Quoting: Avehicle7887I kinda understand where wolfyrion is coming from, not using Steam at all can be hard for those who want to play the latest games and get all the features the client offers. I never liked the client but still fell and bought all the games that I couldn't find elsewhere. It can be really difficult to abandon it completely ... it was just as hard as completely removing Windows and giving up some games, but 1 year later here I am a full fledged Linux user and 3 years DRM-Free gamer..

Which was kind of my point, really. The choice to use Linux exclusively for gaming is not all that different from the choice not to use Steam. Most of the arguments for and against are the same. To embrace one and then object to the other is hypocritical, although everyone has been pretty nice and civil in this thread so far it must be said.

Quoting: HamishThe choice to use Linux exclusively for gaming is not all that different from the choice not to use Steam.

This is only true if ideology is an important part of that choice. It is perfectly valid to choose Linux due to factors that have nothing at all to do with gaming or freedom or whatever. You see this as an all-or-nothing type deal, whereas others are not as ideologically invested. Personally I seriously dislike the Steam TOS. It's just icky. But not nowhere as icky as the (loosening) stranglehold MS has on the PC OS market, with the negative practical implications you might associate with such a monopolistic situation and more. But happily we've got a technically better choice. And ideologically, which is a bonus.

Gaming is really fun. I'd rather stop gaming than go back to windows after 15 odd years though. I just don't see the correlation between this choice and the Steam/DRM debate.

(PS: I love the open source movement. I think it's the best way to promote technological advancement and innovation. I even choose to run my business entirely on open source software, often giving up on opportunities that would require otherwise. Just to make my stance clear, if this is even relevant.)

Quoting: HamishThe choice to use Linux exclusively for gaming is not all that different from the choice not to use Steam. Most of the arguments for and against are the same. To embrace one and then object to the other is hypocritical

Not really... the main 'ideological' reason to use Linux is that it is FOSS. Your argument would hold when comparing close source games and FOSS games. But once you start with close-source game/software, light DRM like offered by Steam really isn't that much different.

And even Richard Stallman acknowledges that games are a form of 'non-vital' software that is also pretty much isolated from the rest of the system, so for them it is not nearly as important to use FOSS software as is the case of a vital piece like the operating system or a webbrowser etc.

Quoting: JuliusNot really... the main 'ideological' reason to use Linux is that it is FOSS. Your argument would hold when comparing close source games and FOSS games. But once you start with close-source game/software, light DRM like offered by Steam really isn't that much different.

Why? For me there is difference between buying a software with a concrete license agreement and usage without boundaries and a software bought through a platform where you'd even call it "renting" because it is only one account-based system. I have hear this argumentation everytime when it goes to Steam and clearly sounds like sugarcoating the fact that the software could only used / installed as long as the publisher wants you to do.

In my opinion, the benefits of Steam outweigh whatever downsides it may have. Could Steam cease to exist tomorrow and I lose access to the vast majority of my gaming collection? Yes, in theory, but so what? The games themselves won't suddenly cease to exist, so whatever value they have as a form of human expression will be preserved one way or another.

And in the eventuality that Steam does shutdown (which I don't think will ever happen; Steam is making way too much money) I'll just find some other games to play.

And, seriously, it's silly to deny that Steam has had a huge positive impact on Linux gaming. If it wasn't for Steam, we'd still be looking at the occasional indie release or Humble Bundle. There have been more commercial games released for Linux in the last two years than the previous decade.

Quoting: tuubiThis is only true if ideology is an important part of that choice. It is perfectly valid to choose Linux due to factors that have nothing at all to do with gaming or freedom or whatever. You see this as an all-or-nothing type deal, whereas others are not as ideologically invested.

I have known several people who refuse to use Steam because they have had practical, rather than ideological, problems with the service. It is not all due to us having higher ideals. You are making a false distinction here.

Quoting: tuubiGaming is really fun. I'd rather stop gaming than go back to windows after 15 odd years though. I just don't see the correlation between this choice and the Steam/DRM debate.

You would give up playing games rather than use Windows. We would give up playing games rather than use Steam. What part of the parallel here still manages to eludes you?

Quoting: Mountain ManCould Steam cease to exist tomorrow and I lose access to the vast majority of my gaming collection? Yes, in theory, but so what? The games themselves won't suddenly cease to exist, so whatever value they have as a form of human expression will be preserved one way or another.

Without Steam any title using Steamworks would become unplayable unless you bypass the DRM service, something which happens to be a criminal act in my country treated on the same level as actual piracy.

Quoting: Mountain ManAnd in the eventuality that Steam does shutdown (which I don't think will ever happen; Steam is making way too much money) I'll just find some other games to play.

Some of us care about the medium enough to not want to see our games become that disposable.

Quoting: Mountain ManAnd, seriously, it's silly to deny that Steam has had a huge positive impact on Linux gaming.

But there is a profound difference between saying that the arrival of Steam on Linux has brought more attention to Linux gaming and saying that without Steam Linux gaming did not, and would not, exist. I have been playing games on Linux for almost nine years now. Somehow I managed to get along just fine without using Steam.

Quoting: HamishYou would give up playing games rather than use Windows. We would give up playing games rather than use Steam. What part of the parallel here still manages to eludes you?

There is a parallel, as you say, but it's so flimsy you'd better not put your weight on it. There is no hypocrisy, however, unless both choices are made for the same ideological principle.

Quoting: Mountain ManAnd, seriously, it's silly to deny that Steam has had a huge positive impact on Linux gaming. If it wasn't for Steam, we'd still be looking at the occasional indie release or Humble Bundle. There have been more commercial games released for Linux in the last two years than the previous decade.

You're just ignoring that Steam has not that impact: With or without Steam there would also be some ports available. What about "Gorky 17"? What about "X2" or "X3"? What about "Sacred"? And there were some more games ported. It would not be that mass, okay. But it is NOT Steam alone!

Quoting: throghWhy? For me there is difference between buying a software with a concrete license agreement and usage without boundaries and a software bought through a platform where you'd even call it "renting" because it is only one account-based system. I have hear this argumentation everytime when it goes to Steam and clearly sounds like sugarcoating the fact that the software could only used / installed as long as the publisher wants you to do.

You seem to have a misunderstanding about what DRM is. Non-DRM software can not be used "without boundaries" either... the exact same license limitations apply. The difference with DRMed software mostly is that there are technical means in place that prevent you from using it outside the license agreement*.

Steam is also not "renting", you buy a software license just like in any other store. If they close down their store (AFAIK) they will have to make it possible for you to continue using the software as by the license given. Calling it "renting" (with some sort of unspecified time limit) is spreading FUD.

But as I said before, FOSS games and software would be much preferable and actually gives the rights anti-DRM advocates ask for, but don't really get with closed-source software either.
Closed-source (with or without light DRM) really isn't all that great, but I am willing to tolerate it when it comes to pure consumer software, aka games.

---------------------
*One of the true criticisms of DRM is that DRM often enforces legal limitations that valid in the USA etc., but in some other countries where there are for example more fair use rights (private copies etc.), these would normally not apply.

Quoting: HamishSome of us care about the medium enough to not want to see our games become that disposable.

This is my perspective: it's just a bit of time-wasting entertainment and not anything of real importance in the greater scheme of life.