We're all moving towards an age where online content servers are the status quo, handling our data and distributing our entertainment. Quite quickly the term "cloud" has sprung up to support technology that serves this kind of function, and, let me kick this off by saying, that term is bullshit. Plain and simple. It's a term coined by those selling online content solutions to make something old sound like something new. If we think about it for a second, just about every element of our online World is "cloud"-based. Our Facebook photos, our Youtube videos, our words and images right here on this site, they're all floating blissfully on a "cloud" somewhere. It's a loaded term, and it's all just online content, simple as that. 

In our own gaming World programs such as Steam are using "cloud" services, storing our game saves and profile settings on their own servers so that they're accessible at all times, even in the event that, for one reason or another, we lose the games they're associated with. 

This is all good, and ultimately benefits us consumers. My problem with Steam, and programs like it, is the idea that we're purchasing ownership of the games they offer. Steam's interface will quite frequently refer to the games you own, and/or would like to own. This is where it gets tricky for me, because my notions of ownership differ quite radically to Steam's. When I consider myself the owner of something, I have full control over it. That thing is mine, and I can put it and change it wherever and however I see fit. Now, Steam on the other hand, that would rather me not do either of those things. Steam would rather I just play the game, and use its interface to do so. Now granted, nine and a half times out of ten all I want to do is just play the game, but what happens to that point five where I'm feeling a little adventurous? And further to that, what happens to those reverse engineers, pulling things to pieces and seeing how they can be recompiled? Suddenly the game they've purchased isn't theirs. If they even attempt to make modifications they risk being banned, and could lose access to the investments they've made. This is where the idea of ownership dies, and what you truly end up paying for is access. 

When a Steam sale comes around, and we're fervently buying up bargain titles, it isn't to own those games, it's to access those games through Steam. It's like having a lifetime pass to a virtual theme park, we're paying to get through the gate, and depending on how much we've paid we get to ride on as many, or as few attractions as we want. But, come the end of the day, we're not taking home a rollercoaster or a huge-ass, swinging pirate ship. Those things stay in the park, and if we want to ride them again, we need to come back. 

I understand that achievements are one of a handful of reasons it would be complicated to allow people full access to their games, but their are solutions to consider. For instance, something akin to a warranty seal could be implemented, where people opt out of achievement and update support, unlocking their game at their own risk. The game remains Steam content, but is marked via the interface as "voided". It's not fool proof, but is at least one idea to put forward (I'm sure there are many out there with far more concrete approaches in mind). 

At the point of writing this, and with a lot of help from the recent Steam summer sale, I have access to about 47 games. By that merit it's fair to say that I'm content using the service, I just don't fully agree with the way it's being advertised to me. These games are not mine, they're really just available to me.