I like gog , its great. But do i get something wrong? I used steam for more than a year in the past and i used it in the offline mode most of the time. So , there are games you can play without internet which you call half DRM free and there games that cannot be played without internet which you call DRM? Then i never met a complete drm game. If there are games like that , that sucks , i have shitty internet thanks to my father and my government.

I'm sorry, I don't remember who made this originally. It's also pretty much all I have to contribute, since I'm way to tired with the subject to argue with people who try to convince others that Steam isn't DRM, the Earth is flat and Megan Fox can act.

...said nobody ever.

I actually disagree. As long as the game can be installed (or unzipped) and played without a client that requires an online login at any point, then it is DRM-free by definition. It doesn't matter if the game (installer) needs a specific store-exclusive download client, be it Steam or Galaxy.

Let's also remember that the old GOG Downloader was (is) also a store-specific (download) client, and people using it didn't feel it made GOG games less DRM-free.

It is just that requiring such specific "download client" is maybe less convenient. Yes, a web browser is a client, but since there are browsers for about any connected device, it gives much more freedom to download your games. For instance, I can download my GOG game installers even with an Android device if I wanted, by using its web browser. I don't think I can do the same if I tried to download them with Steam or Galaxy.
It is not only whether you can play an already installed game without an active internet connection. It is also about whether you can install the said game (without an internet connection, or a client requiring you to validate yourself online).

For a Steam (or Galaxy) user it might be harder to make this distinction because there "downloading" and "installing" are not apparently separate actions. They seem to be one and the same, ie. whenever you want to install a Steam game, you also download it at the same time (normally).

The basic test for a DRM-free game is whether you can move it (or install it) to another PC which is not connected to internet at any point, and start playing it there. If you can do that with a Steam game, then it can be considered DRM-free, even if originally required Steam to be downloaded from Steam servers.

Gog is growing, but steam is still very large.

If gog grows a lot that's good for users because steam will have to add gog options.

For example to me and my friends we like to make achievements but we do not always have internet connection. That option will be in gog soon but it is not in steam. If gog grows valve you will have to add that option.

The Steam vs. Gog war is good for users but gog is still far from steam. Maybe they should get their next game exclusive in gog now that gog starts to be a strong platform.

But the steam client *IS* mandatory. You can't download anything from steam unless you have the steam client installed on your machine. Hence, steam is the DRM.

With GOG, you can just download the game, and that's it. You're good to go. No nasty bloatware clogging up your system.

Steam suck's. (my opinion)

The rise of Steam made this kind of DRM popular.

But the follow ups like Origin, Uplay and what so ever are worse than Steam,

this is why most of the gamer's and I agree that Steam is the lesser evil in this shark pool.

of money greedy Publishers. (not all of them are but most)

BUT !!!, this DRM invention caused another one to disappear almost completely.

SecuROM and other like root kit DRM became out-fashioned.
In this regard Steam even helped us a little.

Steam also used existing game('s) to lure many player to it's client.
While Counter Strike 1.5 was Steam-free, they made it with the 1.6 update a Steam game.
So stick with 1,5 and have all the downsides at hand (cheats/hacks/..) or move to Steam and 1.6.

This combination of luring non Steam gamer's to steam (CS 1.5 to 1.6) and later releasing games like Half-Life 2,
Team Fortress 2 and more showed Dev and Publishers other than Valve that Steam is an option that costumers
accept by millions.
And we all know how it ended, Steam became the most popular DRM/DRM-less choice for game releases.


I prefer to have the all offline option, no client needed to install and/or run the game of my choice.

And some also mentioned "DRM less" games exist on Steam.
Client needed for installation but not to run the game.

One of them is Silent Hill: Homecoming (retail UK release)
When installing the game, it want to have the client open, after installation close steam and
browse to the installation folder and run the Homecoming.exe.
(This is valid with the the vanilla retail UK release, maybe they changes it later with an update)

Both Steam and GoG give a nice re-download/availability option.

With Steam a lost disc means you can still get the game by download,
same with lost GoG files, just reload them.
On this matter they are even, and have a backup advantage over retail only releases.


Unfortunately not all games I want are available on GoG, so I still buy some games on DRM-infested
distribution platforms.

I am an old school player and I really like to be able to have my game library without the need of a client that does not interest me in the least with its features. I mean, ahievements? i know what I've done and don't need for people to see them, I would have to replay old games I played years ago for having the achievements displayed. And all that collect random stuff like cards dosen't interest me either, I consider myself a collector but there are better things to collect that that.

And what I consider most important of all. Gog is an amazing filter, steam is LOADED with crap they call "games" here you get what has perdured through time.

I don't say Gog is perfect but I just like it a lot more than Steam.

No it doesn't.

