It’s stuff like this that makes me not even think about pirating games. Imagine a company that literally just improves features and makes it easier for me and my family to enjoy the media they sell. Why the fuck wouldn’t I buy from their store?
Why streaming services don’t understand this, I’ll never know. Seems like the games industry is riding purely on Steam’s usability while the film/TV industry is speedrunning enshittification.
I have a large library of games I’ve never played on stream. a couple months back I wanted to play a game I had installed a while ago and guess what, forced always online. not from steam, but from the shitty team behind doom (don’t remember which version it was), which just happened to be at the time I had a multi hour internet outage.
afterwards I figured out I had to explicitly block some network traffic to stop it from trying to force me to sign up for an account with the developer.
while steam certainly has DRM options, they are configurable by developers and afaik can’t enforce an always online requirement with just steam, only though custom logic in the game or third party DRM. developers are also free to not use steam DRM.
DRM, as usual, harms the legitimate buyers.
that being said, steam still does bring a lot of value, such as their hardware developments, their work on better Linux gaming support, the update distribution through a trusted source, and various others.
i’m away from my pc for the week but does steam not require you have it running for basically every game? even if it’s a switch devs can flip it still falls under the same category imo but i am curious and don’t know the full facts here
It depends on whether the game wants that or not; it must explicitly opt-in to that. If it wasn’t Steam offering their extremely nonintrusive DRM, those games would likely use more intrusive DRM systems instead such as their own launchers or worse.
It also somehow doesn’t feel right to call it “DRM” since it has none of the downsides of “traditional” DRM systems: It works offline, it doesn’t cause performance issues and doesn’t get in your way (at least it never even once got in mine).
I’d much rather launch the games through Steam anyways though. Do you manually open the games’ locations and then open their executables or what? A nice GUI with favourites, friends and a big “play” button is just a lot better IMHO.
i see. as i said, i’d still consider it drm even in a case like yours where it never gives you trouble. i find performance suffers mostly in edge cases for me but it’s often enough that i prefer to simply take steam out of the equation entirely.
Do you manually open the games’ locations and then open their executables or what?
i just keep a folder with shortcuts to the games i play on the desktop tbh, i am a bit of a slob that way. anyway this is all very no-stakes so i’m not trying to convince anyone of anything here. if you like something and it works for you then you should use it! i will continue to pirate because that’s what works best for me.
Well, every one of these is a different pile of crap, but a pile of crap nonetheless.
It was supposed to be a Steam competitor, and they openly said it, but the only competition it won is the dumbest fucking ideas brought to PC gaming - and that being exclusivity. But after a few released games, I’ve realized it was a good thing! I could try the game for free, and wait a year when the game has those nice QoL features. For BL3, I started when the game already had tons of extra content.
The only games I’ve ever pirated are Sims 4 (I ain’t paying 1000 bucks worth of dlc) and Starfield (I still feel robbed) because Steam just makes buying games at reasonable prices so easy.
The other day I bought RDR2, player it for an hour, didn’t enjoy it and returned it no questions asked
I never gor through the prologue either… but I’m a completionist and each mission was giving me extra parameters that made things so much harder than just ‘beating’ the mission.
So the main takeaway is that you no longer need to be offline if 2 family members want to play at the same time as long as they’re playing different games.
That’s fair and it should alleviate a bunch of headaches.
Hmmm, that’s a lot to go over in there. I have family sharing setup with, let’s say, my found family. There are a lot of improvements listed, but also many things I’m worried about.
The one year period of waiting after leaving one seems excessive. I hope they have good separation of the logical family and the physical pc’s, It’s really annoying to resetup stuff with my partner every time one of us installs a different linux distro.
I understand why they’re doing the ban sharing, but it’s still funny.
The one year period of waiting after leaving one seems excessive.
It’s slightly better than that for the person who leaves. It’s a one year period starting the moment they joined the previous one. So if you’ve been part of a family for 1+ years you can join/create a new one right away.
The slot you occupied however does stay locked for an additional year.
I also have my current setup with found family and as I live close to a country border I cannot switch over properly as I have members on both sides of the border. I understand their intent is “same household”, so I do understand why this is the case, still sucks for me though.
I hope they have good separation of the logical family and the physical pc’s, It’s really annoying to resetup stuff with my partner every time one of us installs a different linux distro.
After toying around in the beta, this seems to not be an issue anymore as they seem to actually go off accounts now and not hardware anymore. It was quite frustrating in the old system though.
I’m pretty sure this was already the case in some games before, depending on the netcode of the game.
The old FAQ said:
What if a borrower is caught cheating or committing fraud while playing my shared games? Your Family Sharing privileges may be revoked and your account may also be VAC banned if a borrower cheats or commits fraud. In addition, not all VAC protected games are shareable. We recommend you only authorize familiar Steam Accounts and familiar computers you know to be secure. And as always, never give your password to anyone.
