Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

anti-steam petition

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 1:36:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

anti-steam petition
(in solidarity to fellow gamer silenced at gamespot forums)

a fellow gamer tried to start a anti-steam petition but was silenced
by gamespot; so cause neither valve, neither gamespot, neither anyone
can do the same in the newsgroups i propose doing the petition here

obviously doing a "real" petition requires work and conditions i don't
have so my proposal is to do a "symbolic" petition
don't put any personal information or even email, but simply follow-up
to this post and no need to write anything
just follow-up with a blank post
its only to show any valve's spies monitoring this groups how many we
are, so lets make this thread surpass the 300 mark! an ambitious number
but i think possible

ps: please valve and steam lovers ignore this, delete this from your
newsreaders or mark as read but don't interfere or do the usual, and
yes i know you all think doing any new thread related to steam in
wanting to start a flame war cause for you questioning master valve
is a capital sin, so go back worshiping your master and leaves us alone
this is a steam-lovers-free thread!

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam

More about : anti steam petition

Anonymous
January 9, 2005 1:36:14 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"difool" <john.difool@mail.telepac.pt> wrote in message
news:io12u0djp265726pausrisij2u39q1i6md@4ax.com...
> anti-steam petition

Just don't buy future games using 'steam' -- it's the only thing that will
work. Your usenet petition is useless and annoying.
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 1:36:15 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"Grackle" <nospam@lalaland.com> wrote in message
news:KFbEd.803$TN6.46142@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
> Just don't buy future games using 'steam' -- it's the only thing that will
> work.


That's the strategy I'm using. I really was going to buy Half-Life 2 and
Condition Zero, but Steam put an end to that idea. Instead, I've gone out
and supported (purchased) other games like Pacific Assault, Far Cry and Doom
3 (to name a few). Regardless of what people think of those games, I'm
happy to have supported games which do not have an overbearing copy
protection scheme. Besides, last time I looked in the store a couple of
days ago, Half-Life 2 is still selling for the same price as any other "top
tier" game on the shelf. If services like Steam are supposed to cut down on
piracy, then why is Half-Life 2 priced so high? I don't think fans of Steam
will answer that question, but it's something to think about.
Related resources
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 1:57:41 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

>snip<
> this is a steam-lovers-free thread!


Must resist temptation...
January 9, 2005 2:00:51 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 10:36:13 +0000, difool
<john.difool@mail.telepac.pt> wrote:

Oh dear, a new address. *plonk*
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 2:39:18 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"difool" wrote

> anti-steam petition

Honestly I feel sorry for you as it's clear that you don't have anything
really usefull to do in your miserable life

Hmm - not killfiled?
Can't be bothered to have a look
Here you go - *plonk* - feel any better?

- Peter
January 9, 2005 2:39:19 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 11:39:18 +0100, "Peter Lykkegaard"
<polonline@hotmail.com> wrote:

>"difool" wrote
>
>> anti-steam petition
>
>Honestly I feel sorry for you as it's clear that you don't have anything
>really usefull to do in your miserable life
>
>Hmm - not killfiled?
>Can't be bothered to have a look
>Here you go - *plonk* - feel any better?

I hope you are not waiting to see his response.
>
>- Peter
>
>
>
January 9, 2005 2:47:16 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"difool" wrote

> obviously doing a "real" petition requires work

Well that's out of the question then.

> and conditions i don't
> have so my proposal is to do a "symbolic" petition
> don't put any personal information or even email, but simply follow-up
> to this post and no need to write anything
> just follow-up with a blank post

> [snipped]

> ps: please valve and steam lovers ignore this, delete this from your
> newsreaders or mark as read but don't interfere or do the usual, and
> yes i know you all think doing any new thread related to steam in
> wanting to start a flame war cause for you questioning master valve
> is a capital sin, so go back worshiping your master and leaves us alone
> this is a steam-lovers-free thread!

I'm sorry for the flame-war, but what you're proposing is *spam*.

You suggest filling the group with useless messages - just wasting bandwidth
and everyone's time.

Although I disagree with almost everything you've ever posted; I think that
your petition *is* a good idea. But this is not the way to achieve it.

Find someone with a web site that you can use, you've got plenty of allies:
John Lewis, Riku, none@nowhere, Etc. Surely one of them can help out.
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 5:03:19 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

difool got up from the bar and shouted: :
> anti-steam petition blah blah blah...

So tell us all what's so bad about it? You can't pirate your favorite
games any more??? boohoo...

Personally I have no problem with it.

My only fear is that every game developer under the sun develops their
own type of steam system, and before I know it, I have to run 27
different game network applications....

I hope MORE games are delivered through steam, this would prevent my
above fear from happening...
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 5:05:28 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

Vince wrote:
> Although I disagree with almost everything you've ever posted; I think that
> your petition *is* a good idea. But this is not the way to achieve it.

