Family Sharing enables you to play games from other family members’ libraries, even if they are online playing another game. If your family library has multiple copies of a game, multiple members of the family can play that game at the same time.
Well this is exceptionally exciting. This potentially solves 100% of my complaints with Family Sharing as it exists currently.
For REAL!! Not playing same game with one copy makes sense. But the one instance per library was harsh. This is tremendous, and honestly, I’ll probably buy even more games knowing my kids can play them and I can stick to my same old same old if I don’t like it.
No kidding. This solves a major issue with the Steam Deck as well, because now someone else can be playing on the Deck while you use your main PC for another game.
I have issues with this even with 3rd party applications. Wanna play PokeMMO, an emulator that doesn’t even exist on Steam, on your Steam Deck while you’re waiting to respawn in Trouble in Terrorist Town? Fuck you, you’re disconnected from that server now.
Its shit like this why I want to smack the “B-BUT STEAMS MONOPOLY” types who claim Steam does nothing with its 30%. Steam is one of the only companies out their in our late stage capitalist society that actually does things for its customer base without being forced to. We have digital refunds, completely remappable controllers, a linux operating system and portable computer that functions as a console when you dont want to use it as a computer, the only DRM in the world that doesnt actively suck, built in mod database/support, VR, official early access marketplace support (I know it has its issues), user game reviews with multiple sorting options, and thats everything I can currently think of. Steam is not only the only company I dont actively hate (Ok, I kind of like Costco too), vut I actually quite like Steam as a company.
Don’t forget private games, it’s a win-win because customers can buy games they don’t want to show to their friends and Valve get more money because they get more people buying those embarrassing awesome games.
CSGO cases pulled $1 billion revenue in 2023. The steam store brought in $8.5 billion in that same year. That’s a 30% cut of all sales traffic on steam vs. in-game loot crates on a single title.
Loot boxes pull insane numbers. And yes they exploit children and problem gamblers. Love to see so many Valve fans downvote you :/
The other reply to my comment has some links, but there’s no way you like Valve and don’t also know about Counter-Strike loot boxes and the third party market sites.
Ehh… Idk if that’s really on them. You can get around the playtime restriction by just playing offline, so there has to be an alternative restriction that doesn’t have that same vulnerability.
Three weeks is more than enough time to figure out something you own doesn’t even work.
I didn’t have the time to play it, tried to play it once and it didn’t work. I have a life and it often gets in the way, especially if I buy something on sale with the intention to play it later.
I’m honestly surprised you are defending it; if my car, bought new, stopped working through my continued usage in its first year, it would be repaired for free. A game which I booted up once after three weeks wouldn’t work… And I get told “no”. Not really acceptable. 30% fee for zero accountability and my money lost.
A car isn’t at max $70 lmfao, you’re comparing completely different worlds of cost. Also depending on where you buy said car, that isn’t the case lol, you buy a lemon… Get fucked it’s capitalism baby.
The problem is that without that rule, you can just buy a game, go offline and play the entire game, then return it. You could essentially play any game you wanted to for free
That already happens; I’ve got a few thousand games on Steam so I’m not taking the piss when I want to refund a faulty game. My total is probably five or ten refunds in the life of my account (almost 20 years).
I think it’s also just generally a good thing for them. I’m way more hesitant to buy stuff from humble and fanatical because I can’t return stuff, so I rather pay a bit more to get it through steam.
The vast majority of games you pay for on Steam can be taken from you in a couple of clicks from a Valve employee. The second there’s a chance in management everything can go out the window very quickly because their position is ripe for abuse.
This isn’t Steam specific; this applies to almost every digital marketplace. Yeah, it sucks, but there’s some things you just have to accept. When’s the last time you bought a physical copy of a PC game?
Yeah, it sucks, but there’s some things you just have to accept.
This reminds me of a certain CEO who said gamers need to “get comfortable not owning games” so that subscription models can grow. I can imagine so, so many gamers in a couple years saying this sentence about that and so many more new exploitative practices.
