The enemy of my enemy is my friend

[Valentin the II]

In this years GDC steam announced a new addition to their service that's supposed to make DRM obsolete. Take a look.

What do you think? Seems like a good solution to me.

[D.B. Cooper]

Is it still attached to your Steam account?

[Tankfriend]

Well, the most noteworthy thing behind this is the fact that Steam is DRM itself - it's just heavily disguised with "comfortable" functions that are normally part of a games' "innate" service anyway.

I'm curious about how effective that new method will be against piracy, though - probably as ineffective as any other DRM and copy protection. So to answer your question Valentin: I obviously don't think that it's a good solution. But then again I also don't like Steam anyway.

Is it still attached to your Steam account?

As far as I've got the linked article, it still is. That new system seems to be simply adding some more verification and control instruments into Steam. I've read on another page that you could say it's putting a "watermark" on your software to make more distinguishable.

[Valentin the II]

I really don't get people that hate steam, its so comfortable. Is it by principle, or what?

And no, steam is no DRM. It does not leave any traces behind like other copy protection services do.

[Tankfriend]

DRM doesn't define itself through leaving some junk on your system after deinstalling it. And it's not simply there to check if you've got a legal version of the game. It's actually there to actively control what you can and can't do with a programme.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Rights_Management
"In contrast to copy protection, which only attempts to prohibit unauthorized copies of media or files[citation needed], digital rights management enables the publisher to control what can and cannot be done with a single instance."

Also have a look at this:
"Valve President Gabe Newell also stated "most DRM strategies are just dumb" because they only decrease the value of a game in the consumer's eyes. Newell's suggests pairing DRM with "[creating] greater value for customers through service value", and stopped short of repudiating Valve's DRM system, known as Steam. [45]"


In case you want to look up the source linked from wiki:

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3171588

Take the DRM that EA has jumped unto with Spore and Mass Effect for example: It forces you to have an internet connection online for the installation and it's restricting the amount of installations that you can do before you have to call in and ask for more.
Compare that to Steam: It similarly forces you to have an internet connection for the installation, it forces you to have the newest version running (after a fresh installation at least), it prevents you from playing at all if it has become aware of a new update and it can potentially completely deny you the access to your software if something went wrong.
Then compare this to a copy protection system like StarForce: You have to install the CP drivers and you have to insert the disc when you want to play the game - and that's it. It's not restricting your access to the game or anything else.
I don't want to say "God save StarForce!" though - I never had any problems with StarForce myself in the past but there certainly are quite some people who did. Sadly, that's something it shares with pretty much every CP and DRM system.

Just as mentioned in that Wiki-Link Steam (unlike the EA DRM, for example) has a package of comfortable features built around it like the automatic updates, an online community, direct2drive sales and some more and I fully accept that as good reasons for many people to like Steam.
I, however, don't really care about all that stuff - I just don't need it because everything's already around without Steam and without me having to install some extra software that can completely control my access to the games that I paid for (note: can; it's not necessarily doing so).

And because of that the negative sides are the determining factor for me: I can neither install and play a game whenever and whereever I want while having no internet connection (having that full freedom of decision is something I value in general; I don't care if high-speed internet is becoming standard) nor can I explicitly choose the version of the game that I want to patch to. Not even to mention the possibility of Steam going out of service - of course Valve has promised no-Steam-fixes for that occasion but they're still just promises.

[snuggans]

i'll reserve comments until i experience it first-hand. this could just be a more draconian DRM replacing another draconian DRM,

or not.

[Sidmen]

I really don't get people that hate steam, its so comfortable. Is it by principle, or what?

And no, steam is no DRM. It does not leave any traces behind like other copy protection services do.

Whats not to understand.

1. It demands you be online to install a new game you buy in a store.
2. It Forces you to download the Patches before you can play the game.
3. It doesn't allow you to choose your game's directory.

These 3 alone are enough to make people hate it; there are others too. Personally, for people with poor or no internet like me. Steam is essentially a "No play for you" setup.

