Steam bans 20000 accounts.

[Blackhawk]

The account is tied to the CD key. So - these people can play Day of Defeat and Counterstrike - just not in multiplayer. Yeah... That's like saying you can drive your car to work, just not on the road.

That clause from Steam would be very difficult to uphold in court when it comes to games purchased prior to the advent of Steam for their multiplayer content and then literally forced onto Steam by Valve years later.

On the one hand, it is nice seeing pirates getting their own. On the other hand, seeing a company put whatever clause they like into a contract that customers are forced to agree to in order to use the products they pruchased years earlier, and then using those clauses to do something illegal to get 'pay-back' on people is disturbing. Others are right, though. Most people will sigh and shrug away their rights, simply because they don't know how to go about objecting.

[Freezer-TPF-]

Do you really think it is that unreasonable? People using the Steam service should know that if they do something illegal like use a fake credit card or a fake CD key, they risk losing their Steam service. They should also know that if they lose their Steam service, their previously purchased multiplayer games then become useless. You could argue that it is unfair that old Valve multiplayer games now require Steam to work (if that's the case), but that's unfortunately an inherent risk of any online software, such as MMORPG's. If you pay your $50 for the boxed copy of Whateverquest, that's no guarantee that it will work forever -- that's a risk the consumer has to weigh for themselves.

I imagine they could buy new copies of the games and register a new Steam account if they want to play again. If so, that's a relatively cheap lesson to learn.

I would probably have some sympathy if someone lost their account because they were automatically signed into Steam (does that happen at boot if you leave default settings?) and a friend/brother whatever decided to try a fake CD key before the game came out and got them banned. I don't have Steam yet, but it's a relatively new concept to gamers and I can see folks not guarding their Steam account/password as well as they should, especially on a family PC with many users. But I doubt that scenario is actually true in many cases (despite claims to the contrary in that steampowered thread).

And, if folks are sending credit cards and CD keys, etc over Steam, I certainly hope Valve has learned their lesson on network security...

[Meghan]

The account is tied to the CD key

but in this case, the accounts were tied to illegal cd-keys. Right? That's how they were caught - they were all using the same illegal cd-key. (If I understand correctly.)

So if they reregister with a boxed retail version they have a new cd & a new key out of the box - so they'd get a new account. Unless I'm missing something. They'd lose the character they'd made with the illegal cd but tough nookies.

So basically people who made illegal accounts now are forced to spend the cash to make a new legal account. Cry me a river.

If software piracy isn't an issue our officers of the law deem enforcable, I can see how companies may go a bit vigilante with their own personal responses. I'm not saying I like it, but I can certainly see how we got into this mess.

IANAL but I'm pretty certain that breaking into someone's computer and going through their stuff is illegal. And I'm almost positive (but too lazy to look it up) that the Patriot Act considers that "terrorism." I can see why some folks might want to do that kind of thing but I've got no sympathy for them as tries it. Tough nookies to the RIAA et al.

edited to add: Valve's forums have apprently crashed under the strain of all this, lol.

[Blackhawk]

The account is tied to the CD key

but in this case, the accounts were tied to illegal cd-keys. Right? That's how they were caught - they were all using the same illegal cd-key. (If I understand correctly.)

So if they reregister with a boxed retail version they have a new cd & a new key out of the box - so they'd get a new account. Unless I'm missing something. They'd lose the character they'd made with the illegal cd but tough nookies.

I agree. Tough nookies. What I object to is that they are also losing the use of every game they had registered with that account prior to that - even legal ones, bought at the store. That includes Half Life 2 if they bought it after trying the fake key.

I'm sorry, but I just can't accept "They did something wrong, so whatever you want to do to them is justified". Losing the fake copy is justified. Being prosecuted in court is justified. Having every other product from that company rendered inert, even if not related in any way whatsoever to the piracy attempt, is not.

[Freezer-TPF-]

They can still play their original single-player Half Life games. And they can still go out and buy new copies of games and register a new Steam account, I assume. They apparently won't be able to play their old games that require Steam to run, but they should have thought of that before they violated the Steam TOS and risked their Steam access. (IMHO, those consequences are a far cry from "whatever Valve wants to do to them," and certainly a heck of a lot better than criminal prosecution.)

