Originally Posted by Anonymoos3r
Think about it from the Game makers point of view. If only one person is buying a game for lets say, 10 people. They won't make any money. Then if the game makers don't make money you can't have stuff like Steam. Yeah, I agree it would be fantastic if we could play simultaneously, but were not to that point yet. Idk if we will ever be, but profit needs to be made from these games.
My wife's account has Guitarsmith and i have Guitarsmith 2014 on my account. She should be able to play Guitarsmith 2014 on her computer while I play some other game on my computer. I intentionally put the new version on my account so we both had a version of Guitarsmith that we could play on our computers. It would have been nice to share my newer version with her, without locking me out of my own library of games. If i wanna play Civ5 while she is playing Guitarsmith 2014, I should be able to.
Their implementation is almost
useless. Yes its better than nothing, but if they allowed you to define a shared library, that would solve everything for most people. Of my 400 games, i know she would like to play 10 of them, then i could add my 10 to the library and have that shared library locked out when in use. They could easily add things like each computer can only have 1 shared library.
BUT, this is all crazy hard to do securely. Requiring all to have the same public IP is easily bypassed by using a proxy or programs like hamachi. One thing that they probably could do is require both accounts to have the same credit card address, this is still problematic. Perhaps have stream check their default gateways and their private IP's and macs to see if they match up. They should just put a huge warning saying that abusers will have their accounts banned and put a few checks inside there and keep an eye on these accounts.