Tomb Raider for Linux

[ZXDunny]

I am confused. If you don't like any form of DRM then don't... well, use it?

I'm sure that if the linux userbase refuses to touch Valve's offering then Valve will have to change. Market forces and all that. If you're free to not use Steam, then I fail to see the problem, other than "Wah! Boo hoo! I want to play a game but the distribution doesn't fit my hipster ethics! Blub!"

 

[thatgui]

I am confused. If you don't like any form of DRM then don't... well, use it?

I'm sure that if the linux userbase refuses to touch Valve's offering then Valve will have to change. Market forces and all that. If you're free to not use Steam, then I fail to see the problem, other than "Wah! Boo hoo! I want to play a game but the distribution doesn't fit my hipster ethics! Blub!"

So by your definition - If you feel something should change, mentioning that should only be allowed if everyone else is agreeing with you - well that something..

 

[WizardStan]

bringing something up, then shutting it down again, in the middle of the discussion

I didn't shut it down, you changed the course of the discussion when you said you didn't think it likely Valve was going to go out of business.
Like I said, I mentioned it because that's a chief complaint against DRM, that the authentication servers won't exist 10+ years from now, and one of my reasons for accepting Steam's DRM is that it's a single gate that would be pretty easy for them to simply leave open if they ever shut down.
If *you* don't believe the scenario is likely then there's no reason to continue discussing that particular issue, since it's a non-issue. Which raises the question, why did you even engage it if you didn't think the scenario was really possible?

Because here's the thing, if you really want to get to the root of all this: it is my opinion (and we are free to agree to disagree on this) that DRM is inevitable. I didn't used to think that, Humble Bundle and GoG gave me hope that we could have easy access and DRM free together, but Humble Bundle has become a lot less humble over the years and even GoG accidentally implemented DRM last year; granted, it was easy to bypass (but only because they made a mistake) and they removed it shortly after, but it doesn't change the fact that a company that claims DRM free as its core principle added DRM without thinking about it; they didn't even consider it DRM until it was pointed out how it was.
So with the opinion that DRM is inevitable, and seeing the different implementations of it, I choose the god with a proven track record of benevolence (more or less) against the many who have a history of broken dreams and promises. If it hadn't been Valve there is little doubt in my mind that it would've been someone else, almost certainly worse.

 

[HelenF]

How easily can the end user change the DRM server to connect to? And if the server key is also used for anything else, e.g. signing the automatic updates, that could be a big problem.

Even if there's no problem with the above, I doubt Valve would release the key. More likely they'd release a DRM-removal patch. If the DRM is in a Valve library that all the games link to, they might well be able to patch that without having the source code for the games.

 

[ZXDunny]

So by your definition - If you feel something should change, mentioning that should only be allowed if everyone else is agreeing with you - well that something..

Comprehension fail much?

If linux users are anti-DRM then linux users should refuse to use Steam. Valve would then get the message that if they want to profit from linux users then they will have to remove the DRM. But using linux while whining about DRM is going to achieve nothing - your money is still going into Valve's pockets and is seen as an endorsement of their practices.

I don't think I can put that any more simply for you.

 

[Grench]

Well, I'm enjoying the game on Linux.

I wish I could say the same. I bought it, downloaded it, tried to run it - and it complained about my four year old GTX 650 graphics card being inadequate and refused to run. Considering the card is also currently in my 7 year old HP xw8600 workstation, I'm not ready to fault the game or Steam. It is becoming clear I'm due to upgrade. I have a real nice case from my computer previous to this one - I'm thinking of building a new one from scratch again. Hmm... Fun - check. Funds - check. Time - doh!

 

[TrashyMG]

@Grench, Yeah having a GTX 970 has a bit to do with it being decently playable for me.

 

[Grench]

@Grench, Yeah having a GTX 970 has a bit to do with it being decently playable for me.

I actually put a GTX 970 in the specs that I was sketching out for my hypothetical new rig and was trying to find articles referencing how well it worked for gaming under Linux. Thank you for answering that one for me!

 

[ekianjo]

Yeah it being 50% off is a bit odd, I also like to see another benchmark to confirm this. Alien: Isolation also done by Feral Interactive didn't seem to have this much of a performance difference.

Plenty of benchmarks out there confirm it (check on youtube) and Alien Isolation suffered from a similar loss in performance (albeit more in the 30%) vs Windows. Feral has simply never managed to deliver a game so far with parity vs Windows performance.

 

[WizardStan]

I wish I could say the same. I bought it, downloaded it, tried to run it - and it complained about my four year old GTX 650 graphics card being inadequate and refused to run.

That's weird. Runs great on my GTX 550. Ultra settings have noticeable frame skipping, but high is nice and smooth.

edit: Ran the benchmark, apparently I consider 20fps to be smooth.

 

[thatgui]

I didn't shut it down,

I guess this was just miscommunication, I made that remark just to give a hint, where I am coming from - I thought that was clear, because I put it in parenthesis, and immediately went on with the argument, as it looks like it wasn't.
Still I don't see anything pointing in the direction that Valve will "just" do it or is even able to technically (what if every user has is own private key for communication?) or legally.

