PDA

View Full Version : Would you pay a fee to add non-Steam bought games to your account?


Krakn3Dfx
10-06-2009, 12:00 PM
I see a lot of people constantly asking if they can input their key on Steam for games that are sold on Steam but that they bought elsewhere. I know personally I have probably a dozen games I bought through retail or other digital distribution sites that I would love to have hosted on Steam.

I'm wondering if Valve allowed for it, would people be willing to kick Valve a few buck for the ability to do this instead of just asking for it for free. I probably wouldn't do it for all the games I own that I would have the option for, but for stuff like Battlefield 2, I could totally see a benefit to kicking a few bucks towards Valve for the ability to add that game to my Steam account.

Any thoughts?

Kyorisu
10-06-2009, 12:40 PM
My answer. No.

epsylon_Z1
10-06-2009, 12:43 PM
My answer. No.Same answer.I would pay to pull out non Valve games from my Steam account.

kimd41
10-06-2009, 12:49 PM
No.

10chars

Freyar
10-06-2009, 12:58 PM
I would. The convenience for me is good enough to allow me to stick with it, and in the case of having a retail copy, should something happen, I've still got the physical copy to fall back on.

KeRupTion
10-06-2009, 12:58 PM
Yes
10chars

DistortedTruth
10-06-2009, 12:59 PM
Nope, wouldn't pay for such a thing personally, and the only current downside to having none steam games in your games list is that they don't receive an automatic update, however i think this has sometimes been proven to be a good thing when developers release an update that likes to mess up the game. Sometimes i like the ability to not update a game if it is running fine as is.

Akudama89
10-06-2009, 01:01 PM
yes
10chars

Cedge
10-06-2009, 01:41 PM
In a magical copyright-free world where this could be possible, yeah, sure, for a couple games maybe.

However, it simply isn't possible, and will never happen. It's not about "Valve allow[ing] it." Valve can't go charging for and distributing anyone else's games, without the proper contracts for them.

In any case where Valve DOES have contracts for retail key activation, that activation is free (and often mandatory); I'll stick with this.

It's an interesting idea, but it simply can't happen.

CannibalBob
10-06-2009, 01:58 PM
If you're asking if I would pay money so I could put a non-steam key into Steam, and download & install the game using steam, then no I wouldn't.

But if extra steam features were added, such as steam cloud, then maybe... because Steam cloud is very nice. I highly doubt that since most games on steam don't even use steam cloud!

KubanitoS
10-06-2009, 02:03 PM
What is this cloud everyone is talking about? What games are using this?

Freyar
10-06-2009, 02:15 PM
Left 4 Dead is about it.

Kunst
10-06-2009, 02:25 PM
Trine as well I believe.

Zorlac
10-06-2009, 02:27 PM
If the fee was minimal, then yes I deffinately would.

DARKNIGHT
10-06-2009, 02:44 PM
If the fee was minimal, then yes I deffinately would.

Me to, it would give me a nice incentive to bookmark the cd keys from retail games and throw away the cd/dvds.

janka^
10-06-2009, 02:58 PM
only if this game is my big favorite and would pay anything 4 it

SmudgePot
10-06-2009, 03:37 PM
The problem with adding your license/key to Steam to get access to their community, cloud and bandwidth is that the only way it would work is if Valve was making money off of ad placement and more viewers meant more money. The majority of the money made via retail sales goes to licensing the game not its distribution method which although more expensive than digital downloads is not off putting for those with the distribution channels to pull it off. So why would Steam assume liability of support for a modest fee when it wouldnt be enough to garner a profit? Ad sales is a business we should leave to Google and Steam should continue to provide us the services they do. Loyal customers are a valuable thing and the more you have the more you can influence pricing. Buy here, play here. Nuff said.

Chapa9dj
10-06-2009, 04:37 PM
Absolutely no.

relaxeder
10-06-2009, 04:58 PM
Yeah, depending on what game it is.

FK120
10-06-2009, 05:07 PM
I proposed a plan like this a few years ago, and it was highly liked. A 5 dollar flat rate or so to add cd keys to steam to compensate for potential bandwith usage; however that isn't the problem. In fact, valve really doesn't give a ♥♥♥♥ if you use their bandwith, they want more people and more games to be retail cdkey activated on steam. The problem lies with the publisher, why would they lose out on potential sales? They don't want to fork over the cdkey databases so Valve can add them to the steam retail activation database. They don't want to hand over easy cash on a nearly dead game; when they can make potentially double profits on a single user.

Valve wouldn't want the money for those games, they'd be more than happy to allow for more steam usage; that way they can get more publishers on board and reap the 40% sales cut they get from 3rd party games sold through steam.

Oatmeal
10-06-2009, 09:02 PM
Yes I would. I prefer the Steam Client (update process) and trust the service.

>X<
10-06-2009, 09:08 PM
I would go broke adding all my games, but I would.

dat1337vet
10-06-2009, 09:09 PM
I'd pay like 20-50% of the game value

paratech2008
10-06-2009, 09:14 PM
Me to, it would give me a nice incentive to bookmark the cd keys from retail games and throw away the cd/dvds.

Until your account gets hacked and VAC banned... Then you might want those CD/DVDs! :p

Oh yeah, only bad/dumb people's accounts get hacked... :rolleyes:

StingingVelvet
10-06-2009, 10:17 PM
No way, but then I mostly prefer retail in the first place.