The truth is, we don’t need to accept it. They need us to accept it so they can get away with it.
I’m sorry bud, but Monopoly doesnt mean “Really large company” Steam has competition, it doesnt do anything to hamper competition, and its easy enough for new competition to arise. It is not a monopoly in any sense of the word. It is the top player as a digital videogame marketplace because it is leaps and bounds better than all of its competition. You dont like the risks of digital ownership? Understandable, GoG exists to fill that niche.
If you have the power to sway the market in the direction that you want, you’re the only one with that power and you’re the default option for your product then yeah, you very much are a monopoly and that’s the position Steam has in its market.
It’s currently in court for adopting anti competitive policies regarding pricing.
Valve is a multi billion dollars company, it doesn’t need you to defend it bud.
It definitely doesnt need me to. I’m just calling bulshit on arguements that are bulshit. And it being in court for that doesnt mean its going to lose, I’d be surprised if someone wasnt attempting to sue them if it meant they could get more money, welcome to capitalism. And Steam has the position it has and is the “default” game store entirely because it is an amazing storefront and its competition sucks. You have to go out of your way to install Steam, the same amount of steps as any other digital storefront. Anyways idealists like you who dont even have a toe in the real world exhaust me, so I’m going to block you now
Small nitpick, but it’s funny that you specifically listed their refunds first. Because they were forced into that. Some may remember how comically awful Steam’s customer support used to be. It was genuinely horrible, with resolution turnaround times measured in days and weeks instead of minutes or hours. There was no instant messaging or automated system; You had to email a sketchy email address, then wait days or weeks for them to finally respond. And chances were good that the response would basically boil down to “lul git fuckd loser, sux 2 b u”
Europe started pushing for them to be more customer friendly, because their refunds in particular were breaching some local European laws. In order to keep operating in Europe, they revamped their refund process entirely and recommitted to better customer service going forwards. But they only started the entire refund revamp in 2015 because they were going to be pushed out of European markets if they failed to comply.
And its also frecking 10 years ago now they added refunds. It’s like people like using “thet got sued to add it” as some sorta “gotcha” that steam is bad, I don’t get some people
I’m starting to think these people think we use steam because we have to, and not because its a legitimately amazing games catalogue/storefront. It makes the “Steam is a monopoly” and “What happens when GabeN dies and Steam goes down the drain” comments make sense
You have to have never seriously engaged with the details of the Valve monopoly if you think that’s what we are upset about.
We know Steam is an amazing storefront—I buy my games there because it’s the best experience for the cost. But Steam charges a premium. And despite taking smaller cuts, competing platforms like Epic cannot actual pass those cost savings to consumers because Valve is strongarming game publishers into fixing prices.
I said no such thing. Please come back to this later with a fresh mind, and remember how wrongly you interpreted what was actually said for the sake of trying to fire off a quick response.
But if you’d rather disengage altogether then it is what it is. Cheers.
Impulse offered refunds for technical issues, and I could easily find examples of Steam doing the same in 2008 for GTAIV, EA only sold its own games, which made the legal hurdles it needed to jump through and the amount of developers it needed to get an ok from significantly lower, and GoG is GoG, an actually decent competitor to Steam, so sure I’ll give you that GoG beat Steam to the punch there
As indicated, digital game storefronts offered refunds explicitly prior to Steam, and it wasn't leading the way, especially given its policy was that all purchases were not refundable, up till 2015's changes.
Leading the way isn't making some exceptions to their policies occasionally, it's making refunds a part of the policies from the outset when others aren't.
Fine. My initial statement was incorrect. I still think Valve put a lot of leg work into getting fairly easy refunds in place for a digital storefront that thousands of different developers sell their games on, and that that is an insanely bigger beast than the other examples outside of GoG’s example, which I havent fully looked into, but my initial statement was more specific than that and thus wrong
Sigh… I’m getting tired of the Valve apologetics in every thread. They make good products, yes. They also abuse their market share to implement anticompetitive policies. The first doesn’t absolve them of the second.
