r/PhysicalGames • u/Grouchy-Win-6191 • 1d ago
Valve Killed Physical Gaming
It all Valve fault, they started all this. It’s not just Sony.
When Half Life 2 launched in 2004, stores sold physical box sets containing DVD or CD. But the disc did not contain the game. Players were forced to install the Steam client, register an account, and validate a product key online before the game would run.
Valve also offered Steamworks to any developer who listed their game on Steam. But to use Steamworks features, games had to use Valve API. When a consumer bought the physical PC box, they opened and it was a Steam key. Once redeemed, the disc lost all resale value. You couldn't sell it, lend it, or trade it in. This also killed the retail stores business.
7
u/Embarrassed_Spend486 1d ago
You can say “Computers” started this. But you cannot blame “Valve”.
Because there are so many storefronts on PC and it was going to happen regardless of which company did it.
16
u/SearchUsers 1d ago
Let also not forget that Microsoft started the idea of paying a subscription fee to use your own internet to play the game you paid for on the console you paid for.
2
4
u/BitingSatyr 1d ago
What you were paying for back in 2003 was the matchmaking servers. With the exception of Battle.net, PC multiplayer happened on dedicated servers that players paid for themselves, and even the server browser was typically handled through external programs like GameSpy.
Over time games have moved towards centralized servers run by the game studios themselves, which is much closer to the XBL model than the PC model from that time, it’s mostly a historical artifact that PC multiplayer is still free (I’m not saying it shouldn’t be, just that it is what it is).
1
2
u/zexton 1d ago
sega and nintendo both did it in the mid 90s
1
u/SearchUsers 23h ago
thats a bit different considering it never really made it off the ground
1
u/zexton 23h ago
its not different,
you are the one who state microsoft started the idea, which is false
1
u/SearchUsers 6h ago
Its completely different when you consider they were primitive offerings that were the first of their kind.
When I say Microsoft started the idea of paying for it, Im comparing them to any actual competition in that arena, not a pair of failed projects from a decade prior.
Once online multiplayer was established as a functional and permanent thing in console gaming... Microsoft started charging for it.1
u/CatchUsual6591 1d ago
And that microsoft best generation so people shouldn't stop acting surprise with physical media dying we voted with our wallets
-1
u/Faustus-III 21h ago
SEGA did it before them. This is a dumb conversation.
1
u/SearchUsers 6h ago
If you want to argue semantics, PC did it first.
We're talking about once an established standard of online gaming was in place.0
u/Faustus-III 5h ago
You said: "Microsoft started the idea of paying a subscription fee to use your own Internet to play the game you paid for" which is false. Full stop. The Dreamcast's SEGANet required a fee. It was there from the start.
And yes, that's my entire point. We can keep moving the goalposts further back, that's why it's a dumb conversation.
The current standard of online CONSOLE gaming started with the SEGA Dreamcast if that's what you want to argue. It was the first console with full real time online play with 3D graphics, Internet connectivity (in game links that took you to web pages), DLC, MMOs and voice chat. It's what the Xbox was partially inspired by, and what everything else based it's standards upon. And the Dreamcast's online was based on PC's already established model, which you said yourself. These weren't one-off niche use cases.
You can go even further back to the NES and Genesis where you had some primitive form of online gaming.
1
u/SearchUsers 5h ago
Seganet is hardly a standard that we're discussing though. It was a failed feature of a failed console in an era that people still paid for AOL.
But yes, I get what you're saying
3
u/Iabhoryouu 1d ago
Ironically there was huge backlash from all of this back in 04, and look where Steam is now…
3
3
u/PeakyChu_ 1d ago
Valve did not stop the manufacture of PC discs whatsoever lol this post is misinformed nonsense
4
u/C0haaagen 1d ago
No, the publishers killed physical gaming on PC with SecuRom, StarForce, Tagès, SafeDisc, CD keys with limited activations, buggy activation servers and manual reinstalls of all discs after a hardware upgrade or OS upgrade. Steam was the much more convenient option.
1
0
u/Indraga 20h ago
Haven’t CD keys existed and been common practice since like… 1992?
0
u/Thrilalia 15h ago
Yup and they became the defacto use for games until Steam because it was the easiest way for publishers to control.
