I honestly don't see what the big deal is. I feel like the whole thing is blown out of proportion.

Were you one that also complained about having the CD in the drive to play the game? Can't have it every way to your personal satisfaction, you know.

(by the way, the word should be 'seated' - not 'seeded')

I fail to see what you are disillusioned about, though. It is simply a new way of confirming that you actually bought the game without having the physical disc in the drive.

"What I had previously expected and enjoyed about PC gaming had been to an extent remodeled."

Is that to say, it is now more difficult to pirate the game?

Actually, it's as easy as it's ever been, and that adds insult to injury to the paying customer who puts up with the BS.

I'm not a particular fan of Steam or Impulse, myself.  I'll put up with Impulse since I only need to use it for updates, and don't need to have it running to install from disk or play the game.  Steam though, I refuse to use.  I won't tolerate having to ask for permission to use something that belongs to me, and any publisher that wants to go down that road can say goodbye to my patronage.  I'm a huge Civ fan that would have happily waded through the mess that Civ 5 had on release, but I won't put up with Steam, so they will never get a sale from me.

I just don't understand how Steam is fucking anyone in the ass. My only experience with it is that it runs in the background while I play a few of the games I own. It doesn't cost me any money, it doesn't try to sell me anything, it doesn't really use any memory, its just kind of there. I've never bought anything off of Steam or Impulse and have never felt pressured to do so. I understand if requiring an internet connection to play an offline game is an issue for some people and agree that's kind of lame but If people have such a problem with these things why not just save yourself a buck and stick it to the man at the same time by getting a pirated copy?

Hardware and device DRM is a different discussion, but I'm missing the point where this is somehow compromising the integrity of PC gaming.

Steam is just fine until your connection kicks off while you're online and stays that way for a week.

Of course, this particular occurrence was a few years ago, but when it happened I was completely locked out of all Steam games until I regained the ability to connect to their god forsaken server before I could switch to offline mode.  Maybe they've changed it, maybe they haven't.  I haven't bothered to reinstall it since I wiped it, and I never left it online after that anyway.

Steam can also screw you out of every purchase you've ever made any time it wants to.  Once your program is wrapped up in a nice little third party package that can be disabled at any time, your program is at their mercy for it's continued function.  Going bankrupt and doesn't want to patch it out?  Not a problem, you're stuck with whatever shit they shovel out for you.  Bought out by EA or whatever evil corporation of the month and disabled?  Same deal.  If they decide to screw you, you're screwed.

Do note that the methods for getting around such a setback are illegal and can result in prison time for the people cracking Steam, and that those methods will remain illegal in the US until copyright wears off Steam or Congress repeals the DMCA, which in the case of the former will be long after your corpse has been planted in a nice little patch of dirt somewhere, if ever.

It's a pain in my ass with no reason to exist.  It's like speed bumps.  They don't do shit to stop morons from driving 30 miles an hour in a parking lot, morons are morons.  They're being far more irresponsible with their property by driving too fast to begin with.  All they do is give everyone else grief as they practically come to a stop every 40 feet to avoid destroying their car on the stupid things.

I like to buy games and then download a version from the Internet that has the copy protection removed. Usually this means I don't need the disc anymore either. Get the best of both worlds!

You want a real example of how DRM is fucking us over, look at Ubi's new-ish DRM system.  "Gotta be Online to play a game that has no Online or Multiplayer functionality what-so-ever, or the multiplayer isn't what people are picking this game up for anyway."  I.E. - Settlers 7 or Assassin's Creed 2.

Legal or not, let's face it, we have to show them we won't stand for it.  Getting cracked games that you already own is a great way of saying, "I filled my end of the deal, and you still treated me like a Criminal, as well as a sub-human being, an integer, a profit.  I won't stand for it."