You think an anonymous, totally unrepresentitive petition is a good
idea? *boggle*
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 5:23:47 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 14:03:19 +0000, Black Shuck <mark.gillespie@gmail.com>
wrote:

>difool got up from the bar and shouted: :
>> anti-steam petition blah blah blah...
>
>So tell us all what's so bad about it? You can't pirate your favorite
>games any more??? boohoo...
>
>Personally I have no problem with it.
>
>My only fear is that every game developer under the sun develops their
>own type of steam system, and before I know it, I have to run 27
>different game network applications....

Maybe but you would only have to use them as you need them and presumably only
one at a time.

>I hope MORE games are delivered through steam, this would prevent my
>above fear from happening...

I hope not as that would mean all those other companies would then have to pay
royalties to Valve and no doubt the quality of the game will suffer because of
it. That money would be better spent on the game itself.
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 5:51:43 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

>
>> Just don't buy future games using 'steam' -- it's the only thing that
>> will work.
>
>
> That's the strategy I'm using. I really was going to buy Half-Life 2 and
> Condition Zero, but Steam put an end to that idea. Instead, I've gone out
> and supported (purchased) other games like Pacific Assault, Far Cry and
> Doom 3 (to name a few). Regardless of what people think of those games,
> I'm happy to have supported games which do not have an overbearing copy
> protection scheme. Besides, last time I looked in the store a couple of
> days ago, Half-Life 2 is still selling for the same price as any other
> "top tier" game on the shelf. If services like Steam are supposed to cut
> down on piracy, then why is Half-Life 2 priced so high? I don't think
> fans of Steam will answer that question, but it's something to think
> about.
>
I agree with both of these posts. Vote with your dollars. It really all that
matters and counts.
There are many viable alternatives as pointed out. Support those companies
that treat the customer with respect.
John
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 6:41:58 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 11:00:51 +0000, Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.>
wrote:

>On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 10:36:13 +0000, difool
><john.difool@mail.telepac.pt> wrote:
>
>Oh dear, a new address. *plonk*

Apparently this is a different guy.

Lynley
January 9, 2005 8:01:42 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 09:26:32 -0700, "NightSky 421"
<nightsky421@yahoo.ca> wrote:

>tier" game on the shelf. If services like Steam are supposed to cut down on
>piracy, then why is Half-Life 2 priced so high? I don't think fans of Steam
>will answer that question, but it's something to think about.

It has been answered many times before.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 8:07:21 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

Memnoch wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 14:03:19 +0000, Black Shuck
> <mark.gillespie@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> difool got up from the bar and shouted: :
>>> anti-steam petition blah blah blah...
>>
>> So tell us all what's so bad about it? You can't pirate your
>> favorite games any more??? boohoo...
>>
>> Personally I have no problem with it.
>>
>> My only fear is that every game developer under the sun develops
>> their own type of steam system, and before I know it, I have to run
>> 27 different game network applications....
>
> Maybe but you would only have to use them as you need them and
> presumably only one at a time.
>
>> I hope MORE games are delivered through steam, this would prevent my
>> above fear from happening...
>
> I hope not as that would mean all those other companies would then
> have to pay royalties to Valve and no doubt the quality of the game
> will suffer because of it. That money would be better spent on the
> game itself.

if it was being delivered through steam instead of a publisher then wouldnt
it even out?
--

You're not a God, you're a birthday cake!
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 8:09:52 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

>> Just don't buy future games using 'steam' -- it's the only thing that
>> will
>> work.
>
>
> That's the strategy I'm using. I really was going to buy Half-Life 2 and
> Condition Zero, but Steam put an end to that idea. Instead, I've gone out
> and supported (purchased) other games like Pacific Assault, Far Cry and
> Doom 3 (to name a few). Regardless of what people think of those games,
> I'm happy to have supported games which do not have an overbearing copy
> protection scheme. Besides, last time I looked in the store a couple of
> days ago, Half-Life 2 is still selling for the same price as any other
> "top tier" game on the shelf. If services like Steam are supposed to cut
> down on piracy, then why is Half-Life 2 priced so high? I don't think
> fans of Steam will answer that question, but it's something to think
> about.

How low do you want the price to be before it actually becomes a viable
purchase ?
PC World and Comet(two retailers with absolutely no idea of wtf they are
doing) are currently selling HL2 for £24.99 here in Warrington. As are
Blockbuster video.
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 8:12:30 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"difool" <john.difool@mail.telepac.pt> wrote in message
news:io12u0djp265726pausrisij2u39q1i6md@4ax.com...

> anti-steam petition

I think it must be a full and rich life, trying to persuade us to give up on
a game we completed weeks ago......
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 8:12:31 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

>> anti-steam petition
>
> I think it must be a full and rich life, trying to persuade us to give up
> on a game we completed weeks ago......
>
>
It isn't the game, idiot. It's the Steam distribution method.
John
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 8:12:35 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

difool <john.difool@mail.telepac.pt> wrote in
news:io12u0djp265726pausrisij2u39q1i6md@4ax.com:

> anti-steam petition
> (in solidarity to fellow gamer silenced at gamespot forums)
>
> a fellow gamer tried to start a anti-steam petition but was silenced
> by gamespot; so cause neither valve, neither gamespot, neither anyone
> can do the same in the newsgroups i propose doing the petition here

Actually they can but so far your posts dont seem to cross any line which
can make it happen. Good luck with your project. I hope it opens some eyes.

