It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
BreOl72: For them, a "DRM-free-Steam" would just be Steam with lesser features and less convenience.
That's not really much of a selling point.
i do not get your issue.

You can have a Steam game with all the API features provided but the game can still be DRM free... it simply means it will launch at any location without a launcher or online-demand. You can simply always use it, no matter how you use it.

Those sort of Steam games already exist but there is just a few... especially for a franchise.

You could have all the freedom and still be "able to use your awesome API"... kinda the same such as GoG Galaxy... which is "free to use".

To me it sounds like, they seem to enjoy forced updates, forced online checks, and what else... this is part of a DRM, not part of any API.

A example of such a game, so you may be able to understand: I have Dragon Quest XI S and indeed, it will launch from its EXE without any online or launcher demand. Yet... if you have Steam installed (or comparable to this, if you have Galaxy installed) then it will launch your "awesome feature"... DRM free and API is not something canceling out each other... this is a different thing.

I am NOT against an API and "awesome Online features", and not against a community, i am just against lack of freedom or simply against a DRM. Of course this counts for games you actually can play offline... indeed if you have a "true" online game it is understandable that you need a launcher or some sort of host.
Post edited March 21, 2023 by Xeshra
Well, that (edit: the "Steam or nothing" point, I was ninjaed) is not entirely true, it was not about "Steam or nothing". When steam was still growing, there were alternatives, and I am not talking about retail versions right now.
Remember MC Games? I still got the offline installers of some games I bought from them. even now that they are long gone. And there were also others. I had games on GFWL as well (sadly it was crap).

I too chose Steam. Sure, first it was outrageous, that Half-Life 2 (I had the big black box with all Half-Life games in it) required it and of course the first thing I did was to crack it. Sometimes later I would register it anyway. At that point I thought "what's the difference?". Online registration had been a thing for some time by then, just the launcher was new.
I still have the big fat Space Marine Package with the heavy book in it. It had to be registered at Steam of course. A Steam edition for SWG with an exclusive item? I bought it, even if I still played the normal version.

You were not forced to use Steam, but it had advantages, it was easy to get keys (computer magazines). Valve did a good job pushing the agenda. Also it was cool that you could gift items or spare keys to friends, because almost everyone was using Steam.

What got me to abandon Steam however, was how that whole community bullsh** was pushed, how competition was encouraged (something I hated in WOW, that's why I prefered SWG, it was more of a 'together' than 'against') and most of all that everything was tracked, tracking can't be deactivated. So I started cracking my Steam games and realized that this was not the way to go.
I am not strictly against that, I play games on Ubisoft and Origin as well and these track as well, but the whole thing how this is brought to the community is something else on Steam. That's a whole different level.

What brought me to GOG was that they had some old adventures (Gabriel Knight and Tex Murphy) and that they would offer offline installers that would not need a client that would track. By now I replaced a big portion of my Steam library with GOG and sometimes Epic versions.
For some games I do use Galaxy, even if I am not much of a achievement hunter I like to see them for some specific games in my library, GOG was kind enough to offer us a switch to deactivate time tracking. I don't know if Galaxy collects hardware informations like Steam does, and frankly I don't want to know.

The downsides of course are not knowing if or when a game will come here, having no guarantee that the game will get updates and of course the price of freedom: Cut down games that miss part of the content. And if they are not cut down but offer that content when being logged in to Galaxy, it's the people who whine about DRM.


edit: and don't say too loud that Steam only has a 'few' drm free games or someone will jump in and tell you that most games are DRM free and then mention, that you have to count in indies of course. That and often people don't think it's drm if you can bypass it using a text file or a cracked dll. It's still a licence check, the game was just cracked. Only if the game is able to run without the steam dll (or galaxy dll) it can be considered DRM free.
Post edited March 21, 2023 by neumi5694
If you need something else in order to "bypass" it then it indeed is some sort of crack... no matter how you may call it. Of course there is many different methods and different level of DRM protection. In general, the expensive franchises are protected in a stronger way (always with exceptions). Ultimately, as long as something have to be "busted" in order to make it run... it can surely not be considered DRM free.
avatar
mechmouse: This whole Steam vs "DRM Free" conversation is a distraction from the main issue
No, it's not.