While I don't find Steam to be a big deal either, I still disapprove of it.  It's a model for a DRM that has the potential to get a LOT worse, like Ubi's DRM.  That's why I particularly like Stardock and Impulse.  They have a commitment to their paying customers, possibly at their own expense, and thus-far, they've lived up to that commitment.  (That commitment being outlined in the Gamers Bill of Rights.)  Other companies like EA and Ubisoft also have this commitment, but they refuse to live up to it, and we continue to eat their crap because of it.

I loved the Settlers games.  I refused to buy Settlers 7 after reading about the DRM.

I ended up just playing Assassin's Creed 2 on my friends 360.

I will never guy another Ubisoft product as long as that DRM Model remains intact in any way, shape, form or function.

And that's the only other thing you can do.  Vote for the companies you like, the ones that use Honest practices, with your wallet.  If they have a DRM model that you like, and games that you like, fork over a few-hundred bucks over the next several years.  Deny that money to the ones you don't like.  When it comes to this though, unfortunately, it's an all or nothing deal, at least regarding PC games.  You can't pick and choose a few games from a publisher just because you really wanna play them.  That supports their DRM.  You have to out-right boycott it until it changes, and that could be a decade or more.

Facing facts, that generally means you're just gonna have to learn to live with shitty DRM from time to time, or buy a legit copy and crack it anyway, legal or no.

Neverwinter Nights 2 was the first time I ever had problems with SecuRom.  Was on a home-network with my Mom and Dad at the time, and I created a rather interesting fix for it out of frustration.

I took all the installation files and put them on our Network Share, and then proceeded to download them onto my Mom's computer.  I uninstalled and completely removed any trace of the game from my machine, and then sent the files back to my computer.

Popped in the CD, ignored making the new Installation, and just ran the game from the newly re-copied files...  And it actually worked.  I was never able to figure out why it worked.

Yeah, its so much more difficult that games are pirated BEFORE release date now

Just look at TPB, you will easily find ANY released game there.

Its _IMPOSSIBLE_ to protect software that is installed client-side. I have no idea why didn't Big Guys figure this simple fact yet. Its one of the basic properties of information.

Only real solution is to keep some code server-side and provide clients only with calculated results. Like, have all AI code on dedicated servers, so even single-player would be 'online'. Sure game itself could be pirated, but with no AI nor other players to play with, its useless. Pirates would have to write own AI substitution with undocumented API, and thats not trivial to do.

Well, obviously, I'm just stating that anyone who has at least some bits of brains in his head should've figured by now that this strategy is the only one which works. All these starforces, securoms, goo's, steamworks etc are not going to work, they will just annoy legitimate customers. If someone wants to protect his assets from pirates, he should not place these assets on the disk or into DD. And only way to provide game but not provide copy of it is to let it be played via online service, which provides some form of unreproduceable results rather than base code/assets.

This is natural thing, and its pretty much inevitable. Gamers can boycott Ubisoft, but gamers cannot boycott Ubisoft, EA, 2k, Valve and Activision at once, and they will have to compel to w/e restrictions publishers come up with.

But, according to laws worldwide, its already this way and always was. You do not own the IP. You are only granted the rights to use it on IP holder's rules. You are buying the license, not the product. Technically, if your EULA does not state that license is irrevocable, publisher could revoke the rights and demand that you stop playing the game according to DMCA even if you 'own' the disc and it contains no DRM.

On the other side, there is http://www.gametap.com/, and I love their business model. No need to 'own' these 'licenses' in the first place. No DRM, no pay-before-play bullsh-t.