Truth is, no one has any idea what it would look like if there were actual competition among the PC games platforms. Steam may be the best possible world, or maybe we don’t know what we’re missing.
To learn more about Steam’s anticompetitive practices:
“Platform Most Favored Nation”. It’s a type of clause in platform/marketplace agreements that prohibit a seller from listing their product for a lower price on a different sales platform. Specifically, it prevents selling on a different marketplace with lower fees (e.g. Epic Games or a publishers own website) and passing the difference as savings to the consumer.
Yep. Because honestly, Steam is better than Epic in almost every way. When you want to buy a particular game X, you get a lot more from your purchase if it’s on Steam (workshop, friends, multiplayer, etc.). There is strong inertia and network effects that keep us all preferring Steam.
Epic can’t compete with the Steam experience. But if Epic was able to list everything 18% cheaper (the difference in fees between Epic and Steam)—then they would rightly be able to compete on price.
Edit: Wait. Do you guys think we use Steam because we HAVE to? GoG exists bros, we’re using Steam because we prefer it. If Steam goes to shit we’ll just stop using it
The 30% it’s always been the standard though, so not just Valve. That figure comes from retail, where 30-50% is still standard practice. You could argue that retail has higher costs, therefore needs the higher cut, but when Valve created Steam, they probably went with what worked.
What I really hate about Steam and all online shops, is that you can’t resell something you purchased second hand. If I can resell my physical copy of a game or movie, I should be able to do the same with the digital version. Also the fact that they can remove access to the product you bought whenever they want. In my opinion, we need a law that specifies that what you buy is yours, and you get to do whatever you want with it, even if the manufacturer doesn’t like it.
Valve is in a really dominant position and has almost always been, so they got a lot of sway on what the industry standard is. So can’t really blame other corporations here for the 30%.
they probably went with what worked.
That’s one way to say it. I think early on they had the cost advantage to retail and needed to convince people to buy digitally instead of traditionally, so lower cut. But of course they, as any company, would keep it near to as high as possible while being competitive. I’m not trying to shit on Valve by saying that, it’s just how it works for any company.
What I really hate about Steam and all online shops, is that you can’t resell something you purchased second hand.
I think that was actually one usecase for NFTs or whatever. There was much talk about it a while back but after the whole jpeg fiasco and shitcoin stuff I think it was all killed off.
Friend, I don’t know if you noticed but we’re talking specifically about game distribution platforms here. I really don’t know what you thought your comment would add to the discussion. What next, you’re going to tell me that money existed before Steam too lol.
Don’t forget Steam Link! It’s one of my favourite features. You’re not even really tethered to any particular device to play your games since so many devices support the app. I play games that are single-player “console” style games in my lounge room for comfort and Steam Link means I can use my very good PC instead of buying into yet another console generation.
But ignoring all the real issues with Steam is stupid. Its people like you that require others to point out all the issues with Valve and how it won’t last forever.
No ones ignoring the real issues. Steam isnt a monopoly and the 30% cut is industry standard. I’m not going to fault those who take issue with “Valve Time” or Valves shit communication. And frankly, the good stuff doesnt need to last forever, as soon as Steam enshitifies, GoG or Itch’ll be there to dethrone it, and Piracy’ll be there to get our games back if worst case scenario happens. You want better competition? Shit on Epic and EA to actually provide it
Epic Games Store—which is trying to undercut steam at a 12% fee—still list games at the same price as on Steam because of Valve has strongarmed publishers into fixing the prices. If Epic is charging 18% less but Valve is stopping publishers from reducing the game cost by that much, how is that not blatantly anti-competitive and anti-consumer?
enshitifies
Oh good, you are familiar with Cory Doctorow. He has an article on how Amazon abuses their position using the exact same playbook Valve uses.
I don’t care about the things you mentioned, but yes, those are also issues.