If it’s a game with VAC it probably always worked as described above, but for example: People in Fall Guys did use this trick to avoid getting banned for cheating until they turned off Family Share for Fall Guys shortly after release.
If a family member gets banned for cheating while playing your copy of a game, you will also be banned in that game.
This sucks.
Yeah, but I an see why as it would be easy to abuse. Only need one copy of the game and you could cycle accounts that never owned the game out of the family sharing when they get banned.
Might be other ways to limit that, but would also likely need more restrictions on the feature that might be more annoying.
Do bans typically only affect the multiplayer portion of a game? I could see my nephew fucking around and finding out with one of my games. I never play competitive multiplayer, but if I got locked out of the game completely, I’d be pretty cross with him.
Even worse, a VAC ban in your game will probably transfer to your account in general. You won’t only be affected in that game, but in any games that check your VAC status.
I guess don’t share it with them, or have a conversation about the consequences of their actions if they happen to cheat if you can trust them. Allowing for the loophole is worse than it possibly hurting a few people though. Cheaters ruin games for everyone else, and they don’t have any control over it at all.
If a family member gets banned for cheating while playing your copy of a game, you will also be banned in that game.
This sucks.
On the other hand, Rust had a cheater issue at some point because they only checked the account ID when banning in EAC. Cheaters leveraged this by purchasing the game in a master account, and using secondary accounts tied with Steam Family Sharing to play. From what I can see they disabled Family sharing altogether.
Secondary account banned? No problem. Log out, share with another account, rinse and repeat.
I don’t think it’s horrible. First, it prevents abuse, and second it adds extra social pressure to not cheat if you’re using this since you know if you get caught all your family comes with you. Sure, maybe some parent sharing with a stupid child it sucks, but I use this with my brother and we’re both adults and know it isn’t an issue for either of us. I don’t really care if this prevents more cheaters from existing. The harm will be very minimal, with pretty good upsides for the vast majority of people.
Awesome! That would mean that family sharing finally works like I thought it would work. No more tears because I started a game while the kid was playing another one.
Sweeney really comes off as an angry guy who sees only enemies. Apple (justified, even though I’m an Apple nerd), Valve… let’s find some more persecution-complex targets. Can we be mad at Steam? Let’s go!
Epic offers jack shit in terms of features, has admitted to be losing money from the 12% cut, has a shitty storefront and is beholden to Tencent, the shittiest gaming company known to the world. Also, Steam is free advertisement, whereas the EGS is antiadvertisement.
Because his shitty company can’t provide any of the benefits Steam provides, so he has to keep creating bullshit distractions to be marginally relevant and not have all of his investors jump ship.
The “you mad bro” is found among internal Valve communication (Valve COO Scott Lynch to Erik Johnson and Newell, i.e. in the sense Johnson/Newell being “mad”, not Sweeney). It was particularly not sent out as a response to Sweeney. Another outlet already got tripped over this and had to make a correction: gamingonlinux.com/…/valve-coo-on-epics-tim-sweene…
This is not quite as sensational as some people are framing it.
people use ‘u mad bro’ like it’s some great insult. people get mad. it’s a human emotion. it exists for a reason. it’s not a glitch. anger is a motivator, and a damn good one. get mad, folks. use that energy. most people aren’t mad enough these days.
yeah i know exactly how it’s used, which is exactly why i’m telling people it’s ok to get mad.
i look forward to the day when i mash some little punk’s face in because they trolled the wrong dude. “yeah, i’m mad and now you have to pick your teeth up”
I wouldn’t spend resources on making a demo unless you just wanted to anyway. Steam’s refund policy gives everyone a two-hour demo by default. Two hours of gameplay has always been enough for me to know if I want to keep a game or not.
Accordingly, I picked up a copy of your game. It looks like it’s my kind of game, but if I’m wrong, I’ll know well within the refund window.
I realize this doesn’t cover other game stores, but people can always test drive through Steam and purchase elsewhere.
I agree and that was mostly our thinking when we decided to not put out a demo at the start (and also the quite cheap asking price) I suppose the benefits of a demo would be…
Not everyone knows about steams refund policy
The gameplay can make it look quite a frustrating game (which it can be at times, but we have really tried to work around this) so a demo might encourage people to try it out and hopefully show them its tough but fair. (And even generous in places)
Not sure this all adds up to a strong argument either way but just thinking it over.
I think the biggest problem has always been visibility in general, we are terrible at promotion and left it very very late.
That’s true that not everyone knows about the refund policy. I know advertising isn’t cheap either. Hopefully whatever you decide, it will help sell some copies!
I like the game, by the way! It’s well worth the price!
Thanks so much… For the purchase and the feedback. Pricing is another mine field - too cheap and people think it is low quality too much and people expect more than just a simple platformer.