[Meghan]

That includes Half Life 2 if they bought it after trying the fake key.

I guess I don't understand. Let's see.

Scenario 1: They never owned any other Valve games.

They downloaded HL2 and enabled it with an illegal cd - that HL2 account is gone and good riddance. They can't play the other games which they never bought anyway. Tough, as they say, nookie.

Scenario 2: They owned previous Valve games.

They downloaded HL2 & and enabled it with an illegal cd-key. That HL2 account is gone and good riddance AND they can't play the other games anymore because Valve has changed their online program to only work with Steam accounts in good standing.

I don't have problem with this. Valve is free to run their online service as they see fit and I further more believe that they are free to welcome or ban whomever they like. If they decide to ban people from their online service because those mopes tried to steal HL2 - I'm ok with that.

Playing an MP game involves playing on other peoples' servers. If you're such a jerk that you find yourself banned from someone else's server than you have no one to blame but yourself. In this case, Valve has defined "jerk" as "someone who tried to steal from us". Sounds reasonable to me.

Scenario 3 - They have a retail copy of HL2 but enabled it with the illegal key.

So - the account made with that cd & the illegal key is gone and etc.

However.

If they bought a copy of Half Life 2, they own a cd and that cd has a unique, legit, and unused key? Right?

So what happens if they reinstall the game and make a new account with their legit cd and the legit key that came with it. They ought to have a new account.

Right? Even if Steam spits at the cd (and I'd doubt it) they should be able to call Tech support and sort it out. Heck, they should just be able to uninstall steam and reinstall it, downloading it again until they get to the point when they can enter their legit code.

What I'm trying to get at is - people in this category still own a legit, unused, cd-key. Their initial account created with the illegal code is gone but the legit (and previouisly unused) cd-key should still work to make a second account.

Right? Or am I missing something?

[Freezer-TPF-]

From what I read of the steampowered thread, some people first used or tried to use the illegal HL2 key before (or perhaps after, for whatever dumb reason) buying the game. Then on the same Steam account, they registered a new legal key after buying the game or had already registered legal keys of their old Valve games. (I may not be understanding exactly since I haven't used Steam and don't know the registration mechanics firsthand.)

Once Valve got around to checking their logs, they nuked all the Steam accounts that ever used or tried to use the illegal key, and banned ALL the cd keys registered with those accounts. I think that is how it went.

[Meghan]

ah, I see. I was missing something. That seems a bit Draconian but like you said earlier - "they should have thought of that before they violated the Steam TOS and risked their Steam access."

I can't really blame Valve for wanting to keep those people off their servers.

[Grifman]

The account is tied to the CD key. So - these people can play Day of Defeat and Counterstrike - just not in multiplayer. Yeah... That's like saying you can drive your car to work, just not on the road.

That clause from Steam would be very difficult to uphold in court when it comes to games purchased prior to the advent of Steam for their multiplayer content and then literally forced onto Steam by Valve years later.

On the one hand, it is nice seeing pirates getting their own. On the other hand, seeing a company put whatever clause they like into a contract that customers are forced to agree to in order to use the products they pruchased years earlier, and then using those clauses to do something illegal to get 'pay-back' on people is disturbing. Others are right, though. Most people will sigh and shrug away their rights, simply because they don't know how to go about objecting.

Blackhawk, exactly what gives people the "right" to play MP on Steam. It's a service provided by Value, and they have the right to allow or not allow anyone they wish. Think of it this way - if I buy goods from your store and then walk in one day and rob you, don't you think I'd have the right to ban you from my store in the future due to your past conduct? You forfeit rights when you steal, and you shouldn't complain about it when you get caught.

As for your comment about this being illegal. that's just your layman's opinion, and about worth what mine is, and I disagree with you.

Grifman

[knob]

Is there a reason why they can't create a new Steam account and re-register the software they actually own? Was it just the account that was banned or was it the person that owned it?

I think a banned account also means banned CD Keys.


