Steam is 10 years old, remember when it sucked?
- Thread starter SneakyDave
- Start date
Shelley
Well-known member
I only joined steam about a year and a half ago so wasn't aware or experienced the issue before that. Glad I hadn't joined up otherwise I probably wouldn't be using the service today which I find to be excellent. Only issue I have is an old bug in l4d2 (elevator bug) where you drop through the floor) that I have fallen victim to 4 times in as many days. Other than that, excellent service considering I only really play 1 game via steam.
When it came to macWhen did steam ever stop sucking
I always hated steam and when I moved to a Mac in 2007 never had to use it. Gave it a try again when the mac version came out and loved it. Must have about 80 games on it now. Cant beat their deals, and greenlight lets you get some awesome games cheap.
SilverCircle
Well-known member
Quite some time ago, actually. I have dozens of games purchased from Steam and cannot remember of having Steam-related issues with any of them in the last couple of years. Steam works quite well and its DRM methods are far less intrusive and much more hassle free than most others. Steam's process of purchasing, installing, updating, backing-up and restoring games is simple and straightforward, especially when you want to enjoy your games on more than one piece of hardware.When did steam ever stop sucking
Yes, of course, completely DRM-free would be better, but even those who are critical towards DRM agree on the fact that some level of protection is, unfortunately, required.
Also, they have pretty cool sales on a regular base and you can find a lot of really good indie games on Steam.
But yeah, back when it was new, it sucked. A lot
Sador
Well-known member
Actually, I disagree. DRM is pretty much always something that gets broken in a few hours by those that upload it illegally, and often hurts legal buyers while not even coming remotely close to affecting the people who pirate the software. I've played way too many games where the DRM was causing massive issues (up to the point of EA posting on their forums "we understand why some people are using cracks to be actually able to play the game right now") to legal buyers, while all the people who pirated the game had no problem at all playing it.
Also, gog.com sells all their games entirely DRM free.
Ontopic: I've not used Steam for that long, but I certainly like it as a gaming platform right now. Even thought it pretty much does what EA and Microsoft would love to do on everything they come up with, they do it way less intrusive and make it feel a lot less nasty.
AzzidReign
Well-known member
Since I got banned from XBL for owning my site (even though they gave me about 10+ reasons why I was banned, and changed every time I talked to support or ms legal team), I've converted over to steam. So far, I'm loving it. The thing that is nice about PC gaming is if you do get banned (for me, I play by the rules so I don't expect to get banned now - plus my ID is different than my site username to not get targeted), you only get banned from that one game. You still get to keep all your other content/games. Where, as right now, my xbox was console banned so it's become a pretty useless paperweight. Good thing that when I got banned, I hadn't turned my Xbox on in 4 months so there are no restrictions on it unless I try to connect to xbl (yeah...4 months of no power connected to it yet I get banned for things like cheating with modded lobbies and marketplace theft and then they claim it did come from my console...even though modded lobbies gets your console banned within an hour of being online lol). But Xbox is no fun unless you have online access :/
tl;dr I like PC gaming more than console. Plus the deals are so much better. I came in a week late where people were getting BF3 for $5!!
tl;dr I like PC gaming more than console. Plus the deals are so much better. I came in a week late where people were getting BF3 for $5!!
SilverCircle
Well-known member
Where did I say that DRM doesn't cause issues? Only Steam doesn't, because their DRM is integrated in a very convenient way. That's why only few people complain about DRM on Steam. It works and it usually doesn't prevent you from playing the games you purchased. DRM that works as it should is not a problem.
Personally, I only purchase a game when it's either completely DRM-free or on Steam. I do no longer purchase from EA nor from Ubi, simply because they screwed up way too often with their DRM and I do not like people or companies who annoy me more than once.
Sador
Well-known member
You said "even critics agree that some level of protection is required". I pointed out that in fact, it was not required and really only hurts legitimate buyers. But I agree with you about Steam.
Ditto.
