https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/keys
It says ‘keys’ here, but if you read the language, it’s pretty clear that a lot of this is a more broad statement about the perceived value of your offering on Steam and offering better deals elsewhere in anything but a temporary way.
i.e. We want to avoid a situation where customers get a worse offer on the Steam store
Aceris
3485
It’s really not clear at all. The Steam key scenario (which gives away most of the Steam value-adds and costs steam resources) and the non steam key scenario (which doesn’t) are very different.
I’m not saying you’re wrong, but it would be great to get a clearer source, or someone who tried to sell a game cheaper outside the steam ecosystem and got pressured for it.
jsnell
3486
The cases these laws have been applied are far closer to what you’ve been claiming is happening with Steam than a “physical products on WalMart shelves” analogy. Examples:
-
Amazon had price parity clauses on e-book contracts, requiring publishers to give Amazon at least as good a deal as anyone else. Amazon is now under a consent decree to stop this.
- Booking-dot-com had price parity clauses on hotel reservations, forbidding hotels from giving a cheaper price via any other channel. When that was found illegal, they tried to change the policy to just forbidding hotels from selling directly for cheaper than via Booking’s site. That was also found illegal, and they were fined.
In all of these cases we’re dealing with a digital middle-man with so much power in that market that the suppliers are effectively forced to deal with the middle-man. (My understanding is that the threshold is around 30-35% market share).
I disagree, it’s clearly talking just about Steam keys rather than other forms of distributing the game. In fact, there are no mentions at all about other ways of selling the game. This makes sense, since it’s the documentation for what you’re allowed to do with a Steam key, not the documentation for what you’re allowed to with your game. That narrow scope is much more likely to be OK from a competition perspective.
Now, obviously you know what the actual contracts say while I don’t. If you say that there is a universal price parity clause in that contract, I’ll believe you.
But again, that would be blatantly illegal at least in Europe. Epic have been playing hardball, have access to the exact contracts due to publishing games on Steam, and have access to a ton of apparently disgruntled Steam developers. It makes no sense that they’d not take advantage of this. Unless the plan never was to sell games for cheaper, and the “we can’t do it because of Steam” is just a convenient excuse.
Basic question: If Valve disappeared, you could still play single player Steam games in offline mode, correct? Or would you really lose everything?
You would lose pretty much everything. If Valve ceased to operate Steam, you would either need to download stand-alone copies of your games or hope that another company buys the services and rights to continue operations.
Yes, afaik there is no limit on lenght of offline mode. But if some games use denuovo and phone home and those servers are down too, shit out of luck. There are however some DRM-free games on Steam that work without steam running.
KevinC
3490
We’d be boned with any game that leverages Steamwork multiplayer components, similar to how when Gamespy went offline. It would definitely be a Bad Thing.
I’d also expect that if Steam were to crater, some enterprising individuals would have most games up and running again without the Steam backend (not saying the multiplayer stuff, just playing your games).
In a world where Denuvo is cracked in a few days, I highly doubt the lack of Steam servers is going to stop anyone.
Although Paul is correct in stating no limit re: offline mode timing, most titles on Steam must be both installed and initially launched while online. From Steam’s offline support page:
“Most games require an initial start-up while connected to the Steam Network before they will work in offline mode.”
Thus if Valve/Steam go down, it’s best to assume most of your Steam games will not operate unless it’s truly “DRM-free” and you have access to the installer. Even if you can install it to a new computer, the above line explains why it might not run properly.
stusser
3493
Uninformed article, as Epic does not handle DRM. In fact, DRM has nothing to do with this whatsoever, except that it’s an advantage for Steam.
The more shit he keeps spewing, the desire for me to get his game next year at release is slowly drifting toward wait till heavy sale price.
KevinC
3496
Pitchford is a douche, but that’s kind of a clickbaity headline.
The “dying store” comment is dumb and he completely contradicts himself, but what he’s saying in context isn’t terribly stupid, especially by Pitchford standards.
He’s still a twat, though.
I suppose if one store was paying me to be there, I too would declare the one that is not, as dying.
Nesrie
3498
Haha, call me when you get a horse head in your bed.
I mean seriously. The reason this topic keeps being rehashed is extreme statements like that.
LockerK
3499
My understanding is that Steam’s DRM is trivial to crack (which is part of why we see companies using Denuvo on top).
stusser
3500
I don’t know how trivial it is, but that’s not really pertinent. That article framed it as a battle between two DRMs, and it isn’t, because Epic doesn’t have DRM.
Yup. Literally everything out of the mouth of Epic-exclusive developers really does need to be understood as the commentary of paid parties. It’s advertising, in other words. Randy Pitchford, brought to you by the Epic Game Store!
I don’t know, it sounds like that’s what the article says:
Just as Steam presented an alternative to user-unfriendly systems like SecuROM, Epic may ultimately end up being able to present itself as a friendly alternative to Steam. It’s appealed to developers with lower pricing rates, and while players have complained about a lackluster interface, they can benefit from some of its structural decisions — like the fact that Epic gives developers leeway to pick their DRM options.
Nesrie
3503
Well it’s mostly comparing Steam to what we were facing at the time, install limits, phoning home every few day, hardware checks… It’s like in a world driven by developer and publisher concerns alone, we wind up with awful DRM and a horrible user experience. Fortunately, almost all those schemes are dead, and it wasn’t because review bombs and forums were seen as the enemy.
