Re: A (small) Step In The Right Direction

On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 09:15:07 -0500, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Thu, 27 Mar 2025 11:36:37 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>

Steam's "you're only sharing the entire
library" method adds a certain distance to this that shields them from
these questions, but by allowing single-game license-transfers,
Nintendo opens themselves up to this next step.

>
I think Steam now allows simultaneous different games playable from the
same shared library. So long as the sharing party isn't playing the
particular game you want to play, you can play their other games. IIRC
>
Don't remember when it happened. Not sure if I'm remembering correctly. I
do know that I don't get "Hooray! Lemonhead's* games are available to
play now!" messages any more.

Steam made changes to their family sharing policy about a year ago and
you are correct, that's more or less how it works. Any one game can be
played within the family group (I think the group is limited to 10
people, but I can't be arsed to check ;-) at any time, but no
individual game can be used by more than one person at a time.

      [Individual accounts still can't play different games on
       multiple devices, though, which is annoying. I had to
       create different Steam accounts for my various devices and
       add them all to the 'family group' so I could do that.]

However, you can't -without a lot of work- only share specific games
between family members. You give them access to your entire library. I
don't think that's necessarily /bad/ but I do like Nintendo's 'virtual
card' method where you can share /specific/ games with people. It adds
a more personal touch.

Steam's method does insulate Valve a bit more from calls to sell
individual game licenses, since you don't really transfer  licenses to
the games but instead share the license to the account that holds the
games.

     [It might open them up to calls to sell or transfer
      whole accounts, however]