Online Server Immortalization :: Suggestions / Ideas

All Discussions > Steam Forums > Suggestions / Ideas > Topic Details

FreedomInTruth 1 Aug @ 1:45pm

Online Server Immortalization

Okay, hear me out... What if Steam/Valve created custom servers for online games that would replace the official servers when they're no longer supported? The amount of loyal customers gained from this alone would be infinite, and Steam's stocks would be unbeatable unless other game launchers adopted the same consumer-friendly policy. Also, Steam/Valve would benefit from doing what GOG is trying to do by granting digital ownership of the products bought. Steam/Valve might also want to figure out a way to have some form of currency that doesn't rely on the cooperation of payment processors, what if we could find a way to turn our real money into Steam Store Credits without having to directly include Payment Processors? Perhaps through the Steam Cards found in stores? Hope this gives Gabe Newell some good ideas that will make those trying to bully his company into submission f*** off. #LongLiveSteam

< >

Showing 1-15 of 53 comments

Mad Scientist 1 Aug @ 1:53pm

Now add up the costs, monthly, per game. That bill climbs quite quickly.

It's best Devs consider EOL in advance and just give out a Dedicated Server App so people can use their own resources to keep EOL games going if they want to.

Last edited by Mad Scientist; 1 Aug @ 2:03pm

Truth 1 Aug @ 1:56pm

Originally posted by FreedomInTruth:
Okay, hear me out... What if Steam/Valve created custom servers for online games that would replace the official servers when they're no longer supported?

That would be illegal and require them to infringe on someone elses IP.

Originally posted by FreedomInTruth:
The amount of loyal customers gained from this alone would be infinite, and Steam's stocks would be unbeatable unless other game launchers adopted the same consumer-friendly policy.

Steam doesn't have public stock, so it would do nothing.

The games that get shut down have a proprietary server that Steam cannot legally copy or manufacture. They also cost a lot to maintain, require people on staff to do backups, bug fixes, maintenance and aren't financially feasible. The servers are shut down when games aren't profitable anymore to run them.

Steam cannot create and host servers for games they don't own.

cSg|mc-Hotsauce 1 Aug @ 1:57pm

Originally posted by FreedomInTruth:
Online Server Immortalization

Okay, hear me out... What if Steam/Valve created custom servers for online games that would replace the official servers when they're no longer supported? The amount of loyal customers gained from this alone would be infinite, and Steam's stocks would be unbeatable unless other game launchers adopted the same consumer-friendly policy. Also, Steam/Valve would benefit from doing what GOG is trying to do by granting digital ownership of the products bought. Steam/Valve might also want to figure out a way to have some form of currency that doesn't rely on the cooperation of payment processors, what if we could find a way to turn our real money into Steam Store Credits without having to directly include Payment Processors? Perhaps through the Steam Cards found in stores? Hope this gives Gabe Newell some good ideas that will make those trying to bully his company into submission f*** off. #LongLiveSteam

https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/multiplayer

https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/multiplayer/game_servers

Last edited by cSg|mc-Hotsauce; 1 Aug @ 1:58pm

Ben Lubar 1 Aug @ 2:55pm

Would Valve also be on the hook for paying car manufacturers for the license to depict their cars in The Crew?

Games don't just get discontinued on a whim. There are actual reasons why the servers get retired, and those reasons apply no matter who's running the servers.

SkollUlfr 1 Aug @ 3:01pm

Originally posted by Truth:
They also cost a lot to maintain, require people on staff to do backups, bug fixes, maintenance and aren't financially feasible. The servers are shut down when games aren't profitable anymore to run them.

private servers where the norm when gaming started. it stopped beingt the norm when companies started locking games down.

companies will kill games to force you to buy the remake.
or simply to make you buy another game.

Truth 1 Aug @ 3:04pm

Originally posted by SkollUlfr:
Originally posted by Truth:
They also cost a lot to maintain, require people on staff to do backups, bug fixes, maintenance and aren't financially feasible. The servers are shut down when games aren't profitable anymore to run them.

private servers where the norm when gaming started. it stopped beingt the norm when companies started locking games down.

companies will kill games to force you to buy the remake.
or simply to make you buy another game.

Not really, private servers have always been a thing and still are, most games outside MMO's or live service games still use them, P2P servers are far less secure and aren't as stable or safe to use which is why some games use them.

Ettanin 1 Aug @ 3:10pm

Why should Valve pay for a game's infrastructure the original developer has given up on? What would Valve earn from such involvement?

