Tell me more... regarding your so praised "acceptance".

So far not a word in good standing for me... when it comes to people. Usually people are accepting a lot of stuff, IF they are forced... an act they seem to tolerate.

Still, i really could care less regarding the entire "community crap", because do i want to play a game or simply trying to compensate for the lack of my "real life social issues"? A game is a work of art to me... fun to play... so maybe i am interested about philosophic talks but i do not need a community in order to play a game.

Just in case: No, i never used Facebook, Twitter or Instagram... i never feelt any lack because of it. It does not improve my "social life"... just fake.

Yes they exist

But do I think they're anything more than a very loud, very tiny minority? I do not.

Just as I don't think every Tesla owner is a raving Musk worshipper

Most people use Steam because that what you have to do, it wasn't a choice, because its a prerequisite to play PC games.

Well no, this was clearly checked out: Cyberpunk and Witcher 3 was released on all major platforms at the same time. GoG had around 50% share, the other 50% went to Steam... all the others was not really worth it anymore, on PC... of course... because just a few %.

The major issue with GoG is still that many of the bigger franchises simply are not released here, if so... probably 10 year into the future (Skyrim was a surprise, at least it came real).

Gaining access to those franchises is critical for the "big mass"... so in that term they kinda may act like a sheep.

A big franchises is making the same revenue such as maybe 1000 Indies. Hades is not a true indie, the studio is probably currently 20 devs... to me simply a small studio. It is very rare that a small studio is able to get such a high success... most games struggle with even very minor revenues; about 5-10% will probably make same cash such as the other 90-95%, so exactly those 5-10% counts.

As for Supergiant: They probably just dont like GoG, maybe Hades II will be a giveaway at some point on Epic and on Steam day one, aswell as good as any console including Switch, and probably even DRM free... as weird as it sounds. Even for a game released on GoG, they do not make any advertisement on their page, but any other shop indeed. With the exception of the "to minor players" who simply play no role in market share at all because below 5% share ADDED TOGETHER. So for the industry the support is not really here, but it was worse in the past because nowadays there is a good bunch of real franchises available yet (age does not matter, a great game will forever stay great and a bad game... not even good on day one°°). Still, the biggest support will have to come from the customers... as the industry as a whole is still very sceptical. °°Do not remember me at the many bugged, glitched... non finished and still expensive products that was hyped so much and ultimately just a fail at launch. But, once the consumer trust is here... every single thing will get a "auto bonus" no matter if reasonable or not, image is critical.

There is room for hope, absolutly, giving up should never be an option, then you indeed will already lose.

I did some research into this a few year back after PC Gamer suggested the 8% of Divinity:Original Sin 2 sold 8% copies via GOG.

I contacted dozens of devs asking what kind of %age sales were they getting via GOG (I did it in brackets <1%, 1-2%,3-6%, 7-9% or 10% or more)

Now most didn't reply, I've got no journalist credentials so its not that surprising.

But about a dozen did

Most put their sales in the 7-9% range
One said they'd got 15% sales (Team behind the new Leisure Suit Larry game IIRC)

Now 8% is a significant market. Most businesses would jump at an extra 8% sales, specially for the relatively low overhead of supporting GOG.

The problems is, even though 8% of PC gamers preferred GOG, this isn't 8% extra income.

You see, a few answered <1% and 1-2%, why that considerable difference?

Companies that saw the 8% sales all advertised that their games were coming to GOG. It was on their trailers, promo material and websites.

Those that got poor sales, either released on GOG days or weeks after Steam, made no effort to announce a GOG release or both.

For while 8% of PC gamers prefer GOG, most will buy on Steam if there is no other choice (or perceived choice). The painful reality is releasing on GOG only gives about 1% extra income, which means any company releasing on GOG is doing so to garner customer satisfaction (and the benefit that brings )more than a direct return in profits.

