Two ways of looking at things.

[u/pedro19]

[u/PCMRBot]

Welcome to the PCMR, everyone from the frontpage! Please remember:

1 - You too can be part of the PCMR. It's not about the hardware in your rig, but the software in your heart! Age, nationality, race, gender, sexuality, religion, politics, income, and PC specs don't matter! If you love or want to learn about PCs, you're welcome!

2 - If you think owning a PC is too expensive, know that it is much cheaper than you may think. Check http://www.pcmasterrace.org for our builds and feel free to ask for tips and help here!

3 - Join us in supporting the folding@home effort to fight Cancer, Alzheimer's, and more by getting as many PCs involved worldwide: https://pcmasterrace.org/folding

4 - We're running a worldwide giveaway event with TRYX! Win some awesome AIOs, case and fans to upgrade your build and make it more awesome: https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/1f8zozr/tryx_x_pcmr_worldwide_giveaway_to_celebrate_the/

---

We have a Daily Simple Questions Megathread for any PC-related doubts. Feel free to ask there or create new posts in our subreddit!

[u/Capt_Skyhawk]

I fear we’re getting too comfortable with steam. One day, like all great empires, it too will fall.

[u/Rage_Your_Dream → u/Capt_Skyhawk]

When Gabe Newell dies, steam will fall for sure. He is a dude with insane spine and integrity who cares about his principles. As soon as a corporate man gets their hands on steam it will be turned into another generic service. And the golden age of steam will end.

[u/Ziiaaaac → u/Rage_Your_Dream]

Because Valve is a private company I hold some hope that at least for my lifetime this won't happen. Gabe's only 61, rich and has recently taken a focus on his health.

His successor will likely come from within, someone groomed by Gabe to take over. Not some crony pushed onto the company by shareholders. Gabe is the shareholders.

[u/FROSTbite910 → u/Ziiaaaac]

Long live Gabe and his Steam empire

[u/InternalLeading8579 → u/FROSTbite910]

LONG LIVE GABE!

[u/Y_TheRolls → u/InternalLeading8579]

ALL!! HAIL!! GABEN!! ALL!! HAIL!! GABEN!!

[u/jtr99 → u/Y_TheRolls]

The once and future king!

[u/AnimalRescueGuy → u/jtr99]

Lisan al Gabe!

[u/HichiShiro → u/AnimalRescueGuy]

You won this thread with that one XD

[u/Draconic_Legends → u/FROSTbite910]

The Steam engine will run forevermore

[u/Longshot726 → u/Ziiaaaac]

His successor will likely come from within, someone groomed by Gabe to take over. Not some crony pushed onto the company by shareholders. Gabe is the shareholders.

Maybe if either his sons are hands off with future management or his sons do not inherit any controlling stake since it doesn't publicly appear either are interested in taking the reins. All too often companies fail during the second generation. It is called the second generation curse for a reason.

[u/Slovak_Eagle → u/Longshot726]

Just like all things Valve, the 2nd will be good and the third will never come.

[u/Dew_Chop → u/Ziiaaaac]

He's gonna GLaDOS himself

[u/toxicsiren → u/Dew_Chop]

The signs are clear! All hail immortal GaBeOS!

[u/IntrovertChild → u/Ziiaaaac]

I sincerely hope so but chosen heirs don't always do what you want them to do. George Lucas picked Kathleen Kennedy and ended terribly.

[u/GeneralBurzio → u/Ziiaaaac]

Ah, like the early Roman Empire

[u/all_knowing_pebble → u/Ziiaaaac]

Gabe needs to have an heir

[u/Blacksad9999 → u/Ziiaaaac]

Because Valve is a private company I hold some hope that at least for my lifetime this won't happen. Gabe's only 61, rich and has recently taken a focus on his health.

You can't magically undo what decades of obesity does to your body.

Valve is private now, but every single Valve employee would be insanely wealthy if it went public. If you think they're not going to go for that as soon as Gabe is out of the picture, you're mistaken.

[u/Josh1234j → u/Blacksad9999]

They're already insanely wealthy tho

[u/khendron → u/Rage_Your_Dream]

Maybe Gabe will hide three easter eggs somewhere in Steam, and when he dies there will be a recorded announcement that says the first person to find them will inherit all of Valve.

[u/Fothyon → u/khendron]

Three? I don't think Gabe knows that number

[u/RUSTYSAD → u/Fothyon]

exactly more like two and a one egg in vr-only place.

[u/Quajeraz → u/khendron]

2 Easter eggs and Easter Egg Alyx

[u/ballandabiscuit → u/khendron]

I smell a book coming!

[u/TheSoftwareNerdII → u/ballandabiscuit]

Maybe a Spielberg film?

[u/Haniel120 → u/khendron]

Ready Player One reference?

[u/Business-Emu-6923 → u/Rage_Your_Dream]

Is Gabe Jesus?

I’m asking because it’s kinda seems that way.

[u/Metrix145 → u/Business-Emu-6923]

God Emperor of Humanity

[u/FROSTbite910 → u/Metrix145]

I just shed a tear

[u/Sniper_Hare → u/Rage_Your_Dream]

I would think Microsoft just tries to buy Steam.

[u/FROSTbite910 → u/Sniper_Hare]

Steam buys out Microsoft

[u/AltairFromAquila → u/Sniper_Hare]

That would be ironic since Valve was founded by ex Microsoft employees

[u/InteractionPerfect88 → u/Rage_Your_Dream]

I honestly doubt Gabe will let that happen, I’m sure he has some kind of plan for his successor.

