DRM-free games

[Shame]

I think it's safe to say people are going to move over to buy games from GOG if they are available there more and more. They have high discounts just like Steam, if not even higher and more frequent, not to mention a higher product quality and customer-satisfaction ethic.

If Valve wants to compete and keep on top as a PC game distributor, they should allow you to actually own your games and get them DRM-free. Then where you buy your game from would be a case of which one has it first or which one can sell it to you for cheaper at a given time (depends entirely on what the customer is looking for and when).

Otherwise GOG always wins in the long-term. May be that's a good thing, but yeah, I probably won't be buying any more games through Steam if DRM is just going to stay here. But don't think about going the "exclusive" route, cause that's just gonna make things worse for you, Valve. I would love to get Mario Maker 2, but I am not getting a Switch just to play that, so unless your games become DRM-free in the future, I'm just getting games from GOG when they are available.

[Crazy Tiger]

The issue with GoG is that it has a much smaller catalog due to their DRM policy. People won't go over, people will use GoG next to Steam just as people have been doing for years.

Question though, OP. Are you aware that GoG isn't doing that well financially?

[Tito Shivan]

Most people don't really care that much about DRM. They just play games. And because of their hard stance on DRM free titles GOG will always lack a series of best sellers to drive people to the store.
Developers are also free to release their games DRM free in Steam (there's lots of Steam games that don't require the client at all)

And DRM or not, the game ownership is in either case ruled by the same license terms. DRM only gives devs a way to enforce the license terms and avoid abuse.

DRM free doesn't mean you get to do whatever you want with the game.

[MoonC A T]

Tito Shivan님이 먼저 게시:

Most people don't really care that much about DRM.

This.

It sounds worse than it is because the only ones that talk about it are the ones that it bothers.

[🅷🅴🆇🅴🅽]

I have yet to see a game which gave me any problems with it's DRM.

[MoonC A T]

S H ▲ N D O R님이 먼저 게시:

I have yet to see a game which gave me any problems with it's DRM.

I think it's more about laziness than problems

[Spawn of Totoro]

Developers choose to have DRM or not and have a choice on Steam. GOG, they are told they are not allowed to have DRM.

It is as much a right of the developer to choose as it is the end user.

There are limits to DRM free as well. For example, you can not use the GOG Diablo with out Battle.net is you do not download an use it though GOG Galaxy. Same may even consider that a for of DRM.

GOG is also having trouble making money. They layed off people and even removed their Fair Price Package program.

https://www.techspot.com/news/78937-drm-free-pc-gaming-storefront-good-old-games.html

[Shame]

Crazy Tiger님이 먼저 게시:

The issue with GoG is that it has a much smaller catalog due to their DRM policy. People won't go over, people will use GoG next to Steam just as people have been doing for years.

Question though, OP. Are you aware that GoG isn't doing that well financially?

They catalogue is substantial, they even have Rain World, a game I wish I had known I could have got DRM-free.

I wasn't aware of them not doing well financially, but they ought to do better over time given larger library of game availability going forward, and clearly there are plenty of people interested in DRM-free games.

Tito Shivan님이 먼저 게시:

Most people don't really care that much about DRM. And because of their hard stance on DRM free titles GOG will always lack a series of best sellers to drive people to the store.
Developers are also free to release their games DRM free in Steam (there's lots of Steam games that don't require the client at all)

And DRM or not, the game ownership is in either case ruled by the same license terms. DRM only gives devs a way to enforce the license terms and avoid abuse.

DRM free doesn't mean you get to do whatever you want with the game.

It means you don't lose your games if the platform you got it for/from shuts down. That's the risk of the vast majority of steam games, the one only exception that I know of and own being Don't Starve and 2/3 of its DLCs.

I don't see what the issue is with the licence, of course making copies of a game you have bought and sold is still illegal, but you are free to install the game for personal use, even save it on a disk for keeping a hard copy for yourself, and none has the right to stop you, no?

DRM inherently encourages piracy. Without DRM pirating a game would hold less and less ground and probably become less frequent as a result. Not that it won't go, but it is something to consider when requiring DRM for your game.

MoonCAT님이 먼저 게시:

Tito Shivan님이 먼저 게시:

Most people don't really care that much about DRM.

This.

It sounds worse than it is because the only ones that talk about it are the ones that it bothers.

