Posted June 26, 2010
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/87d71/87d71389de41f198d5aa53565eacc32eb9fe736f" alt="avatar"
For example: By forcing you to install all Steam games to a Steam folder on a single drive, and then having to at some point transfer everything in that folder to another bigger drive when you start running out of space on the original drive is just going to slowly move customers away from the service. How many gamers love Steam so much they are going to spend money on another huge drive to copy their Steam folder to to continue buying games and having them all sit in that one folder on that one drive?
My Steam folder is now 190GB on a 350GB drive, with companies like Impulse and CeX (here in the UK) I have already started buying games elsewhere to avoid this folder getting even bigger. I have a second drive which is 160GB drive.
It doesn't take a genius to see how slowly people are going to find they don't have enough space on their Steam drive to buy their latest Steam purchase, and find their other drive (if they have one!) is not big enough to copy the original Steam folder and the new game to it. While some will actually go out and buy a bigger drive, most will look elsewhere, even if it means spending a little more.
With the arrogance of Steam in it's customer relations, I doubt it will do anything about this until it's too late, or that it is far enough into the future it won't matter because by then Valve will be a console only developer/publisher.
You do know that you can just delete the local content to free some disk space and just re-download whenever you want right? Because the disk space argument is pretty weak.. I have 100+ games and only keep a few installed, the others I reinstall whenever I want to play them.