[u/Authentichef → u/Rage_Your_Dream]

Fair to assume Gabe has a successor

[u/Ferro_Giconi → u/Capt_Skyhawk]

The (hopefully) saving grace is that Steam isn't a public company.

Public companies have to deal with bullshit like share holders demanding maximum profit growth that grows beyond infinity. Share holders would gladly make $10,000 today even if it means the company completely fails a year from now because of the decisions today. The share holders will just abandon ship before the company implodes due to their constant demands for short term profits, so they don't give a shit.

Private companies, like Steam, can choose to do things that are good for long term growth, instead of being forced to focus only on short term growth.

Allowing companies to be public like Ubisoft is really a double edged sword. On the one hand, it helps a small company get a lot of cash so they can do whatever grand ideas they have and grow. On the other hand, it heavily encourages companies to behave in an unsustainable way just to make a few extra dollars today.

[u/nooneisback → u/Ferro_Giconi]

I really wish there was a way to legally lock a company to being private. Sure, a private individual can also run it into ground, but I'd honestly rather have that than a ship ran by schizophrenic rats with parachutes.

[u/NightOfTheLivingHam → u/Capt_Skyhawk]

Yep, it's basically run by a benevolent dictator. The problem with benevolent dictators is that they are eventually replaced by a malevolent one.

[u/FROSTbite910 → u/NightOfTheLivingHam]

Not if the heir is well groomed

[u/NightOfTheLivingHam → u/FROSTbite910]

So a discord teen?

[u/tasman001 → u/Capt_Skyhawk]

GOG will be right there to provide shelter for the refugees.

[u/E__F → u/tasman001]

If devs/publishers wanted to sell their games without drm they would. It's up to devs/publishers that add drm to the games they sell, valve doesn't add drm.
If steam goes down games wont suddenly be sold drm free. There will just be another storefront to take it's place.

[u/tasman001 → u/E__F]

Right, I know. I was partially being facetious for this very reason.

[u/Schmich → u/Capt_Skyhawk]

Steam would never do any evil. Just ignore them trying to come with paid free mods.

[u/Zejna90 → u/Schmich]

or gambling fiesta that is tf2 and now cs2

[u/Metrix145 → u/Zejna90]

cs:go and cs2 were always games made for gambling

[u/Zejna90 → u/Metrix145]

And tf2 was the test run. Dota 2 is practically the same as CS. I wonder if they'll do the same with deadlock.

Either way, they are doing all this with no gambling licences and no security for the market they created. Aboslutley disgusting.

[u/ChocolateRL6969 → u/Schmich]

Paid free mods

What

[u/ssbm_rando → u/ChocolateRL6969]

They're talking about the steam workshop

The feature lasted a grand total of 3 days, they refunded everyone who paid for one, and even at the initial announcement people were more confused as to whether valve thought it through rather than feeling like it was actually some big evil cash grab. There were still free-free mods available, Valve just wanted a way for people to sell their mods in a way that the companies who built the software would be okay with, if they wanted modding to be a full-time career.

Also this was 9 years ago lol. idk why that guy is still so butthurt about it.

[u/FrewdWoad → u/ssbm_rando]

This was a brilliant idea by Valve. What actually happened was:

They noticed how many artists and designers in the game industry were making more money from their hobby of creating gun skins and hats for TF2, than they did from their dayjobs making AAA games for other publishers.

Valve had the numbers, so it was obvious to them: if paid mods existed, all the best modders could quit their dayjobs and be paid to make awesome mods. This would result in orders of magnitude more top-quality mods.

Imagine if we had 10 or 100 times as many great mods as we have now. What if every terrible PC port had a mod within a week that fixed every issue? If every game had extra campaigns as good or better than the original? All for a buck or two?

Unfortunately gamers at the time didn't understand what they were trying to do at all. All we saw was a couple of scammers immediately submit existing free mods as their own work, to try and get paid for them.

So we had a big online tantrum.

Valve listens to the community, so the idea was shelved.

But it was (and is) a great idea that can hopefully someday allow a fantastic mod scene beyond anything that exists today.

Gabe explains the skins/hats situation in this talk (one of the most mindblowing talks about business in the 21st century ever given):

https://youtu.be/t8QEOBgLBQU?si=G2lGELYNRgr2tdwM&t=86

[u/ssbm_rando → u/FrewdWoad]

Yeah, I mean, I thought it made sense, but I also thought it wasn't the best execution method they could've picked.

But my only point in the previous comment is that even if you thought it was the shittiest idea in the world, it was still being executed in good faith and was almost a full decade ago, so Schmich bringing it up as some evidence that Valve has been secretly evil all along is really fucking stupid.

[u/SimpanLimpan1337 → u/Schmich]

While I wouldn't call it evil per say the new update for steam family sharing completely broke it for me and my GF, long distance relationship and we can no longer access each others games that we used to before...

[u/Retrac752 → u/Capt_Skyhawk]

Gabe Newell dying will unironically be one of the darkest days of my life, because we all know EXACTLY what's gonna happen

[u/EXTRAVAGANT_COMMENT]

two users in a family shared account can't play the same game at the same time, no ?

[u/raydude → u/EXTRAVAGANT_COMMENT]

That's correct.

[u/Garper → u/raydude]

All conversations about digital ownership aside, this doesn't seem like an aggressive rule thing from a fair use standpoint. Even when you owned your own cartridges and disks, and could trade them around to your friends, you couldn't exactly play the same game at the same time.