This discussion started with a dev/publisher stating, that their sales numbers here on GOG aren't high enough to warrant the extra work/money it would take to release another game here.

That begs the question: why are their sales numbers so low here on GOG?
(as far as I can tell, they released their game on "day-1" here - so, no low sales due to "came here too late")

What is the main difference between Steam and GOG?
Well, being DRM-free as an requirement for the games released here on GOG, surely?

Steam doesn't bother wether a game has DRM or not. Neither do their customers.

Something else?
Well, Steam offers their customers more amenities, besides simply playing their games.
That may very well be another reason for this.
Because Steam customers (in general) very much care for their amenities.

And why can Steam offer its customers more amenities than GOG?
Could this possibly have something to do with the fact, that games sold here on GOG, are required to be DRM-free? - Again?

Hm...to me it sure looks like "Steam vs DRM-free" is right in the center of this discussion.
avatar
mechmouse: This whole Steam vs "DRM Free" conversation is a distraction from the main issue
avatar
BreOl72: No, it's not.

This discussion started with a dev/publisher stating, that their sales numbers here on GOG aren't high enough to warrant the extra work/money it would take to release another game here.

That begs the question: why are their sales numbers so low here on GOG?
(as far as I can tell, they released their game on "day-1" here - so, no low sales due to "came here too late")

What is the main difference between Steam and GOG?
Well, being DRM-free as an requirement for the games released here on GOG, surely?

Steam doesn't bother wether a game has DRM or not. Neither do their customers.

Something else?
Well, Steam offers their customers more amenities, besides simply playing their games.
That may very well be another reason for this.
Because Steam customers (in general) very much care for their amenities.

And why can Steam offer its customers more amenities than GOG?
Could this possibly have something to do with the fact, that games sold here on GOG, are required to be DRM-free? - Again?

Hm...to me it sure looks like "Steam vs DRM-free" is right in the center of this discussion.
River city Girls was released on Steam 5th of September (release date listed on Steam)
River city Girls was released on GoG 15th of October (date of release post on GOG Forum)

Over A whole month later.

I don't have a time machine, so Don't know if Wayforward did any GOG marketing for RCG before that point. Nor do I know the reason behind the delay, but it did exist and it was significant.

But lets not let facts ruin things.

The verifiable fact is Divinity:Original Sin 2 sold 8% of copies via GOG. That is a significant and viable market share.

The problem is of the 8% of PC Gamers that prefer gog, the majority will use Steam if it does appear a game is coming to GOG. This isn't because they prefer Steam, its because for that game (like the vast majority of games) its the only way to play that game. And that a big issue for GOG, because even if a Developer pulls out all the Stops like Larian did and get 8% sales on GOG, they're actually only making an extra 1% or 2% extra sales than if they just went Steam only.
Post edited March 21, 2023 by mechmouse
avatar
mechmouse: River city Girls was released on Steam 5th of September (release date listed on Steam)
River city Girls was released on GoG 15th of October (date of release post on GOG Forum)

Over A whole month later.
Ok. Point taken.
Have to admit, I didn't check the release threads. Got a little distracted here.
My bad, won't happen again.

avatar
mechmouse: [...] Nor do I know the reason behind the delay, but it did exist and it was significant.
Well, maybe it took 'em a month to remove any possible existent DRM from the GOG version (I have no clue whether their game is DRM'ed on Steam).

Doesn't matter: so - 40 days later - and the chances for the second game getting released here on GOG are ruined already?

The 3 years and five months of possible revenue since then couldn't make up for that initial loss?

Well, that doesn't evoke much confidence in GOG and the GOG user base, huh?

I mean...is GOG as a store simply too small to compete with the top dog?
Differently asked: are there too few GOG users to make up a significant revenue base?