Gandalf Parker
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 8:37:08 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"Black Shuck" <mark.gillespie@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:41e139a3$0$44858$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net...
> difool got up from the bar and shouted: :
> > anti-steam petition blah blah blah...
>
> So tell us all what's so bad about it? You can't pirate your favorite
> games any more??? boohoo...
>
> Personally I have no problem with it.

I do, but only on one level.. that being that you have to still run
the damn thing (steam) to play in offline mode. It sits there
eating up a chunk of ram.. When you are trying to play with
high res textures on only 512mb ram.. I want every single
megabyte I can get (to avoid texture thrashing). I hate seeing
it sitting there running in the task bar.

I was pretty vocal about it when it came out and how I thought
it was a bad move.. I'm over that now. But I do think it's dumb
that it has to be run even for the offline mode. Once you have
validated, why can't you just run it like a normal game? Why
do you have to run steam?
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 8:43:40 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote in message
news:vqo2u0h8jqafs3hrrbj29d2ib91k97jmke@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 09:26:32 -0700, "NightSky 421"
> <nightsky421@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
> >tier" game on the shelf. If services like Steam are supposed to cut down
on
> >piracy, then why is Half-Life 2 priced so high? I don't think fans of
Steam
> >will answer that question, but it's something to think about.
>
> It has been answered many times before.

I understand why it's priced so high, but steam didn't do anything
to stop the pirating of the game itself. People were even stealing
it right from steam itself on the first few days after release. Valve
claimed they "leaked a CD-key to catch people" in an effort to
damage control, but that was bull. I was reading up on the thing
at the time, where people were registering with *any* legit CD key,
but then pulling their network cord while it processed the key. Then
instead of saying "this key is already in use" it would bypass and
go right into where they could download and decrypt it.

Valve already fixed it so it's safe to talk about I think. But still, their
own system had a flaw in it that made it possible to steal it, and there
are still tons of copies of it floating online. Sadly I know a guy at
my work who is playing the pirated copy, and he even get's the latest
patches... someone is releasing them.

Steam utterly failed when it comes to any form of protection. It
did no more than regular disc protection does. Stop casual
piracy. That's it! However I conceed it's a useful delivery service,
and seems to be pretty stable these days. But I think they wasted
their time trying to make it a secure service because they clearly
didn't know what they were doing if people could come up with
an exploit that simple to be able to download the game.
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 9:11:05 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 09:26:32 -0700, NightSky 421 wrote:

> That's the strategy I'm using.

That's the strategy I am using for any kind of scheme or system I disagree
with. I have greatly cut down on the number of Koch Media games I purchase,
for example, because they use SafeDisc 4 for copy protection. I find this
particular system unacceptable, so I don't buy these games UNLESS it's a
must-have title (I allow myself this bit of inconsistency. ;) ). I also
emailed them and told them about this. Felt a bit bad when they were
actually nice in their response, but I stick to the plan.

M.
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 9:25:09 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 17:07:21 -0000, "Stoned Monkey"
<tenny2k@NOSPAMrtennant.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

>Memnoch wrote:
>> On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 14:03:19 +0000, Black Shuck
>> <mark.gillespie@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> difool got up from the bar and shouted: :
>>>> anti-steam petition blah blah blah...
>>>
>>> So tell us all what's so bad about it? You can't pirate your
>>> favorite games any more??? boohoo...
>>>
>>> Personally I have no problem with it.
>>>
>>> My only fear is that every game developer under the sun develops
>>> their own type of steam system, and before I know it, I have to run
>>> 27 different game network applications....
>>
>> Maybe but you would only have to use them as you need them and
>> presumably only one at a time.
>>
>>> I hope MORE games are delivered through steam, this would prevent my
>>> above fear from happening...
>>
>> I hope not as that would mean all those other companies would then
>> have to pay royalties to Valve and no doubt the quality of the game
>> will suffer because of it. That money would be better spent on the
>> game itself.
>
>if it was being delivered through steam instead of a publisher then wouldnt
>it even out?

I suppose its possible. But this discussion has already been had in here and I
think there was serious doubts as to whether games bought online with
something like Steam are going to be any cheaper at all than retail. I believe
that greed will win the day and the games will be EXACTLY the same cost no
matter how they are delivered. The reason for this is because WE are prepared
to pay those prices so why should they charge less?
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 9:32:19 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"NightSky 421" <nightsky421@yahoo.ca> wrote in
news:10u2mpqpsovs64a@corp.supernews.com:

> If services like Steam are supposed to cut down on
> piracy, then why is Half-Life 2 priced so high? I don't think fans of
> Steam will answer that question, but it's something to think about.

