Actually, this is a flaw that potentially exists in other DD platforms as well... including GOG

No, i'm not kidding, GOG has the same "issue", and it's pretty easy to notice... funny enough, i don't see you complaining about that.

a lot of people are going to flame, but trust what some of us say and get it on steam, you will find out later how the benefits roll in later.

I'm not complaining about it because you are simply wrong. Apparently you just didn't understand what I wrote above.

Once again: the games I have already bought and downloaded from GoG will continue working on my XP machine, even if GoG suddenly said they are not supporting WinXP anymore (at least in their future games).

In GoG's case, that does not affect my ability to run my existing GoG games on the platform I originally bought them for. In Steam's case, it does, because (most of) the Steam games rely on me running the common Steam client, which may or may not work on the original platform anymore.

It is funny how some people like Jepsen complain that I tell this "over and over again", and STILL it doesn't seem to get through to some (like you, for example). Apparently I haven't repeated it enough many times yet. :D

So if I install a GOG game on a computer, check that it works, and put the computer inside a bunker for 20 years. Then, after those 20 years I take the computer out and boot it. Assuming nothing's broken, you're saying that the game might refuse to work because GOG has stopped supporting the OS the computer has? How does it even do that, I mean, it doesn't connect to GOG to check.

Same experiment with a Steam game. The first thing it does is try to update the platform, and go all "holy cow, not only do we not support your OS anymore, we're bankrupt, lol" or alternatively "you're not connected to internet, shame on you".

:D

There are sooooo many things wrong in your message, so I'll start with the most obvious ones.

1. Which is worse: me telling in a Steam-related discussion that I didn't even start about the drawbacks of Steam that many people like Antaniserse are obviously still ignorant about, or people like you complaining that I tell about them, especially as you people seem to lower yourselves to ad hominen attacks? You seem aggravated as if I called your kids ugly, I didn't realize Steam is that touchy subject to you.

2. "Nobody asked for your opinion...", so who asked for your opinion then? I know I didn't. That has to be the most stupid argument I've seen in ages, congrats to you for that.

3. Fine, you lose your games anyway if your house burns down, but at least it is at least partly in your control (e.g. prepare yourself and your house for fire hazards). What Valve does with Steam is not in your control whatsoever. Thus, your analogy does not work.

4. You claim the original question was not about Steam vs GoG in general... So what was it about then? That the gameplay of Far Cry offered in Steam and GoG is different from each other, or what? I would presume that the advantages and drawbacks of the delivery method are generic to all games, not just Far Cry 2.

5. "You will not change your mind about Steam and refuse to see any advantages in it...".

First of all, I don't see you or any of the other Steam proponents changing your mind about it either, so you are just a pot calling a kettle black. Quite on the contrary, you keep claiming that the disadvantages that I raise are not really disadvantages at all, and does not really affect anything, like your flawed "your house may burn down"-analogy.

Second, I have already said it before that IMHO Steam is pretty good platform for e.g. multiplayer games (that require central gaming servers anyway). So you were wrong with your claim that I fail or refuse to see the positive side of Steam.

And as always, it takes two to tango. This Steam-related thread would be much smaller already if you Steam-freaks didn't come here one by one with your silly ad hominen attacks, with nothing worthwile to the discussion other than to voice your displeasure with my opinions.

At least I am talking about the Steam platform itself (which is what this discussion was about), you are not. So maybe you should heed your own advice and STFU, okay? I didn't force you to read any of my messages.

Have you noticed that all the native DOS games sold on GOG are packaged in a single, Windows 32 bit executable? Why?

That means that, even if the game would run flawlessy in a DOS environment (even better, since you'll not need emulation of any kind), they cannot be installed on the OS they were intended to run.... you have to hack with some 3rd party tools to manually extract the files or use a second PC to do a setup & manual transfer.

This also means that, with future OS, you'll always have to deal, potentially, with 2 different layer of compatibility: will the setup program run? will the game itself run?

Not to mention that they are all bound to a free, 3rd party emulator thay they have zero control over, that might cease to work/be free/be supported/whatever at any time.... what if DOSBOX version xyz stops Win XP support in the future? what guarantee you have that they wont?

Those are all understandable, yet arbitrary, choices made by GOG... i know, i'm nitpicking a bit here, and are not really "issues" to me... yet, they have the same potential consequences of your Steam example.

(sigh) No, they are definitely not the same thing at all. I don't know if you are deliberately misunderstanding, or just building strawmen.

You bought a GoG game in order to play it on certain OS, just like you bought a PS2 game in order to play it on the original PS2 console. You will be able to continue doing this for however long you like, as long as you are using the original OS/system you bought it for.

Your examples of "what if the game doesn't work on some future system or OS, what then huh???" are totally irrelevant. No, I do not expect my PS2 games to be playable on e.g. future PS4 console (if there will be such), even though it would certainly be a nice extra. Similarly, if I bought a GoG game for e.g. WinXP or Win7, I don't necessarily expect it to run ok on Win8 or Win9, even though that would always be nice of course.

Either way, by default Steam offers less compatibility with different OSes than e.g. GoG because Steam does not guarantee that your older Steam games will work with future OSes either, and at the same time Steam will revoke your ability to play them on the original OS for which you bought the game for, as soon as they decide to drop support for that OS. GoG does not do the latter, just like Sony does not prevent PS2 games from running on PS2 console for which you bought the game for afterwards.

Just to clarify: the GoG versions of DOS games were never intended to be run on a genuine MS-DOS computer, and never were marketed as such either. They were re-released by GoG as games to be run in Win32 environment, period. However, of course it can be considered as a bonus if even that is possible with a workaround, if someone wants to try it for some reason with his GoG games.