I was talking more about the issues around gambling and making loops specifically to take advantage of gamers with problems.
As well as the real problem that a single leader leading a company/nation will mean that company/nation always fails. The successors will inevitably mess it up sometime.
You say this like the competition hasnt already failed at the get go. Valve has the market share it has because no one else is offering anything better. Itch and GoG offer some things Valve doesnt, and because of that I wont say ALL of Valves competition is shit, but MOST of the competition STARTED off as your worst fear for what Valve MIGHT become
Valve is good, but they have shit features and I’m not sure why you’re defending them (but maybe you’re just a troll/ignoring my points?).
I don’t care about the competition - it’s like saying a person is molesting a child but hey, those two over there are molesting multiple children and murdering them! So they’re worse!
Marketshare is also a poor predictor as it’s often the first person to market as opposed to what’s best.
Think of it another way - Google has the most marketshare of search. Is it the best and is it doing only good things? If you say yes to both then I can’t help you further.
Just like you dont care about the competition, I dont care about CS:Go. I havent really defended anything they’ve done with CS:go. Right from the start I’ve focussed on two arguements, Steam’s (not a) monopoly, and its 30% cut
You can’t just ignore the arguments that don’t fit your world view/argument. In that scenario I could just look at the negatives of Steam and the positives of Epic and say that the Epic Store is better than Steam because I ignore all the stuff that doesn’t fit my argument.
It’s not just Cs go but multiple games like Dota Etc. They have specifically built a whole market and ecosystem to convince you to buy stuff and gamble effectively.
At no point did I say that steam is a perfect clean organization. I was calling out two very specific and common complaints against Steam, that is that its a monopoly and that it doesnt deserve its 30% cut. Your grievance against them is valid and I dont really have much to argue against it. Your fight is not mine personally, but I have no qualms against it
Valve can be attributed with saving PC gaming. When people were terrified of buying “digital only” games on this fugly client called Steam—which only had Valve games and a few no name indies—the PC gaming shelves in places like Walmart and EB Games looked like a clearance section. Just a hodgepodge of games in no particular order, worn out looking boxes of new games picked up and put back down, meanwhile the PlayStation and Xbox walls flourished and even GameCube got more love from a merchandising standpoint.
Now we trust Valve with our digital libraries the way we’d trust a bank with our money. They’ve earned that trust, and I can’t say the same for Sony or Nintendo which are happy to charge you repeatedly for the same game. Microsoft actually does a pretty good job of making your old games still playable in some form, so Kudos to them.
So will we be surprised when Epic Games Store goes tits up? No. Will we care when we lose all our games? No, they were all free. Should we support Valve as long as they continue to be the champions of PC gaming? You better if you care about where it goes.
100% These idiots shit on Valve like the PC marketplace wouldnt be infinitely worse without them. If you truly care about the PC sphere getting better, shit on Valves lack of competition, dont try to tear down the best example we have. That being said I’m hesitant to say ONLY option as at this point GoG and Itch are passable competition, even if what they provide is TINY compared to what Valve has brought the PC Gaming Sphere
Paid mods is almost never a good thing for the game itself.
Almost every mod out there is addressing some (real or perceived) deficiency in the base game. Good game studios look at what’s popular and either pull those features into the base game, or work with the modder to do the same.
Adding a paid mod system changes that cooperative relationship into an adversarial one, where modders see their revenue stream attacked by the game maker.
I have an example, most of DCS World’s content is made by external people, each “mod” that adds a new aircraft priced at full game price, and is actually worth the money.
Bohemia is trying to do something similar to Arma, with some community mods being sold as essentially DLCs.
I can’t say I don’t like the model, if the content is big enough. No microtransaction crap though like the first iteration of paid Skyrim mods. Those sucked.
There was initial paid mod attempt that they walked back due to player outcry, not because the paid mods themselves caused any problems. Which doesn’t really work as an example of “paid mods are almost never a good thing for the game itself”.