Akudama89
10-06-2009, 10:30 PM
I think the people who are saying no to this...must think of it this way:

Do you rather have to buy the game again, to have it on steam, or pay a small fee, to add it to steam? i'm not saying every game out there is worth paying to put on steam, but there's many games i already have that would be nice to have on steam, and if i didn't have to pay for the whole game all over again, and only a small fee, that would be nice, i'm not seeing how anyone could say no to that

Ruyo
10-06-2009, 10:41 PM
If I could use Steam features on Battlefield 2 I'd do it. However I bet it's like Call of Duty where you can see that your friend is playing it but you can't join them through the friends list.

However I don't think I would do it for the vast majority of my non-Steam games.

StingingVelvet
10-07-2009, 12:28 AM
I think the people who are saying no to this...must think of it this way:

Do you rather have to buy the game again, to have it on steam, or pay a small fee, to add it to steam? i'm not saying every game out there is worth paying to put on steam, but there's many games i already have that would be nice to have on steam, and if i didn't have to pay for the whole game all over again, and only a small fee, that would be nice, i'm not seeing how anyone could say no to that

You seem to live in a world where everyone likes using Steam. A lot of people don't.

Icaras
10-07-2009, 12:42 AM
Me to, it would give me a nice incentive to bookmark the cd keys from retail games and throw away the cd/dvds.

Ditto. I really want to get rid of my physical library and have the ease of digitally loading my games.

Europhoria
10-07-2009, 02:20 AM
Left 4 Dead is about it.

Trine as well I believe.

And Madballs in... Babo:Invasion.

Skaery
10-07-2009, 03:23 AM
Yes, I would. But not more than ~5 bucks.

Centurian
10-07-2009, 05:18 AM
I'm wondering if Valve allowed for it, would people be willing to kick Valve a few buck for the ability to do this instead of just asking for it for free. I probably wouldn't do it for all the games I own that I would have the option for, but for stuff like Battlefield 2, I could totally see a benefit to kicking a few bucks towards Valve for the ability to add that game to my Steam account.

Any thoughts?

Depending on the fee, I may.

I mean I know alot of people that buy games "again" to so their on Steam, so I think people would use it.

Vetron
10-07-2009, 06:33 AM
I'd happily pay a small fee, I've recently bought some of my old retail games on Steam and would be great to add more without re-buying them.

Steam is just much more convenient than installing and running from physical disks.

epsylon_Z1
10-07-2009, 07:07 AM
I think the people who are saying no to this...must think of it this way:

Do you rather have to buy the game again, to have it on steam, or pay a small fee, to add it to steam? i'm not saying every game out there is worth paying to put on steam, but there's many games i already have that would be nice to have on steam, and if i didn't have to pay for the whole game all over again, and only a small fee, that would be nice, i'm not seeing how anyone could say no to thatI'm sorry,but i lost my " I love Steam" T-shirt.Why should i add for example a DRM free indie game to Steam? Just to have those cool :rolleyes: achivements with a crappy client and slow patch support ?

mouton
10-07-2009, 07:56 AM
My initial reaction to the title of the thread was that it is the new high of Steam zealotry. I mean, seriously now.

Still, trying to be a nice and reasonably objective chap, I can see some pros of such a move, even if i dont find them compelling.

Anyway, this simply won't happen. Reasons range from financial - Valve and the publishers would prefer you just bought the game again instead - through legal pitfalls and to the fact that they would have to negotiate it with every publisher again. Also, it is a major change of the system and unless we will see thousands of supportive posts here in a very short time, it is probably too small of an issue.

Akudama89
10-07-2009, 09:10 AM
You seem to live in a world where everyone likes using Steam. A lot of people don't.

i never said everyone does however to say no because you don't like steam is illogical as it's still a good system to have even if you don't like steam

That's like saying you don't want a new kind of defibrillator for hospitals because you don't use them...even though the benefits from them could save lives

This isn't a "do you like steam or do you not like steam" thread, it's a "would this be a good feature", in which case, it is, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it, you don't HAVE to use it, and people who would like to use it no longer have to buy the game again, by saying no to that just because you don't like steam, is selfish beyond belief

mchufnagel
10-07-2009, 11:03 AM
Do you rather have to buy the game again, to have it on steam, or pay a small fee, to add it to steam?

I think having to pay a fee to add a game is the best option. I have a good paying job, but I wouldn't re-buy a game just to have it in Steam. In my opinion only a wastful or foolish person would do that.

StingingVelvet
10-07-2009, 11:57 AM
This isn't a "do you like steam or do you not like steam" thread, it's a "would this be a good feature", in which case, it is, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it, you don't HAVE to use it, and people who would like to use it no longer have to buy the game again, by saying no to that just because you don't like steam, is selfish beyond belief

The thread asked "would YOU pay a fee..." and many people said no. You then said you don't understand why anyone would say no because Steam is so awesome.

What you are saying NOW I agree with.

epsylon_Z1
10-07-2009, 12:23 PM
Would Valve pay a fee to bring our retail games to Steam ?

Nextra
10-07-2009, 03:11 PM
Sometimes I'd like to link retail games to my steam account when they are being sold over steam anyway. I would not pay for it, though.