I thought steam was copy protection, not crack protection.

Gandalf Parker
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 9:33:48 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"Gandalf Parker" <gandalf@most.of.my.favorite.sites> wrote in message
news:Xns95D95DFF31049gandalfparker@208.201.224.154...
> difool <john.difool@mail.telepac.pt> wrote in
> news:io12u0djp265726pausrisij2u39q1i6md@4ax.com:
>
>> anti-steam petition
>> (in solidarity to fellow gamer silenced at gamespot forums)
>>
>> a fellow gamer tried to start a anti-steam petition but was silenced
>> by gamespot; so cause neither valve, neither gamespot, neither anyone
>> can do the same in the newsgroups i propose doing the petition here
>
> Actually they can but so far your posts dont seem to cross any line which
> can make it happen. Good luck with your project. I hope it opens some
> eyes.
>
> Gandalf Parker
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 10:05:08 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

Gandalf Parker wrote:
> difool <john.difool@mail.telepac.pt> wrote in
> news:io12u0djp265726pausrisij2u39q1i6md@4ax.com:
>
>
>>anti-steam petition
>>(in solidarity to fellow gamer silenced at gamespot forums)
>>
>>a fellow gamer tried to start a anti-steam petition but was silenced
>>by gamespot; so cause neither valve, neither gamespot, neither anyone
>>can do the same in the newsgroups i propose doing the petition here
>
>
> Actually they can but so far your posts dont seem to cross any line which
> can make it happen. Good luck with your project. I hope it opens some eyes.
>

Opens some eyes to what?
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 10:05:09 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

Walter Mitty <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in
news:crrrok$ufo$04$1@news.t-online.com:

> Gandalf Parker wrote:
>> difool <john.difool@mail.telepac.pt> wrote in
>> news:io12u0djp265726pausrisij2u39q1i6md@4ax.com:
>>
>>>anti-steam petition
>>>(in solidarity to fellow gamer silenced at gamespot forums)
>>>
>>>a fellow gamer tried to start a anti-steam petition but was silenced
>>>by gamespot; so cause neither valve, neither gamespot, neither anyone
>>>can do the same in the newsgroups i propose doing the petition here
>>
>> Actually they can but so far your posts dont seem to cross any line
>> which can make it happen. Good luck with your project. I hope it
>> opens some eyes.
>
> Opens some eyes to what?

He is correct in one thing, that the game industry needs some hard numbers
on how many people will actually refuse to buy a game because of certain
protection schemes.

Gandalf Parker
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 10:42:10 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

Memnoch wrote:
>
> I suppose its possible. But this discussion has already been had in here and I
> think there was serious doubts as to whether games bought online with
> something like Steam are going to be any cheaper at all than retail. I believe
> that greed will win the day and the games will be EXACTLY the same cost no
> matter how they are delivered. The reason for this is because WE are prepared
> to pay those prices so why should they charge less?

Exactly, so whats the problem? I think Steam is great : no boxes & cds
cluttering the place. Games on tap wherever you are in the world.
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 10:42:11 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

>> I suppose its possible. But this discussion has already been had in here
>> and I
>> think there was serious doubts as to whether games bought online with
>> something like Steam are going to be any cheaper at all than retail. I
>> believe
>> that greed will win the day and the games will be EXACTLY the same cost
>> no
>> matter how they are delivered. The reason for this is because WE are
>> prepared
>> to pay those prices so why should they charge less?
>
> Exactly, so whats the problem? I think Steam is great : no boxes & cds
> cluttering the place. Games on tap wherever you are in the world.

After sitting on the sidelines for at least as long as the Steam/HL2 debacle
has been out, I finally must respond.
1. I am 48 years old. I have playing with computers, and computer games
since my '81 Vic-20.
2. I have never pirated any games. I have boxes, receipts, etc. for all of
the hundreds and hundreds of games I have every played.
3. I consider computer gaming a hobby worthy of spending my money on. Of
course, I have been burned by bad releases. Shame on me, particularly since
the early 90's and easy access to the Internet (ease of access to
information).
4. Ease of access to the Internet is still way over-rated in most areas. I
live not far outside of a major metropolitan area in Georgia (USA). The only
access I have to the Internet is via dial-up (26 kbs max at my location, 8
miles from my telephone company's main terminal) or satellite. I have chosen
not to participate in satellite access to the Internet at this point in
time.
5. Because of #4, anything over a few megabytes is a major
download/pain-in-the-ass/unreliable method of receiving data.
6. Anything that absolutely assumes I have unlimited access to the Internet
and ease-of-access to the Internet is anathema to me. Probably in 10 or 20
years the situation will be different when most anyone is likely to have
easy access to the Internet. (However, there are still many areas in the
world that do not have public plumbing!)... maybe I'm being too presumption.
We become so spoiled in the world 'we' live in that we assume everyone has
access to the same luxuries.
7. I had seriously considered purchasing HL2. After reading the posts in the
immediate weeks following it's release and learning of the egregious method
of 'authorizing'/loading/access software that accompanys the game, I knew
HL2 was never a game I was going to participate in or play in any way shape
or form. The same will be said for any other game that might be released in
a similar manner.
8. Even assuming a fast, reliable connection to the Internet, necessary to
support the Steam distribution restrictions, I would still not support the
company and purchase/use the software. When I *buy* anything, I want the
CD/manuals/boxes/etc. in my possession. EVERYTHING necessary to run the game
completely on my own from my system. If I am restricted to having to
download necessary parts of the program from the company, *my* rights and
freedom to run the software *I* have *purchased* become abridged and I will
chose not to participate.