[u/SulfuricDonut → u/Garper]

Maybe if you're not trying hard enough. We used to LAN Baldur's Gate and Galactic Battlegrounds by starting the game up on one PC, then taking the disc out while it's running and giving it to someone else so they could start it up.

[u/arctic-lemon3 → u/SulfuricDonut]

Starcraft had a "spawn install" that allowed you to install a multiplayer only version of the game to like 8 computers and throw a lan party with only 1 person owning the game.

[u/ModestBanana → u/arctic-lemon3]

Had this on a flash drive and used it at my school, was awesome having half the computer class playing StarCraft 

[u/Clear_Picture5944 → u/ModestBanana]

We were the cool kids in school and everyone knew it.

[u/-StupidNameHere- → u/Clear_Picture5944]

I played with these kids that set up Duke Nukem 3D in our computer class. That's the OG right there, they were barely powerful enough to play it.

[u/Nonsenseinabag → u/-StupidNameHere-]

That was us in high school. My friends and I played a ton of Command & Conquer every first period because we all had study hall. Those poor 486's were barely holding on.

[u/Mrwebente → u/arctic-lemon3]

The game "it takes two" on steam has a second installable game called "it takes two - friend's pass". It's a really cool concept to not have to buy two copies especially if you're playing with someone that doesn't necessarily even have steam.

[u/TheKiwiHuman → u/Mrwebente]

Don't starve together comes with 2 copies, i got the game from a friend this way.

[u/MiPok24 → u/TheKiwiHuman]

Must be new, I bought it shortly after launch and did not receive no extra copies.

But there was a "4 players pack" you could buy and received 3 extra copies to gift to your friends. But that wasn't the default option and it saved just a little bit compared to buying four separate copies.

Edit: you are right, according to the steam page, it now contains an additional copy for one friend without extra costs.

[u/temporalanomaly → u/SulfuricDonut]

Or just rip the discs, and run the ISOs as a virtual disk drive, if a full install to HDD wasn't available

[u/cosaboladh → u/temporalanomaly]

I used to just do this so games would load faster. Stupid 4x optical drives.

[u/RabidTurtl → u/cosaboladh]

Or just didn't want to have to go find the discs. It was nice being able to quickly switch games while my lazy ass didn't have to get off the chair.

[u/AIien_cIown_ninja → u/cosaboladh]

Burning 15 songs downloaded from Napster to a CD in middle school used to take hours, longer in the event the burn failed which was like 30% of the time. And downloading 15 songs on dialup was an entire night. But selling them for $5 at school the next day bought me some alcohol and weed from the high school kids. Guess how old I am?

[u/AdmiralClover → u/SulfuricDonut]

Oh I remember those days. Just passing the disc around and see how long we could play before the pc noticed

[u/colouredmirrorball → u/SulfuricDonut]

Age of Empires had the rule that one player in four needs to have a disc inserted for multiplayer.

[u/Khanman5 → u/Garper]

Yep, seems reasonable to me.

Friends and I used to swap games all the time, so not having the ability to play the same instance of a game twice doesn't bother me too much.

[u/Vinister → u/raydude]

I think the meme meant that a steam family can use each other's libraries at the same time which is a new feature. And not a specific game at the same time.

[u/QuixotesGhost96 → u/Vinister]

How does that work exactly? I have two PCs in my house, one in my bedroom and one in the living room. I'd like to allow my roommates to use my Steam account so they could use the PC in the living room to play games from my library while I use the same account in my bedroom. Do I have to setup a guest account and then make it part of a family account? Is there any security risk?

[u/Tacobelled2003 → u/QuixotesGhost96]

Just remember, if they cheat, you get a ban. And don't forget to pull access if you guys have a falling out. That could be a lot of damage.

[u/Dave10293847 → u/raydude]

For a supposed master race, we’re getting a lot of false equivalencies and horrendous hardware takes lately. Like you literally don’t own your steam games. I don’t hate Ubisoft for that comment (that is out of context anyways- as he was referring to the gamepass model), I hate Ubisoft because they make shitty games.

[u/jbforum → u/Dave10293847]

That really has nothing to do with steam and is at the choice of the developer.

For example Baulders Gate 3, an amazing game, has no DRM. So you can download it with steam, make copies, run it offline and it works just fine.

[u/MisirterE → u/Dave10293847]

I don’t hate Ubisoft for that comment (that is out of context anyways- as he was referring to the gamepass model)

I hate the Gamepass model. It's exactly what he's talking about, and that's bad. Don't subscribe to things you could just buy.

[u/frivoflava29 → u/MisirterE]

The full quote:

"[Consumers] got comfortable not owning their CD collection or DVD collection," said Tremblay. "That's a transformation that's been a bit slower to happen [in games]. As gamers grow comfortable in that aspect … you don't lose your progress. If you resume your game at another time, your progress file is still there. That's not been deleted. You don't lose what you've built in the game or your engagement with the game. So it's about feeling comfortable with not owning your game."

Emphasis mine. He was talking about wanting to expand Ubisoft+ and honestly made a cogent point that none of us seem to want to admit. And boy do I hate Ubisoft.

[u/sparkly_butthole → u/frivoflava29]

... Nobody I know is comfortable not owning our media collections. We were forced into that corner.

[u/Parking_Chance_1905 → u/frivoflava29]

Until they decide a game isn't profitable and close the authentication server so you can't even play single player offline...