The Creation Club has been around for years, so technically speaking “paid mods” have been around in Skyrim for a while. Which maybe suggests that paid mods aren’t going to cause problems if they’ve been in place for this long?
If you want examples of games where the situation with mods is much worse than it is for Skyrim, you could look at literally any other game that exists. For one indication of that, if you look at the front page of nexusmods.com right now it appears to list the games it covers in order of mod files downloaded. Skyrim is #1 (SE) and #2 (LE) on the list. The next three are other Bethesda games. Skyrim Special Edition is ahead of the first non-Bethesda game on the list by an order of magnitude. You will not find a game anywhere else offering anything like the quantity, quality, and diversity of mods that Skyrim has, and this is a large part of the reason it ranks among the best-selling games of all time.
They're mad to try and mess with the model that has proven itself more successful than anything else for more than a decade.
In addition, mods always end up in a situation where someone’s work was stolen, which no one cares about when it’s free. Everyone’s just using everyone else’s stuff because it’s all working to make a better ecosystem
That all changes when people get paid, justifiably
In addition, mods always end up in a situation where someone’s work was stolen, which no one cares about when it’s free. Everyone’s just using everyone else’s stuff because it’s all working to make a better ecosystem
<span style="color:#323232;">Creations can range anywhere from simple cosmetics or gameplay tweaks to entire new quests and encounters - it's up to what you can conjure! Our internal document available to Verified Creators has some specifics, but in general:
</span><span style="color:#323232;">
</span><span style="color:#323232;">Creations must be standalone, so it cannot depend on other community releases, free or paid.
</span><span style="color:#323232;">
</span><span style="color:#323232;">Creations must be all-new to qualify for release. You cannot re-purpose older releases – or work by other authors, unless contracted.
</span>
They’ve had those before and it hasn’t worked. Maybe I’m just cynical, but I’ve never seen an official supported modding marketplace exist without a significant number of free mods being sold as paid by not the original developer
Maybe I’m just cynical, but I’ve never seen an official supported modding marketplace exist without a significant number of free mods being sold as paid by not the original developer
The only paid mods that Skyrim has are the ones for Creation Club, and I haven’t heard of people getting through the approval process with stolen work.
reference: every single marketplace that lets anyone upload things that in some way drives revenue back, from app stores, to youtube, to music platforms.
Almost every mod out there is addressing some (real or perceived) deficiency in the base game
Emphasis on “perceived”. In my experience, the vast majority of mods are for things that I would never have asked for or expected from the developer.
Like Thomas the Tank Engine being everywhere. Or the other day I visited a friend and he was playing Civ 6 as Luigi from Mario. Or adding guns to Skyrim. Or adding tons of sexual content.
Should that content just not exist (licensing issues aside)? While I’m grateful to the noble people making and giving away mods for free, if I could start a decent side gig with it I might start making mods myself.
I can’t imagine myself ever buying a mod, but it seems like opening the platform up to allow creators to monetize is better than closing the platform entirely, or relying on the generosity of a few enthusiasts. Seems like this closes a gap on the spectrum from making your own indie game, getting a job as a developer, or using some DIY creator like Dreams.
Bethesda’s goal, as usual, is rent-seeking. They can’t penetrate more markets, so they need to make new ones, and what better way to do this then to hire what amounts to contractors doing gig work. They don’t even have to pay them except in commission, which is a really scummy thing to do.
Some people see this as a way for mod-makers to make money, but mod-makers already have those! Every mod I’ve seen and every modder I’ve talked to has a donation link you can send money to, and the ones who didn’t had organizations and charities you could send your money to instead.
It’s not exactly that, yes they want to get fees/rent that I agree, but this at least the current idea is not a walled garden, devs can decide not put it in there, or put it there but free. Of course if that changes in the future, and that might be the plan, then that’s another topic.
Every mod I’ve seen and every modder I’ve talked to has a donation link you can send money to, and the ones who didn’t had organizations and charities you could send your money to instead.
