You can pay for online multiplayer and not have an offline option on consoles. There’s no reason to believe that paying for it would make more games playable offline.
Steam is pretty much the only thing that stopped the Microsoft Store.
If that had happened, you probably couldn’t even run games anymore on windows unless they were installed through the Microsoft store. Mods would be dead, and we would be in the same, but worse situation.
Hell, maybe you couldn’t even buy games, but had to buy “game subscriptions” like game pass on xbox
You don’t remember pre-Steam then, because it was already headed down this path. Piracy and used copies have been the boogieman for a long time, and doing anything they can to prevent both was always the natural destination of the industry, unless more people start shopping on GOG.
Don’t be naïve. As long as greed is enabled in our society this or worse would’ve always been the outcome. Or do you think other companies would’ve slept on the opportunity?
Nice strawmen you got there. Where the fuck did you see me defend a billionaire?!
I am just being realistic here. Our current society enables greed and greed would’ve always led to this situation or worse. We need to change the system fundamentally to change that.
You are not being realistic you are being stupid. You are indeed defending a evil corporation and a billionare with a fleet of mega yachts by stating that their work is necessary. They are needed for what? For a long time before they rolled in and started misleading kids tossing money in marketing you didn’t need a third party proprietary launcher to run software and you still don’t need it now.
The original comment was that without them you would probably still own the games you paid for and you argued that if not them someone else would have do the same thus giving the idea like others have expressed here that steam is somewhat fine where it is.
Well you are wrong. I am not saying that this situation is fine. I am saying that it is not the individual company that is the main problem but the system that enables them to begin with.
Just dismantling valve is not a long term solution. It’s short sighted. Without them there would be others in their footsteps. One needs to change the system to change that. Give companies opportunities and they will exploit them. I actually agree with the above comment that legislation / regulation is a solution to this problem.
That is why I am pissed off that I am called stupid and bootlicker. That is not a good way to discuss things and especially not a good way to get to an understanding.
And yes I do think that there is a high chance other big tech companies would’ve done worse than valve. Which is not a great endorsement for them to be clear.
What would we do without them? Use FUCKING Epic?! Lmao
With Valve and Steam? You would be paying for online multiplayer.
Atleast there would be a offline option with that. If online multiplayer was paid.
Steam itself has an offline mode, even if they sell online-only games. I use it pretty often.
You can pay for online multiplayer and not have an offline option on consoles. There’s no reason to believe that paying for it would make more games playable offline.
without them you would probably still own the games you paid for
Steam is pretty much the only thing that stopped the Microsoft Store.
If that had happened, you probably couldn’t even run games anymore on windows unless they were installed through the Microsoft store. Mods would be dead, and we would be in the same, but worse situation.
Hell, maybe you couldn’t even buy games, but had to buy “game subscriptions” like game pass on xbox
Microsoft now installs games in an unprotected directory because people were so annoyed they couldn’t use the mods made for other storefronts.
You don’t remember pre-Steam then, because it was already headed down this path. Piracy and used copies have been the boogieman for a long time, and doing anything they can to prevent both was always the natural destination of the industry, unless more people start shopping on GOG.
Do you? pre-steam you would install games and play them outside steam
Everyone was experimenting with their own lousy DRM, including those that had activation limits and would require a phone call to reset them.
Yea, right. It would’ve been another platform to capitalize on the internet becoming more available and digital distribution becoming viable.
You don’t need any third party proprietary launcher to run software
Don’t be naïve. As long as greed is enabled in our society this or worse would’ve always been the outcome. Or do you think other companies would’ve slept on the opportunity?
Are you using lemmy through a third party proprietary launcher?
Yes, Android. Why?
“Daddy Gaben can do the bad thing because he was first to do it, heehee”
The fact is we need new regulations and laws but the government will never act if bootlickers like you are the majority.
Stop defending billionaires that are actively robbing you.
Nice strawmen you got there. Where the fuck did you see me defend a billionaire?!
I am just being realistic here. Our current society enables greed and greed would’ve always led to this situation or worse. We need to change the system fundamentally to change that.
You are not being realistic you are being stupid. You are indeed defending a evil corporation and a billionare with a fleet of mega yachts by stating that their work is necessary. They are needed for what? For a long time before they rolled in and started misleading kids tossing money in marketing you didn’t need a third party proprietary launcher to run software and you still don’t need it now.
Where did I say they are necessary? Where did I say you need a proprietary third party launcher?
What other statements do you want to put in my mouth?
The original comment was that without them you would probably still own the games you paid for and you argued that if not them someone else would have do the same thus giving the idea like others have expressed here that steam is somewhat fine where it is.
Well you are wrong. I am not saying that this situation is fine. I am saying that it is not the individual company that is the main problem but the system that enables them to begin with.
Just dismantling valve is not a long term solution. It’s short sighted. Without them there would be others in their footsteps. One needs to change the system to change that. Give companies opportunities and they will exploit them. I actually agree with the above comment that legislation / regulation is a solution to this problem.
That is why I am pissed off that I am called stupid and bootlicker. That is not a good way to discuss things and especially not a good way to get to an understanding.
And yes I do think that there is a high chance other big tech companies would’ve done worse than valve. Which is not a great endorsement for them to be clear.