I am in the meantime a big fan of Steam. Sorry, there are reasons.

a) I can buy them games and pay with paysafecard.

b) I havent anymore to spend time in search for updates and the updatedownloader is the fastest. Forget all those download mirrorsites where you have to register, memorize your logins and still have to queue in sometimes for an hour before download even starts.

c) No more cds and dvds needed. I like computers, but I hate running games with cds and dvds running. Sorry, the imagination of a motor needed to drive something (rotate the data-disc) is totally unnerving me, and the handling is simply too stupid for me ....

I think three good reasons are enough to stay on steam. Even with gog you get your games without datadisc. One great advantage. And believe me, with the cloud coming, no one ever will play datadiscs for games within ten years.

When the gaming community in general sees something with Steam as a flaw they tend to bitch and news sites tend to report it. It happened with the EULA changes a couple times, and with some bans that were seen as wrong.

I think in the end your real issue is that what you see as flaws are not considered flaws by most others.

The issue isn't fuzzy at all - Steam just sucks and is, by virtue of the way it operates, a criminal organization.

When you buy a game it ought to be yours to sell or rent or do whatever you want with. This is the BOTTOM LINE.

You should not be forced to update your game unless you want to. It should be up to you whether you choose to update your game or not, and NOT up to some third party (i.e. a "client"", e.g. Steam). Any attempt to interfere with a product which you have bought ought to result in a prosecution of the interfering third party. Companies should just not be allowed to get away with this kind of behaviour.

Since when did it become compulsory to be online to buy / install/ activate / play a computer game ? This needs to be outlawed.. This is a truly evil development, certainly equal to anything which Jon Irenicus could have thought of. You simply have no right to have anything to do with me or the game which I bought from you after the transaction has been completed. But I, as the customer, DO have a right to have something to do with you : if your product is defective I deserve at least a refund.

The PC games industry STINKS of corruption. I cannot understand why people are sticking up for things like Steam and DRM.

The ability to force people to be online in order to activate or play or update a game : this is what needs to be made illegal, because it is being exploited by the worst kinds of people. It never used to be like this day back in the days of "good old games" and it shouldn't be the case now. The internet was such a bad idea if only because it was from the outset bound to give free rein to the criminal element worldwide. You can control people via the internet and unfortunately this is what is going to happen in the future. The PC gaming industry, as it is now, is just a rather pathetic early indication of what is to come. Gird your loins because it is only going to get worse, The human race is an absolute idiot beyond all comprehension.

Incidentally, anytime people who dislike Steam want to know why they sometimes get painted as silly, it would be because of over-emotional, nonsensical, hyperbolic garbage like the previous two posts.

Nothing like hilariously over-the-top extremism when you're trying to make an argument!

I suffer for the contrary: I shall never buy at Steam.

The industry is changed when we entered digital. We can't assume that the old buying and selling like with physical goods will last forever only because it has been around for thousand of years. New territory -> new rules. In principle I agree with you, at least in the part of actually owning the game but being able to sell or rent isn't something I want done because of the consquences.

What's worrying, like any other industry, is the corruption that erupts while the industry has established itself and no one cares about it, at least not enough people to make a difference. For example, why are games suppose to sell 40 to 60$ at release? Publishers have probably analyzed it that it pays for them in the end, not both the consumers and them. Also the idea today that all games are short term, there's no long term in mind. Take online DRM for example. That makes no sense for the consumer when the publisher have cut down the servers. One can always throw in the piracy argument as I'm sure a lot of people pick that choice when the way to play games hits them on the nerves but I'm not sure enough people pick that lane to force the gaming corporations to change or a better word, adapt. After all there's few people in the industry that looks at the bottom issues of piracy rather than the easy, escape answer "our consumers are thieves, all of them and let's use morale and guilt to fight the idiots!".

I would have to agree on the must-update-now issue with steam too but I never buy games on Steam that I plan to use mods with and if there are known issues in the final update (but works great with the second last or even the first version) so I guess a little strategy never hurts your gaming habits. :P

You tell 'em man, start the new crusade. This evil must be purged. Starvation and health care can wait, we have mild DRM on an open platform to worry about!