Edit: Damn, I'm so late. Didn't realize there was a second page.

[Alefroth]

The account is tied to the CD key. So - these people can play Day of Defeat and Counterstrike - just not in multiplayer. Yeah... That's like saying you can drive your car to work, just not on the road.

That clause from Steam would be very difficult to uphold in court when it comes to games purchased prior to the advent of Steam for their multiplayer content and then literally forced onto Steam by Valve years later.

On the one hand, it is nice seeing pirates getting their own. On the other hand, seeing a company put whatever clause they like into a contract that customers are forced to agree to in order to use the products they pruchased years earlier, and then using those clauses to do something illegal to get 'pay-back' on people is disturbing. Others are right, though. Most people will sigh and shrug away their rights, simply because they don't know how to go about objecting.

Blackhawk, exactly what gives people the "right" to play MP on Steam. It's a service provided by Value, and they have the right to allow or not allow anyone they wish. Think of it this way - if I buy goods from your store and then walk in one day and rob you, don't you think I'd have the right to ban you from my store in the future due to your past conduct? You forfeit rights when you steal, and you shouldn't complain about it when you get caught.

As for your comment about this being illegal. that's just your layman's opinion, and about worth what mine is, and I disagree with you.

Grifman

Would you have the right to demand return of goods I purchased before I robbed you? I think that is the issue at hand.

Ale

[Spike]

If you pay your $50 for the boxed copy of Whateverquest, that's no guarantee that it will work forever -- that's a risk the consumer has to weigh for themselves.

Unless, of course, the folks at Verant mark your account as free and completely forget about you. Haven't paid them for years now.

[Grifman]

The account is tied to the CD key. So - these people can play Day of Defeat and Counterstrike - just not in multiplayer. Yeah... That's like saying you can drive your car to work, just not on the road.

That clause from Steam would be very difficult to uphold in court when it comes to games purchased prior to the advent of Steam for their multiplayer content and then literally forced onto Steam by Valve years later.

On the one hand, it is nice seeing pirates getting their own. On the other hand, seeing a company put whatever clause they like into a contract that customers are forced to agree to in order to use the products they pruchased years earlier, and then using those clauses to do something illegal to get 'pay-back' on people is disturbing. Others are right, though. Most people will sigh and shrug away their rights, simply because they don't know how to go about objecting.

Blackhawk, exactly what gives people the "right" to play MP on Steam. It's a service provided by Value, and they have the right to allow or not allow anyone they wish. Think of it this way - if I buy goods from your store and then walk in one day and rob you, don't you think I'd have the right to ban you from my store in the future due to your past conduct? You forfeit rights when you steal, and you shouldn't complain about it when you get caught.

As for your comment about this being illegal. that's just your layman's opinion, and about worth what mine is, and I disagree with you.

Grifman

Would you have the right to demand return of goods I purchased before I robbed you? I think that is the issue at hand.

Ale

Nopo, you still have the goods, you just can't visit my store. The people still have the games, they just can't use Valve's servers for MP. No one took their games from them.

Grifman

[Blackhawk]

Bullpoop. How, exactly, do you play the commercial versions of Counterstrike or Day of Defeat without multiplayer? It's like saying you can still play Half-Life 2, just not single player.

When those two particular games (along with Team Fortress Classic and vanilla HL multiplayer) were released, there was no Steam. You could play these games on GameSpy, All-Seeing Eye, HEAT, or other public server systems. Valve, years later, altered things so that you had to have Steam to play them - unless you like playing on empty servers. If the owners of these games wanted them to keep working, they had absolutely no choice but to use Steam. Now Valve is using that forced control in an unethical manner to 'punish' people for unrelated incidents, effectively taking away legally owned products.

Tinker with the semantics and EULA all you want, the fact remains that customers bought products free to play them on public Servers; Valve then took that ability away and is using it for vigilante justice.

Oh, and before someone misinterprets my interest - my copy of HL2 is working just fine. It is the idea that 'anything goes' against anyone who did something wrong that I object to. It is the way the mob seems to support 'anything goes' that disturbs me.

