam were to go out of business, they would release a final patch to steam removing the requirement for it to communicate with their servers. You would get to keep all your games, but it's obviously easier to just make wild claims without actually looking into their validity, right?

Hence the use of the word "abruptly." Look it up one day. No wild claim made at all. Hey, and what happens when I wake up one day with my internet unavailable? Do I get to play MY game that was sold to me with "no internet connection required for single player play?" No, I can't. Once again, you are just spouting bullsh*t because you don't have the integrity to admit that you are wrong and that Steam is wrong.

Bye

 

[The_J]

Moderator Action: Seems this thread has run its course.
Closed.