I have more thoughts about this system of distribution, but suffice to say I
think it's an egregious restriction on legitimate purchasers/users rights to
use the software they have paid for. I also *KNOW* that this is a very poor
way to foster customer loyalty and show respect for customers who chose to
buy your products and support your company. Certainly piracy is a
legitatmate concern. But there are more effective ways to deal with it than
making your loyal paying customers carry the burden.

To Mitty:
>
> Exactly, so whats the problem? I think Steam is great : no boxes & cds
> cluttering the place. Games on tap wherever you are in the world.

I hope I have answered your first question. I'm glad you think Steam is
great. I am flabbergasted at how easily you seem to have given up your
rights as a consumer (apparently you feel that it is alright to pay money
for simply a 'bitstream'. You assume you will always have ease-of-access
from anywhere in the world to that 'bitstream'. I'm sorry but you are
mistaken. You do *not* have ease-of-access from anywhere in the world.
'Games on tap wherever you are in the world'? What a naive, presumptious,
short-sited point-of-view.

Regards,
John
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 11:31:03 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

Gandalf Parker wrote:
> Walter Mitty <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in
> news:crrrok$ufo$04$1@news.t-online.com:
>
>
>>Gandalf Parker wrote:
>>
>>>difool <john.difool@mail.telepac.pt> wrote in
>>>news:io12u0djp265726pausrisij2u39q1i6md@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>
>>>>anti-steam petition
>>>>(in solidarity to fellow gamer silenced at gamespot forums)
>>>>
>>>>a fellow gamer tried to start a anti-steam petition but was silenced
>>>>by gamespot; so cause neither valve, neither gamespot, neither anyone
>>>>can do the same in the newsgroups i propose doing the petition here
>>>
>>>Actually they can but so far your posts dont seem to cross any line
>>>which can make it happen. Good luck with your project. I hope it
>>>opens some eyes.
>>
>>Opens some eyes to what?
>
>
> He is correct in one thing, that the game industry needs some hard numbers
> on how many people will actually refuse to buy a game because of certain
> protection schemes.
>

No they dont. The individual companies who use things like Steam need to
know how many actually buy the game and whether its a profitable business.
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 11:31:04 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

>>
>> He is correct in one thing, that the game industry needs some hard
>> numbers on how many people will actually refuse to buy a game because of
>> certain protection schemes.
>>
>
> No they dont. The individual companies who use things like Steam need to
> know how many actually buy the game and whether its a profitable business.

Mitty,
You obviously would not make a good business person. As Gandalf pointed out,
any business concerned with longterm growth is going to want to know how
many people might chose *not* to buy there products, for what ever reason.
It's called 'planning for the future'. Knowing how many actually buy a game
is a lagging indicator of business process. All forward thinking companies
are going to want to also use leading indicators to predict future success.
From this aspect, the developers of Steam had better be paying close
attention to the discussions being held about their distribution method.
John
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 11:31:44 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"difool" <john.difool@mail.telepac.pt> wrote in message
news:io12u0djp265726pausrisij2u39q1i6md@4ax.com...
> anti-steam petition
> (in solidarity to fellow gamer silenced at gamespot forums)
>

Meh...I depise steam very much, but this petition (like most online
petitions) is just stupid. The only way Valve will listen is if a bunch of
people refuse to buy the game. For any other game, I would have done just
that...but since it's HL2, I'll just have to live with it. Valve ain't
gonna listen to any petition if they already have your money though.
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 11:35:06 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

Walter Mitty <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in
news:crs0pn$2cg$01$1@news.t-online.com:

>> He is correct in one thing, that the game industry needs some hard
>> numbers on how many people will actually refuse to buy a game because
>> of certain protection schemes.
>
> No they dont. The individual companies who use things like Steam need
> to know how many actually buy the game and whether its a profitable
> business.

They already know how many buy the game. The whole concept of steam is that
they have to balance the number of copies they might lose thru casual
copying (friends giving it to friends) vs how many customers they lose
because they hear about the copy protection. Until lost customers number
more than casual copying we will continue to have things like steam.