[Freezer-TPF-]

I think we just have different definitions of "anything goes." And again, those banned folks knew they could no longer play their MP games without Steam, yet still did something to put their Steam account at risk.

In any event, it's an interesting move by Valve. I wonder if Steam will now face some increased hack attacks (probably no more than they were already facing; hopefully they are prepared to deal with them).

[UsulofDoom]

Does anyone know if you can remove a key? Say you want to sell HL 2 to some one or trade it. Does this mean store will not buy it back or sell used games of HL 2?

[Al]

Bullpoop. How, exactly, do you play the commercial versions of Counterstrike or Day of Defeat without multiplayer?

Bots? The software still works, the fact that Valve won't let pirates that they caught play on their playground is not Valve's problem.

When those two particular games (along with Team Fortress Classic and vanilla HL multiplayer) were released, there was no Steam.

Yeah, they integrated Steam later so they could continue to support those titles years after they had been released! The bastards!

Tinker with the semantics and EULA all you want, the fact remains that customers bought products free to play them on public Servers; Valve then took that ability away and is using it for vigilante justice.

Then the pirates should take Valve to court I guess. Of course, if they did that Valve might respond by going after the pirates in court for violating US copyright law and the DCMA which could net them six figures in damages. Huh. Maybe that isn't such a hot idea after all.

[Intruder]

Well to clear things up. I think people that got caught were the ones that used the first "trick" to unlock Steam version of HL2:

Enter this infamous key, let verification start, unplug internet connection, wait 10 min. Steam said: Cannot authenticate but will unlock HL2 now.
Wait 10-15 for decryption of files. Play.
NOTE: This is NOT working anymore and anyone trying it will surely lose his/her Steam account, too! So beware!

Seems they forgot that once they re-plugged the connection Steam seemed to have continued authentication...

The warez copies out there now are emulating Steam and one doesn't need to authenticate against it.

In principle I think it was not a thing Valve actively did (like setting up a trap) but the stupidity of the people that had no idea what they did.
Real pirates of course did block all possible inet access of Hl2.exe etc. with personal firewalls.
Not sure if I need to mention that no one in their right mind would have used an already existing Steam account with games in it already, too...
So once again the casual gamers were hit.

I also remember that people that bought HL2 did use this trick since Steam was overrun once the servers were online at release day.
Valve might have killed some legit users, too.
Not sure if it made sense business-wise pissing these people off.
Simply disabling the HL2 key might have been the better alternative (if technically possible of course).

[Blackhawk]

Lots of companies - all of them, as a matter of fact - support their games without anything like Steam. Valve did not need Steam to support their games. In fact, I would be willing to be that sending out a dozen copies of a patch to 3dGamers, Gamespot and the like is much, much easier than doing it on their own bandwidth over Steam. Likewise, it is certainly much easier just to let the third party browsers manage the servers. Old games weren't converted to Steam for 'support' - they were converted so Valve would have control over them.

Half Life 2 is one thing - Steam was a condition of purchase and use. That isn't true of the other games. Nobody had even heard of Steam or conceived of Valve taking control of the games when they purchased them.

As to bots - that is utterly irrelevant. First of all, I don't believe any of those games have bots. The best you could hope for is to play alone in LAN mode. It doesn't matter, though - Valve doesn't have the right to intentionally take away or cripple products that you legally own just because you did something wrong with a completely different product.

Good lord - I'd love to see an EULA that said "Should you ever attempt to illegally copy any of our products at any time in the future, we will disable all other products that you own from our company".

[LawBeefaroni]

Good lord - I'd love to see an EULA that said "Should you ever attempt to illegally copy any of our products at any time in the future, we will disable all other products that you own from our company".

Steam ToS state that you will lose your account if you violate the ToS. This is all they have done. Whether you agree with it or not, it has nothing to do with a EULA for HL or CS.

You agree to the terms of service when you set up a Steam account. Whether you do it for Half Life or Half Life 2. Personally I think it's all a bit draconian, banning CD keys for previous products. They should just ban Steam accounts (and the persion in violation could set up another with their HL CD key). But regardless, they are within their rights to do what they did. It's laid out clearly in the ToS (and common sense would dictate that if you use Steam to try and steal one of their products, your account will be banned).