It sounds to me like "ownership" or simply "making something last almost forever" is simply no matter at all for most of the gamers. They have a competly other perception and i am not sure which one or how it exactly looks. It sounds to me like they got the perception of "tomorrow i could be dying, so lets get everything i am able to pick today".

One thing is still certain: Without advertisement nothing works... the majority apparently is very vulnerable for it... weird enough because i had in mind most people do not enjoy advertisement... i could be wrong.

About the other stuff i can not truly judge but, even if DRM is an obstacle for many "bigger games"; the main obstacle is still "there is not enough demand for this"... this is really the major obstacle and the voice of the gamers ultimately matters, which is a hard cookie to gnaw on because it would translate into "they enjoy lesser rights or... they simply do not care for certain rights". This in my mind is the behaviour of sheeps... not the one from people who know what they want.

Clearly, as long as the sales is maybe less than 10%... they may simply lose interest, this is true. The few who still got interest in this term are indeed trying to make customers happy, even if there is almost no gain. I would say 10% share is the critical number "for making it count"; lower than this... this is only a matter for ideals or acting friendly, in todays economy.

and I do not agree. most people find steam convenient. one place for all games, social features built in, workshop features built in, achivements, easy patching and so on. for the common gamer, there are more benefits than drawbacks by using steam. keep in mind that the common gamer do not care very much about DRM, but more about conveniency, and is what steam offers.

i am not saying that they "wotship" steam, but when offered a choice they would rather use it than not. beacuse if you are right, then when the same game is sold in different stores (e.g. steam, gOg, epic, itch.io), then steam should not have such a large market share. but they do - given the choice most people still buy a game on steam (not because they are forced to, but beacuse they want to)

(and do not fall into the fallacy that most people think like you - they do not)

any source for these numbers? I would like to read it

edit: this sources says that gOg had 10% of the Cyberpunk sales - https://www.pcgamesn.com/cyberpunk-2077/pc-sales

Oh... to me it is not very convenient as soon as a DRM is preventing me to do something with a game i want to do, any location and anytime... or simply "lack of ownership rights".

However, if you enjoy becoming totally bound to Steam and its "offers"; then indeed... you are happy with, and this is the majority it seems.

If the majority does apparently not care for DRM, or being "controlled", then actually i see not much reason using Denuvo and Steam DRM (this is optional... not a must). Those who care will even crack it and in this term get it for free... no better option to the industry.

Still, what truly hurts is that there is a sheer mass supporting mainly one single place, and the others they can do what they want... it may barely count. This behaviour is not unknown to me... the world is shaped with extreme terms and extreme cases where the majority is just rolling over everything.

Indeed, it seems to be the minority fighting for freedom, the majority just is looking out for "short term convenience" this is the visible main behaviour.

Of course, if people are not buying DRM free because they enjoy a Steam account (or Epic whatever) the possiblity to please "other" customers is very low because the majority is in charge.

people care about DRM when it becoes intrusive. however, Steams DRM is very non-intrusive, most people never notice it, they just download the game --> click the play button and off they go.

this is the reason why some DRM free fanatics complain about the "double standards" for players that accept Steam's DRM, but complain about for example Denuvo or other types of more impact full DRM chemes. For them, everything as DRM is just as bad as each other, but for a common player it is about what they notice / impacrts on them, and the notmal use of Steam as DRM do not. which is why they make that destinction.

(the problem with most DRM fanatics is that they never try to see it from the point of view of a common gamer, and then be confused when there is incongruence between view points. you can never convince somone if you do not start from where they are at)

edit - and you would never convince a steam user if your starting point is that your "fight for freedom" while they are only looking for "short term convenience". that will only alienate them, and you have lost the battle before you started

I had it from preorder ot launch data, long time ago on a Wiki entry (actually it seems deleted now). But nowadays the share seems different and i it seems that the customers had a lot of preorder on GoG but pretty fast they was switching to Steam. I think... as long as the customer got "no other choice" they may get it on GoG, but OBVIOUSLY.... hard to spell out for me... their first choice is nowadays Steam and do mainly not care for DRM at all. Could aswell just remove it because this is simply not a matter for the majority... so in this case it will make the minority happy to.