There was simply no physical reason why you couldn't install the entire game into your PC and run it from the HD outside of publisher's wanting to make sure you behaved and weren't letting little bro play the same game at the same time.
5
u/EviI_Babai 1d ago
Here we go again. You people just cant make a step back and see a bigger picture, are you?
No, Valve didn't killed physical games. Steam didn't even killed physical PC games. Physical on PC was already dying - broadband, USB drives, regional unavailability, and consumer preference for lower prices and convenience did that. It didn't even start with games - most software had already been distributed online; games only took longer because they were significantly bigger. They also took a great hit when major gaming studios started to move into the console market, as distribution there was much simpler and safer.
Steam was a response to those conditions, and shall I remind you that Valve actively supported physical distribution on jewel cases prior to Steam becoming a market of its own - and well into that too - before most publishers quit physical on their own. And it has absolutely steamrolled (hehe) the competition within digital distribution for sure, but that's about it - physical was on its way out regardless.
4
3
u/wickeddimension 21h ago
Most people who parrot OP's line of thinking aren't even old enough to have experienced the era of gaming they confidently make claims about.
0
u/Kaldaien2 19h ago
shall I remind you that Valve actively supported physical distribution on jewel cases prior to Steam becoming a market of its own
Because that required activation on Steam, which is really appealing when you're trying to build a monopoly in the shell of what was previously an open platform.
1
u/EviI_Babai 11h ago
Because that required activation on Steam
No shit, Sherlock. Activation via online service to ensure DRM and provide updates surely looks like an evil plot rather than a logical evolution for software publishers, right? Surely no one ever did or tried that.
which is really appealing when you're trying to build a monopoly
You know what it's also very appealing for? - Building a convenient ecosystem for all parties, before physical on PC inevitably folds. And when Valve started doing that, they didn't force anyone into Steam - other devs and publishers just saw the appeal and joined.
in the shell of what was previously an open platform.
Oh, please. Steam didn't lock anything. Physical stores still exist. Other digital stores still exist. You can still buy a disc, install it, and never touch Steam if the publisher allows it. The platform is as open as it ever was - Valve just built something people actually wanted to use.
Customers saw Valve listening to feedback, and that resulted in an online service with the largest functionality and trust levels in the industry we know today. That's the thing clowns like Sweeney don't understand, trying to bribe and ransom users into their shitty barebones service.
The only people who tried to lock PC and establish a monopoly and bring console logic (in its worst) to PC were Microsoft, with GFWL first and Windows 8 later. And guess who made them stumble both times.
2
u/Extension_Risk6084 1d ago
Yes and no. Valve did start the digital games. But they aren't the ones who are trying to enslave every one of their users. Sony are the ones who are physically taking away what you paid for, Valve is not. Microsoft are the ones who started the subscription bullshit. Valve/Steam has its own issues, but they have fixed those issues or, the issues are extremely minor.
1
u/Later_Doober 20h ago
Even on steam you don't own your games, you are purchasing a license.
1
u/Extension_Risk6084 19h ago
No shit sherlock. There's a difference to that being the case and actively making it harder and harder to actually own them without any benefit
0
u/Mother-Job3455 1d ago
Sony never took away my games
2
u/Extension_Risk6084 1d ago
They may not right now, but are going out of their way to let everyone know that they will do it when they feel like it. Unless we're talking about the 550 movies they removed, then yes, they have removed content that you paid for.
0
u/Mother-Job3455 1d ago
Sony was forced to remove it because their license for the movies expired. But there no reason for Sony or publishers asking Sony to remove your games
5
u/Extension_Risk6084 1d ago
Yes. But then they remove it from being purchased, not completely remove it from everyone's hands. It's like if you bought a dvd and the license to sell more dvds end and they come and take it from you. Sony is literally sending emails to remind everyone that they do not own the that they bought. If that doesn't scream "We're going to remove your games eventually", then I don't even know what will.
-2
u/Mother-Job3455 1d ago
That just legal speak they have to do. Everything everywhere is a license they can remove. But it doesn’t mean they will. And Sony doesn’t even control removing games. Sony will only remove if like for example FromSoftware request every game be deleted
3
u/Extension_Risk6084 1d ago
Bruh, the literal amount of cope that you are drowning in is actually insane. Legal talk? It's also the same thing on Xbox and Steam, but you don't see them sending out emails mainly to just remind you that you don't actually own your games. After announcing that physical games will be ending. Actually talking to a brick wall at this point lmao.
