Closed

anti-steam petition

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
302 answers Last reply
More about anti steam petition
  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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...
  4. 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.
  5. 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
  6. 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
    >
    >
    >
  7. 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.
  8. 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...
  9. 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*
  10. 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.
  11. 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
  12. 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
  13. 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.
  14. 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!
  15. 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.
  16. 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......
  17. 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
  18. 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
  19. 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?
  20. 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.
  21. 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.
  22. 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?
  23. 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
  24. 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
  25. 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?
  26. 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
  27. 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.
  28. 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
  29. 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.
  30. 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
  31. 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.
  32. 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
  33. 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.
  34. 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.
  35. 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.
  36. 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 ?
  37. 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
  38. 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.
  39. 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.
  40. 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.
    >
  41. 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.
  42. 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!".
  43. 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.
  44. 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.
  45. 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.
  46. 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
  47. 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?
  48. 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
  49. 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
Ask a new question

Read More

Games Steam IBM Video Games