Gandalf Parker
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 11:35:07 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"Gandalf Parker" <gandalf@most.of.my.favorite.sites> wrote in message
news:Xns95D98054D44D8gandalfparker@208.201.224.154...
7>
> They already know how many buy the game. The whole concept of steam is
> that
> they have to balance the number of copies they might lose thru casual
> copying (friends giving it to friends) vs how many customers they lose
> because they hear about the copy protection. Until lost customers number
> more than casual copying we will continue to have things like steam.
>
> Gandalf Parker
>


Agreed. This would be a fair way of looking at things.
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 11:41:27 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"Black Shuck" <mark.gillespie@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:41e139a3$0$44858$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net...
> difool got up from the bar and shouted: :
>> anti-steam petition blah blah blah...
>
> So tell us all what's so bad about it? You can't pirate your favorite
> games any more??? boohoo...
>
> Personally I have no problem with it.
>
> My only fear is that every game developer under the sun develops their own
> type of steam system, and before I know it, I have to run 27 different
> game network applications....
>
> I hope MORE games are delivered through steam, this would prevent my above
> fear from happening...

Steam doesn't stop piracy for people that actually want to play the
single-player HL2, as most of the pirated releases bypass steam entirely.
The biggest deterant Valve can have is by making good online games.
January 10, 2005 12:02:34 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"Black Shuck" <mark.gillespie@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:41e139a3$0$44858$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net...
> difool got up from the bar and shouted: :
>> anti-steam petition blah blah blah...
>
> So tell us all what's so bad about it? You can't pirate your favorite
> games any more??? boohoo...
>

/bait taken

It doesn't stop piracy. HL2 was out within hours of the commercial release.
OK, you can't play MP with it - but there is no decent multiplayer game
anyway - and none planned.

> Personally I have no problem with it.

In many ways, nor have I - but I think Valve is one of the best developers
out there - imagine if EA have the equivalent. Just try using Gamespy
sometime for an idea.

> My only fear is that every game developer under the sun develops their own
> type of steam system, and before I know it, I have to run 27 different
> game network applications....

They all will. Why do you fear this? It is going to happen. I fear the
unknown.

> I hope MORE games are delivered through steam, this would prevent my above
> fear from happening...

Yeh... Sure.
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 12:33:21 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"John A." vomited...

>> I think it must be a full and rich life, trying to persuade us to give up
>> on a game we completed weeks ago......
>>
>>
> It isn't the game, idiot. It's the Steam distribution method.
> John

Do you really think so John ?
Or are you just pissed you had to pay to play ?
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 12:33:22 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

>>>
>> It isn't the game, idiot. It's the Steam distribution method.
>> John
>
> Do you really think so John ?
> Or are you just pissed you had to pay to play ?
>
>
Please read my earlier post about never having pirated any games. I fully
support paying for my hobbies.
You said this petition was late since the game have already been played
(implying, I suppose that it's a moot point). My objection to your statement
was that the Steam distribution method is not a moot point, and in fact, may
be used in the future. It is this danger that must be stopped. As others
have posted in this thread (though I couldn't verify), the game was already
cracked and is currently available for free piracy, so I supposed even if I
wanted to get the game, I could. So why would I be pissed about having to
'pay to play'?
John
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 12:49:16 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

This seems as good a place as any to express my concerns about Steam and
similar devices in use or that will be used in the future.

I don't play FPS's, but let's say I did, and bought Half-Life 2. Online
activation now wouldn't be a big deal, but when I buy a game, I keep it
around for a loooong time to be played whenever.

I still have a machine running DOS and Windows 98 to play games only as old
as '96, and a lot of the 'autopatch' online connectors no longer are able to
connect to anything, which is my major gripe with Steam.

What happens 4, 5, 6 years down the road? What if by that time that machine
is no longer able to get online because of a new protocol it doesn't have
the hardware for? Does that mean my then 'old' machine will still have to be
fully online?

Sure, there'll probably be cracks I could use, but that'd be a bit
ridiculous to resort to piracy in order to play a game I bought.
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 1:00:22 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 19:42:10 +0100, Walter Mitty <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>Memnoch wrote:
>>
>> I suppose its possible. But this discussion has already been had in here and I
>> think there was serious doubts as to whether games bought online with
>> something like Steam are going to be any cheaper at all than retail. I believe
>> that greed will win the day and the games will be EXACTLY the same cost no
>> matter how they are delivered. The reason for this is because WE are prepared
>> to pay those prices so why should they charge less?
>
>Exactly, so whats the problem? I think Steam is great : no boxes & cds
>cluttering the place. Games on tap wherever you are in the world.