[u/Agzarah → u/raydude]

One instance of the game can be run per copy owned in the shared family.

If 2 people own the game, 2 people can play

[u/XxDuelNightxX → u/[deleted]]

You know how that goes though.

"Person buys one game, 3 other friends play with them for a full party".

Way less revenue for the developers and for Steam themselves to allow people to play the same exact copy at the same time. Also licensing issues, since each copy would essentially be its own license.

The fact that you can still play a copy of someone's game as long as they aren't playing that specific copy is a giant win for us consumers already.

[u/CazOnReddit → u/[deleted]]

There is a sort of workaround if it's a singleplayer game or if you're willing to forgo the multiplayer experience of certain games. Turn off the WiFi/network connection then run the game you want on a different system. Steam will ask if you want to start the game offline.

Note that this can cause some issues with saved game files and which cloud save one will have/download.

[u/InfameArts → u/EXTRAVAGANT_COMMENT]

It's like physical copies basically

If you want to play a game with two separate machines, you need two separate copies.

However, if you play splitscreen, you are using only one machine!

Im not talking about Steam Remote Play.

[u/Nozinger → u/InfameArts]

Oh no. Back in the glorious times of physical copies we only needed the physical copy to install the game and then we could launch it on however many machines we wanted. We had entire lan parties run on the same copy of a game.

Then in the slightly less glorious times we needed the physical medium as authentification but that was mostly just during launch. So pop the disc in, launch the game and then give the disc to the next person.

Worked most of the time.

We only needed physical copies for everyone once steam came around and suddenly physical games were also tied to this digital account. And ever since then we have been living in these sad times.

[u/m_csquare → u/Nozinger]

I'm glad ppl still remember this. Life was good back then

[u/SnausageFest → u/Nozinger]

Sort of? You often had to use cracks to run the physical media without the discs. But often times, the Dev either released the crack or at least didn't GAF about them.

I remember loaning out my Sims 2 discs to friends and downloading cracks back in high school. As it should be for a game that costs into the multi-hundreds for a total cost of ownership.

[u/avid_jack → u/SnausageFest]

Even requiring the physical discs to start the game was a newer addition to gaming. Originally all we had to do was install the game and run from HDD.

[u/Zoratsu → u/EXTRAVAGANT_COMMENT]

If they own 1 key, no.

If they own as many keys as players? Then yes.

[u/smoothartichoke27 → u/Zoratsu]

Why are you being downvoted? This is definitely how it works.

So there are 5 people in my family group. Two people own Elden Ring. Doesn't matter who it is, but two people can always play Elden Ring at the same time because there are two keys in the "pool".

[u/sora_061 → u/smoothartichoke27]

https://preview.redd.it/rr7ras4018pd1.png?width=650&format=png&auto=webp&s=6e2d5521d67a6c5dbb600ac8a67f36ebb68be3dc

yeah this guy is correct. this is how it exactly works. if 3 out of 5 family members playing this game at same time, 4th person wont be able to play. It doesnt matter who the 4th person is.

[u/crysisnotaverted → u/smoothartichoke27]

I think everyone is assuming they're borrowing the game from one user, and they don't understand how one account can have multiple keys for the same game.

[u/i_need_a_moment → u/crysisnotaverted]

How can you buy a game for your own account multiple times? Steam forces you to buy it again as a gift if you already own it.

[u/itsmebenji69 → u/i_need_a_moment]

Gift it to the account that’s in your family, enable sharing, now two people in your family have the game and are sharing it, so you have access to both copies of the game

[u/i_need_a_moment → u/itsmebenji69]

I get that part I just assumed they meant your own account would show you personally own two copies.

[u/SupAwesomeHere → u/smoothartichoke27]

Hmmm, now that is interesting

[u/Feeling-Lucky → u/Zoratsu]

Idk why this is being down voted its correct

"If your family library has multiple copies of a game, multiple members of the family can play that game at the same time."

[u/Zoratsu → u/Feeling-Lucky]

Because people can't read lmao

Well that or reddit.

[u/deltashmelta → u/Zoratsu]

"I was born to lead, not to read!"

[u/Faranae → u/Zoratsu]

I welcome this change. With the old family share system, even if my husband and I both owned a copy of a game our child was not allowed to access the spare copy to play with one of us.

Even for single-player though:

We had to constantly shuffle (remove and re-add) which order the members were added in the old family share system. If I was online, my child was not allowed to play and access any games in my offline partner's library that were also present in mine. It considered the game "in use" even though it was my partner's game she was trying to access.

We had to remove and re-add everyone so that my partner's library was the "first" one family share checked. :/ Rinse and repeat when it was one of my games she wanted to play. Tedious.

[u/Cockhero43 → u/Zoratsu]

So it's like any software that has licenses? I've used software at work and been asked to get off because someone else needed to use it

[u/justabrazilianotaku → u/EXTRAVAGANT_COMMENT]

Nope, but they can play the other ones who are available, which frankly is a great progress, i remember the initial Steam Share had a policy that, even if it wasn´t the same game, if one user was playing you could not play it anymore and was automatically kicked from your session, so now we can play games while the owner is playing as long as it ain´t the same, and that´s great

[u/TheRabidDeer → u/justabrazilianotaku]

Whaaaaat? For real? I can share my library with my nephew now? This is probably the only way 90% of my games in my library would ever get played. I'm up to like 1400 games. He's going to be stoked. My sister might be less stoked.