[Al]

Lots of companies - all of them, as a matter of fact - support their games without anything like Steam.

So?

Valve did not need Steam to support their games.

So?

In fact, I would be willing to be that sending out a dozen copies of a patch to 3dGamers, Gamespot and the like is much, much easier than doing it on their own bandwidth over Steam.

Easier on the company maybe but harder on the end user. I like that Steam keeps up with the patching for me and I bet that having Steam do it automatically cuts down on support calls which is more expensive than bandwidth.

First of all, I don't believe any of those games have bots.

Bot for DoD. Bot for CS.

It doesn't matter, though - Valve doesn't have the right to intentionally take away or cripple products that you legally own just because you did something wrong with a completely different product.

Valve didn't do either. Valve simply stopped supporting pirates over Steam. It's their system; they have the right to do that.

[ImLawBoy]

These people knew that CS and DOD and other Valve multiplayer games currently only work via Steam.

These people knew (or should have known) that attempting to defraud Valve via Steam would result in Valve disabling their Steam accounts.

This is not an ex post facto thing where the pirates deserve sympathy because they can no longer use the Steam service on their older games - they should have used common sense (or read their EULA) to know that if they stole HL2 and tried to defraud Valve via Steam, then they would have their Steam accounts banned. It's certainly not some sort of anything goes frontier justice.

[Zaxxon]

These people knew that CS and DOD and other Valve multiplayer games currently only work via Steam.

These people knew (or should have known) that attempting to defraud Valve via Steam would result in Valve disabling their Steam accounts.

This is not an ex post facto thing where the pirates deserve sympathy because they can no longer use the Steam service on their older games - they should have used common sense (or read their EULA) to know that if they stole HL2 and tried to defraud Valve via Steam, then they would have their Steam accounts banned. It's certainly not some sort of anything goes frontier justice.

^---- What he said.

[Blackhawk]

SO saying that Valve used Steam so that they could keep supporting their games is utterly meaningless, innaccurate, and untrue. They did not convert their games to Steam for support, they converted them for control, for their own interests, not as some beneficient act on the behalf of the product owners.

If I steal a car, and the manager of the auto lot comes and gets the car, that's his right. He has no right to go through my parking lot and slash the tires on every other car in my lot.

Valve is using one illegal act to justify crippling products that have no relation whatsoever to the illegal act. Steam account and that instance of Half-Life 2, fine. Other games, legally purchased and owned, are now rendered useless. There are alternatives, steps that they could take that could disable the illegal product. There are legal steps they could take. Instead, Valve decides to show the pirates just how powerful they are by taking away their right to use the things that they legally own.

If these games had been purchased knowing that Valve could disable them, the way people know that Valve holds the keys to Half-Life 2 when they buy that game, it would be different. They weren't, though. They were purchased as standalone products and then later forced into a new integrating system. But wait - they are pirates. Whatever Valve wants to do to them is perfectly justified because they are no-good stinking thieves, right? Petty, arrogant vigilante bullshit.

[godhugh]

SO saying that Valve used Steam so that they could keep supporting their games is utterly meaningless, innaccurate, and untrue. They did not convert their games to Steam for support, they converted them for control, for their own interests, not as some beneficient act on the behalf of the product owners.

If I steal a car, and the manager of the auto lot comes and gets the car, that's his right. He has no right to go through my parking lot and slash the tires on every other car in my lot.

Valve is using one illegal act to justify crippling products that have no relation whatsoever to the illegal act. Steam account and that instance of Half-Life 2, fine. Other games, legally purchased and owned, are now rendered useless. There are alternatives, steps that they could take that could disable the illegal product. There are legal steps they could take. Instead, Valve decides to show the pirates just how powerful they are by taking away their right to use the things that they legally own.

If these games had been purchased knowing that Valve could disable them, the way people know that Valve holds the keys to Half-Life 2 when they buy that game, it would be different. They weren't, though. They were purchased as standalone products and then later forced into a new integrating system. But wait - they are pirates. Whatever Valve wants to do to them is perfectly justified because they are no-good stinking thieves, right? Petty, arrogant vigilante bullshit.