Or...and this would be really harrowing..are GOG's users so inpatient, that they rather bought on Steam (despite the (possible) DRM there), than to wait for the (DRM-free) GOG release?

avatar
mechmouse: The verifiable fact is Divinity:Original Sin 2 sold 8% of copies via GOG.
That is a significant and viable market share.
Not compared to the rest 92%

avatar
mechmouse: The problem is of the 8% of PC Gamers that prefer gog, the majority will use Steam if it does appear a game is coming to GOG.
This isn't because they prefer Steam, its because for that game (like the vast majority of games) its the only way to play that game.
Erm, sorry....what?
avatar
BreOl72: Well, maybe it took 'em a month to remove any possible existent DRM from the GOG version (I have no clue whether their game is DRM'ed on Steam).

Doesn't matter: so - 40 days later - and the chances for the second game getting released here on GOG are ruined already?

The 3 years and five months of possible revenue since then couldn't make up for that initial loss?
The vast majority of a games total income is made in the first month. It used to be something like 80%, though I'm guessing its a little less now, but not by much.

So yeah, a month is a huge deal.

avatar
BreOl72: Well, that doesn't evoke much confidence in GOG and the GOG user base, huh?

I mean...is GOG as a store simply too small to compete with the top dog?
Differently asked: are there too few GOG users to make up a significant revenue base?

Or...and this would be really harrowing..are GOG's users so inpatient, that they rather bought on Steam (despite the (possible) DRM there), than to wait for the (DRM-free) GOG release?
This is what I keep saying about "choice"
People will buy a game where its available, for most people the platform or DRM solution is a secondary consideration.

If it does not look like a game is coming to gog (as in no coming soon, or gog logos on a games marketing material) most people will assume its going to be Steam only, just like the majority of the games. If they want to play the game, they'll get it on Steam.... even IF their preferred platform is GOG.

If GOG users all stood their ground and only bought on GOG, GOG would be in a much healthier position. But that's not how people are. In spite what the "No Steam, No Buy" people scream, people are buying Epic exclusives in the millions. Not because they're all gone "Look at this superior platform" but because its the only place you can play the game.

This is what I keep saying about the history of Steam. People didn't choose Steam, they chose to buy a physical disc to play a game and accepted Steam as a requirement. All the bells and whistles that Steam has came long after the death of physical media.

avatar
mechmouse: The verifiable fact is Divinity:Original Sin 2 sold 8% of copies via GOG.
That is a significant and viable market share.
avatar
BreOl72: Not compared to the rest 92%
8% of users in a billion dollar market is not insignificant.
avatar
mechmouse: The problem is of the 8% of PC Gamers that prefer gog, the majority will use Steam if it does appear a game is coming to GOG.
This isn't because they prefer Steam, its because for that game (like the vast majority of games) its the only way to play that game.
avatar
BreOl72: Erm, sorry....what?
100 people in a room
8 prefer to use GOG

Super popular GameX4: "to the Xtreme" is coming out, but doesn't look like it will come to GOG, only Steam

6 or 7 of those 8 People will buy it on Steam.... even though they prefer GOG.

As I said. The problem GOG has, is that even though 8% of user prefer GOG, most will still use Steam if there is no other choice. Which actually means selling on GOG doesn't give an 8% extra sales, its 1%or2% at best.

Its worth noting IF GOG reduced their cut to less than 30% (which is the amount they are currently taking), then there would be far greater impetus for Devs to market their games on GOG, because 8% of GOG sales will be worth far more than 1-2% extra revenue they produce. Its something Devs have been saying about Epic, their 12% cut makes a huge difference even with the reduce numbers sold.
Post edited March 21, 2023 by mechmouse
avatar
mechmouse: Which actually means selling on GOG doesn't give an 8% extra sales, its 1%or2% at best.
Well, there goes GOG's raison d'être.

avatar
mechmouse: Its worth noting IF GOG reduced their cut to less than 30%...
...they would probably be out of business by the end of next year.
It may have escaped your attention, but they are already in financial struggles.

