The confirmation came from the Steam support staff earlier this month when Resetera forum user delete12345 asked Steam support if he can put his Steam library in...
Oh for sure, but it's definitely a concern for stuff like this. It's a lot easier for valve to just expect people to pass login info down as a way to pass on an account.
Valve actually migrating purchases from one account to another risks upsetting publishers, and requires whole new policies on how to verify death and verify who should receive the account. Finally there's the risk of scams and having to resolve them. Overall it's a lot of headache for valve, I'm not surprised they're not jumping to offer it officially.
True but ultimately this is about ownership - we don't own our games. We license them - that is what is lost with Steam and DRM, and moving away from physical media.
GOG is an alternative in that you can download and back up the installers for your games (mostly) but even then do you own your ganes?
You’ve never owned your games. You owned the media they came on but legally you only ever had a license to use the software. Depending on the license agreement (the thing where most people click “I agree” without reading) you had more or fewer rights, such as transfer of license, but the way things work legally ownership of software seems to mean the more of the copyright ownership. Maybe like a book: you own your copy of the book but you don’t have the rights to print more books or make a movie based on the book.
Realistically, the transfer would likely need to be set up ahead of time via the account holder. For instance, my password manager has a function to allow me to designate a beneficiary. But importantly, that beneficiary assignment must come from my account before I die. If I die without designating a beneficiary, there’s nothing my family can do to gain access to my password vault. Only the accounts I have designated will be able to gain access.
In other words, in order to falsely designate a beneficiary, they would already need access to my account. And at that point, they wouldn’t need to deal with death certificates and beneficiaries, because they already have access to my account.
I'd like you to read what you just wrote very slowly and imagine it's somebody else saying it, just to visualize if it's an absolutey bonkers thing to say.
Life Pro Tip: Register an LLC to buy your steam games under. The LLC will never die and you can transfer ownership of the business entity while it retains control of the steam account.
As others have pointed out - costs a few bucks annually,and requires beneficial ownership report (free IIRC).
Otherwise, it’s a tried and true tactic to pass businesses down through generations. An LLC vs. a corp vs a trust is a convo to have w/ lawyer barred in your state but the general premise is vaguely sane.
Tldr: Don't do this unless you have a business that requires a steam account for tax purposes. It doesn't need to be successful but it does need to be real.
Trusts are probably a better option for this sort of thing than a LLC.
Register a religious organisation/church worshipping digital media and proclaim that this account is part of religious rituals of your church. In the United States, freedom of religion is a constitutionally protected right provided in the religion clauses of the First Amendment.
It's a bit more complicated. Besides the Steam credentials, you also need to share your email and its password. You need to provide your mobile phone unlocked or share its password (for SMS and two-factor authentication).
Do they check? Or can i just give my password to my homie in a letter
"Dear homie,
if you are reading this, it means that i'm on the long path to meet with master Kaio to train my ass off to death in the afterlife. Until we meet again, this is my user and pass of my steam account.
PS: i didn't bought the porno VR games. Someone gifted them to me.
Bro, but what about the credit card receipt for porno VR games, signed by Siegfried? What about the warranty card for the porno VR games, filled out by Siegfried? What about the book "Porno VR Games and Me (This Sort of Thing is my Bag, Baby!)" by Siegfried?
Lol. That's hilarious. But unfortunately you never owned the games in the first place. You rented the privilege to play the game for life?...life of the rental company or your life only? Oh man, we gotta go thru the small print on this.
I understand for the life of the company. But it's not even my steam account. It's my child's who's currently -5 years old (give or take). I did create it on their behalf a decade ago to redeem the free games on their behalf and gift them games I think they'll enjoy.
"Add to Cart", "Continue Shopping", "Purchase for myself", "Purchase as a gift", "Purchase".
Who knows, one day a court may find these terms could lead people into believing they're buying a game and force some companies to allow us to to trade or resell them (an EU court most probably).
The article goes into that and states password sharing is against the Eula so technically they can kick you off the service if they find out..... IF they find out wink wink
The interesting question is what happens if Valve is still around after all of us are long gone and there are millions of 150+ year old accounts, many under active use?