I trust Valve. I don't trust EA, Ubisoft, etc. They don't help their case when they release crap like Origin that's stupidly invasive.
Steam is simply the best option. Their deals are unbeatable and the overall app feels stable.
Jaxel
Well-known member
I've never liked Steam. People seem to forget that Steam is still a form of DRM with Steamworks. Games that don't have Steamworks, I can get off of Steam, but if it has Steamworks, I am forced to use this crappy middle-ware. Steam is terrible, poorly written software that consumes computer resources and runs very slowly. The only thing it really has going for it, is Steam sales, where I can buy 200 games for $1... and then proceed to never play them.
The best middleware platform was always Stardock's Impulse; which unfortunately was bought by Gamestop a while back, and they have proceeded to run it into the ground.
Why do I think Steamworks is so bad? Well I've experienced better in the form of Stardock's DRM systems. When I played Demigod using Stardock's Impulse::GOO system, I could play it, and Impulse didn't even have to be running. I didn't even have to be connected to the internet (though its an online game, so thats pointless), it didn't even force me to patch the game. When a new patch for the game comes out, it doesn't FORCE people to patch the game. In fact, even with the unpatched version, I could still play online! The difference is, you could only play against other people who didn't patch it either.
With Steamworks, I can think of several examples... but I'm going to use Supreme Commander 2 (terrible game) as an example. When SupCom2 came out, it had a 1gb day-one patch. Because Steamworks FORCES you to patch a game, that meant everyone who bought SupCom2, even if they bought it in a store, had to download a 1gb patch. Now this is where things get worse, Battlefield Bad Company 2 came out on the same day... so Steam servers were hammered and it took most people 3-4 days to download the entire patch.
So you go to a store, buy SupCom2... forces you to install Steam... then you can't play the game for 4 days because Steamworks is a terrible form of DRM. If this was SupCom1, which was released on Impulse; this wouldn't have been an issue. People could have just played with the unpatched version while the patch was downloading. This is not the only example of this happening, happened during the releases of Civilization 5 and Total War: Shogun 2 as well. Thats all I can remember, since I tend to avoid Steamworks and those are the only 3 games I have that use it.
Then of course, you have other issues... even if the game doesn't use Steamworks. Lets take for example: Ubisoft. I have lots of games from Ubisoft on Steam that I simply can't play anymore. Why? Because Ubisoft decided that Valve charges too much to patch games; so they decided not to release the most recent patches of Settlers 7 and Anno 1404 on Steam (again, the only games I have, I am sure there are more examples). They did however release the patches on other platforms like Impulse.
Valve decides "**** you Ubisoft", we won't allow you to have out-dated versions on our platform while you give the patches to other platforms. So now those games are no longer playable on Steam. Again, wouldn't be an issue, if Steam allowed you to play unpatched games. The funny thing is, Steam still sells Ubisoft games... knowing full well in the future that they will disable the games once the free-patches run out.
Meanwhile, Steam is now 10 years old and they have FINALLY added the option to define install directories for your games. Seriously? And people try to argue that Steam is a good piece of software? I don't know how many times I have to restart Steam because it fails to connect to Paypal with cookie problems. Steam is in itself a web-browser, and a poorly written one.
Honestly, I have no issues with DRM methods like Tages-3... But I do have problems with DRM methods that require me to install middle-ware, like Steamworks or EA-Origin.
The best middleware platform was always Stardock's Impulse; which unfortunately was bought by Gamestop a while back, and they have proceeded to run it into the ground.
Why do I think Steamworks is so bad? Well I've experienced better in the form of Stardock's DRM systems. When I played Demigod using Stardock's Impulse::GOO system, I could play it, and Impulse didn't even have to be running. I didn't even have to be connected to the internet (though its an online game, so thats pointless), it didn't even force me to patch the game. When a new patch for the game comes out, it doesn't FORCE people to patch the game. In fact, even with the unpatched version, I could still play online! The difference is, you could only play against other people who didn't patch it either.