Yeah but they cannot enforce it or totally make it a paid mod. A Bethesda implementation would be more enforceable, well maybe not so much on PC, due to piracy… but at least on consoles. So if somebody said, look this is good content I am not giving it for free, they cannot currently do, (in part maybe due to EULAs too… not sure, but not just that).
It is exclusively about money for Bethesda. You can tell by looking at the last time they implemented paid mods, where they took a 25% cut for doing nothing. They offered no quality control, no resources, and boy howdy were a lot of paid mods stolen content, but they didn’t care because they wanted that money.
As to the modders, the only offer Bethesda can give is a wider customer base, but the assumption that you will make more money offering your mod for a price isn’t founded. We will see a large amount of shitty mods clogging the store using asset flips to maximize returns, because that’s what makes big money on mobile right now. Mod quality isn’t going to be enhanced by this: Mods will remain the same. You will just more of the bad ones. $99 horse dicks, anyone?
This is pretty fantastic. I have two kids that I share with, and when one plays any game from my library currently, my entire library gets locked out from the other kid. Changing this to a game by game basis makes so much more sense.
My account has been locked up because my daughter has three separate BG3 games going with friends. Last week my son said we need to put a time limit on her because nobody else can play on Steam.
You can avoid this by bringing one of them off the Internet but it’s a real pain. It’s not so bad on the Steam Deck but bringing a desktop offline intentionally seems crippling. No Streaming music, no email alerts.
Either way I’m excited for the change. It makes way more sense.
There’s no reason Pajama Sam from 1997 can’t be played at the same time as Stardew Valley on 2 separate PCs.
Simply blocking steam in your local firewall was enough with the old system, if the last thing the account saw was the library being open to play on or being the owner of the game.
There are a lot of weird, convoluted tricks you could do with the old system to get around most of the issues. For example: I’ve recently managed to play Outlast: Trials with my brother despite only one of us owning it by turning on the firewall between sending the invite and accepting it and then accepting the invite and launching the game before the invite receiving account (who has to be the owner of the game) sees the invite sending account as offline.
We’ve discovered this firewall trick relatively soon after Valve fixed the offline mode “exploit”, but we never shared it publically so it wouldn’t get fixed too. I have seen a few people talk about it over the years though.
I feel like this is how it should work all the time for account related “exploits”.
If you’re willing to fuck with your firewall settings every time you want to play the game just to pay for one game license instead of two, fine. You payed for the game with intelligence and frustration instead of money.
I definitely paid with some time investment, but you bet I wrote a short script to automate toggling that rule on/off. It’s also not like I had to run that script every time I wanted to play a game. Only to play a game in my brother’s library while he was playing something else or when I wanted to play one of my games and he was already in one.
Summing up the time investment vs. the cost of games, and using a time-money conversion rate that assumes I had a well paying job in my field and wasn’t still a student, it was definitely profitable.
You’re definitely right on the frustration front though: I bought many games just to not have to deal with this. It was mostly used for games one of us was on the fence about. Or (like in the Outlast case) only one of us really wanting to play a game and the other just playing along because playing together is fun no matter the game.
Now, in the former case, it might be back to sailing the seas.
Isn’t that exactly the same as how it worked before?
There may have been a brief moment where that didn’t happen, and then people discovered they could make cheat accounts, share their own games with them and get only the cheat accounts banned, and then make new ones and repeat.
Currently each steam account is given a unique steam id number which is how most steam games identify the player and when you family share you are just associating that new steamid with your steamid so you can share certain purchases with if the developer allows it. Since each account is unique if I ban one it doesn’t ban the other. In the past you could use the steam public web API to query a steamid to see if it was a family shared and it would respond with the parent account and you could compare that to your ban list and then ban the new account. A few years ago steam removed that capability for privacy protection and moved it to the game developers partner only access so a game developer could implement that same check but very few did and older or abandoned games are rife with cheaters now.