Thermal Lance 1 Aug @ 3:22pm

Originally posted by Ettanin:
Why should Valve pay for a game's infrastructure the original developer has given up on? What would Valve earn from such involvement?

Nothing as always. Self serving suggestions

Sciencemile 1 Aug @ 3:27pm

Originally posted by Ettanin:
Why should Valve pay for a game's infrastructure the original developer has given up on? What would Valve earn from such involvement?

If I was making this suggestion it would have entailed a subscription fee.

And I would have thought GOG would do it first.

Ettanin 1 Aug @ 3:29pm

Originally posted by Sciencemile:
If I was making this suggestion it would have entailed a subscription fee.

For MMOs or games that require a large playerbase to function, yes.

For games that could reasonably be hosted on a player's machine, no. That's what peer-to-peer and Steam Datagram Relay is for.

Last edited by Ettanin; 1 Aug @ 3:29pm

#10

HikariLight 1 Aug @ 3:45pm

Originally posted by Sciencemile:
Originally posted by Ettanin:
Why should Valve pay for a game's infrastructure the original developer has given up on? What would Valve earn from such involvement?

If I was making this suggestion it would have entailed a subscription fee.

And I would have thought GOG would do it first.

Same rules that apply to Steam also apply to GoG.

GoG cannot run servers for games that have been shut down and that they don't own.

GoG is DRM free games, not free from online modes being shut down.

#11

Sciencemile 1 Aug @ 3:47pm

Originally posted by HikariLight:
Originally posted by Sciencemile:

If I was making this suggestion it would have entailed a subscription fee.

And I would have thought GOG would do it first.

Same rules that apply to Steam also apply to GoG.

GoG cannot run servers for games that have been shut down and that they don't own.

GoG is DRM free games, not free from online modes being shut down.

We can presume that they get permission similar to their current program of forever games or whatever it’s called.

Edit: actually if the “stop killing games” thing goes anywhere this might be a bit less pie in the sky.

Last edited by Sciencemile; 1 Aug @ 3:49pm

#12

HikariLight 1 Aug @ 3:51pm

Originally posted by Sciencemile:
Originally posted by HikariLight:

Same rules that apply to Steam also apply to GoG.

GoG cannot run servers for games that have been shut down and that they don't own.

GoG is DRM free games, not free from online modes being shut down.

We can presume that they get permission similar to their current program of forever games or whatever it’s called.

They only have permission to distribute the game, GoG in no way has ownership rights over the game.
The owner is still the devs or IP holder.

A store having permission to distribute or sell something does not grant that store the same rights as the owner.

The owner can pull the game from the program and GoG would have no choice but to remove it.

#13

Truth 1 Aug @ 3:57pm

Originally posted by Sciencemile:
Originally posted by HikariLight:

Same rules that apply to Steam also apply to GoG.

GoG cannot run servers for games that have been shut down and that they don't own.

GoG is DRM free games, not free from online modes being shut down.

We can presume that they get permission similar to their current program of forever games or whatever it’s called.

Edit: actually if the “stop killing games” thing goes anywhere this might be a bit less pie in the sky.

Not really, if you read the wording of that it has giant clauses that would make it perfectly fine to kill live service games due to the cost and complexity of hosting the servers. Most of the games without local servers are far more complex and can't just be run on someone's PC. Many take multiple servers running and operating together to get the game functional.

#14

Start_Running 1 Aug @ 4:05pm

Originally posted by FreedomInTruth:
Okay, hear me out... What if Steam/Valve created custom servers for online games that would replace the official servers when they're no longer supported?

And what would Valve for all this money they're spending and from whom would they be getting it from?

Originally posted by FreedomInTruth:
The amount of loyal customers gained from this alone would be infinite, and Steam's stocks would be unbeatable unless other game launchers adopted the same consumer-friendly policy.

Loyalty don't pay the bills m8.
And before you say repeat purchases, this doesn't make sense when those repeat purchases saddle valve with more on going expenses.

Originally posted by FreedomInTruth:
Also, Steam/Valve would benefit from doing what GOG is trying to do by granting digital ownership of the products bought.

Uhm. GoG doesn't grant digital ownership m8. They sell licenses just like everyone else.

#15

< >

Showing 1-15 of 53 comments

Per page: 1530 50

All Discussions > Steam Forums > Suggestions / Ideas > Topic Details

Date Posted: 1 Aug @ 1:45pm

Posts: 53

Start a New Discussion