In a world that isn’t drowning in late stage capitalism what we call that is the overwhelming gift given to us by the generations before us so that we may in turn give it to the next generation. Video games are only a tiny subsection of those gifts compared to everything else we just get handed for free.
Wealthy US boomers brutally executed that way of looking at the world though, so literally any form of passing on gifts to the next generation other than being rich as fuck and directly leaving an unbelievable amount of money to your kids is unfathomable or framed as unfair or absurd in modern day society.
Assuming that the world continues to exist in a way that lets me have a steam account at the time of my natural lifespans average end (another... 46 years):
My steam library grows at a slower rate than my mass storage has, and I'm quite confident that one will be able to fit my entire steam library as it currently is on a normal and affordable drive in at most 15 years.
With those two facts in play I can remain confident in my ability to crack everything I own (assuming I even want everything) and safely store it for at-will passing down to as many people as I want.
But thanks for the reminder to not blindly trust you, Valve. Always useful to have those.
With the amount of people that made their account with a fake DOB of like 1900 or something to get around mature content I'm sure they already see plenty of users that age lol
Friend could have in theory just authorized their steam library on the computer and played them through a different account. The "family sharing" thing.
You can but they can just go to a steam profile site and see your previous names/the id doesn’t change
And if they have a link to your profile (since it uses the id) they will always find you
For this case they made her player of the week in a group she wasn’t apart of. It’s still there today but the profile is deleted (hence the question mark)
Blocking an account doesn’t really solve the trauma of being scared to accept any friend request since it could be this guy
True for digital goods THEY are supposed to own, but also consider how dominated we are with OUR digital property. I have witnessed how readily tech giants will abuse their position, abuse the power of defaults, weaponize psychology, and feign deletion... even against my lowly grandma. They think nothing of effectively stealing one's digital photos, using them for their own purposes, and giving them to the police, so they can destroy your life and your dog.
Just because it is wrong and obviously contradictory to other established precedents doesn’t at this point mean that it won’t be enforced unfortunately.
Less about enforcement than ease of transfer. If I've got a Steam account and you've got a Steam account and I die, Steam won't let you transfer the licenses from my account to yours. You just have to maintain two independent accounts now - accounts with 2-factor authentication that you also have to maintain (so second cell numbers and emails, etc).
Steam will simply let the administrative burden of juggling extra accounts take these licenses out of the pool.
This. It's absolutely already enforced. Valve simply will do nothing to enable access to a relative that comes asking and most of the currently existing accounts will just fade into the ether because in most cases relatives aren't going to be particularly worried about recovering game accounts of all things when somebody passes away.
To be absolutely clear, this is not new. Steam accounts being non-transferrable and not your property has always been how Steam's terms work. It's not even the first time the death situation comes up.
Because digital ownership sucks, and that absolutely, very much includes Steam. If you can't keep an offline copy you don't own it.
But honestly, given the new family groups Steam came up with this gets weirder now. Other accounts that are more closely tied to hardware are one thing, and I do wish we had a more effective and reliable way to hand over passwords and credentials to relatives in case of emergency, but it's so weird that now your mom can have an accident and you slowly see the games she was sharing with you over that system fade away as her account gets shuttered. It's such a grim, sci-fi distopian piece of minutia. This is not a great timeline we landed on.
Depends on what country you live in. Just because they call is that doesn't mean the law and courts will see it their way.
Relatedly, check out www.StopKillingGames.com. When you buy a game without an expiration date on the box it either is illegal or should be explicitly made illegal to destroy your copy of the game when the company shuts down their servers. Stop Killing Games is a campaign to stop this from happening, and it's actually getting some progress like being noticed and picked up by politicians. If you know Freeman's Mind, Civil Protection, or Ross's Game Dungeon, this campaign was started by Ross Scott (Accursed Farms) who made all of those.
Edit: quote from the FAQ in the website:
Q: Aren't games licensed, not sold to customers?