Edit: typo and wrong word
Post edited March 21, 2023 by BreOl72
avatar
mechmouse: The verifiable fact is Divinity:Original Sin 2 sold 8% of copies via GOG.
That is a significant and viable market share.
avatar
BreOl72: Not compared to the rest 92%
Name any company (or employee) which would throw away 8% of their income and call it unsignificant.

Yes, we all know that Steam sells more. If it was 1 or 0.5%, then it could be called insignificant. 8% are not.
Post edited March 21, 2023 by neumi5694
avatar
mechmouse: Which actually means selling on GOG doesn't give an 8% extra sales, its 1%or2% at best.
avatar
BreOl72: Well, there goes GOG's raison d'être.

avatar
mechmouse: Its worth noting IF GOG reduced their cut to less than 30%...
avatar
BreOl72: ...they would probably be out of business by the end of next year.
It may have escaped your attention, but they are already in financial struggles.

Edit: typo and wrong word
Not really
Figures for a £30 game

Selling at 12% to encourage Devs use GOG, to pre-advertise and sell on day one

If GOG gets 8% of 1,000,000 units sold that's 80'000 units.
80,000 x £30 = £2,400,000
12% of £2,400,000 is £288,000

Opposed to current situation and %30
Games get release a month later, and devs don't push the GOG release in marketing material.
If GOG gets 1% of 1,000,000 units sold that's 10,000 units.
10,000 x £30 = £300,000
30% of £300,000 is £90,000

3 times the income by reducing their cut.

It would seriously be in GOG's best interest to have a contract that offers a 12% cut IF devs promise marketing, day 1 release and version parity.

Yes the figure only work IF devs adhere to a the day 1 release and support, but thats in their own interest too
Only about 12% of a games sale price comes back the the developer as profit (from what I can find online), that could jump to 30% for Units sold via GOG. making each GOG copy twice as valuable to them than a Steam sale.
avatar
BreOl72: Not compared to the rest 92%
avatar
neumi5694: Name any company (or employee) which would throw away 8% of their income and call it unsignificant.

Yes, we all know that Steam sells more. If it was 1 or 0.5%, then it could be called insignificant. 8% are not.
I remember working for a company where the sales director had managed to get an exclusive supply contract for a company that held ~4% of a market (Static caravan holidays), the guy was worshipped like a god for weeks and drove up in a brand new Porsche SUV.
Post edited March 21, 2023 by mechmouse
And where do you suppose that wonderous increase in buyers will come from?

Steam users are notoriously loyal to their platform. GOG might attract more developers to publish their stuff this way, but they won't attract more customers.

Let's face it, money talks, especially with the downturn on various economies around the globe, and if you intend to sell your stuff on steam, you can't price it lower anywhere else. It's in their bloody conditions.

So. You can't undersell them, and your only claim to fame is DRM free. Hell, you'd get me that way, but I'm already here, and so is probably everyone who gives a flying crap about that particular thing.

The rest?

"But all muh games are on Steam!"
"But all muh friends are on Steam!"
"But I got this cheap key from Dodgysteamkeyresellers.com!"

It's a losing battle. Unless Steam folds or develops massive technical issues preventing people from playing the games they rented there on a permanent basis, GOG has no benefits for the average consumer that doesn't care about stuff like, say, actually owning their shit and not having to bother with DRM.
avatar
Timboli: Sorry, but I don't see any of that as trying to grab some of Steam's market share, just offering gamers who might buy at GOG instead, some of the features they desire.
The perspective is legitimate, certainly. From my point of view, at the very least, what can not be in question is that those "desires" have been shaped in minute detail by the PC distribution monopoly.

avatar
mechmouse: People accept things they don't want in order to get something they do want or need all the time. Didn't mean they wanted it.
It's a kind of blackmail really. But acceptance is/was at the end of it. And unfortunately, I have to say that the brand loyalty far exceeds mere acceptance. Epic is throwing billions at game enthusiasts, and they still remain with Steam. Epic is buying exclusives, and suddenly PC gamers don't start using another platform that has the exclusives they want. They have that one library on Steam and they feel that they'd do a disservice to their virtual shelf, even scatter their online identity if they ever buy games elsewhere.

