Exactly, I don't want SecuROM or Starforce in Steam games. I buy games off Steam to avoid this kind of crap. Steam need to ban or at least discourage 3rd-Party DRM.

He's completely right. I simply don't buy anything that so restricts me, the paying consumer.

It's a pity even on Steam DRM is there for certain games (non-Valve) as I guess the publishers insist. Really though, it clearly doesn't limit piracy much and it for sure puts of potential customers.

Publishers need to realise DRM really is a lose/lose and be more in sync with consumer.

Twistedpixel said: Valve ported their games to Mac before the PS3 which makes them incredibly......... wierd. Who does that?

People who think the PS3 is too much effort to put up with the effed up architecture. Remember that Macs run on intel?

I think the Steam DRM is fantastic. You get features like Achievements, Anti-Cheat, Auto-Updating, and Steam Cloud. I play all my favorite games like CSS & TF2 on Steam anyway. So why not have all my games on Steam?

Steam DRM is fine, I'm talking about how certain titles sold via Steam still have their own silly DRM in them as well.  Valve should stipulate all Steam retailed games only use Steam DRM.

I love the whole Steam system, so much so I have it on 1 desktop and 3 laptops so that no matter which machine I'm using I can play my games, etc.

For me, the pros of Steam has long since outweighed the cons. And I'm aware of just about all of them. So Steam as a DRM is absolutely amazing, in my book. Best DRM out there.

That's the thing about Valve... they atleast give the impression that they try and do right by their fans.

I mean heck, look at their porting to Mac.  If you own a Valve game on PC you also own the valve game on Mac.

No double dipping.

Steam itself is a DRM... but it's so useful and does so much for me, the positives are far greater then the negatives.

As mentioned on here, Steam itself is a form of DRM. When you buy a game from Steam, you don't really "own" the game. If you can't sell the game, can you really "own" it? No. In principle, I feel that what Valve is doing is evil. It's just less evil than what other Pro-DRM companies are doing. That's why gamers give them a free pass. But they shouldn't get a free pass. Just because Ubisoft, EA, etc. are more evil, doesn't mean that Valve is good. You just get less evil with Valve.

I don't see how Steam is a net benefit for consumers. You can install your games on as many computers as you like? You can do the same with DRM-free games. And you can resell those if you want.

You have achievements? So what? Xbox 360 does and you can sell your retail Xbox 360 games.

You have friends list? Ditto.

You have free multiplayer servers? Battle.net has that too. And so as long as you aren't dealing with a douchebag seller who keeps using the serial key after selling the game, I'm pretty sure you can buy a used copy of Diablo, Starcraft or Warcraft without a hitch. It's risky to buy those games second-hand but at least you can provided that the seller is honest (this is what feedback ratings on ebay are for).

You don't need to put the disc inside the computer while you play? DRM-free games allow that too (disc check is a form of DRM btw and yes there are retail games out there still that don't even require a disc check). And you can resell those.

Steam has some killer sales at times. I'll give it that. But I don't "get" what's so great about Steam overall. Gamers are doing a disservice to themselves for talking up a company that is committed towards destroying true ownership and consumer rights (first-sale doctrine).

It's true. Consumers aren't completely opposed to DRM, you just need to compensate them for the extra cost of DRM. And the more you raise the cost of DRM, the more compensation they will demand in services or reduced price before they'll sign the contract.

Consoles and Steam are acceptable forms of DRM because they apply a minimal cost to the consumer, and yield benefits which outweigh the cost of the DRM for most customers.

You are comparing weird things here. First, it's only natural that any DRM is worse than no DRM. Seriously dude, how can Steam as DRM is bad because it's worse than no DRM?

Resale of intangible goods is difficult, not to say impossible, to get to work as a system. That is the true for  any Digital Distribution platform. It's inherent in the system, and doesn't make Steam as a means of Digital Distribution any worse than it could be.

And PC gaming isn't console gaming, hence the need for DRM in the first place. If you want achievments, Steam is one of two places you can get it on the PC (GFWL being the other), and for most games it's the only place. It is also the only place where you can talk to all your friends and see what they are playing, invite them or join them easilly no matter what game they are playing, on the PC. Yes, it already exists on consoles, isn't it great that we can now do it on the PC as well?

Battle.net doesn't work for that many games either. Blizzard games only, if I remember correctly.

It's a compromise, they're saying that: Yes, it's sometimes inconvenient. Here's a ton of great features you can get nowhere else on the platform to make up for it.

That is the essence of the Steam DRM. Less intrusive DRM, more focused experience, easier to manage games and a community around it are bonuses you get for shopping legally using Digital Distribution. I'd rather take the Steam DRM than any other DRM on the market.