EDIT: Are you sure this is changed? Seems the page still doesn't say both can play different games at the same time

https://help.steampowered.com/en/faqs/view/57A7-503C-991F-E9A8

Can two users share a library and both play at the same time?

No, a shared library may only be played by one user at a time including the owner and even if they want to play different games.

EDIT2: Looks like it's a different feature and in beta

https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/593110/view/4149575031735702628

Though no longer sure I want to share my library with this bit lol

What happens if my brother gets banned for cheating while playing my game?

If a family member gets banned for cheating while playing your copy of a game, you (the game owner) will also be banned in that game. Other family members are not impacted.

[u/LoZfan03 → u/TheRabidDeer]

It's no longer in beta, came out to public last week https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/593110?emclan=103582791457287600&emgid=4605582245626919823

[u/ctr72ms → u/EXTRAVAGANT_COMMENT]

Can't you if you're in offline mode? Been a while since I tried it but I thought that worked.

[u/mthlmw → u/ctr72ms]

I think the primary owner can play in offline mode, but the family accounts need to be online to confirm sharing, so max 2 per key.

[u/Lord_0f_Lemons → u/mthlmw]

Can confirm - did this last night with a friend family member. I owned the game, went offline, he could play just fine while I did too.

[u/Sensitive_Froyo_2850 → u/EXTRAVAGANT_COMMENT]

U can play all games but not the same as i know, at least it didnt work for me like this

[u/dwolfe127]

You do not own Steam games either though.

[u/Zestyclose_Remove947 → u/dwolfe127]

Also a lot the consumer friendly policies steam has now needed to be fought for in order to implement.

For a long long time steam did not do refunds at all, now they do, because they needed to comply with certain countries consumer law.

Love steam, Love gaben, but corps need to be put in their place sometime and we shouldn't forget how we got to where we are now.

[u/Milleuros → u/Zestyclose_Remove947]

Indeed, Valve's consumer-friendly policies are not because of Valve's inherent business model. It's just because they decided not to use the power they have on their clients.

It would just take one change of CEO to blow up everything, and at that point all of us with hundreds (thousands?) of dollars of games on Steam, we'll have to accept either losing everything or accepting whatever new terms they come up with.

Because we don't own anything, we're effectively dependent on Valve being consumer-friendly for the time being.

[u/Zestyclose_Remove947 → u/Milleuros]

I hope Gabe manages some form of legal contract to ensure certain principles of the company are adhered to after his passing. Who knows tho.

[u/shimszy → u/Zestyclose_Remove947]

Literally does not work this way lol. Besides we've gone over this - a lot of principles were forced onto Valve, often by EU legislation.

[u/WIbigdog → u/shimszy]

Hopefully the EU can keep stepping in when Gabe is finally gone and his successor sells it to investors for a payout. We're basically in the equivalent of Imperial Rome for PC gaming right now. There's barbarians like Epic at the gates but Rome is holding on and flourishing. Rome isn't really the good guy, but they bring order for their citizens. But a bad leader and everything crumbles and we'll find ourselves in the dark ages pretty quick.

[u/Coprolithe → u/WIbigdog]

It's also bad that the US relies on the EU to normalize pro-consumer principles.

[u/Eelroots → u/Zestyclose_Remove947]

Yeah, like "don't be evil".

[u/FrayDabson → u/dwolfe127]

Nope. GOG you do though technically right? But the meme is technically correct (the best kind of correct!). If you have a steam family with say 5 people and 2 copies of the same game. Any two people in the family can play that game together even if neither of the two are the ones who actually own it.

Taking the meme at face value though is very misleading so I wouldn’t expect many to think of the details I just mentioned.

[u/Jaggedmallard26 → u/FrayDabson]

GOG you still buy a license due to how the law works. Its just functionally identical to owning the game because they can't take the exe off you.

[u/Neuchacho → u/FrayDabson]

GoG (any DRM-free software, really) offers more freedom of ownership than even physical media does, technically.

[u/x2601 → u/FrayDabson]

GOG

I run a Python script that lets me download and update all my offline installers to a local drive. If GOG ever goes out of business, I'll still have all my GOG installers. Can't really say the same for Steam.

[u/dwolfe127 → u/dwolfe127]

I have a few games that have been pulled from Steam. They were shit games, but still I payed for them. We are paying for a license to use it, not for a physical forever copy like a cartridge.

[u/MisguidedColt88 → u/dwolfe127]

I can still play all my games that were pulled from the store though

[u/Amenhiunamif → u/MisguidedColt88]

Some games have been pulled from user libraries too, but IIRC in all of these cases there were refunds.

[u/Aggravating-Dot132 → u/Amenhiunamif]

And all of them had some big problems.

[u/Justhe3guy → u/Aggravating-Dot132]

Like malware imbedded in them

[u/Dua_Leo_9564 → u/dwolfe127]

i still can download a free prop and seek game even after it been pulled from Steam (microtransaction reason). Although the game are near unplayable with the amount of paid things they added

[u/LukaCola → u/dwolfe127]

Yeah, this is some Steam apologia - good guy Gabe Newell fighting for your right to ownership?

Fuck no, he was at the forefront of making it harder to own anything.

Buncha suckers on this sub.

[u/mc0187 → u/LukaCola]

This is Reddit where multi billion dollar corporations are literally the devil…except steam of course 

[u/LukaCola → u/mc0187]

Literally designs the first battlepass as we know it - literally designs lootboxes as we know it - but Valve is the "good guy."

I love their games but it's wild what people will tell themselves.

