Baby steps before flying, but we're getting there. I see your point though.

What is your point again? I am talking of the monopoly Steam has on the PC market and you seem to be stuck on the idea that CDs are unreliable, which I honestly don't even care much about. I'm cool with or without them as far as PC games go.

You bought CD's vs Steam keys into discussion. Steam's "monopoly" is well earned. They have support, they have many games, they are reliable, it's hard to speak about gaming today and ignore Steam. Their platform allows using it as an reference, you get few physical games, you have the keys, you know you have them all in the same place and you don't need to use an different DRM for each game.
If you are cool either way, your point it's the one missing the target, not mine.

Uhm, no. I brought up the fact that CDs are no longer CDs. They are Steam codes when you are supposed to buy a CD< hence the monopoly argument.

I don't give a damn. Not a fan of monopolies, whether well or ill earned. It's not me controlling it, but it's negatively impacting the way I purchase things. It can go to hell as far as I'm concerned.

Again, I don't really care. This does not justify the dick riding some publishers do when it comes to them or the ignorance of the user base.

Like Ubisoft and EA games, no?

You and I are not on the same frequency. Your point is moot and wrongly placed. I'm not here to discuss CDs, I'm here to discuss the downsides of a monopoly. I don't think you even realize the absurdity of the conclusion you just drew.
If I want to buy a CD/DVD with the game on it I'm expecting to purchase just that. If I wanted to use Steam and besides their DRM service also have extra like in Ubisoft's case I would've just went straight to Steam.
When the lines of physical and digital medium are blurred it's when I'm calling into question the ethics of the business.

Don't get personal or insulting guys, this is just over the future of GOG, and we all agree it should rather be prosperous... :)

I... really don't see how Steam has "earned" its monopoly. Steam is nothing but a server farm, more Valve employees are fired every year, and the entire publishing process is automated so game developers essentially run the platform, not Valve employees. Steam is successful because the buying habits of PC customers are ludicrous, forcing the market into a console like publisher dependency.

Yes, I can definitely agree on the fact that it's the market's fault. Alas, at this point it is a futile endeavor. Even I engaged in it. Let me explain.

One makes a nice image resembling a trading card game. One creates a full deck of such images that if assembled it can be crated in a badge, and those who grew up with Pokemon love badges. Now, the catch is that this one only allows you to get half of the cards, at least in a decent time frame. If you want to get that badge and level faster you have to engage in market trading. One essential component of market trading is that Valve taxes about 20% of the value you want to sell something for.
It is the duty of devs to provide such images as incentives for people to buy their games (or this is at least the case now), thus Valve makes money out of thin air and work they do not do themselves, but others.

This is almost as genius as Goodwill's "here, we take the stuff you don't need for free and sell it for a profit" MO.

steam can eat a penis.

i'm the best debater in the planet!

I suspect the mentality prevalent at the big publishers is that DRM-free and GOG release becomes acceptable once a AAA game's major release window has closed; i.e., it's made whatever money it was supposed to make and they don't have to sweat the piracy boogeyman barging into their houses and stealing everything. Nevermind that this attitude is a delusion and the pirates are still stealing the games on day 1 anyway - got to keep up appearances and pretend like you're "doing something" by maintaining DRM.

Honestly I would be okay with this but we're still missing many major games (not "attached" to Steam or Origin or uPlay, and from publishers already here on GOG) that had their release window closed years ago.

Yeah. Adding on to it I would say most publishers, even ones with a GOG presence, are just lazy and figure a Steam release is good enough to leave off on. Because Steam is PC gaming and PC gaming is Steam and who are these weirdos who keep pestering us about releasing on PC but not on Steam can't they just capitulate and give us their damn money already whywhywhy...

By then, however, those games are locked into horrible clients and DRM systems (Uplay, Origin, Social Club, etc.).

Once they're in there, no one's getting those games out again, it seems. Regardless of time passed. :(

One thing that sucks about GOG's curating system is the fact that they won't accept games that received a low sale in other platforms despite being good. Games that are decent also don't get accepted. Wish they would judge on quality rather than on number of sales in other platforms.

If a game requires an online connection for installing it on a fresh PC, then I don't consider it DRM-free.

There are allegedly also DRM-free games on Steam which you can "install" (=move) to a fresh PC and play there, even without the Steam client and internet connection.

However, the difference is that on GOG they are officially supported as such, not to mention that they come in convenient DRM-free installers, and update installers on top of those too. On Steam the supposedly DRM-free game either works DRM-free or not, or maybe the base game works but the DLCs don't, or you are supposed to add some entries manually to the Windows registry before it works correctly, or you are supposed to hunt down a non-Steam patch from the publisher's homepage in order to make the Steam-version DRM-free.

If you are not happy with those quirks while trying to play a Steam game without the client, tough.

No, multiplayer support does not make DRM for the single-player part mandatory.

Has this changed then? I recall it was originally added to the "DRM-free games on Steam" list on this forum because it passed the basic test, ie. you could copy the installed game to another Steam-free PC and continue playing there. At least back then I don't recall hearing that it would need some extra third-party patches to achieve that.

I recall the Windows Live requirement would accept an offline account too.

EDIT: So I checked the original list in that thread and there Fallout 3 was added as a "DRM-free Steam game" to the list without any remarks, while the newer wiki list mentions it having CEG, unless you apply FOSE.

So either the people who reported it originally in that thread did piss-poor job testing its DRM properly, or the publisher has indeed added CEG afterwards to the game.

Which just goes to show why I prefer official DRM-free support for my games (= GOG games), instead of some unofficial list of supposedly DRM-free games gathered by some hacks.

I was referring to the Steam version, not the retail (DVD) version. Steam Fallout 3 was originally (incorrectly?) reported as a DRM/CEG-free Steam game in this discussion:

http://www.gog.com/forum/general/list_of_drmfree_games_on_steam/page1