Now it would steam they are automagically making that check now or instead of a steam id it’s a family id, I have no idea but if it prevents account whack-a-mole and brings back automation I’m all for it.
Not disagreeing, but I think the point is that no single person or company should be in a position of that much power. All it takes is for one thing to go wrong, one law to change, or one financial scare to happen, and BOOM. Suddenly this great monopoly is doing things people hate and there’s no alternative.
I think people are more negative than positive about this change. The old system allowed for far more freedom at the cost of being more annoying to set up.
This change cracks down on anyone who used the old system in unintended ways, i.e. to share games with family members not living in the same household. For now that check only compares store region/country, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they tighten the requirements further in the future.
It’s also a negative compared to the old system if one of your (adult) family members throws a huge tantrum, allowing them to cause a lot more damage and inconvenience than before.
Edit: I just wanna mention, I am saying this as someone who is usually “RiDiNg sTeAm’S DiCK”.
The game doesn’t go on sale very often because it’s very fairly priced at $35 and I’ve gotten each DLC the day of release so idk how they do bundles. It may be a long wait if you’re hoping for a deep sale as I’ve never seen it drop more than 25% below retail price.
You get a lot of the core experience from the base game+mods. So don’t feel like you need to get DLC to start because there’s a learning curve on the game anyway. The community endearingly calls your first 1000 hours in the game “the tutorial.”
I’m 1800hrs in (with probably another couple hundred making mods), Rimworld is pure crack in all the best ways possible. Hands down the best $30 I’ve ever spent on a game.
Everyone plays a bit different, personally I’d recommend playing the vanilla game for a bit and using mods to flesh things out or iron out any rough edges in how you experience the game. The modding scene for the game is absolutely phenomenal, if at any point you’re going “gee, there’s got to be a better way to do X, deal with Y, or add more Z”, there’s probably a mod that does it, for example I like designing my colony fairly early on (so I have something to build towards), but since the existing mono-color plan gets confusing pretty fast (what was wall and what was workbench, tool cabinet, light, etc), I find More Planning to be a bit of a must have. As a blanket statement, the Vanilla Expanded mods are very well done and integrate neatly into the game (that said, they aren’t necessary meant to all be run at once, so you can pick and choose what you want and go from there).
I have a pretty decent list going, but if we’re just talking a short list of personal favorites, I really love Megafauna, Frozen Snow Fox’s Bionics, and Cyber Fauna. (Oh and a shameless self-plug for my own mods)
Enh, I’m not so sure about that, one of the most unique parts of RimWorld is that the primary goal is to tell a story. Even the best stories need a bit breathing room for the action-y bits to have weigh. RimWorld is filled with stories about colonies that ran out of food in the dead of winter, lone survivor types that either bleed out or later died of infection after a freak hunting mishap, or trying to hide from the flames and wait out the raiders/ murder machines. It may be waiting, but I find that more often than not (especially in the early game), it’s either a welcome break after a hectic day or an edge-of-your-seat fight-for-survival kind of waiting.
Also, 2 weeks ago Last Epoch disabled family account sharing because it was being abused for real money trading:
We have unfortunately had to disable family sharing on Steam for Last Epoch.
This feature enabled the use of significant RMT (Real Money Trading) and Botting options, and was removing our ability to ban/remove accounts, faster than they could share them with their entire networks.
I don’t think any one specific thing is responsible for this change, but the 5 account limit seems like it would certainily be a welcome change for the Last Epoch devs.
While we know that families come in many shapes and sizes, Steam Families is intended for a household of up to 6 close family members.
To that end, as we monitor the usage of this feature, we may adjust the requirements for participating in a Steam Family or the number of members over time to keep usage in line with this intent.
This sounds like they are going to limit usage to geo-locational. Or that’s just supposition by me but I don’t see any other things this would target.
Assuming it is store country that is checked: Simply VPN-ing doesn’t change that. Instead you have to make a purchase in the new place with “a payment method from the region you have moved to”. From experience this locks your account to the new region for 3 months. What would be interesting to know is if you can be in a family and then change regions afterwards without getting auto-kicked.