A: The short answer is this is a large legal grey area, depending on the country. In the United States, this is generally the case. In other countries, the law is not clear at all, since license agreements cannot override national laws. Those laws often consider videogames as goods, which have many consumer protections that apply to them. So despite what the license agreement may say, in some countries you are indeed sold your copy of the game license. Some terms still apply, however. For example, you are typically only sold your individual copy of the game license for personal use, not the intellectual property rights to the videogame itself.
shrugs framing it this way feels like a finance industry tactic where business people attempt to seem intelligent and beyond the public’s capacity to understand by taking concepts and renaming them to finance concepts and then pretending their grift is different than every other con man’s grift in history.
Steam sells games, that is far as I need to zoom in, any farther and business bros are just wasting my time with their sandcastles made out of PowerPoints and economic spiritualism that is grounded in absolutely nothing other than absolving the person running the business for the harm they may enact in doing so.
You don't inherit a lease to a house your parents rented.
Not that I'm happy with "buying" a game actually being "getting a license" instead of actually owning it. Gamepass and the like should be the renting model, not when you pay a game full price.
The Court of Justice of the European Union found that a
copyright owner exhausts the right of distribution to a copy of a computer
program once he sells, or authorizes the sale of, the copy. This means that whoever purchased the
computer program can resell it and the copyright holder cannot control the
resale of the copy. The Court found that
this exhaustion principle applies whether the copy is on a tangible medium like
a CD-ROM or DVD or an intangible download from the Internet, and it also
applies to corrected and updated programs that the copyright owner sells. Furthermore, the Court made clear that contract
clauses that deny the customer the right to transfer his copy of the computer
program are void.
When you buy something you should be able to pass it on or sell it to someone else. This "the software not sold, only licensed" BS should be illegal. Either you rent with a monthly fee, or you buy it and own it. Owning something means you can sell it to someone else.
Seems like a shitty hill to die, sacrificing entire generations of family remaining on your platform over old obsolete games on a subscription service. Tell me the video game industry is stale without telling me the video game industry is stale.
I'm pretty sure they are legally forced to do this. Also, the moment you allow people to inherit accounts, you're inadvertently sanctioning account transfer and sale. They can't really enforce this amd they know it, so nothing really changed.
Precisely. They never check that you are who you say that you are or that you are in fact still alive, so this "rule" is unenforceable. Case in point, many years ago I told Valve that my birthday was Jan 1st 1916, the earliest date it would let me select when I get prompts to input my age for mature-rated content. It still remembers that and autofills it for me on every age-restricted game page I land on in the discovery queue. If it were true, I'd be a 108 year old gamer right now, which isn't impossible but would probably raise some eyebrows at Valve if they ever had the intention of enforcing the "no passing down your account to other people" rule as it would be highly likely that I would be dead and my successors are the ones actually spending 7 hours on the weekends binging TW: WH3 and Stellaris.
It's the executors job to handle the inheritance, which is very different to transfer and sale. Insurances and services of all types handle inheritances, and they ask for documents specifically only available in such circumstances to verify it. It really is due to unwillingness on behalf of Steam
What if you do it a roundabout way? Record your Steam and email login info and include the paper that has it in the will. You're not giving them the account, just a piece of paper. What they do with it is up to them.
Same but under mine, we are starting to split who buys a bit more now since our kids want to play different games at the same time. Time to start spreading them across 4 accounts soon
IIRC, they are in beta testing to allow multiple people play multiple games from same account at same time, and you can now buy multiple licenses for your account so can both play same game at same time on same account . Don't ask me the specifics, I only know that I can buy multiple licenses for my account currently.
Pretty sure I'm good. Account email is a forwarder to a family domain and they have access to everything relating to the account. For all intents and purposes, it's just me logging in from the grave.
Soon they’ll clarify their philosophical stance on identity & claim a person changes so much from moment to moment that yesterday-you doesn’t exist anymore, & therefore must pay again
At some point, Gabe is going to sell the company and/or die. The company will be transferred to a hedge fund. And then you'll see a bunch of evil IT bros come up with increasingly sadistic means of cannibalizing the user base for profit.
Drink the Mountain Dew Verification Can to continue, etc, etc.