However, the market is not humanistic... usually the market is just based on hard number crunching, with a few exceptions.

Wtong choice of word here, I think. Humanistic / Humanism is the notion that people do not need a god or gods to satisfy emotional needs. many atheists adpts humanistic philosohies.

People (especially here on GOG) like to forget, that any new gamers (= newcomers to the hobby of PC gaming) have grown up with Steam.
And with every year their numbers rise, while our numbers dwindle.

Take my son as an example.
He is 20.
He never knew a world where Steam wasn't a thing.

I could care less... those people who think "they are better" or know "how it works" are the reason why i have a high lack of love, as soon as i am inside their huge "territory" which they seem to own almost completly. Short term is on their side but long term they will see what will happen for creating the "mass-monopoly" we go today... and i am almost certain, not even the mass will enjoy it in long term.

What i actually see here is a "Steam fighter" not even knowing what he is actually fighting for... "but no one should criticize this case else no one from the ones not currently fighting will ever fight at all", at least not for the demanded case. Okay.... we do not need any changes... because it is very convenient not to have changes at all. However... the world WILL change, that is the problem with this view, we just do not know the changes we may get. As i feel... the strongest fight the majority is doing is a purely personal fight... the one against anyone who is "against their ideals", thats about the only... but (to them) critical fight, they enjoy to execute. Any other fights... i never was detecting any of it, it seems to be "the way of the sheep", sure it is legitime, but it is not the only valid way. There i start to become a issue with, telling me "how it works" or "whats correct" an then by sheer mass able to not allowing for serious alternative approaches. Not a good case but have to accept reality, the one with power will get what they want, the others rather occasionally: This is todays world, enjoy it... and if not... fight for it.

I never said you do need a god in order to be humanistic. Although, to me it seems like those "atheists" actually got a god, one of them is the money-god and the other god is "the place with the money".

So... i guess there is less true atheist as we may believe. For me, to be humanistic means "to respect the diversity of the humans and not to create a monopole or rules forced by the sheer power of a certain mass or might".

To me even a slight DRM can become "intrusive", because the reality in the end is different for everyone. It all depends on "your way of gaming"... as a mainly offline gamer, the constant online demand is already a big nuisance to me... and if i want to make it future-proof, with Steam demand bound to it... forget about. Without the account you are doomed... you do not own the game, and... sorry to say... not even the account (as you can get banned...).

Okay... again, everyone got another reality. Someone ones told me "she is a geek" by playing a few PS4 games and the PC is not used anymore because the constant "need for update" was to much of a hassle. Okay... but to me this is not truly a "geek", no matter how relative the reality can be considered. A geek is someone who really will care about data management, how to do stuff better... enjoys to preserve data, all the stuff GoG truly cares about. Steam is... you already told... just "convenience"... Easy to use and cheap to buy, as long as your account will last... including your connection. Although there is no bigger focus attached to it... other than having it in the "most convenient way possible":

Okay, have to accept... we have not many fighters in general, at least not for any approach other than 08/15.

and that right there is a very good reason to not engage with you ever again. this may be due to langauge, but it shows a lack of care and a complete misunderstanding of what the meaning of words are. good luck

Goodbye! You can be free with or without a god... this is not a matter. True freedom, in my view, is when someone or something else is able to adapt to as many wishes and views as humanly possible, thus maintaining a high support for many different approaches. There is probably not one human believing in absolutely "nothing", thats why we have people acting the way they do, with the exception of a nihilist, really rare species... and some simply will respect any approach, i feel this is a good and humanistic idea... because we simply am unable "to know it better".

Of course, a atheist mainly believes "there is nothing beyond... or non natural, including a bigger might". although they still may respect the idea of having something useful coming out by high competition and a good diversity.

Indeed, it seems to be a major issue and unfortunately, advertisement is a important part for the majority.