Needless to say, my experiments ended at trying to see if they have any kinds of restrictions in place (unlike for the original family share) and I don’t wanna buy a throwaway game and lock an account into a different region for 3 months just for shits and giggles.
Worth noting that this could also potentially be due to differences in censorship/rating laws across country lines. For instance, Germany has some strict regulations regarding Nazi imagery in media. So games need to have a specific Germany-friendly version if they feature that kind of imagery. And Steam may not be able to serve two different versions of the game with a single license.
It would be nice if they could someday find a better way to enforce this. What if your kid has shared custody with their other parent, and they aren’t in the same household all the time? What if they’re studying abroad and aren’t even in the same country?
I don’t have the solution, but I do hope someone eventually finds a better way to do it.
I’m all for supporting developers not being harassed, but what the hell is that screenshot library? What even is this game? I stopped scrolling after a bit because the dialog looks…gross, at best, if not straight up soft incest porn.
This is the exact type of comment that led the dev to abandon everything.
It’s not “the incest game”, the topic of incest barely even appears only if you make several specific choices in the game, and even then it’s never painted in a good light.
Thank you for the clarification. The screenshots for the game on Steam’s site led me to believe it was a horror-romance focused game that heavily leaned on incest. In either case, this is likely not a game for me. Good on the dev for being able to step away from the drama and focus on their work. Shame on people for harassing them.
I want to be absolutely clear that I don’t condone doxxing or harassment, and people should be free to push boundaries in artistic endeavors.
But you only get to Bowser in 8-4 if you make several specific choices in the game, and it seems like the main draw of the game is being edgy with sexy cartoons. If it didn’t want to be “the incest game” then it shouldn’t really have incest in it. That’s a controversial choice, and if the developer didn’t know that, they didn’t read or watch Game of Thrones.
Even the first episode of the game was rife with incestuous undertones. I fully support the dev in their art, but it’s hard to say it’s not an incest game.
People just need to grow up. Weird things happen all the time. We can’t be puritanical and pretend it doesn’t exist.
To be fair, judging by the fact it's either incest or people getting knives/cleavers put up against their throats, i'm going to go on a wild guess and say it doesn't paint it in a positive light. Maybe even suggests there's something wrong with them.
Genuinely thank you for clarifying and yeah, I realize I’m kind of being part of the problem here, but that is literally all I know about the game because of the internet mob.
Every time I tried to ask anything about it on Reddit or Twitter I would get shouted down because of the “problematic content”, and that is all the topic would devolve into. The creator doesn’t deserve to be bullied or doxxed over it, even if the entire story WAS about incest. That really sucks.
It cannot really be about that, there are tons of incest porn games on Steam that pass largely unremarked upon, and this seems way less explicit than most of them. Surely if someone wanted to punish incest game creators, they’d start with one that’s way more explicitly incesty?
I think they just decided to bully these devs, in particular, and whatever they say it’s about is just a pretext for the bullying.
I prefer donations to the modders. Not paying 30% of it to steam for doing… Nothing much. And also being forced to pay for a mod.
Modding made so many mediocre games fantastic. The community is always a blast. People doing it for the “fame” or just for fun, and also getting occasional donations as a heartfelt “thank you” as a cherry on top.
I can’t imagine paid mods to do anything good for the scene. When does money ever…
This is exactly what I’ve been waiting for. My son is 13 and we share a Steam library. It’s not usually an issue but sometimes he does want to play something that requires online connection at the same time as me. Now that problem should be permanently in the past.
Even if he moves out in who knows how many years he can still take all his games with him. This is why I never feel guilty about spending money on Steam/Valve; I know that as long as GabeN lives, I won’t get stabbed in the back.
Or to bump up the price by twenty bucks. And it still won’t be finished, either - stuff like the story and bandits will come in future updates after 1.0.
steamcommunity.com
Ważne