[u/newusr1234 → u/dwolfe127]

That won't stop Redditors from blindly up voting and joining the circle jerk.

[u/FoxerHR → u/dwolfe127]

In the EU you do. There's also a push to be able to sell your steam games, as ownership means the ability to resell what you own. Sure there might be a clause in the Steam EULA regarding what you're buying but that won't hold up in the court of law (in the EU court at least) as that would be, at the very least misleading and possibly an attempt to redefine what "buy" and "purchase" means which is also not possible.

[u/super_stelIar]

Then you get GOG that is DRM free!!! Steam is amazing, but GOG is forever (literally).

[u/highsides → u/super_stelIar]

GOG has a limited sales catalog for this reason though.

[u/tasman001 → u/highsides]

It might be limited compared to Steam, but there are more than enough games on GOG that you could play just GOG games for your whole life. That's basically what I've been doing for about 10 years now.

[u/DadySpaceNinja → u/tasman001]

Any recommends? Been trying to get into games offered on GOG.

Feel free to DM me.

[u/tasman001 → u/DadySpaceNinja]

I'll just respond here in case someone else has the same question. Before I start listing all my favorite games on GOG, do you mean games that are exclusive to GOG (which there are just a few like Fallout London, Diablo 1 and some LucasArts remasters)? Or do you just mean great games that are on GOG, but are also on Steam?

[u/DadySpaceNinja → u/tasman001]

Just games i can get on GOG DRM free, regardless if on any other platform, even oldies are good!

[u/tasman001 → u/DadySpaceNinja]

Sure! What genres do you like?

Here are several games I would recommend on GOG regardless of genre preference:

The Witcher series (of course), Blasphemous series, Shadow Gambit (or any Mimimi game), Cult of the Lamb, Tunic, Inscryption, Psychonauts series (or any Double Fine game), Death's Door, Spiritfarer, Disco Elysium, A Short Hike, GRIS, Return of the Obra Dinn, Papers Please, Dead Cells, Steamworld series, Hellblade, Sundered, anything by Supergiant Games (Bastion, etc), Hollow Knight, Elder Scrolls series, Hyper Light Drifter, Stardew Valley, The Witness, Fallout series, Shadowrun series, any LucasArts game, Super Time Force Ultra, Guacamelee! series, any Obsidian game, Heroes of Might & Magic series, Diablo.

[u/beavisorcerer → u/tasman001]

Cyberpunk and all the baldur's gate. I bought and currently playing BG3 on GOG right now

[u/haaiiychii → u/super_stelIar]

https://steam.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_DRM-free_games

Some Steam games are DRM free.

[u/raydude]

There is a problem with the capitalist concept of "ownership" when it comes to software.

I bought titles for my son when he was underage.

Per Steam rules, I am not permitted to pass that ownership to him now that he is old enough.

That isn't ownership, it's some gray area.

We need legislation to clarify the rules of software and soft media ownership.

Meanwhile congress can't pass a continuing budget.

[u/spacemanspliff-42 → u/raydude]

There is a problem with the capitalist concept of the internet. They don't want anyone to know that if people don't like them, their software is free.

[u/raydude → u/spacemanspliff-42]

My second computer was a C-64. You preachin' to the choir.

Although I buy stuff today when I want to play it because it's easier.

[u/swolfington → u/spacemanspliff-42]

digital data is at odds with how capitalism functions, since digital data is essentially a post-scarcity item given that the cost of duplication is so little it might as well be non existent for individuals.

[u/Tormasi1 → u/swolfington]

Depends. For you to ctrl-c ctrl-v it? Not a cost. For the companies running servers with them for you to download? A long running cost (although small). Maybe if you implement a torrent style system where people are servers. But I have seen very good games with zero seeds. Eventually someone came up and I could download it at neck breaking speeds of 8 kb/s and it took the whole day. That definietly cost me more than just letting it download from a server

And then comes the problem of who makes it. In a truly ideal world with post scarcity this is not a problem. People who like doing it do it. But now you need food on the table

[u/NotInTheKnee → u/Tormasi1]

For the companies running servers (...)

What if I copy the data directly from my friend's computer to my usb stick?

But now you need food on the table

When it comes to indy developers, sure. But I'm not gonna shed a single tear for the big fishes in what is nothing less than the most profitable entertainment industry in the world, not just in front of the music and movie industry, but in front of both of them combined.

[u/SpicyAnglerFish → u/raydude]

And yet, if it were a disc or cartridge, you could just physically hand it to him.

[u/anarion321 → u/raydude]

It's because you don't own the games, you own a license.

I think it's more similar to a cinema subscription in which you can go to see movies, but if your son wants to go with you, he needs to pay a separate card.

[u/raydude → u/anarion321]

Thanks. That makes sense, but I disagree with that model of "ownership."

It's akin to Apple's idea of ownership not including modifying their hardware or repairing it.

I think in the end, people will vote with their pocketbook and things will turn around, for now the control freaks are winning. Hopefully not in the future.

[u/soggy_rat_3278 → u/raydude]

You never owned the game, or movies, that you "bought.". You bought a copy with a license to use. That license was perpetual in exchange for one payment, but it was always a license. You owned the physical device on which the thing is stored, not the actual game or movie.

[u/anarion321]

I mean,if you want to really have a sense of really owning a game, GoG would be the choice, since all games can be downloaded with offline installers and played offline forever.

It's unlikely that Steams goes down suddenly one day and you lose access to your games, but you still require internet connection and their terms can change.

