It seems Valve are quite serious about getting back into making games, as Campo Santo the developer of Firewatch has joined them.
Writing on their official website in a post, the team from Campo Santo confirmed that the news is true. They said they found that people at Valve share the same values that they do, so it became an "obvious match". Expanding on that, they said this:
We had a series of long conversations with the people at Valve and everyone shared the satisfaction we take in working with people whose talents dwarf our own to make things we never thought possible. Both sides spoke about our values and how, when you get right down to it, we, as human beings, are hard-limited by the time we have left when it comes to making the things we care about and believe in. They asked us if we’d all be interested in coming up to Bellevue and doing that there and we said yes.
They confirmed that their next game, In the Valley of Gods, is still being made and so it's now a Valve game.
Personally, I think it's great that Valve are bringing in some obviously talented folk to make games. Valve have a lot of resources and contacts that can help for sure. It should also mean they have good Linux support, since Valve are still committed to Linux gaming.
Since it will now be a Valve game, it will be interesting to see if In the Valley of Gods will make it to GOG. I wouldn't expect it to now, but maybe Valve will surprise us there.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
All posts need to follow our rules. For users logged in: please hit the Report Flag icon on any post that breaks the rules or contains illegal / harmful content. Guest readers can email us for any issues.
You didn't show a difference to the paperback.
The difference is more clarity. Physical goods have an instance to which you can apply common use cases such as first sale doctrine and the like. Digital case is more complicated and way less consistent. And various owners try to get away with messing up the rights of the user.
Last edited by Shmerl on 27 April 2018 at 1:20 pm UTC
0 Likes
The difference is more clarity. Physical goods have an instance to which you can apply common use cases such as first sale doctrine and the like. Digital case is more complicated and way less consistent. And various owners try to get away with messing up the rights of the user.
The difference is they are trying to get away with it? Well... *shrug*
Back to real life: We are able to copy and run a part of the games from Steam. Noone will ever find out. (If somebody would, I'd be ready to take on the fight, but this is not real life again.)
So, Steam is offering DRM, some of the games are using it (I got no idea of a percentage), others are not.
Steam is not DRM, it offers DRM.
3 Likes, Who?
The difference is they are trying to get away with it? Well... *shrug*
Use stores which respect the user, such as DRM-free ones. That's the whole point of the above discussion. I find attempts to whitewash crooked practices rather strange.
Last edited by Shmerl on 27 April 2018 at 1:26 pm UTC
0 Likes
Not necessarily if you go by TOS alone, as you did with Steam (and since laws vary from country to country, that's all we can really do given the scope of this community). One example off the top of my head (emphasis mine):You're not allowed to photocopy a paperback either
You are allowed, for your personal backup. It's called fair use.
"Any reproduction or unauthorized use of the material or artwork contained herein is prohibited without the express written permission of Wizards of the Coast."
That's a contractual limitation, not digital rights management, i.e. a practical impediment. Steam's TOS is just the same.
2 Likes, Who?
That's a ridiculous circular argument that wouldn't last five minutes in court. You're basically saying that the client is DRM simply because it exists, not because it contains any actual anti-copying measures. And you failed to address my second point: if that's the case, why did Valve go to the trouble and expense of adding a cryptographic DRM API to Steam in addition to the client?Nothing. You copied some files. There are no “measures”.Accessing the files outside the client can be viewed as circumventing in this case. You don't buy files through Steam, so it can be viewed that you aren't supposed to access them. But again, I'm not really interested in debating this topic since it changes nothing. You still can't legally back things up in DRM-free fashion. Ergo, Steam is not DRM-free.
Don't misunderstand me; I appreciate your concerns about the TOS, share them to some extent, and I agree that this would probably be a publisher's line were a case to be brought, but it's a pretty weak argument. If such a case were to succeed, it would cause havoc in the industry. Mind you, on the upside, real DRM would be dead in the water. Who would need it?
0 Likes
That's a ridiculous circular argument that wouldn't last five minutes in court
Anti-circumvention laws themselves are really unconstitutional, so in normal court it would have fallen apart. But we are talking about the current messed up system and undemocratic policy making attached to it. Courts are known to abuse such kind of laws. So instead of whitewashing DRM practices with demagoguery, avoid those who use it.
Last edited by Shmerl on 27 April 2018 at 3:45 pm UTC
1 Likes, Who?
Doc Angelo Apr 27, 2018
I think it's also important to point out that there is FOSS available through Steam. As I said, the TOS are not 100% applicable in 100% cases, even if the TOS were to be interpreted the way Shmerl interprets them. It's also important to point out that almost any TOS has some shady/misinterpretable parts, and while discussing this, we found parts in Valves TOS and in GOGs TOS that were not 100% clear and could be abused.
I'm sure everybody agrees that software like Godot or Krita or games like Teeworlds or Zero-K are not being "DRMed" by Steam and that they would press charges if you make a backup of them... or even make a copy for a friend.
The developers choose to make those softwares freely available. The developers of some games on Steam chose not to use DRM. For me, it's as simple as that, and I think I can't say anymore on this matter. Everything has been said.
I'm sure everybody agrees that software like Godot or Krita or games like Teeworlds or Zero-K are not being "DRMed" by Steam and that they would press charges if you make a backup of them... or even make a copy for a friend.
The developers choose to make those softwares freely available. The developers of some games on Steam chose not to use DRM. For me, it's as simple as that, and I think I can't say anymore on this matter. Everything has been said.
2 Likes, Who?
Says who? Not all games on steam use DRM. Some do but those are not what I'm referring to. A lot of people think literally every game on steam is DRMed but it isn't. There are quite a few games that DO NOT care AT ALL if steam is running or not and can be coppied anywhere and will run just fine. The steam DRM is literally a single method call. If the game never issues the call then the game isn't tied to steam even if it can only be purchased through steam. Again I'm not talking about all games on steam. A lot do use DRM but definitely not all of them.I disagree simply because once you download a game from steam(assuming it doesn't use the steam DRM) nothing stops you from making a backup of it.
Did you even follow the discussion above? You aren't allowed to do it if you are using Steam.
0 Likes
Well, not being in the US, I'll bow to your superior knowledge of the DCMA. But if it really does what you say it does, it's spectacularly bad law (mind you, I think it is anyway; copyright should be a civil matter, not criminal). Or your judges are a bunch of idiots. There is no way the legendary “reasonable person” could possibly imagine that the client alone is a “measure” that must be “circumvented” in order to copy games. And I'll say it again: if that's ever held to be the case, actual, cryptographic, DRM will become a complete waste of time. (As if it wasn't already, but you see what I mean.)That's a ridiculous circular argument that wouldn't last five minutes in court
Anti-circumvention laws themselves are really unconstitutional, so in normal court it would have fallen apart. But we are talking about the current messed up system and undemocratic policy making attached to it. Courts are known to abuse such kind of laws. So instead of whitewashing DRM practices with demagoguery, avoid those who use it.
3 Likes, Who?
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me