204
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2026
204 points (100.0% liked)
PC Gaming
15499 readers
225 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Unfortunately "should" and "must" have different legal meanings
At least they are saying steam will not help or support that feature in any way. That reads like, if it makes your game unavailable offline, sale is prohibited.
Or shall.
Valve can kick out games that do not play along their rules. They should follow the rules, or they risk to get kicked out. So whats your point?
A little harder to enforce ('no, judge, it says SHOULD, grant our civil suit please') and a little easier to grant exceptions for than saying "must" (ah sorry customers, bigco had a bunch of money, and the rules don't say MUST). It's a well known wording choice in software, see every RFC ever.
It signals to me that Valve wanted an out for their rules when they wrote them because it's an odd choice for such a well known word choice otherwise.
I think in this context "should" and "must" are interchangeable, because its under "Not Supported" listed.