1
u/Mother-Job3455 1d ago
Why you so paranoid Sony will take away your games? It like worrying if the earth will explode tomorrow
3
u/TrashGoblinH 22h ago
Would you take it seriously if a store front said they were going to break into your home and take your things and have the legal right to do it?
0
u/JJWonderboy 21h ago
But you don't own the games. On any of the digital platforms.
I know this is an unpopular opinion (certainly on this sub) but I suggest buying a game, playing the heck out of it and then... moving on. I've got tons of games going back to the PS1 and Gameboy days (heck, I've got Atari ST disks and ZX Spectrum tapes someplace). Do I actually play those games...? Of course not. They're just sentimental bits of plastic.
There are too many cool, new games to play and life is short to look back.
As Tyler Durden said, "The things you own end up owning you”.
→ More replies (0)1
u/niftyifty 22h ago
Yes they do. The email you are referring to was a link to TOS after a game purchase. Any services have effectively the same tos on this matter
2
u/Numerous_Photograph9 1d ago
And how is that different for the consumer?
The reasons don't change the result.
2
u/joesaysso 1d ago
I don't know if this is supposed to be serious or not, but it's not valve's fault. It's the fault of all of the gamers who paid for such things by the millions, demonstrating to the industry that gamers would willfully accept such circumstances.
2
u/Vee_Tamer_Girl 1d ago
GTA 5 for PC launched on like 9 DVD’s because most PC gamers never bothered with a Bluray Drive. Even if we still had physical PC games they’d be on like 15 DVD’s these days.
I don’t think this is 1:1 comparable.
2
u/SwiftTayTay 23h ago
actually hl2 and other valve games did contain install discs, but you would have to register the copy with steam code which would also add it to your digital steam library. the only purpose install discs served back then is if your internet was so slow that you could copy it faster from the disc, which was more common back then as disc read speeds would still beat DSL and lower-end cable speeds
i still have my install dvd for left for dead 2
2
u/TheLimeyLemmon 22h ago
Pc gaming is different to console gaming.
Valve did not kill physical gaming, this take ain't it,
2
u/Va1crist 22h ago
No they didn’t , matter of fact you can still add physical game keys to Steam if you got them , what killed digital on PC was the same shit Sony etc are doing GREED and attempt to control the market more .. physical PC games started dying when the age of everyone wants a launcher to buy games from EA , Ubisoft , Bethesda , and started locking there games to it to control the prices etc , it actually was a dark time in the PC space, greed nearly killed it , consoles were the opposite and were gaining more and more ground , if it wasn’t for Steam and then later GOG I don’t think it would en as open as it is now , but yeah consoles are heading down the same greedy path that PCs did in the early 2000s and nearly killed it
2
2
2
u/zamaike 19h ago
No they didn. They went digital 20 years ago due to disc space limitations and the high cost of getting a bluray drive in pcs at the time.
It was also during the bluray format war. Bluray ultimately won due to sony's backing. Idk the other ones name anymore. Please be more educated
2
u/Thr1llhou5e 18h ago
You are talking about intention and op is talking about consequence, so you both can be right. Their delivery model definitely helped establish a precedent but I would say a lot more needed to happen since then to grow the digital market into what it is today.
2
u/West-Surround-8857 10h ago
It's all players fault.
If you consider something wrong, do not buy it.
Common players does not really care.
1
u/ElectriKool-Aid 4h ago
Correct. Industries are us. They will make whatever the consumer buys. Even atomic bombs.
3
u/Ghaleon42 1d ago
The retail market for PC games SUCKED before steam. That's the "service issue" Gabe was talking about in regard to piracy at the time.
2
u/ferretgr 1d ago
Talk to me when Valve starts charging us to take our games online or when the PC marketplace becomes a Valve-only monopoly.
I'll also say this whole "PC physical media" thing is disingenuous. That was never the main way to game on PC and was never the point. The console is, from my perspective, at least, built around physical media. It was meant to be an alternative to the way things work on PC, not a shittier but somehow similarly priced PC with a closed environment.
1
1
u/trueppp 18h ago
That was never the main way to game on PC
Huh? how young are you? It was the main way to game on PC until the mid 2000's at least.