That website merely claims that those games are "launcher free once installed," which presumably means that one needs to engage with Steam DRM at least once before those games can be installed. Based on what that website says, I also infer that one cannot make DRM-free backup copies of installed games, because they do not provide the user with a standalone installation file (which means one would have to engage with the Steam DRM yet again every time the game needs to be installed another time). Therefore, based on what that website says, nothing on that list is free of the Steam DRM.

Furthermore, that list is infinitesimally small next to the entire library of games on Steam which likewise have the Steam DRM, only to an even worse extent.

When you say that, are you including the Steam DRM itself? How many Steam games are exempt from the Steam DRM itself? Zero?

Play your games where you want. I personally purchase and play my games on Steam these days, and if I find a game I REALLY liked, I'll buy it here and back it up so I'll always have a copy.

That way when Trump starts WW3 I'll be cozy in my bunker with my video games still. Surrounded by my cans of beans, packets of seeds (which WILL be the new currency!) and my rifles and ammo. It's a win-win for me.

That is still wrong. Even a web browser is a client, and you need to log in to your account with it in order to download your game. But the important part is whether you need the online client to install or play the game at any point. That defines if it is DRM.

GOG Downloader was also a separate online client where you had to log in to download you games, and no one felt it made GOG games less DRM-free.

So, just leave the downloading part out of the DRM discussion. Downloading a game is the same thing as when you bring a physical retail game to your home from the store or the post office brings it to your home, it is part of the delivery and has nothing to do with DRM. It is only when you start actually using the game (install, and play it), where it matters whether you need to be connected to some validation server or something.

Why? Are you talking feature-wise, or are UPlay and Origin somehow more "evil" than Steam?

First I thought how bad it is that EA releases some games only on Origin (and not e.g. on Steam)... but then Valve does the same, you can't buy Valve games on GOG or Origin either. Heck, even GOG apparently limits some games to their store, like all those games where the publisher is GOG Ltd (Fantasy General etc.).

I know I said I would't get involved in this but this is such utter bullshit I just can't. Utter, total bullshit.

A browser is necessary because it actually is necessary. As in, it's impossible to access your account without it, to do anything without it. But the Steam client is not. It is made to be necessary. It's an artificially added requirement.

To use your analogy about bringing the game home from a store, it's as if to play the game I was required to call a cab to go to and back from the store, and only a cab of one, specific company.

And the GOG donwloader was optional, as in actually truly, fully optional, so what in the hell has it got to do with anything?

I have no idea why you think that the tool (client) used to log into your account and download your game has any bearing on whether the game can be considered to have DRM. That just doesn't make any sense.

Why would that be "DRM"? It doesn't matter how you are made to bring the game home, it only matters what you are made to do after you have the game in your possession (at your home).

Sure it may be more convenient to you that you are given more choices how to deliver it to your home, but still it has absolutely nothing to do with DRM. I already said before that browser downloads may be more convenient for some people, e.g. you can download your GOG games even with an Android device which you can't do with Steam or Galaxy clients.

Let's use another analogy. You buy a physical retail game from an online store, and the only way they can deliver it to you is to use your national post office network. So you can't tell them to e.g. bring it to you using DHL, or go to their online store yourself to pick it up with you own car. Only one way, using the national post office (snail mail).

Is that DRM? According to your logic it is because you are given only one option for the delivery.

So if it had been the only way to download GOG games, would that have meant all GOG games would have suddenly had DRM? Including those I have already downloaded before?

Interesting how people (like me) to whom DRM-free matters, didn't have any objections on using such a downloader client which is supposed to make the games DRM games.

I still can't understand your logic that having several different client options (e.g. web browsers, or the GOG Downloader) to download your games has anything to do with DRM. If there were two different kinds of Steam clients (with which you can download your games), would you then consider Steam games DRM-free? (Actually I do think there is some third-party tool to also download your Steam game files, but you just can't install nor play them with it, for that you still need the original Steam client. Someone mentioned that tool in some other discussion before.).
Another thing for you to ponder, since you concentrate so much on which kind of client is needed to access your games (a browser, or a store-specific client like Steam or Galaxy).

Let's say that in order to, not just to download, but also to install and play your GOG games, you'd always have to log into your GOG account using a web browser. So, you want to play Baldur's Gate which you have already installed your PC, but before you can run it, you need to log into your GOG account with any web browser.

Would you consider such games DRM-free? I wouldn't because it requires you to log into an online account every time you wanted to either install or play the game. It is irrelevant which tool you are allowed to use for this log in.

You, on the other hand, seem to suggest that since that log in is made with a generic web browser (and not a specific store client), it is not DRM.

Stop concentrating on the tool itself, it is irrelevant. The only thing what is relevant is WHEN you are required to log into your account. If it is only for the delivery of the product (to e.g. download your game), but not for installing or running the game, then it is not DRM. Period.

...would you rather he post a "GOG hasn't sold any new games this year/GOG is now just selling only new indie shovelware/GOG doesn't sell good games anymore!" thread? :P