I don't know how it is in other countries, but in the USA, the law is if you purchase something, you own it.  Any claims by anyone other then a court judge stating the opposite is full of shit.  It's true that the end user doesn't own the intellectual property, the company retains that even after a sales transaction is completed, but they weren't selling that in the first place.  The copy of the game is physical property and cannot be taken away, and the ability to play the game cannot be revoked because of the agreement made by the original seller (the developer) under good faith by the purchaser (the gamers), that they would be able to use the product for it's lifespan.  Business law 101.  The EULA is there to spell out the fact that you the purchaser are the only one to use it, you're not going to copy it or reverse engineer the software, and you're not going to change the programming, protecting their intellectual property and profit, ie the concepts and mechanics to the game and the money they get for selling it.  It does not give them the right to revoke your ability to use their product and/or enjoy the game.  The EULA is also there to spell out that you also accept that any and all information put on your computer is with your permission and any damage caused by putting said information on your computer is fully your liability and responsibility to fix not the company who created it.  Physical property and Intellectual Property.  Two completely different things.  Don't confuse them to be the same thing because they're not.

Another issue with everything being server based is what about games that are old.

If I want to play a game like the first Command and Conquer Red Alert, Westwood Studios doesn't exist anymore, does the company that owns the game now pick it up and keep the server running even though it's over 15 years old?

How about games like Tron 2.0 and SW Republic Commando?  Both saw a couple of update patches in the few months following their releases, and then all support was completely dropped never to be touched on again by Disney and LucasArts respectively, even had their listings removed from the websites so if you wanted to find the game, you couldn't, to much annoyance of the people who played and still play those games.  I highly doubt either company would be willing to keep servers up if they themselves abandoned the games not even half of a year after they were released.

What if I'm on vacation?  I'm an insomniac so most nights, I only get an hour or two of sleep if any at all.  I fill my time waiting for my friends to wake up by playing games since I have no idea what the hell is on TV if I'm even in a place where I speak the language.  If everything is server based, I'd have to be in a hotel with a wifi connection that was stable enough to play.  Not that I'd be worried about sucking up all of their bandwidth because most people would be sleeping, but still.  If there wasn't a wifi connection or I had to pay extra for it, then I'd have nothing to do for several hours.

The statement isn't out there, just your understanding of it, that's why you're the only one who doesn't get it.  But if you want, I'll spell it out for you like you were a 2 year old.  But first, the flaws in your statements!

1) I never said it was, if I did you would have seen commas, not parenthesis.  Read them as two separate, but equally valid statements.  DRM itself isn't a law, but bypassing it intentionally is illegal because you're bypassing the method they chose to protect their product, and by extension their profits.  Make no mistake, it's all about money.  Free software still comes with an EULA protecting the intellectual rights of the software's creator and releasing them from liability if you suffer any damage from their software, however, there's no DRM because there's no money being lost if it's passed around or installed 10,000 times.

2) It's easy to make a counter statement when you only point out crimes and don't put them into context with a situation.  Murder is completely subjective, I can't kill you unless my country is pissed off at yours and we're shooting at each other then it's perfectly okay.  In some places, simply not liking you is good enough of a reason to kill you and those in power wouldn't care, thus making it not illegal.  Thievery is illegal unless you're a politician or a corporation who can afford to own a politician, or a starving person in a Muslim based society and you're stealing food.  Children are exploited before they're even born by way of baby showers, and after their born by making them do chores (work) many times without being reimbursed for it.  Paperboys of times past made pennies on the dollar compared to news companies that hired them to distribute their goods.  Farmers often use their children to run equipment, but I don't see anyone rushing in to stop the long work hours.  Photographers make a killing off exploiting children.  So does Disney every day if you care to know.  Selling poisoned food isn't illegal so that part of your statement is just stupid.  Every piece of food you buy that isn't labeled as organic is poisoned.  Every piece of preserved or processed food or drink you consume is poisoned.  If someone dies from eating something, a company can be sued for wrongful death, not murder because selling poisoned food is NOT illegal.

Now to spell it out like you're a two year old...

Take a law like gun control for example.  If I want to buy a gun legally, I have to purchase it, but before the seller can give it to me, I have to go on a waiting list and have my background checked at my own expense, if I clear that, then I get to own my gun.  But wait, there's more.  Before I can leave the store with it, I have to register it.  Just because the seller is allowed to sell it, does not mean it's legal to own it, so even then, I may not be able to keep the gun even though I've already paid for it.  Supposing I can own it where I live, that's not all.  I need a permit to carry it just to even get it home.  More time and money lost...  Yet that little drug dealer that threatened my life walks down the street picks one up for $40 and shoots me when I'm leaving for work the nest morning.  Laws only hurt the law abiding.