I’ll never understand the absolute cock worship of steam. They’re just a huge, near monopolistic gaming store that apparently requires daily fellatio on this platform. Apparently, I’m supposed to agree or get smashed with the typical vitriol one gets with disagreeing with the hive. You Assholes
I’ll never understand why some people look at the fact that steam is popular because of their policies, and can’t help but make a comment like this equating that popularity to cock worship.
Like, we get it bro. You’re thinking about cocks and you’re mad about a half decent game store. What compelled you to combine those thoughts on a public forum?
The weird thing is that this isn’t even the first comment I’ve seen like this. Dudes that are mad about steam want everyone else to know about steam’s massive, throbbing cock for some reason. This guy alone has posted 3 of these.
I mean, aside from the lack of a period at the end of the sentence, the post looks grammatically correct to me. Why do you think I didn’t proofread my own post? What a silly goose
It’s because of their backend tech. Steam has some of the most efficient CDN usage in the world. How do you think you’re able to download a 60Gb game in 10 min?
I mean it’s not like Epic does anything to help sales, they just give devs slightly more of the money. Or at least it cannot prove that. Their store is so badly organized that the reduction in discovery and the Sweeney-created (and in fact at this point seemingly deliberate) negative association of the epic store and in particular exclusivity on it, it’s impossible for a company to judge whether the 25.7% increased money (70%->88%) is not easily eaten up by the loss in sales compared to other stores.
Valve can also trivially point to all the stuff Steam provides like forums, mod integration and streaming to justify higher cost, and Sweeney suspiciously never talks about that. I bet if he had to, he’d have to admit that he actually provides less value with his baby store considering how little devs get for the 12% taken compared to what Valve provides for the 30% they take.
Is it cool that stores take 30%? No.
Can I, as a gamer, judge whether it’s a valid amount of even one worthy of critique in particular comparing brick&mortar supply chains (his 75%-loss-criticism is a false equivalence, as the extra costs he adds existed with physical stores, too)? No, I cannot.
Does it feel to me as a gamer that I get “more” buying a game on Steam than on Epic? For sure! Sometimes I can get it cheaper on Epic, which might be worth it compared to having stuff like workshop integration or prompt updates on Steam. Or it might not be, that’s something everyone has to judge.
For me personally, my takeaway from Sweeney’s baby trantrum antics and aggressive exclusivity has been this:
I window-shop on all digital store fronts.
I select where to buy based on isthereanydeal, with no particular weight given to any store except a little one towards GOG because I get actual installers for offline storage there.
However, Epic is explicitly excluded. I browse there, I take the freebies, I don’t buy there. The only money Swine-y ever got from my was the 7€ when that bug around Death Stranding happened and I didn’t realize my free game actually cost me money instead of being free.
His criticism might be valid. Or not. I cannot judge that. Regardless, he’s an asshole and his shop is terrible for me as a customer comparing the alternatives.
Then Sweeney adjusts his flight goggles and gets ready for takeoff on one of his pet peeves: the 30% platform fee on Steam. “There was a good case for [such fees] in the early days,” writes Sweeney, “but the scale is now high and operating costs have been driven down, while the churn of new game releases is so fast that the brief marketing or UA value the storefront provides is far disproportionate to the fee.”
Sweeney opines that, if you were to strip away the top 25 selling games on Steam, “I bet Valve made more profit from most of the next 1000 than the developer themselves made.” The maths to get there is 30% to Valve, 30% on marketing, and 15% on servers / engine costs, so “the system takes 75% and that leaves 25% for actually creating the game, worse than the retail distribution economics of the 1990s.”
Sounds valid, it’s a really high cut
“Right now, you assholes are telling the world that the strong and powerful get special terms, while 30% is for the little people,” writes Sweeney. “We’re all in for a prolonged battle if Apple tries to keep their monopoly and 30% by cutting backroom deals with big publishers to keep them quiet. Why not give ALL developers a better deal? What better way is there to convince Apple quickly that their model is now totally untenable?”
Sounds valid, making deals with the big publishers for smaller cut and taking the big cut from smaller publishers. Sounds pretty shit
Yeah but OTOH I can easily see this be discussed away. Economy of scale is very much a thing in physical distribution (so smaller board games have to set aside significantly higher percentages to manufacturing, logistics and marketing), and I lack the business knowledge to know how this does or does not translates to digital distribution.
In other words I cannot judge that, but I have two indicators to suggest it might be a thing:
Physical distribution mirrors it.
Sweeney is an absolutely untrustworthy source, and him so vehemently poking at it suggests it’s a false narrative.
(Plus let’s not forget that Sweeney would take a 105% cut if he could get away with, he himself is a money-greedy bastard)
I think their claims seem credible. I think Steam lowering their take shows that 30% was indeed higher than necessary. And lowering it for those selling shitloads of copies and keeping it high for smaller sellers does sound a bit backwards and scummy.
But both Epic and Valve are businesses. Of course they’re going to be greedy and scummy. I wouldn’t really expect anything else. I just think in this case the specific arguments towards Steam seem valid.
steam
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.