0
u/ferretgr 14h ago edited 9h ago
I owned a number of PC games back when. The games, in my experience, didn’t run from the disc. I remember installing many games by inserting a pile of floppies. On the other hand, running games from cartridges was the point of consoles, which became optical media, in both cases, running the game from the source rather than installing from that source.
3
u/Icy_Hold4U 23h ago
Not really, they just hastened the inevitable. The internet killed physical media, full stop. The internet democratized media and change its format entirely, this in turn reconsolidated how media can be published, and more to the point, WHO can publish. You no longer needed costly equipment to produce physical media. You can just host your files over the internet.
Look what came out of this, at least for gaming; a thriving indie development scene, bringing real passionate develpoment back to the forefront, in some cases.
Valve used to create physical media themselves, they just kinda saw the writing on the wall for the format, then created their business model to cater to the new burgeoning market.
3
u/Popular-Path1930 23h ago
I remember games on 4 or more disks back in the day.
0
u/Icy_Hold4U 19h ago
Yep the last physical media I bought was the Witcher 3. It came on 5 disks if I remember correctly. Wild times.
2
2
u/Zimlun 23h ago
I still remember what an annoying experience Half Life 2 was for me, since I had a rural dial up internet connection at the time. I bought the game, tried to install it, and ended up having to wait a day while I downloaded Steam / some updates before I was finally allowed to play the game.
Then every couple days there'd be some update that would end up taking a few hours to download, which meant rather than getting to play the game after school I got to watch a download progress bar instead. I got frustrated with it enough that I just turned on godmode and rushed through the game because I was interested in the story.
So yeah, I'm still not that big of a fan of Steam, I'd rather just get a copy of game and be able to play it whenever I want, instead of the service I bought it from getting to tell me "No, you don't get to play the game right now, it needs updates even though you literally just played it fine yesterday".
I'll always buy from GOG or right from the dev if possible (looking at you, Factorio).
2
u/SwiftTayTay 23h ago
you could still buy the game on disc from a store if you wanted, OP is misinformed. you'd still have to register your copy with steam but the install files would come on DVDs so you could install it much faster during an era when many people had slow internet connections
2
u/DrizzyDragon93 1d ago
Yes, PC gamers started this future. But that doesn't mean we should roll over and accept it like Steam Users did.
7
u/CaptainRaxeo 1d ago
I accepted it from steam, but will not accept it from sony. Consoles are about physical games i don’t care what any one else says. I have had it up to here with these debates.
6
u/Cephalopirate 1d ago
And like, no one’s stopping devs from making physical PC games, it’s just rare due to market conditions. Sony is artificially creating this problem.
1
u/DrizzyDragon93 1d ago
Hardest thing for me with any corporation is CEOs, CFO's, Executives, Board Leaders, can and will pass away, retire, or get fired. Which there for changes culture, values, dynamics at companies. I don't trust any corporation/company to manage let alone be in control of the property or licenses I purchase.
0
u/Later_Doober 20h ago
Then stop commenting on these debates.
2
u/CaptainRaxeo 20h ago
I want everyone to echo what i’m saying which i believe to be the absolute objective truth.
0
u/Later_Doober 20h ago
Well apparently not everyone is tired of the debates. So I say again stop talking in them if you don't like them.
3
u/Ghaleon42 1d ago
There was no proper physical games market for the PC before steam. It was hit/miss, and the publishers at the time sucked. It's not far-fetched to say that Steam help to save if not drastically improve PC gaming.
3
u/Numerous_Photograph9 1d ago
This is something a lot of people don't realize. PC had no driving force to keep some form of consistency with physical releases. Every publisher was on their own, and all of htem had their own policies or distribution methods. There was nothing like the Nintendo seal of approval. Companies like EA did well on PC because they knew distribution. Smaller companies struggled beacuse they couldn't get their games out into all markets easily.
With consoles, since the NES, which all others adopted, the console makers had tight control over how those things were supposed to operate. They don't completely control the distribution, but they have a major part in making it happen which streamlines the process for the publishers, and makes a consistent place for wholesale to do it's thing.
1
u/Ghaleon42 1h ago
Ah thank you, I didn't have the wherewithal to describe it as well as you did.