I prefer to buy solely on Steam. I have my games on there, Steam Community is essentially my "Facebook" (though I can't stand the proper Facebook as it is anyway), there are significant amount of deals, cloud saves are available, and it's all in one place. I don't like buying games from Origin, I don't like buying games from SquareEnix/Digital River, I didn't like buying games from Direct2Drive (Now Gamefly), and I really don't like uPlay.

I suppose part of it is the "MMO" aspect of it. I've been with Steam so long that my account's value is significant. I've got a lot of games you can't even buy on it anymore either. As such, I'm reluctant to fragment my collection over many services. I forget I have games in Gamersgate, GreenmanGaming, and other places. It's easier to have them in one list.

Is Steam perfect? Not at all. Regional pricing is a complete PITA, and I fully support the $1 != €1 movement. I've been finding myself frustrated with the instability of Steam Community and subsequently their matchmaking as of late, and I really don't like the new ACF format that causes TF2 and other source-engine games to verify at least once a day.

Despite all that, I still prefer to stick with them, assuming and hoping that they'll take care of it eventually.

This is a good question, and you are partly right, in that it has been analysed - deeply - but the conclusion is a bit off.

When someone makes a game, the company has no income at all, just expenses. During the production time there are staff salaries to pay, rent, equipment, software and so on. To pay for this a developer has three options 1 - use savings (if they have), 2 - borrow or 3 - find a publisher to foot the initial bill. Bottom line is, when a game is made the developer faces a huge deficit, and this needs to be closed as fast as possible if they are to stay solvent in turn to make the next game. Enter two types of buyers - day 1 buyers and the rest.

The day 1 buyers are the ones who will 'save' the producers initially. They are the ones who are willing to pay more then the others, for various reasons, to play the game as soon as possible. For them the price is not so much an issue (to a degree), and it is in the developers interest to capitalise as much as possible on them. The instant cash flow they inject back through the $60 day one sales, can make or break the developers. This is a very limited marked, and very short term - but very important - It basically goes to cower debt incurred during production. The $40-$60 price tag is not plucked out of thin air, but calculated again and again to make the most out of it. This is a waterfall, but a very short one. A big burst, if you like.

After this term, the long term survivability starts, this is when the price of the games drop and you see sales. This is equally as important as day 1 sales, but this is the long term side of things. Now that the hardened fans have made the company survive, it is the rest who will make them live longer and help finance the next game being made. The reduced prices will catch the buyers who are not so interested, and impulse buyers. The steady cash flow is like a constant stream. The point being - this stream would not be fast enough to cower the initial debts, and if the developers where only waiting for it, then they would not survive the initial phase.

This is very simplistic, and there are many caveats (size of teams, digital and physical, licensing, and so on) but it is the underlying reason. What we have seen now in the digital marked is that some games have managed to come out with a lower initial price point (especially digital only games) and that the day 1 period is becoming shorter and shorter. But - it is still important for the quick cash injection needed to keep afloat.

Edit - game development is a lot like gambling :)

I use all the services available except Impulse. I use STEAM because I like it, but I do not discriminate among the available digital distributors. I even use Origin now as Greenman Gaming had the Battlefield 3 Premium for 29.00 and I couldn't pass it up; nor the Mass Effect 3 Deluxe Ed for 14.00.

And I'm going out on a limb here, but the new Gamefly Client has a superior owned games shelf to STEAM's. You see the actual box art for the games. No missing game icons. Easy to navigate, zoom way out or in.

I like DRM free games when possible. GOG gives me DRM free versions I don't have to phone home to use. Indie Bundle gives me all DRM free games with the option of additional STEAM key versions where applicable.
Plus lossless soundtracks in FLAC.

So other than Impulse, I use them all. Don't put all your games in one store engine.

When you have 1300+ games, having a "shelf" with boxart becomes a bit cumbersome to use/filter.

Yeah. Even with 150 on GOG it's a bit cumbersome. Lists are cool.

I would say it's the industry constantly exploiting all new technical achievements to maximize earnings while the customers still need to find a suitable way to react to this. They would probably prefer more open systems, but it takes time for somebody to come up with such a platform. In 10 years maybe. But there are already laws against monopolies and for consumer protection. They might be extended and applied some day.