No, no , no.

These people knew that they could only play CS or DoD or whatever through Steam. They willingly put their Steam account at risk when they used the illegal CD key. They got burned for it.

If those 20k want to set up their own servers outside of Steam and play CS, they're free to do so. Nothing is stopping them. They just can't use the service that they tried to defraud.

[ImLawBoy]

Originally posted by Blackhawk:
Whatever Valve wants to do to them is perfectly justified because they are no-good stinking thieves, right?

Others have tried to point this out, but this is the weakest part of your argument. Absolutely no one is saying that Valve can do whatever they want. People are saying that Valve has the limited right to terminate their Steam accounts. There's a huge difference between unchecked "vigilante justice" and a single, well defined, perfectly logical (even if you don't think they have the right to do it) remedy.

Nonetheless, the users knew fully well (or should have known) the consequences their actions when they pirated the game. They knew (or should have known) that they were risking the use of their previously purchased games. They chose to steal the game anyway, and now they have to live with the consequences of their actions. All they had to do to keep using the games, regardless of the intent of Steam (whether it was to update the games, take control, etc.), was not steal HL2.

They knew they would not be able to play their old games on Steam if they tried to defraud Steam.

[Blackhawk]

These people knew that they could only play CS or DoD or whatever through Steam. They willingly put their Steam account at risk when they used the illegal CD key. They got burned for it.

When? When did they know this? They sure as hell didn't know it when they plopped down the cash for Half Life, Dod, and CS. It wasn't part of the system they paid their money to be a part of. It was something that Valve added later on, with the consumer having no choice but to either accept it or be unable to play. These people bought the product, agreed to the terms, and then Valve changed the terms into something completely different.

If Valve had said "Counterstrike will now be playable only through Steam; Either accept the new ToS or we will refund the purchase price of your now-changed product", I would have no argument. They didn't. They said "Accept the new ToS or your purchase will be voided at your loss." The consumers did not know the risks of their investment when they made that investment. This wasn't an unknown, but deliberate decision on Valve's part. IF - IF the customer had the option not to use Steam without just throwing away their investment, then I would have no problem with this.

[godhugh]

When? When did they know this? They sure as hell didn't know it when they plopped down the cash for Half Life, Dod, and CS.

They knew it when they tried to steal HL2 and that's what matters.

[ImLawBoy]

Originally posted by Blackhawk:
If Valve had said "Counterstrike will now be playable only through Steam; Either accept the new ToS or we will refund the purchase price of your now-changed product", I would have no argument. They didn't. They said "Accept the new ToS or your purchase will be voided at your loss."

If the new Terms of Service were onerous or something, I could buy that point. The conflict from the new Terms of Service, though, is that they say, "Don't steal from us!" (in essence). It's not like Valve is coming in here and saying after the fact that a customer has to pay an extra $5 a month to play the old games on Steam, or that they have allow their computers to be used for extra Valve processing power when idle. I can't imagine that any court would have a problem with this action by Valve based on some sort ex post facto argument.

[Blackhawk]

When? When did they know this? They sure as hell didn't know it when they plopped down the cash for Half Life, Dod, and CS.

They knew it when they tried to steal HL2 and that's what matters.

They did not know it when they paid their money, and that's what matters.

They bought those games, they put down their investment, their cash, to be able to play those games. That money is gone. It is paid, and the game is what they received in return, a good old legal transaction. The bought them with the understanding that this was true. They were standalone products, playable irregardless of what Valve did.

Now that transaction is being nullified because of an unrelated incident that wasn't a known issue when the transaction took place.

[The Meal]

I want in on the mod fight!

Blackhawk, I think you're losing the battle but winning the war. Your (unspoken) point is that if Valve pulls this with old games and Steam now, what on earth are they going to pull with Steam and HL2 in the future? Do we really want producers to have that kind of control over our future gaming with a product we've purchased today?

godhugh's point would seem to be, you don't get burned if you don't do anything wrong. You can't argue with that in this instance, but what checks-and-balances exist to protect your dollars spent on HL2 in the future?