It's difficult to apply the usual set of customer and games logic to the kind of monopoly Valve has, because their competitors frequently find that this same logic doesn't apply to them. Not to Epic, not to GOG. All their efforts to be more like Steam have brought them nothing and possibly even were detrimental to their market position.

For the consoles, the cards are shuffled anew every time there's a new console generation. Which is great, because competition keeps them on their toes. Valve has no such competition. Valve is sitting on its fat ass and nobody will ever break what they have.

avatar
neumi5694: edit: and don't say too loud that Steam only has a 'few' drm free games or someone will jump in and tell you that most games are DRM free and then mention, that you have to count in indies of course.
If people asked me today why I don't use Steam, I wouldn't say "DRM". I'd say "Valve is co-financing a genocide". I haven't been approaching this from the DRM angle in a long time, eight years at least. If Valve decided to drop DRM altogether tomorrow, their business clients would have to accept it like they had to accept that absurd no-questions-asked-refunds policy. Valve has long since introduced dozens of 'soft' copy protection measures like the achievements and assorted other social media integration, the auto updates, etc. Every game is cracked within minutes, but you only get the achievements on your profile and the gamer levels and the game cards and assorted other crap if you own the game(s), so basically, we'll see more of the social media bullshit on Valve's platform and less of the hardcore DRM.

But that doesn't solve the problem of the massive PC games distribution monopoly in the hands of an immoral company, quite the contrary.
Post edited March 21, 2023 by Vainamoinen
avatar
von_Hardenberg: And where do you suppose that wonderous increase in buyers will come from?

Steam users are notoriously loyal to their platform. GOG might attract more developers to publish their stuff this way, but they won't attract more customers.
If that was to me, the buyers are already there

8% isn't an increase or new buyers, its the number of PC gamers that if given a choice will chose GOG.
May I add my couple of cents? Recently migrated from Russia to Turkey, I can see clearly why Gog (regional) pricing policy is a disaster. Every game is a lot cheaper on Steam (and I mean EVERY game), on top of that Steam is selling game in TL and Gog only in USD. The difference is so huge for some games it's staggering. Couple of examples: A Plague Tale: Innocence with spring discount on Steam 50 TL, on Gog 8*19 ~ 152 TL, w/o discount on Steam 250 TL, on Gog 40*19 ~ 760 TL; Terminator: Resistance w/o discounts (no discount on Gog): 200 vs 760 TL, Baldur's Gate 3: 250 vs 1140 TL. Indie? A Short Hike (w/ discount): 9.3 vs 91.2 TL (almost 10 times); Grim Dawn (w/o d)-- 144 vs 457 TL, Shadow Man Remastered: 32 v 380 TL, Unavowed : 9.6 vs 128 TL. Some games have a ratio close to 20. Where do you think Turkish gamers buy their games?
They ignore a whole lot of countries for which Steam provided more suitable regional pricing systems, from South America and Africa to Middle East and orient. The world is not only the US and Europe. Even if other countries may make less money per purchase, their share and user-base should not be ignored (should not have been?).
Post edited March 21, 2023 by ng
avatar
mechmouse: This whole Steam vs "DRM Free" conversation is a distraction from the main issue which is

Company B can't get Devs to release their games on their platform because Company A is so dominating it makes releasing on Company B financially unviable for the Devs, which in turn reduces Company B's ability to compete and further strengthening Company A's domination.
In the past a company with Steam's share of the market would be seen as a monopoly -- and limited in certain actions to allow viable competition -- but nowadays...

And EGS makes the monopoly argument a bit harder to prove (although it seems EGS does a much higher volume of giving away free games than actually selling games).

Still, I believe that the first step is visibility... getting the GOG logo on advertisements (both "print" and video) where a game is to be released on GOG; it should sit alongside the ubiquitous Steam logo. I shouldn't be able to watch a release trailer or see a "print ad" for a game releasing on GOG that only displays a Steam logo.