But... but... I miss you.

It used to be called having an opinion. :)

Nothing wrong with out-debating the other side and having them come round to your point of view ;)

but I seriously doubt any "side" here will out-debate the other...

We can discuss if countries should spent more or less in time of crisis, we can discuss if Julius Cezar was a good leader or not, we can discuss if invasion on Iran is necessary or not.

But if you want to discuss with me what service I should like more, what store is more convenient for me or what I should buy or not, then we have nothing to talk about.

That is exactly why I love people. Ever hang out with a group of people whom you see eye to eye with? IT'S BORING!

Pretty much, yeah. :)

You are one a video game forum, to be more precise a video game's digital distributor forum; if you are here to discuss the meaning of life, history, or advanced geopolitics then you probably made a mistake somewhere ;)

Actually the best topics on this forum that I have seen weren't about games. But what I wanted to say is that you shouldn't bother to discuss with me about my personal preferences, because it won't change anything. You can tell me that you hate games I like, that you hate services that I like, that I'm stupid sheep because I use them, but it won't change a thing. I won't stop playing games I like or using services that I like, just because random dude in Internet is telling me so.

Of course we can have casual discussion about our preferences etc., but don't try convince me that I'm wrong because I like different thing than you. ;)

So? Discussing personal preferences can help one see things from a different perspective, it's a pretty good thing to know actually.

As I added:

I'm just really tired with people that are saying "How can you like it? You are so wrong!"

I don't think many - if any - of the DRM-free crowd have been trying to convince the Steam fan(atic)s that they are wrong for using Steam (HiPhish briefly perhaps, but not really anyone else). As I and others have said before, if Steam works for you, that's great. What many of the DRM-free crowd are campaigning for is more a matter of choice. Steam doesn't work for everyone.

Sure, you can use Steam if you want, and Steam can be a fine thing when it's not a leash, but many reasonable folk would rather have the option of a DRM-free copy (possibly foregoing Steam's features in the process). That's why the Humble Bundle approach - THQ bundle notwithstanding - is really the way to go.

So there is nothing wrong with 'liking' Steam. There is, however, something wrong with insulting people who prefer a DRM-free option as being 'backward', 'unreasonable', 'quaint' or 'old-fashioned' as people like SimonG, FredDM or Pheace seem to do on a regular basis. People like this don't want to accept that Steam is not a one-size-fits-all solution. They think because it works for them, that anyone for whom it doesn't work must be stupid or doing it wrong.

People who see themselves as superior because they use what they perceive as 'superior technology' and look down on people who stick with what works for them are the worst kind. Just imagine how things will be if streaming ever takes off. The streamers will be looking down on Steam users as being 'quaint', 'obsessed with local storage' and 'backward'.

I don't think it's people who use Steam per se, it's people who don't use Steam for all the wrong reasons that get this treatment - when someone says "I don't use Steam because I've had my issues with it / I don't feel comfortable tying my games to an account / my hardware hates Steam" - those are arguments I can understand and won't argue with, because those people obviously have reasonable arguments for not using Steam and it comes down to their personal preference.

However, when a person appears and says "I don't use Steam because there's 3rd party DRM on top of it!" or "I don't use Steam because I can't do what I want with my games!" or similar ill-researched arguments that just aren't true either within the given context or not at all... Well that's when I call bullshit.

This is an invalid argument indeed, although ironically it's the most ardent Steam users that complain about it the most (when I still hung around on the SPUF, it seemed as though every second thread was "3rd party DRM? FUUUUUU"). I agree that 3rd party DRM on a CEG-protected title is pointless, but refusing to buy a game because it requires UPlay or GFWL for reasons that also apply to Steam is a little silly.

In the case of Velvet's "Punkbuster" argument, for example, while I agree that Punkbuster is a crap technology, Steam is not exempt from its use. There are plenty of games on Steam that force installation of PB. Yet its acceptability varies depending on which service installs it. UPlay installs it? UPlay sucks! Steam installs it? PunkBuster sucks!

What's so 'ill-researched' about this though? People like to lend and sell (and keep) games and have an issue with Steam's handling of it. It's pretty well-established that neither of these two are possible with Steam.

I don't use Steam because I like the convenience and freedom of archivable installers without any checks. I am risk averse and probably overly cautious regarding privacy, therefore I don't like any control measures. I just can't have the same with the games from Steam I would like to have. Steam is not so much worse though service-like, I can even see that many people like achievements and automatic updates while I don't need that and it even annoys me. But if Steam would just change some small but essential bits of it I can easily imagine myself being a Steam customer. However since this is unlikely of Steam to change I don't see this happen anytime soon.

Overall I think that competition is crucial. Steam, Origin, UPlay, GOG, Amazon, ... there are many good possibilities to buy PC games. I hope the competition will be even increased more or at least stays like this.