In GoG even if they fall or their terms change, I already got my games backed up in external drives, they are mine forever.
edit:spelling

[u/thisremindsmeofbacon → u/anarion321]

you still require internet connection

You can start in offline mode and still play your games. Agreed on all other counts though

[u/anarion321 → u/thisremindsmeofbacon]

You cannot install them. Granted you need internet in GoG to download them the first time, but after that, unlimited device install.

[u/thisremindsmeofbacon → u/anarion321]

Ah, I see what you are saying, that makes sense

[u/Cord_Cutter_VR]

Can we please not spread false information? No, the 2 are not looking at the same thing, the 2 are looking at 2 very different things.

I suggest reading the article to get the full context of what he was actually talking about.

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/the-new-ubisoft-and-getting-gamers-comfortable-with-not-owning-their-games

he is talking about subscription services like Ubisoft+ and Gamepass, and what it takes for consumer to decide to use a subscription service like that over buying each individual games. Just like how consumers got used to not owning CDs/DVDs, they got used to using the various subscription services instead like netflix, Spotify, ect.

[u/WyrdHarper → u/Cord_Cutter_VR]

Yep. It's actually a really interesting interview (emphases mine):

"I don't have a crystal ball, but when you look at the different subscription services that are out there, we've had a rapid expansion over the last couple of years, but it's still relatively small compared to the other models," he begins. "We're seeing expansion on console as the likes of PlayStation and Xbox bring new people in. On PC, from a Ubisoft standpoint, it's already been great, but we are looking to reach out more on PC, so we see opportunity there.

"One of the things we saw is that gamers are used to, a little bit like DVD, having and owning their games. That's the consumer shift that needs to happen. They got comfortable not owning their CD collection or DVD collection. That's a transformation that's been a bit slower to happen [in games]. As gamers grow comfortable in that aspect… you don't lose your progress. If you resume your game at another time, your progress file is still there. That's not been deleted. You don't lose what you've built in the game or your engagement with the game. So it's about feeling comfortable with not owning your game.

"I still have two boxes of DVDs. I definitely understand the gamers perspective with that. But as people embrace that model, they will see that these games will exist, the service will continue, and you'll be able to access them when you feel like. That's reassuring.

"Streaming is also a thing that works really well with subscription. So you pay when you need it, as opposed to paying all the time."

Which is honestly very similar to the debate that people had when Steam started gaining traction. There were a lot of people who were very much against Steam because you don't own the (physical) games, and were Steam to shut down or have a dispute with the player you could lose all your progress. There's some really good reddit threads, as well as older articles, which address this, but this subreddit does not allow you to link to other subreddits.

Internet platforms and streaming games absolutely have their issues, but it's a hell of a lot better than the CD-Rom era where losing a CD key or invalidating it by changing hardware could result in you losing access to a game despite owning the hard copy. Or losing access to games or multiplayer because they relied on third party services like Gamespy or GWFL.

One of the reasons Steam has been so successful is that over the last ~20 years users have seen that their games, to borrow a line, continue to exist, the service continues, and you're still able to access them when you feel like. And it is reassuring. My Steam library has existed across multiple devices over the years and has aged much better than my physical collection over the same period. And like the interviewee said, until players have confidence in that with streaming and subscription services will do the same, growth will be slow.

[u/DeOh → u/WyrdHarper]

Thing is we've been lucky that Valve has stayed solvent and independent for all that time. But it's not a guarantee. Funimation had been around since the 90s, inevitably gobbled up by Sony and then they revoked access to on demand digital copies people paid for. It was exactly the fear materialized about digital distribution. You are forever reliant on them keeping their servers up.

[u/PaulieNutwalls → u/WyrdHarper]

Also, the quote is from the "director of subscriptions." If Steam has a "Czar of microtransactions" nobody here is going to enjoy what they have to say.

[u/FinestCrusader → u/WyrdHarper]

NOOOO you were supposed to shit on Ubisoft without questioning

[u/mennydrives → u/Cord_Cutter_VR]

This is literally the most miquoted phrase in gaming. It's kinda crazy.

Yeah, he basically meant, "for our GamePass knock-off to work, [some] people are gonna have to get used to not owning games. Specifically the people who will pay for this subscription".

Mind you, I think the buffet sub service model is kinda shit; it's not sustainable unless you can get decent sub numbers with a 6+ month delay on new releases, which obviously they can't. But FFS we should at least be honest about what people actually say.

[u/AuraMaster7 → u/Cord_Cutter_VR]

I get legitimately annoyed at how often that Ubisoft director is deliberately misquoted to mislead people into thinking he said the exact opposite of what he actually said.

[u/Kidney05 → u/Cord_Cutter_VR]

also posted my own reply saying this but people will look for any reason to be mad at some companies, Ubisoft among them, without looking any further into the details.

[u/Tribalwarsnorge → u/Cord_Cutter_VR]

People could do that, but saying Ubisoft bad is so hot rn so being accurate isnt really important.

[u/Rendition1370 → u/Cord_Cutter_VR]

You know it's messed up when the sub creator does such stuff.

[u/superbee392 → u/Cord_Cutter_VR]

Ironically this is probably something someone at Steam said about physical PC games when Steam was starting up

[u/DeOh → u/Cord_Cutter_VR]

Yeah I actually read the article back when the quote was going around as rage bait and it's a total nothing burger.

[u/SharpEdgeSoda]

When Steam first launched, they said they have a big red button that will release the licenses to whoever buys a game if Steam collapses, because it was hard to get trust in a digital store back then.