Naturally this discussion does not concern e.g. Far Cry, because it is not a DOS game.

First of all the OP was asking about FC1 on GoG vs Steam in relations to mods, "extras", dlc etc. for the game - not about GoG vs Steam in and off itself. And like so many others have already told you, your first comment was fine but after that you are just beating a dead horse again and again. I'm not sure you understand the word ad hominem attack because nowhere in my post did I do that - if I call you a retard that's an ad.hom. attack since I haven't use logics to show why I think that. But I never called you any names and I only told you to shut the fuck up about your constant Steam bashing since it serves no purpose - but that's only a request that you can choose to follow or not. So no, I didn't use ad.hom. attacks here.

Since several other goggers have written the same as me against you I assume that they would "ask" me about my opinion. The reason why they have written against you (like CaptainPyro) is that you pollute the forums with your constant Steam hate. Noone has ever said that you cannot state your opinion on this but do it ONCE and then move on. Imagine if a person who loves consoles would come on to GoG and hijack every single thread about PC games by telling everyone how much better consoles games are - that person has the rights to do that but at one point the rest of the community would probably tell that person to shut the fuck up about since it serves no purpose. And that is what some of us do with you, we say: state your opinion on Steam ONCE but then move on.

I'm not a confrontational kind of guy and I prefer to spend my time on a forum where people can get along and share ideas about PC games in a civil manner. I love RPGs but hate RPGCodex because most people there behave like raving jackasses. The entire point of my post to you was to hopefully get you to think about the way you behave on these forums and the "tone" of your posts. CapPyro called your posts redundant and I totally agree. This is why on most forums you are told to stay on-topic. I guess what I hope from you in the future that you will ask yourself before posting another Steam bashing if it serves any purposes to do so and if it doesn't then I hope you will stop yourself. Sometimes we have to think about the greater good of the community rather than just our own little egoes.

I have no desire to start a flame-war here and I have no ill-will against you. I hope we can agree to disagree and then leave it at that.

As before, your message has nothing to do with the original question, just with your personal problem with me.

So you use the first paragraph to prove that you are not using ad hominem attacks, yet in the next one you once again start telling how "many GOGers are against you" and how "you pollute/hijack discussions". Here, I'll provide you the definition straight from Wikipedia: As for what the OP was asking, he simply asked what advantages/disadvantages there are getting e.g. Far Cry from Steam or GoG, and later he asked whether the Steam version is modable.

And if I am really beating a dead horse, why then is the horse still moving? It takes two to tango, I am not arguing alone.

Further, your "you are like a console gamer who would tell in every GoG discussion how much better console games are" doesn't work because I am voicing my opinion in relevant Steam-discussions like this one, and I am not doing this on a Steam-lovers' forum, steampowered.com. You would have a point if I was doing it in the Steam forums, but I'm not. This is a site which promotes DRM-free gaming, if you didn't notice. Steam is not DRM-free gaming.

Also, I think it is a complete joke you call yourself a "non-confrontional guy" with a nice tone, your earlier messages in this thread speak for themselves. Just read them yourself if you don't believe me. Same for using CapPyro as an example, considering his sarcastic responses to me. My tone back to him was just as sarcastic, I have no reason to apologize.

Voicing my opinion "only once" would be great as long as it got through to you so. Considering the lenghty discussion afterwards seems that this is not the case, like the misconception what e.g. Antaniserse still seemed to have in regards how Steam and GoG works, it didn't seem to work with one try. Just because you feel you "understand" what I'm saying, does not necessarily mean that e.g. Antaniserse does. You don't have to read my replies to him if they aggravate you.

I understand exactly how both system works, and the Steam issue you were pointing out; my analogy was not meant to say that GOG has exactly the same problems, but to note that there are issues and compromises regarding compatibility even here.
Yes, they are small nuisances, yes, they don't rely on online DRM so they can be fixed more easily, but they are still here.

Now, if you think you need to instruct me more on how those services works, please don't: i already know.
If, on the other end, this followup is a valid excuse to continue your endless repeating of how and why Steam sucks, then by all means feel free to go on, i honestly don't mind at all.

Really? where is this thing specified?
Because, at most, i can find this sentence in GOG's feautures list:
"Thanks to our handsome programming team, the classics are now Windows Vista and Windows XP compatible. "

It does not say that they are re-released as Win 32 games only, nor that they are not intended to be run on a native DOS machine... and there is really no reason to assume that, more so if you consider that the files inside the Win32 packages are completely untampered and in most cases the exact copy of those originally distributed for DOS (while some old Win32 titles here have been indeed directly patched, so the EXE are modified)

Check any game page, there is a list of compatible OSs, GOG only promises that their games will run on those OSs. Some DOS games are modified to be better suited for modern systems, like they have their music replaced by MP3 files, disks are mounted as images on DOS box, the installer only works on Windows, etc.

It is a simple logical fallacy, a "red herring argument", to say that the extra restrictions in Steam do not matter if e.g. GoG has any restrictions at all (like that they don't necessarily provide the ability to play their current games on future systems like Win8 and Win9).

Your red herring argument goes like this: "Since some people avoid taxes, it is ok to rob banks.".

Steam also has the same restrictions that you mention (like that they are not necessarily playable on all future systems and OSes, or that some old or emulated Steam games are not directly playable on the original (emulated) system with their release; something that no one is expecting anyway), but on top of that Steam has the design flaw (or "feature") that it will afterwards revoke your ability to play the Steam games you have bought from them on the systems they were originally marketed and sold for by the Steam system itself.

OmegaX already replied to you about your claim that GoG is promising or even implying their games to be playable also on genuine MS-DOS system (many of them may be with workarounds, but they have never been marketed as such).