this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2025
67 points (89.4% liked)

Gaming

32169 readers
163 users here now

From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!

Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.

See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Godort@lemmy.ca 43 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (46 children)

This issue has multiple facets and the answer changes depending on the end result you want.

The author of the article sees the problem as "Old games you bought on steam are unplayable on modern hardware". Kaldaien sees the problem as "Steam cannot run on older hardware anymore, even if the games I bought still work there". Both people want the same thing (To be able to play the games they bought) but are looking at it from different angles.

Ultimately, Steam is a DRM tool that has a very good storefront attached to it. If you want true ownership of the software, buy the game in a way that will let you run the software by itself. Valve expects that the overwhelming majority of its users will keep up with semi-modern hardware (In this case, a machine capable of running windows 10/SteamOS) which I don't feel is is an unreasonable ask. However, expecting Valve to retain support for an OS that hit end of life 20 years ago is unreasonable.

I agree with the opinions of the article's author. It would be far better to ensure that support for the old titles you bought are available on modern hardware rather than making sure Steam is still accessible on a PC running windows 98. This is one of those corner-cases where piracy is acceptable. You already paid for the game, you just need to jump through some hoops to play it on your 30 year old PC.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (30 children)

Valve expects that the overwhelming majority of its users will keep up with semi-modern hardware (In this case, a machine capable of running windows 10/SteamOS) which I don't feel is is an unreasonable ask.

Valve is forcing them to upgrade their software and hardware to keep playing games they already purchased, on the hardware they purchased it on.

However, expecting Valve to retain support for an OS that hit end of life 20 years ago is unreasonable.

It is very reasonable. No one forced Valve to build their business model this way, and they are one of the most profitable companies per employee, ever. It would not be onerous for them to continue supporting a couple of old versions of Windows, they would just have to hire a few more people to do it. Gabe would still be a billionaire.

[–] Godort@lemmy.ca 22 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (20 children)

It is very reasonable. No one forced Valve to build their business model this way, and they are one of the most profitable companies per employee, ever.

Literally every software company built their business model this way. Go open a support case with any software vendor complaining that their product won't run on Windows 98 and see how many help you out beyond "Buy a computer from this millennium"

It would not be onerous for them to continue supporting a couple of old versions of Windows, they would just have to hire a few more people to do it.

You are failing to understand just how much has changed since Windows 98. It's a completely different environment that requires specialized knowledge to develop for. They can't just dust off some old source code and re-release the client. The entire back-end has changed. It would be a massive undertaking that would appease about 12 people total.

Gabe would still be a billionaire.

Sure, but I would argue that there are a lot of better things that Valve could be doing with those resources than supporting Windows 98

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca -1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

Literally every software company built their business model this way. Go open a support case with any software vendor complaining that their product won't run on Windows 98 and see how many help you out beyond "Buy a computer from this millennium"

No, they didn't. I can install the software I bought back in the day on the computers I bought it for, using the license key provided. GoG also famously uses a model where GoG does not care what OS you're using.

You are failing to understand just how much has changed since Windows 98. It's a completely different environment that requires specialized knowledge to develop for. They can't just dust off some old source code and re-release the client. The entire back-end has changed. It would be a massive undertaking that would appease about 12 people total.

Lol, I'm a software developer that started by writing legacy windows software, I know exactly how much (little) has changed.

Sure, but I would argue that there are a lot of better things that Valve could be doing with those resources than supporting Windows 98

I don't care. They have the resources to support it.

Either strip the DRM out and pay whatever you have to to the publishers to do that, or keep supporting the systems you sold your software for.

The idea that Valve is blameless for shitty behaviour because other tech companies also do that shitty behaviour is nonsense. They have been the dominant platform forever, and have had an insane amount of resources available to them.

[–] HarkMahlberg@kbin.earth 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Lol, I'm a software developer that started by writing legacy windows software, I know exactly how much (little) has changed.

It is this perspective that exposes your bias and colors your perception.

We live in a post-Heartbleed world. We live in a post-UAC world. We constantly find new bugs and vulnerabilities, and they cannot always be patched without massive changes to the architecture. We cannot forever maintain old systems that cultivated bad habits in it's users.

Not all change is good, but all change is inevitable.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

No that perspective is what makes me understand that when corporations talk about obsceleting things for security reasons, it's almost always not actually because of security, because it would be a little less profitable to continue support.

And Valve didnt have to build a business around always checking in DRM if they didn't want to support old clients, and they have more than enough resources to continue support.

[–] HarkMahlberg@kbin.earth 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Can I hold you to the decisions you made 20 years ago? I bought that program you built decades ago, that means I'm entitled to your continued support. And don't you even think about getting paid, your support should be free. You shouldn't have built and sold the software if you can't support it...

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago (3 children)

We're not talking about support, we're talking about not breaking the software we bought after the fact.

[–] missingno@fedia.io 2 points 1 week ago

It would not be onerous for them to continue supporting a couple of old versions of Windows, they would just have to hire a few more people to do it.

You literally did say support.

[–] HarkMahlberg@kbin.earth 1 points 1 week ago

It would not be onerous for them to continue supporting a couple of old versions of Windows

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

GoG also famously uses a model where GoG does not care what OS you’re using.

I could have sworn their model was keeping old games updated to work functionally on newer hardware.

https://www.gog.com/en/gog-preservation-program

The GOG Preservation Program ensures classic games remain playable on modern systems, even after their developers stopped supporting them. By maintaining these iconic titles, GOG helps you protect and relive the memories that shaped you, DRM-free and with dedicated tech support.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Yes, and thats literally completely irrelevant.

The fact that their games are DRM free means that doesn't matter one iota. If you buy a game from them on a set of hardware you'll be able to play it on that hardware forever, regardless of whether their desktop client changes.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

But if they keep it updated for modern systems that means as time goes on the files they are offering to install... won't work on old hardware because they've been updated to the modern era.

Sure if you grab a file from them and never get a newer, more maintained version, it will play on exactly the hardware and software you had when you bought it... But if you lost the install file somehow and went to grab a new copy five years later the updated ones may no longer run on your old hardware

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Sure if you grab a file from them snd never get a newer, more maintained version, it will play on exactly the hardware and software you had when you bought it...

That's literally the entire point.

Also, they can still offer the olde versions of the file for download.

Also, they can still offer the olde versions of the file for download.

Except in a lot of cases they really don't.

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago

Lol, I'm a software developer that started by writing legacy windows software, I know exactly how much (little) has changed.

Oh, so this whole situation is to a significant degree, your fault.

=P

load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (25 replies)
load more comments (40 replies)