I would tend to agree up to a point. There is no way I am not going to take a
backup of everything though as that would be more than a little foolhardy so
you will still need CDs and fortunately Steam seems to have this built in. I
have never used it in anger though as I bought HL2 retail on DVD but I may
give it a bash and wipe everything just to see how the restore process works.
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 1:03:17 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 21:02:34 GMT, "Schrodinger" <no@way.com> wrote:

>
>"Black Shuck" <mark.gillespie@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:41e139a3$0$44858$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net...
>> difool got up from the bar and shouted: :
>>> anti-steam petition blah blah blah...
>>
>> So tell us all what's so bad about it? You can't pirate your favorite
>> games any more??? boohoo...
>>
>
>/bait taken
>
>It doesn't stop piracy. HL2 was out within hours of the commercial release.
>OK, you can't play MP with it - but there is no decent multiplayer game
>anyway - and none planned.

Yes you can its called Half Life 2: Deathmatch.

>> Personally I have no problem with it.
>
>In many ways, nor have I - but I think Valve is one of the best developers
>out there - imagine if EA have the equivalent. Just try using Gamespy
>sometime for an idea.
>
>> My only fear is that every game developer under the sun develops their own
>> type of steam system, and before I know it, I have to run 27 different
>> game network applications....
>
>They all will. Why do you fear this? It is going to happen. I fear the
>unknown.
>
>> I hope MORE games are delivered through steam, this would prevent my above
>> fear from happening...
>
>Yeh... Sure.
>
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 1:12:25 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 21:49:16 GMT, "Tom Meyer" <fake@email.address> wrote:

>This seems as good a place as any to express my concerns about Steam and
>similar devices in use or that will be used in the future.
>
>I don't play FPS's, but let's say I did, and bought Half-Life 2. Online
>activation now wouldn't be a big deal, but when I buy a game, I keep it
>around for a loooong time to be played whenever.
>
>I still have a machine running DOS and Windows 98 to play games only as old
>as '96, and a lot of the 'autopatch' online connectors no longer are able to
>connect to anything, which is my major gripe with Steam.
>
>What happens 4, 5, 6 years down the road? What if by that time that machine
>is no longer able to get online because of a new protocol it doesn't have
>the hardware for? Does that mean my then 'old' machine will still have to be
>fully online?
>
>Sure, there'll probably be cracks I could use, but that'd be a bit
>ridiculous to resort to piracy in order to play a game I bought.

I don't think using a crack to play a game you bought constitutes piracy as
you haven't actually stolen anything. You might be breaking rules about not
modifying code or something like that.
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 1:15:37 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 21:49:16 GMT, "Tom Meyer" <fake@email.address>
wrote:

>This seems as good a place as any to express my concerns about Steam and
>similar devices in use or that will be used in the future.
>
>I don't play FPS's, but let's say I did, and bought Half-Life 2. Online
>activation now wouldn't be a big deal, but when I buy a game, I keep it
>around for a loooong time to be played whenever.
>
>I still have a machine running DOS and Windows 98 to play games only as old
>as '96, and a lot of the 'autopatch' online connectors no longer are able to
>connect to anything, which is my major gripe with Steam.

According to some narrow-minded people here, people like you just
don't exist. ;-)

>What happens 4, 5, 6 years down the road?

The same people would probably wonder: "Why would you want to play
games that are older than one year anyway? I mean, COME ON! Why would
anyone want to play old games like Planescape: Torment, when you can
play Doom 3 instead? Sheeeesh!".
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 1:19:39 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 22:12:25 GMT, Memnoch
<memnoch@nospampleaseimbritish.ntlworld.com> wrote:

>>Sure, there'll probably be cracks I could use, but that'd be a bit
>>ridiculous to resort to piracy in order to play a game I bought.
>
>I don't think using a crack to play a game you bought constitutes piracy as
>you haven't actually stolen anything.

DMCA and Euro-DMCA consider cracks and other means trying to
circumvent copy protections as illegal.

Plus, cracks are one good way to get trojans and viruses to your
system, depending where you are looking for them.
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 1:24:02 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

John A. wrote:
> 7. I had seriously considered purchasing HL2. After reading the posts in the
> immediate weeks following it's release and learning of the egregious method
> of 'authorizing'/loading/access software that accompanys the game, I knew
> HL2 was never a game I was going to participate in or play in any way shape
> or form. The same will be said for any other game that might be released in
> a similar manner.
> 8. Even assuming a fast, reliable connection to the Internet, necessary to
> support the Steam distribution restrictions, I would still not support the
> company and purchase/use the software. When I *buy* anything, I want the
> CD/manuals/boxes/etc. in my possession. EVERYTHING necessary to run the game
> completely on my own from my system. If I am restricted to having to
> download necessary parts of the program from the company, *my* rights and
> freedom to run the software *I* have *purchased* become abridged and I will
> chose not to participate.

That's pretty much the same way I feel about it.
I want a standalone game.

> Certainly piracy is a legitatmate concern. But there are more
> effective ways to deal with it than
> making your loyal paying customers carry the burden.

I don't think there are any really effective ways to deal with piracy.
But I don't think many pirates would be buying games they couldn't
play for free anyway. Some of them don't even live in countries where
legitimate versions of the games are for sale. (And some of them
are probably "too young" to be sold the game anyway, even if
their parents give them a generous allowance.) So a huge number of
pirated versions of a game doesn't equate to a huge amount of lost
income for the game manufacturer. What *is* lost income is when
customers can't get their games to work or are inconvenienced
to the point where they get fed up and stop buying computer games.