Interesting discussion.

~Neal

[SuperHiro]

I'm agreeing with Blackhawk. Blizzard doesn't ban a legit Diablo II owner from battle.net when they pirate WCIII. At worst said owner can just make another account with the legit keys.

[LawBeefaroni]

When? When did they know this? They sure as hell didn't know it when they plopped down the cash for Half Life, Dod, and CS.

IIRC, non-Source DoD and CS are free. You can buy them, yes, but if you have a valid HL key you can download them for free (albeit now via Steam for the most recent version). They are mods.

If you paid for HL and CS (needlessly) you can pop the $50 for HL2 as well ("you" meaning "them," not BH). Or don't play it.

People did try and steal HL2, so now they have the option of buying it when they set up a new Steam account. If they get the Silver package, they get HL, CS, DoD, all of it back. Pretty good deal considering they tried to fuck Valve.

You may remember me as the guy who hates Steam. Still don't like it, but I don't see anything wrong with what they've done here. What if someone got caught using a hacked/stolen key on WON? They got banned too. Once again, common sense would dictate that since you have one Steam account for all games, and the ToS are clear, you don't want a hacked/stolen key on your Steam account.

[godhugh]

When? When did they know this? They sure as hell didn't know it when they plopped down the cash for Half Life, Dod, and CS.

They knew it when they tried to steal HL2 and that's what matters.

They did not know it when they paid their money, and that's what matters.

They bought those games, they put down their investment, their cash, to be able to play those games. That money is gone. It is paid, and the game is what they received in return, a good old legal transaction. The bought them with the understanding that this was true. They were standalone products, playable irregardless of what Valve did.

Now that transaction is being nullified because of an unrelated incident that wasn't a known issue when the transaction took place.

No, that transaction is not nullified. They still have the game and it's still playable. They just can't use the Steam service for multiplayer. They can't use it because they tried to steal it.

As for checks-and-balances, Valve won't terminate your service if you don't try to steal from them. So don't do it and you won't have a problem. That's all you really need in my opinion.

[Smoove_B]

Blackhawk - I've been reading this thread off and on...and I'm not clear on whom you're championing. You seem to be playing devil's advocate a bit, but I'm not totally clear. If you feel like to, could you clarify your "Patient Zero" for the discussion.

[ImLawBoy]

Originally posted by The Meal:
Your (unspoken) point is that if Valve pulls this with old games and Steam now, what on earth are they going to pull with Steam and HL2 in the future? Do we really want producers to have that kind of control over our future gaming with a product we've purchased today?

Slippery slope argument. Valve taking perfectly legal, logical actions now does not mean that they would be emboldened to take illegal or illogical actions in the future.

[The Meal]

Originally posted by The Meal:
Your (unspoken) point is that if Valve pulls this with old games and Steam now, what on earth are they going to pull with Steam and HL2 in the future? Do we really want producers to have that kind of control over our future gaming with a product we've purchased today?

Slippery slope argument. Valve taking perfectly legal, logical actions now does not mean that they would be emboldened to take illegal or illogical actions in the future.

ABSOLUTELY. This comes 100% with all the slippery-slope nonsense you can muster. And yet? Even as a legitimate customer, I find myself hesitant to throw in with this distribution model for any of my future game purchases due to Valve's behavior here.

~Neal

[IceBear]

I choose to be a optimisit (laugh) and hope that after a period of time (I'm sure that most of their sales will be in the first few months) they'll patch it so you no longer need Steam.

Bioware is also having a lot of grief over this too, but in their case it was more of an experiment than a business model.

[Zaxxon]

I don't play CS, and so I need someone to clarify something for me. If I purchased Half-life, CS, or whatever pre-Steam, those products now only work with Steam?

[IceBear]

I don't play CS, and so I need someone to clarify something for me. If I purchased Half-life, CS, or whatever pre-Steam, those products now only work with Steam?

I believe in the past you were authenticated by WON servers, now you are validated by Steam. You can play Half-life single player all you want, but if you want to play mutliplayer you'll have to connect to Steam.