Quoting: Quote from ShmerlI think this is similar to the question of secondary liability. Imagine a situation when someone lives in an oppressive country, governed by some crooked regime. Can one work to support own livelihood? What about the fact that it will indirectly benefit the regime for example, by economic input?

It's somewhat similar to distributing through DRMed distributors at the same time as through DRM free ones.

I see what you're getting at :D but hardly comparable in reality. I'm willing to be lectured by the first kind of "hypocrite" but not the second ;)

I just wanted to add: If a game hasn't DRM, it hasn't DRM on Steam either.

All you need the client for, is downloading the game, the rest is up to the developer.

In fact one could argue that Steam improved the DRM situation by providing a "solution" that's lighter than any other I know of so that those devs who want DRM use that instead of the heavy rootkit crap they would choose otherwise.

For those devs who can't be bothered with DRM, go to the steam game folder and start the game's binary.

fabertawe: The situation is similar. If the scope of DRM free distributors would be bigger, then there would be less of a dilemma. Then there would be no point for developers to use Steam in addition. But often most of their profits come from Steam, so they see it as way to recover their expenses. Otherwise sure, they'd ignore Steam and just use DRM free channels only. So I don't blame such developers for using Steam, however I won't ever buy through it, I'll buy what they release through their DRM free option.

Quoting: Quote from CaldazarI just wanted to add: If a game hasn't DRM, it hasn't DRM on Steam either.

All you need the client for, is downloading the game, the rest is up to the developer.

In fact one could argue that Steam improved the DRM situation by providing a "solution" that's lighter than any other I know of so that those devs who want DRM use that instead of the heavy rootkit crap they would choose otherwise.

For those devs who can't be bothered with DRM, go to the steam game folder and start the game's binary.

And Steam keeps it up to date for the lazy ;)

My avatar is from "Sir, You Are Being Hunted", my favourite game. Which incidentally is DRM free whether you download it from Humble or Steam or both, as in my case. I have the most up to date version in its Steam folder and also, the previous couple which I saved from the Steam folder and run directly (it's an alpha so I like to keep older builds with different playability so I have a choice. By the way it runs perfectly on Linux, especially for an alpha).

Quoting: Quote from ShmerlHamish: It looks like you were replying to me, but all that was really from fabertawe, not from me :)

Yes, indeed. That is the problem with working with multiple quotes. :S:

Quoting: Quote from fabertaweSurely a game released by a dev that condones DRM is tainted by association, if not literally. How can it not be? You are supporting a dev that releases DRM. Fact.

I do not buy the "tainted" argument. I buy a DRM free game from a developer that sells DRM free titles. Fact. My money is paid in exchange for that DRM free title. Fact. Anything else is not really relevant to the exchange. This is another reason why I do not believe voting with your wallet really is that effective, as most financial exchanges are inherently limited and the scope of them is small. It is not a great way to send a message, and I really do not feel that I am sending much of one with my spending habits anyway.

Quoting: Quote from fabertaweIt's the use of "ethics by degrees" that I don't understand. If you find something unethical then boycott it. Simple. If it means you go without then that's your conscience clear. If however, you're making the best of it then you're compromising. At least admit you're compromising that ethic, although such a thing should not be possible, or else it's no longer an ethic.

I find Steam to employ practices I find unethical, so I do not use it. Neither Humble or Desura provide a DRM mechanism with their service, so they do not employ practises themselves I find unethical. Some of the developers on them do, but the services themselves do not, which is the distinction as far as I am concerned.
 

Quoting: Quote from fabertaweI didn't accuse you of "telling anyone not to use it", you weren't referenced and I was actually talking to Shmerl! That was my personal opinion anyway.

If the comment was not directed at me, fair enough. But then you do later go on to say you are not "willing to be lectured"...

Anyone, can you answer a question for me? Wouldn't it be stupid for game developers to ignore the large influence and following Steam has? Potentially reaching 65 million customers isn't what I'd call stupid. It's just good business. And as others above have said with steam including all of these features, doesn't it make sense for game developers to benefit from them rather than attempting to implement them another way spending more money in the process? Now what if the game the developers made was DRM free in its entirety. Wouldn't it still make sense to publish on steam, even though it might "taint" the ethical stance of their game?

Granted they could publish through multiple mediums, that doesn't seem to happen very often these days. 


Steam makes sense. It's up to the developers if they wish to publish to other platforms, but economically speaking there isn't as big of a market as exists with steam.

If you ever made anything, and had to live off selling it, would you try to bring your product to as many people as possible, or would you limit your audience to those with the same beliefs as you.

Quoting: Quote from HamishIf the comment was not directed at me, fair enough. But then you do later go on to say you are not "willing to be lectured"...

I hope you're not getting as paranoid as me ;)

n30p1r4t3 - Spot on. Ultimately, if you sell games then you're running a business. Capitalism is certainly not ideal but it's the system we have to deal with.

I've had a good rant and learnt a few things in the process of this debate and I do respect others' points of view, even if I (over)play devil's advocate at times :P We all have an opinion and have to live within our own means and everyone has their own unique perspective on life. Live and let live.

An interview with Marcin Iwinski of CD Projekt Red about the issues of DRM:
http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/cd-projekt-red-waves-goodbye-to-drm/1100-4783/

He avoids mentioning the unethical aspect of DRM, so his views can be classified as simply pragmatical. He gives his theory why many publishers aren't even pragmatical about it.

Great read Shmerl. That guy talks a lot of (common) sense and we'll probably see more going in this direction.

I hate to be that shameless plug guy, but I recently wrote about Steam and DRM on my site: http://www.thelinuxrain.com/articles/opinion-steam-and-drm

If that link is a problem, feel free to delete it, I have no idea what the policy is here.

Anyhow long story short I say in the article/ramble that I personally generally despise DRM but accept Steam, for the most part. Which probably makes me look like a hypocrite of the highest order, but I generally see Steam as more of a vehicle for others to provide DRM rather than being responsible for it themselves, but a developer is free (AFAIK) to not provide any DRM at all when they distribute through Steam, so I think we need to be looking at the devs more than Steam I guess.

So yeah, I generally like to avoid DRM. Steam is my one guilty pleasure otherwise.