Which is greater, the number of former customers who won't buy
the game (or future games) because of invasive copy protection
or the number of pirates who'd buy the game if they couldn't
download it for free? There are certainly some people who have
money and opportunity to buy a game and don't because they can
get a pirate version for free. But getting something for nothing
is part of the challenge. And considering that there are a
growing number of people who buy games and then download the
cracked version so as to avoid copy protection hassle, it
seems pretty obvious copy protection has gone too far.
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 1:33:21 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

Gandalf Parker wrote:
> Walter Mitty <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>No they dont. The individual companies who use things like Steam need
>>to know how many actually buy the game and whether its a profitable
>>business.
>
>
> They already know how many buy the game. The whole concept of steam is that
> they have to balance the number of copies they might lose thru casual
> copying (friends giving it to friends) vs how many customers they lose
> because they hear about the copy protection. Until lost customers number
> more than casual copying we will continue to have things like steam.
>
> Gandalf Parker
>

Exactly.
Of course the people who develop copy protections don't
want to consider customers lost due to over-invasive
copy protection so you won't get any straight answers
from them.
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 1:53:16 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

mrlg <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in
news:RiiEd.2314$KJ2.556@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net:

> Gandalf Parker wrote:
>> Walter Mitty <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>No they dont. The individual companies who use things like Steam need
>>>to know how many actually buy the game and whether its a profitable
>>>business.
>>
>> They already know how many buy the game. The whole concept of steam
>> is that they have to balance the number of copies they might lose
>> thru casual copying (friends giving it to friends) vs how many
>> customers they lose because they hear about the copy protection.
>> Until lost customers number more than casual copying we will continue
>> to have things like steam.
>
> Exactly.
> Of course the people who develop copy protections don't
> want to consider customers lost due to over-invasive
> copy protection so you won't get any straight answers
> from them.

I dont think they could give those answers even if they wanted to. It
would take something like the petition which started this thread to bring
such numbers to light.

Gandalf Parker
January 10, 2005 2:28:31 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"Walter Mitty" wrote

> Vince wrote:

>> Although I disagree with almost everything you've ever posted; I think
>> that your petition *is* a good idea. But this is not the way to achieve
>> it.

> You think an anonymous, totally unrepresentitive petition is a good idea?
> *boggle*

Why would it be anonymous?

And how can a petition be unrepresentative?
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 3:14:54 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 10:36:13 +0000, difool
<john.difool@mail.telepac.pt> wrote:

>anti-steam petition
>(in solidarity to fellow gamer silenced at gamespot forums)
>
>a fellow gamer tried to start a anti-steam petition but was silenced
>by gamespot; so cause neither valve, neither gamespot, neither anyone
>can do the same in the newsgroups i propose doing the petition here
>
>obviously doing a "real" petition requires work and conditions i don't
>have so my proposal is to do a "symbolic" petition
>don't put any personal information or even email, but simply follow-up
>to this post and no need to write anything
>just follow-up with a blank post
>its only to show any valve's spies monitoring this groups how many we
>are, so lets make this thread surpass the 300 mark! an ambitious number
>but i think possible
>
>ps: please valve and steam lovers ignore this, delete this from your
>newsreaders or mark as read but don't interfere or do the usual, and
>yes i know you all think doing any new thread related to steam in
>wanting to start a flame war cause for you questioning master valve
>is a capital sin, so go back worshiping your master and leaves us alone
>this is a steam-lovers-free thread!

Go sod off, impostor.

I guess I'm somebody now, now that I have a doppelganger
running around besmirching my good name...

John DiFool the 1st
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 3:27:44 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

mrlg wrote:
> Gandalf Parker wrote:
>
>> Walter Mitty <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> No they dont. The individual companies who use things like Steam need
>>> to know how many actually buy the game and whether its a profitable
>>> business.
>>
>>
>>
>> They already know how many buy the game. The whole concept of steam is
>> that they have to balance the number of copies they might lose thru
>> casual copying (friends giving it to friends) vs how many customers
>> they lose because they hear about the copy protection. Until lost
>> customers number more than casual copying we will continue to have
>> things like steam.
>>
>> Gandalf Parker
>>
>
> Exactly.
> Of course the people who develop copy protections don't
> want to consider customers lost due to over-invasive
> copy protection so you won't get any straight answers
> from them.

This is all the bleeding obvious. But they can never know this. However,
I suspect that not many refuse to buy a game because of "overly invasive
copy protection" which isn't really overly invasive. Steam is overly
FUDed IMO and works well for the great majority.



--
Walter Mitty
-
Useless, waste of money research of the day : http://tinyurl.com/6yh2f
http://www.tinyurl.com
    • 1 / 7
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • More pages
    • Next
    • Newest
!