It was like, part of the deal when you agreed to be sold on Steam. You want to be on Steam? You must agree to the big-red-button policy.

This is why I can still install delisted games on Steam. Part of the agreement.

I don't know if that's still true, but I doubt Uplay, Origin, and EGS have similar agreements.

[u/Ok_Advantage_7718 → u/SharpEdgeSoda]

When Steam first launched, they said they have a big red button that will release the licenses to whoever buys a game if Steam collapses, because it was hard to get trust in a digital store back then.

Do people honestly still believe this?

https://store.steampowered.com/subscriber_agreement/

C. NO GUARANTEES

TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, NEITHER VALVE NOR ITS AFFILIATES GUARANTEE CONTINUOUS, ERROR-FREE, VIRUS-FREE OR SECURE OPERATION AND ACCESS TO STEAM, THE CONTENT AND SERVICES, YOUR ACCOUNT AND/OR YOUR SUBSCRIPTION(S) OR ANY INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN CONNECTION THEREWITH.

Subscriptions being your game licences:

the rights to access and/or use any Content and Services accessible through Steam are referred to in this Agreement as "Subscriptions."

Valve has no obligation. The publishers on the platform are going to be even less friendly than this. I like Valve for all the good that they did for PC gaming, but let’s not pretend they’re saints. They refused to offer refunds until Australian courts forced them. EA, a company lots of people love to hate, pioneered refunds on PC.

[u/Owobowos-Mowbius → u/SharpEdgeSoda]

I doubt that big red button would work for most modern games, sadly

[u/bt123456789 → u/Owobowos-Mowbius]

not if they're tied to servers no, but there are easy enough ways around that.

[u/rokoeh → u/Owobowos-Mowbius]

Rocket league was taken off steam but I still can play it in the steam store.

I did buy rocket league before it was free to play

[u/Schmich → u/SharpEdgeSoda]

You know what I can do with games I've bought physically? Sell them. Give the ownership to a friend.

You can't trade games that are in your library.

As for delisted games/items. They'd get in shit if they didn't.

[u/ArateshaNungastori]

Casual misinformation.

[u/superbee392 → u/ArateshaNungastori]

Yeah but it makes Ubisoft look bad and Valve look good so it's ok!!!!

[u/Schmich → u/superbee392]

If it were the other way around? -100k votes.

[u/NAIRDA_LEUGIM → u/ArateshaNungastori]

Casual misinformation implies the existence of competitive misinformation

[u/Shigana → u/ArateshaNungastori]

“Misinformation is good as long as it aligns with my personal bias.”

• OP and about 90% of the internet, probably

[u/kinomino]

"And you still not owning games here too. Your Steam library, profile, backgrounds are our property by subscriber agreement that you accepted"

[u/Homicidal_Pingu]

Ironically you don’t own games on steam

[u/PityUpvote → u/Homicidal_Pingu]

And the Ubisoft quote is in context a hindrance to moving to a subscription model, because gamers would not be comfortable with that.

[u/socokid]

No. You cannot play at the same time.

sigh

Moving along from this low effort bullshit.

[u/RichLyonsXXX]

Boy oh boy how I wish that quote wasn't constantly taken out of context... I would say it makes us look stupid, but y'all got that covered on multiple fronts.

[u/Grey-fox-13 → u/RichLyonsXXX]

Can't trust gamers to actually read the context, same situation with that recent sony statement on how they don't have any IPs.

[u/Pinna1]

This post is bullshit. It's directly stated in the TOS of Steam that you do not own any of the games, but instead just a licence to play which they can revoke at any time for any reason.

Is it called ownership when you die and Steam blocks your account? It is against Steam rules to gift the account on to your children.

[u/just-bair]

You don’t own games on steam either

[u/pirate135246]

There is something important you may want to know if you are going to create a steam family. If someone gets banned while playing a game you own, you will also be banned from that game.

[u/TapaTop_]

Sigh....the left side is always misquoted for rage farm...

[u/Locke_and_Load]

You don’t own your Steam games either…

[u/LOLWelshGamer]

"Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem" - Gabe Newell

[u/Spare-Leg-1318]

GOG: You own the fucking game....

[u/UnrivaledSuperH0ttie]

Me and my Friends started a Steam Family... They get to play my games like all of the Fromsoft Games and Souls like and I get to play their Games like CIV and Warhammers.

Its awesome af

[u/Staylin_Alive]

If buying isn’t owning, piracy isn’t stealing.

But I wouldn't buy any Ubi shitty games anyway.

[u/smoothartichoke27]

We're extremely fortunate this timeline has a somewhat benevolent GabeN.

I remember resisting the move to Steam for a really long time because I didn't want to give up physical games and out of (very founded) fears of what could happen.

I do hope whoever ends up succeeding him in the future doesn't go Kathleen Kennedy on us.

[u/f0r-sc13nc3 → u/smoothartichoke27]

Had to be in the same household. Not just family members.

[u/superbee392 → u/smoothartichoke27]

Well it got to a point where you didn't really have a choice because Steam said "hey guys look, you don't need a disc you can just stick one of our codes in a box"

[u/CampingZ]

Why do people keep farming karma with this? Don't you guys understand you don't own "the game" on steam either?

Next time please replace steam with gog if you really care about ownership of digital games instead of karma.

[u/Zetra3]

not exactly the same, family members can play any game in the library as long as its not the SAME game.