With Steamworks, I can think of several examples... but I'm going to use Supreme Commander 2 (terrible game) as an example. When SupCom2 came out, it had a 1gb day-one patch. Because Steamworks FORCES you to patch a game, that meant everyone who bought SupCom2, even if they bought it in a store, had to download a 1gb patch. Now this is where things get worse, Battlefield Bad Company 2 came out on the same day... so Steam servers were hammered and it took most people 3-4 days to download the entire patch.
So you go to a store, buy SupCom2... forces you to install Steam... then you can't play the game for 4 days because Steamworks is a terrible form of DRM. If this was SupCom1, which was released on Impulse; this wouldn't have been an issue. People could have just played with the unpatched version while the patch was downloading. This is not the only example of this happening, happened during the releases of Civilization 5 and Total War: Shogun 2 as well. Thats all I can remember, since I tend to avoid Steamworks and those are the only 3 games I have that use it.
Then of course, you have other issues... even if the game doesn't use Steamworks. Lets take for example: Ubisoft. I have lots of games from Ubisoft on Steam that I simply can't play anymore. Why? Because Ubisoft decided that Valve charges too much to patch games; so they decided not to release the most recent patches of Settlers 7 and Anno 1404 on Steam (again, the only games I have, I am sure there are more examples). They did however release the patches on other platforms like Impulse.
Valve decides "**** you Ubisoft", we won't allow you to have out-dated versions on our platform while you give the patches to other platforms. So now those games are no longer playable on Steam. Again, wouldn't be an issue, if Steam allowed you to play unpatched games. The funny thing is, Steam still sells Ubisoft games... knowing full well in the future that they will disable the games once the free-patches run out.
Meanwhile, Steam is now 10 years old and they have FINALLY added the option to define install directories for your games. Seriously? And people try to argue that Steam is a good piece of software? I don't know how many times I have to restart Steam because it fails to connect to Paypal with cookie problems. Steam is in itself a web-browser, and a poorly written one.
Honestly, I have no issues with DRM methods like Tages-3... But I do have problems with DRM methods that require me to install middle-ware, like Steamworks or EA-Origin.
Last edited:
Arantor
Well-known member
Steamworks does not force you to patch a game. You can selectively turn off patching for any individual game in Steam. (There's no global turn-off option, though.)
As for TAGES 3, there are practical issues with 3-machine limits; I don't tend to download and keep every game locally; out of the 600 or so games in my library, I tend to only have 20-30 installed at any one time, which causes issues with activation limits. And while companies can give out further activations, you're reliant on them doing so, and it certainly wouldn't be the first time that companies have stopped giving out activations for games they no longer support.
As for TAGES 3, there are practical issues with 3-machine limits; I don't tend to download and keep every game locally; out of the 600 or so games in my library, I tend to only have 20-30 installed at any one time, which causes issues with activation limits. And while companies can give out further activations, you're reliant on them doing so, and it certainly wouldn't be the first time that companies have stopped giving out activations for games they no longer support.
Jaxel
Well-known member
Not all games on Steam use Steamworks, those that do, do in fact force you to patch the game. Even if you only want to play the offline single-player mode, you still have to patch the game. Thats what happened to me on the launches of SupCom2 and Civ5.
TBH I don't see the issue with Steam's DRM. It's hardly intrusive.
- You can play offline
- You can play on multiple computers
- You can play on Mac or PC
Install wise, if you've got a crapload of games it's not expensive to get a USB 3 hard drive and install them on there - thats what I do, and they work fine over USB 3. Never ever had a problem with Steam. Cant fault it IMO, it's the right balance.
- You can play offline
- You can play on multiple computers
- You can play on Mac or PC
Install wise, if you've got a crapload of games it's not expensive to get a USB 3 hard drive and install them on there - thats what I do, and they work fine over USB 3. Never ever had a problem with Steam. Cant fault it IMO, it's the right balance.