Yea but you need the owner account to authorize the computer. So next time you upgrade or wipe your gaming rig you'd be screwed unless you find a bypass and if you're working that hard, just have the password+mfa
Check out the new Steam Family Beta. My friends and I are now a polyamorus "family" as far as Steam is concerned. I can play their games, they can play mine, didn't have to touch each other's computers, and live in separate households.
Exactly what I was thinking, people would be mad as hell. Heck, a few months ago I made someone realize they didn't own their games on Steam because they were complaining about Epic and it blew their fucking mind.
There are two and only two things that makes Epic Games a pariah.
(1)Exclusive content on PC should be shunned so hard that it's not even a fucking option. You can explain away exclusively on PS3 because of its unique hardware, but it's just a naked monopolistic power grab on PC.
(2) Epic game store sucks on every level. It's a pigs 3 week old rotting corpse compared to Valve's packaged ham.
What Stream support have sent that person is probably an accurate representation of what happens when you apply their policies as written. Write another article if they are seen enforcing it.
Luckily, SteamDRM is usually easy to bypass, so if that happens one could prepare accordingly.
These days a will should include documentation of logins. No need to bypass Steam DRM when my relatives have my phone's PIN and email credentials to just access all games. Pretty sure my local laws cover digital inheritance.
Yeah, my point was, if they do try to enforce their policies, we could probably find a way to work around it. It's probably cheaper and easier than for your heirs to test those digital inheritance laws in court.
The difference is that your Steam account is probably holding thousands of dollars in value while your pirated copies of Steam games are worth nothing. And presumably that whichever of your grandchildren gets nerdy gran's stash will likely not care to reverse engineer your warez archives just to play Bioshock again in 2075.
It's not about access to the games, it's about whether you own what you buy.
I personally don't value them differently, but I see your point.
The wonky ownership of these games is actually the reason I've been pretty much exclusively buying stuff on GoG for a few years. I don't know their stance on inheritance, but at least the hypothetical grandchild won't need perpetual access to the account to keep playing the games.
In the end, clear legislation is kinda the only thing that can resolve this mess.
Criminals can claim a lot of things but that is not democracy which requires citizens which requires autonomy. Anyone stealing individual autonomy is a traitor.
It's unlikely that would survive a lawsuit. If they claim the games have value, as evidenced by then having a price, then that value can be transferred.
Absolutely nothing... This article literally just says that somebody on an internet forum pointed out that what might happen is that if your account has been around longer than the average lifespan then they'll investigate and maybe terminate it after determining it's no longer owned by the original account owner. Valve today doesn't have the support capacity to perform this kind of investigation. Valve in 50-60 years will be an entirely different beast. This speculation means nothing.
Just don't tell them lol. My friend in school gave me his steam account that had some games on it that I had no money for and he wasn't using it anymore. Still my main steam account 8 years later.
Did anyone actually think they? Is there anywhere where it is allowed to share your username and password with anyone else in order to use your account, whether you live or not?
this. it's kinda shitty considering how much people spend on games they "own" but don't actually have any privileges they had with physical copies, but this is nowhere suprising
Why is there even a debate about this? You need emulators to play 10 year old games, maybe twenty. In 60 years you'll need who knows what to be able to play it. The question is whether people will want play them at all. There might be a VR with anally plugged interface which would lack support for hand controllers.
Wooo... glad I stopped investing into video games about a decade ago. Between this and Ubisoft's, "DEI" into their video games lol.. fk the whack gaming industry.
Which part of diversity, equity and inclusion are you opposed to? Or do the quotes mean that Ubisoft is doing something nefarious in the name of DEI and I'm out of the loop?
Sorry, I can't explain (in detail) why because my comment will be deleted and more than likely banned. Let's just say that if I was still playing Assassin's Creed franchise, what Ubisoft has done pretty much would make me stop investing further into the franchise.
I'm not interested getting into it nor defending my opinion, it is what it is.
I.. don't care about the race of a character in Assassin's Creed.. lol it's a fkin video game, bro. As if I've never played Final Fantasy with different "species" and skin colors for lack of a better term.
Psssst I'm Latino. I have family members who look straight up Black to the typical plebian.