[Valentin the II]

Whats not to understand.

1. It demands you be online to install a new game you buy in a store.
2. It Forces you to download the Patches before you can play the game.
3. It doesn't allow you to choose your game's directory.

These 3 alone are enough to make people hate it; there are others too. Personally, for people with poor or no internet like me. Steam is essentially a "No play for you" setup.

So get a faster connection. It's not like its expensive or rare. You don't complain about video games making you own a computer do you? Its just another small requirement.
Also, point 2 is false, you can turn outoupdate off before installing the game. I'm not sure about point 3.

[Kamos]

So get a faster connection. It's not like its expensive or rare. You don't complain about video games making you own a computer do you? Its just another small requirement.

But unlike the computer Steam is a completely unnecessary requirement, one I would like to avoid.

[SonOfCrusader76]

Whats not to understand.

1. It demands you be online to install a new game you buy in a store.
2. It Forces you to download the Patches before you can play the game.
3. It doesn't allow you to choose your game's directory.

These 3 alone are enough to make people hate it; there are others too. Personally, for people with poor or no internet like me. Steam is essentially a "No play for you" setup.

No 3 would be enough for me, if it didn't install into my D: Program files, instead of the one on C: (if it had've done that, then there wouldn't even be enough room for one game).

And come to think of it, No.1 is a pain in the arse as well. Who wants to have to wait to patch the damn game first? Try it, have a bit of fun, and then patch it!

No. 2 is just out of order, because if the server goes down, or is too busy, or you're having internet problems, then you can't play the bloody game you've just bought in a store. Not on bloody Steam!

But unlike the computer Steam is a completely unnecessary requirement, one I would like to avoid.

Precisely. Steam takes freedom of choice as far as games goes and throws it out of the window. The freedom to decide whether or not you want to patch, or which directory you want to install in!

[Xen]

Whats not to understand.

1. It demands you be online to install a new game you buy in a store.
2. It Forces you to download the Patches before you can play the game.
3. It doesn't allow you to choose your game's directory.

These 3 alone are enough to make people hate it; there are others too. Personally, for people with poor or no internet like me. Steam is essentially a "No play for you" setup.

And essentially, your speaking a load of crap. For multiplayer games, you will have to download the patch first, but thats the same for any multiplayer gane steam or not, Who doesn't have an internet connection nowadays?

It's a very simple, streamlined way to play, and the download speeds are good, essentially your just hating it for the purpose of hating it.

[vizi]

Love Steam.

[Legionary Jezza]

Well some places in the world have dial-up like me and I would get broadband or a faster connection if it was possible so sods law we buy the game verify it then have to download a 100 mb patch which would take 6 hours on a 64kb connection like mine.

-Evil

[Stalins Ghost]

The new stuff they're introducing sounds good, but I can't help but feel that the "Steam eliminates DRM!" was nonsense. Steam is after all a major DRM system - a good, customer friendly one but a DRM system non-the-less.

[Sidmen]

So get a faster connection. It's not like its expensive or rare. You don't complain about video games making you own a computer do you? Its just another small requirement.
Also, point 2 is false, you can turn outoupdate off before installing the game. I'm not sure about point 3.

I pay $15/month for internet; the next (and only) improvement would be satellite internet, which costs $300 to set up, and $80 a month to maintain. There is no DSL, no Cable, no other options. No game, or set of games is worth $80 a month and the $70 for the game. And you know how many people have the same options as me? Millions.

And yes, it is just another requirement, a requirement that is unnecessary for anything.

[Kamos]

Plenty of people don't use the internet.

I hate it because I shouldn't have to use it and I don't enjoy using it.

[Sidmen]

It's a very simple, streamlined way to play, and the download speeds are good, essentially your just hating it for the purpose of hating it.

Despite the fact that I just gave you very good and well-reasoned reasons why I despise being forced to do unnecessary and annoying things to play a game? Sure, I'm making things up, Steam is awesome and there is no reason to hate being told to do something that takes me a long time to play a singleplayer game.