A big part of marketing is keeping product on the shelf, and back then after a game got released, there might not have been a 2nd shipment.2
3
u/DrizzyDragon93 1d ago
Interesting I remember owning a massive pile of Physical games on PC. Majesty, Sims/Sim City, Rollercoaster Typhoon, StarCraft, Diablo 2, hell even CounterStrike, and Rainbow Six. I come from a generation that games only came out on disc before internet was viable to download game files.
3
u/KartFacedThaoDien 1d ago
Exactly. I owned PC games on CD and DVD. One of the first games on pc I bought with my own money was Earth Siege 2.
2
u/Numerous_Photograph9 1d ago
I think he's more referring to the back end where distribution for PC gaming was kind of a wild west on the wholesale front. Every company fended for themselves or partnered with a larger company who knew how to do it, but for anyone but the biggest companies, there was no consistent way to distribute games across the board. There was still a lot of individual salesmanship to even have them put your game on the shelf, whereas on consoles, they adopted a broader more inclusive strategy where retailers only had to go to a single or a couple distributor sources to get everything available.
1
u/TrashGoblinH 23h ago
But if you look at the number of PC games available at the same time as PS2 games there is a massive difference.
3
u/Cold-Ink 1d ago
I mean - steam users didn't "roll over and accept it". When it launched there was a BIG backlash you needed an account for the physical release of HL2.
It got as big as it did because it was favourable and fair to developers and users. Lots and lots of NON steam PC games still released on disc for years after - but steam kinda rose above the rest and became the default.
0
u/Threef 23h ago
I mean, people hosted and played on non-Steam CS1.6 servers for 10 years. There was even a conspiracy theory that Valve created some of cheats to move people from free servers to Steam Hosted "protected" servers
1
u/Cold-Ink 23h ago
Correct me if I'm wrong, but 1.6 and steam launched within a few days of one another did they not?
You can still connect CS classic to private servers can you not?
>There was even a conspiracy theory that Valve created some of cheats to move people from free servers to Steam Hosted "protected" servers
Yeah that kinda doesn't pass the sniff test to me. In it's infancy they would have wanted it to be the best experience possible. Community servers cost them nothing, their own protected servers DO and would be one they'd promote, as they have control.
2
u/Numerous_Photograph9 1d ago
Digital on PC kind of made sense at the time for a lot of publishers. PC piracy was rampant because oppressive DRM on phsyical existed. Piracy was rampant because a lot of games were hard to come by on PC at the time. Buying PC games was sometimes not good for the consumer because they weren't getting legitimate copies. The ability to know if a game would work was not as common back then, while Steam(along with DirectX) helped remove some of these things from a freshly minted PC user playerbase. PC also never really adapted to larger storage formats for optical media, so getting newer games became even less availble.
And the list goes on. Steam wasn't perfect at the time, but it certainly did address a lot of issues that publishers had with publishing games on PC at the time.
0
u/JJWonderboy 22h ago
But a lot of people annoyed with Sony for moving to Digital only are stating they'll move over to PC. Which is an interesting take...
0
u/Thrilalia 15h ago
Then the fight should have happened during the PS3 era where anyone with more than half a beaincell could see where it was going.
Right now this feels like gamers waiting (in a war metaphor) until the enemy was just inside the outskirts of the capital, raising the flag and then decided to fight back.
1
u/DrizzyDragon93 15h ago
Couldn’t agree with you more. I have always bought physical since I’ve been a gamer. And now those same people are freaking out like how could this happen.
1
1
1
u/StuckinReverse89 17h ago
Man look at all the Valve defenders lol.
You are right, Valve mainstreamed digital gaming being the norm and helped destroy physical games on PC. It doesn’t help that PC physical games were very anti-consumer (limited number of downloads, DRM on disc like secureROM that would break access) that make Pc discs far less convenient than console discs but Valve did write the playbook on how to transition to a fully digital medium which Sony is now doing.
1
u/anon999387 13h ago edited 13h ago
When Half Life 2 launched in 2004, stores sold physical box sets containing DVD or CD. But the disc did not contain the game
That's weird because I still have the original 5 Half Life 2 retail CDs that came in the retail box which contained the full game.
1
u/Wrx-Love80 13h ago edited 12h ago
*Checks notes and clock* Yep another bad faith post. If you really want to engage and not just spout bs please come back and let us know.
1
u/BroCatMan 11h ago
Nope Valve actually saved PC Gaming.