You know what, that may be too advanced for you, let me dumb it down some more.

You need to get to the car before your brover does to get the good seat, but mommy and daddy said you can't walk on the grass.  Poor wittle yous, you have to walk all da way down to da sidewalk and over to da dwiveway and back up to da big scary vroom vroom.  But your brover, he jus wuns acwoss the gwass anyway and climbs in and takes da good seat.  Poor wittle yous obeyed da laws and you got swewed anyway.  Aww, shucks.

It was actually 10 times harder to write in baby talk.    That's so stupid...  Hahaha.  I'm such an ass.  =P

Okay, all previous two year old joking aside, laws really do only hurt the law abiding.  Just take a moment to think of a law.  Disregard the punishment since we're not talking about that.  Give yourself a need that would make you consider breaking the law, and walk yourself through the process both ways, obeying the law, and completely blowing it off.  Ignore the punishment because we're not saying anything about being caught or not.  You always end up better if you blow off the law.  And I'm not saying imagine yourself as a child porn producer or anything morally sick like that, but things like murder.  If you kill someone, you are a murderer.  What if some dude kicked in your front door and tried to murder your family (assuming you love your family).  Would you shoot and kill him to protect your family or would you rather become a statistic.  Murder is illegal, yet, you'd still do it, you'd even be labeled as a hero who shot and killed a homicidal intruder, yet, you killed someone, so really you're just a murderer yourself, but who cares, you're a hero right?

How about running a red light.  That's illegal.  It's 3am, not a sole is on the road, emergency services are tied up at the town next to yours because a tornado shredded the place, your wife is in the back seat giving birth to your child, but it's coming out feet first which means there's a high probability the umbilical cord is wrapped around it's neck and it's going to die of strangulation in the next minute or two.  You know this which is why you decided to drive rather then wait for paramedics who might take 30 minutes or more to just even arrive.  Do you wait the 30 seconds for it to complete it's cycle or do you just say fuck it and floor it?  Personally, I'm red lining that engine and surpassing 100 because I can.  I'm speeding by the way which is also illegal, but who gives a shit, my not quite newborn yet kid is dying.  You being law abiding, you wait at the light, you drive the speed limit, your baby dies.  I'm sorry for your loss.

DRM...  Oh scary DRM.  It only affects those who don't actively disregard it.  I 'could' be like other people and force myself to maintain a persistent online connection with a company's server to play a single player game.  I'd have to deal with server down time, internet outages, and not be able to enjoy playing a game on my laptop while riding the train between San Diego and San Francisco, or the jet ride from New York to Paris.  OR!  I could just download the hacker patch that cuts that shit out of the game and let's me play my game where ever and whenever I want.  I could register my game and be forced to only install it 6 times, or I could download the hacker patch that installs the game and bypasses the register step thus maintaining my install count.  DRM only hurts those who abide by it.

I'm not sure where the hostility is coming from.  But in your wall of text you go on to give context and specific examples to clarify your statement, but you're supporting my point when you do that.

You said it's easy to not put the situations into context.  Your original statement was an absolute: "all laws only hurt the law abiding"  (paraphrased). If you acknowledge that context is significant at all, it invalidates your absolute.

If you had phrased your opinion in a more accurate fashion, like, "some laws only hurt the law abiding", or even, "laws often hurt the law abiding" there would be no issue.  Personally, I find  your statements regarding anti-murder laws somewhat nonsensical.  In no scenario that I can think of, would "law abiding citizens" be hurt *less* by having no laws prohibiting murder, the exploitation of children, the sale of poisoned food, etc, even if there are a wide variety of circumstances that can sometimes muddle our attempts at applying those laws.