I choose the god with a proven track record of benevolence (more or less)

Freudian slip ?
Could you go into detail regarding the "proven track record"

Comprehension fail much?

If linux users are anti-DRM then linux users should refuse to use Steam. Valve would then get the message that if they want to profit from linux users then they will have to remove the DRM. But using linux while whining about DRM is going to achieve nothing - your money is still going into Valve's pockets and is seen as an endorsement of their practices.

I don't think I can put that any more simply for you.

I would really like to give you an intelligent answer, but due to the lack of cerebral processing power I am just able to accomplish: Has your comment any depth that goes beyond the probably 10-15 cm your keyboard allows ? What responses do you expect to get out of your babbeling ? "Oh yes mister Dunny, I am just a damn Hippocratic that just want to wine, glad you gave me the possibility to finally have a coming out..oh and I have a tiny penis too" ?
But just to get it over with:
I actually use Linux and I refuse to buy games on Steam (for any plattform). But as in every other "group" people have different opinions about things, so not everybody that uses Linux refuses Steams DRM. So what to do now ? Would it be a possibility to express my discontent with that situation in order show others that not everybody is happy about that situation, which may or may not lead to others noticing that there are actually other people that think the same way. Which in turn may help to create a "group" of like minded people that grows and maybe makes a difference someday ?
According to your first post no, because reason (some nonsense about "hipsters")

How do you think gog came to life ? "A: Damn this stupid DRM, I wish I could play games without being hassled by it. Why can't it be like in the good old days when all you needed to play a game was to look into a small booklet where glossy black text was printed on matte black background", "B: I have a cool idea, why don't we sell games without DRM", "Cool..wait..a shoot..no one is complaining about it on the internet, I guess we just forget about then" "A: No, we will do it anyway because we have stupid hipster ethics"

 

[WizardStan]

(what if every user has is own private key for communication?)

They don't. That isn't how secure communication works.

Still I don't see anything pointing in the direction that Valve will "just" do it or is even able to technically or legally

There's nothing technical or legal to prevent them from doing it. A possibility is better than an impossibility.

Freudian slip ?

No? What?

Could you go into detail regarding the "proven track record"

Their DRM is entirely self contained, it doesn't require the user to do anything to activate, as opposed to previous schemes which needed DVDs to be inserted and codes to be entered.
They let you install a game before it's release in anticipation of verifying it the day of.
Offline play allows you to continue playing even if the internet is out.
Family sharing lets other people play your games when you aren't.
They actively encourage Linux development, even writing their Source 2 engine specifically in OpenGL (Vulkan).
They give refunds if you don't like the game (with reasonable time limits).
That's a short list, but better than other schemes.

 

[thatgui]

They don't. That isn't how secure communication works.

Ok, but why not? Have a initial communication with a known key, wherein a private key is exchanged which is stored encrypted both on Valves side in the customers profile and on the customers installation.
It still not 100% secure, but in a scenario were the "main" key gets out in the open due to criminal activity (leaving the scenario that Valve closes down aside) it may prevent damaging most of its customers.

No? What?

I choose the god with a proven track record of benevolence (more or less)

(Or am I only showing a lack of skills in the english language?)

Their DRM is entirely self contained, it doesn't require the user to do anything to activate, as opposed to previous schemes which needed DVDs to be inserted and codes to be entered.
...That's a short list, but better than other schemes.

These are positive points for sure, but they are just reactions to a changing market, nothing one could extrapolate a behavior, in a situation where Valve shuts its doors, from. But no need to move this any further > thanks for the details > agree to disagree

 

[ZXDunny]

ThatGui: Why are you bleating on about it here? If you dislike Steam's DRM, have you informed Valve of your opinion - or are you waiting for Valve to read this thread? I can pop a complaint to them for you with a link here if you like?

 

[WizardStan]

Ok, but why not? Have a initial communication with a known key

Because if you format your computer the key is lost and you'd have to re-install Steam; under your scenario, the new install would simply contact our fake server which the client would be able to verify was "actually" Steam because we have Steam's private key, and then the fake server can negotiate a user key. The client has no way of knowing whether it existed before or not, it simply needs to trust the server isn't lying to it, which is possible through the original private key.

(Or am I only showing a lack of skills in the english language?)

It's a euphamism, or metaphor I guess, and a fairly common one at that, I thought: the god/devil you know; the benevolent god to guide us. etc and so on. I'm equating Steam with an all powerful entity with the power to help or to hinder based on their whims, against the likes of Microsoft, EA, and pretty much every other company that has ever come close to touching this type of power.

These are positive points for sure, but they are just reactions to a changing market

You asked for examples of benevolence, I gave them, the reasons not withstanding. There have been many examples of companies over the years in a position to do something good and choosing to do the opposite even though the market was leaning that way. Kodak and the digital camera is an amazing example of this. So far Valve has continued to do more right by their Steam customers than wrong, and especially in better proportions than any other DRM company; it doesn't matter that they profit from it, or more precisely I guess it totally matters that they profit from it: a company that can actually see the signs of a changing market and adapt is better than one that tries to suppress.

agree to disagree

Agreed. There's way too many variables to even attempt to say what will happen, just hunches and opinions for the foreseeable future.