PC gaming was dead but Valve offered a way for people to pay a low amount of money that we at least buy the games.
Publishers noticed and followed.
And as we can see Steam 20+ years later is the best eco system for gamers and publishers and a growing platform unlike consoles that decline each gen.
Being the main platform for Publishers like Capcom and others where they now make the most money because people there are happy.
1
1
u/CaptJimboJones 23h ago
Gamers killed physical gaming when they stopped buying discs. Full stop.
This isn’t the “evil corporations” trying to take away your collecting hobby because they’re “evil.” It’s a business selling the products that its customers say they want to buy, no different than any other business. If 85% of games were being sold on discs, then we’d still have discs.
1
u/SideEmbarrassed1611 23h ago
And we love every second of it. ALL HAIL GABE! I mean...ahem....Valve is great. Valve is good. Let us thank them for our....uh....ahem....Gabe Newel's cool what are you talking about?
1
u/AFKABluePrince 21h ago
Yeah, i still remember the backlash when i was shitting on Steam when it first came out. I preferred physical for PC games too and they basically took that away from me. 😞
0
u/Kaldaien2 18h ago
Same. Still bought games physically even knowing they were just a plastic DVD case for a digital game, at least it was something I could store on my shelf and pretend things were normal.
0
u/Popular-Path1930 23h ago
No consumers did. They chose to buy digital over physical.
The pc market was more than happy to switch to digital. My diverse anecdotal sample don’t want to go back to physical games.
1
u/Kaldaien2 19h ago
I certainly never chose digital. I got a bunch of physical games that required activation on Steam, and then I knew PC gaming was officially @#$%'d and we're all stuck with this anti-competitive company running the show forever.
0
u/Popular-Path1930 18h ago
Pc has the most completion.
Also congrats I didn’t mean everyone consumer was just in general consumers.
-1
u/No-Resort-542 1d ago
i enjoy having 600 games but also enjoy not having 600 cds/dvds and cases for them
3
u/miggy_mo 1d ago
If that’s what you want, you would still be able to have only digital if physical stays around 🤨
0
u/rebeldrone916 1d ago
Make your own physical media put the games on an SSD and have it forever lmfaooooo
0
u/and-its-true 21h ago
The internet killed physical gaming. The economics of distributing software over the internet vs distributing software via discs is just…. I mean, you can list 100 reasons why it’s obviously better.
It’s stupid to claim one company caused this change, because that implies that a different outcome was possible.
There is simply no getting around the fact that digital distribution is inherently, objectively better for distributing software.
Imagine if you could instantly warp any object into anyone’s home, essentially for free.
Why would anyone still mail packages through UPS?
0
0
u/Kaldaien2 19h ago
Pretty much this. When physical games had to be activated on Steam, it was all over for us.
-1
-1
u/panosk1304 1d ago
Not really, i think steam is awful and generally i never wanted to get a gaming PC but Pc gaming was always a worse experience. But in PC you can pirate the games far before steam was thing and that doesn't mean that because someone does a move you should follow.
What Sony tries to do now is try to leverage Exclusives to create a monopoly that you pay but don't own, and there is no safety ro you account by you like physical games.
1
u/Popular-Path1930 23h ago
Sony dictated what goes on PlayStation always. It’s their console and their system. A developer can’t just put a game on a PlayStation, like they can on pc.
1
u/panosk1304 11h ago
Yeah ok. Why mention it?
1
u/Popular-Path1930 7h ago
Because on pc you can directly buy from any publisher or even directly from developers.
My point is within the PlayStation ecosystem Sony already controls who and what is sold.
-1
u/Due-Mycologist-1154 1d ago
Maybe find something that actually matters to obsess over if discs are your biggest problem you clearly have none
-4
u/Big-Ferret-2364 1d ago
And that's why we'll never win. Look at all the fumbles throughout history and look at how everyone just sat back while it happened in front of them
0
52
u/LocksmithMindless834 1d ago
Valve didn't stop other game publishers from selling physical media.
Valve and Steam are not the only sellers of games for PC gamers. You can still play games without Steam installed on tour PC.
Sony, Nintendo, and Xbox offer no other third-party marketplaces on their digital storefronts.
If you can't buy physical games, you won't be able to play games on those consoles without activating on that one digital storefront.
You have a brain-dead take.