A long overdue "games as service" rant

[NeuralStunner]

Stop being an apologist for ruthless big business tactics. That's pathetic.

To summarize:

Digital distribution isn't inherently flawed - for the most part it's just the industry following technology - and no distributor is any better than the others on that premise alone. DRM has to sour everything because - as intrusive as it is - it's doing exactly what it's supposed to. (I'm fully aware that companies often do completely bonkers things just to save a buck, even if it's poisonous.) And the #1 scapegoat for DRM's prevalence just continues to happily play along, not caring that they're just helping make things worse.

Still, things aren't nearly as bad as they could - or more likely will - be.

Simply "quitting" the entire industry does exactly as much good as closing your windows does to reduce air pollution. Doing something that can be seen - like shifting sales percentages toward companies that do support their customers - could actually make a difference.

Yes, technically games don't have to utilize Steam DRM despite being on Steam, but Valve encourages the use of Steamworks (for achievements, cloud saves, etc) which does, and makes it hard if not impossible to make it optional.

S3DNA has achievements and cloud support, but still runs fine without Steam. From what Blzut has told me, it's not really that difficult - since the application still has to tell the Steam API when it wants something.

Microtransactions affect gameplay. Any game with them will ultimately turn into a grind to get anything done instead of playing the game being its own reward. Even the examples that are straight up honest about what they're doing to monetize have this affect in them. How is that not evil?

The first games with microtransactions appeared in arcades. I'm only partially joking, of course. Arcade games are designed to bring in those sweet shiny quarters. (You could put in the time to practice, but even that is behind a paywall.)

[Rachael]

I think this thread has seen about enough. It's at a point now where it's devolving and I don't feel anything further can productively come of this.

Ultimately, NeuralStunner is right that you're going to have to support companies that do the RIGHT thing - and prove that their business practices are sound. Customer-first business is something that's gradually becoming something of a bygone practice, but it still occurs, and when a game company does something honest and supportive you HAVE to vote with your wallet - because in the end, it's the shareholders who decide, and they're the ones making bank off of this debacle.

Graf is right too, though. When no one does what you like, then you simply don't contribute to a terrible gaming economy that's ultimately harmful to the consumer and harmful to the computer industry as a whole.

At any rate, the arguments aren't worth keeping this thread open.