S H ▲ N D O R님이 먼저 게시:

I have yet to see a game which gave me any problems with it's DRM.

MoonCAT님이 먼저 게시:

S H ▲ N D O R님이 먼저 게시:

I have yet to see a game which gave me any problems with it's DRM.

I think it's more about laziness than problems

Not so, and DRM should bother people more, and it bothers me a lot, but of course people are not going to care until ♥♥♥♥ hits the fan, like Steam being shut down. Or, for instance, games that have additional DRMs and if that DRM shuts down, like was the case with that one Tron game that sparked a bit more discussion concerning DRM:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yUmR6eQNrY

[Electric Cupcake]

Gog is the only real competition Steam has.

Epic, Origin and uplay are worth about as much as a bucket of warm spit.

Humble Store is good.

[RemyXIII®]

Hugsie Muffinball님이 먼저 게시:

Gog is the only real competition Steam has.

Epic, Origin and uplay are worth about as much as a bucket of warm spit.

Humble Store is good.

Using the word "competition" when comparing GOG and Steam is a huge stretch

Epic is a far bigger threat, though their business model is not sustainable

[Shame]

Spawn of Totoro님이 먼저 게시:

Developers choose to have DRM or not and have a choice on Steam. GOG, they are told they are not allowed to have DRM.

It is as much a right of the developer to choose as it is the end user.

There are limits to DRM free as well. For example, you can not use the GOG Diablo with out Battle.net is you do not download an use it though GOG Galaxy. Same may even consider that a for of DRM.

GOG is also having trouble making money. They layed off people and even removed their Fair Price Package program.

https://www.techspot.com/news/78937-drm-free-pc-gaming-storefront-good-old-games.html

They are blunt with their reasoning and don't go out of their way to screw you over. Even if games are more expensive, I respect their decision. Who knows, if their business model works out and they start making a lot more money, they may bring that feature back. I would rather buy a game for $15 without DRM than the same game at $10 with DRM.

DA|Astelan님이 먼저 게시:

Hugsie Muffinball님이 먼저 게시:

Gog is the only real competition Steam has.

Epic, Origin and uplay are worth about as much as a bucket of warm spit.

Humble Store is good.

Using the word "competition" when comparing GOG and Steam is a huge stretch

Epic is a far bigger threat, though their business model is not sustainable

Isn't Epic really only big so far because their company was already well-known? Comparing something just through their profits alone doesn't mean you can't compare them with other factors, like the very fact that GOG sells DRM-free games and Steam rarely has any of those. In any case, the more people buy games from GOG, the bigger they will grow.

[Spawn of Totoro]

Shame님이 먼저 게시:

They are blunt with their reasoning and don't go out of their way to screw you over. Even if games are more expensive, I respect their decision. Who knows, if their business model works out and they start making a lot more money, they may bring that feature back. I would rather buy a game for $15 without DRM than the same game at $10 with DRM.

That is just it, their model isn't working out too well at the moment. The only big titles they get for release are from their parent company and even then, many buy the games on other platforms.

You may be willing to spend more for DRM free, but there are many who are not and will get the game's cheaper elsewhere if they can.

To buy DRM free or not is a personal decision.

A developer making their game DRM free, regardless of platform, is a business decision and they will choose what they feel is best for their business. In most cases, DRM to maximize profits in the first few months, when the game makes the most money.

So I don't see Valve changing their policy any time soon and forcing developer to have DRM free games. They will likely continue to let developers choose if they wish to include DRM with their game or not and that, imho, is how it should be.

So if you want to see a game DRM free on Steam, then I suggest asking the developer as it is not Valve's decision to make.

[Shame]

Spawn of Totoro님이 먼저 게시:

Shame님이 먼저 게시:

They are blunt with their reasoning and don't go out of their way to screw you over. Even if games are more expensive, I respect their decision. Who knows, if their business model works out and they start making a lot more money, they may bring that feature back. I would rather buy a game for $15 without DRM than the same game at $10 with DRM.

That is just it, their model isn't working out too well at the moment. The only big titles they get for release are from their parent company and even then, many buy the games on other platforms.

You may be willing to spend more for DRM free, but there are many who are not and will get the game's cheaper elsewhere if they can.

To buy DRM free or not is a personal decision.

A developer making their game DRM free, regardless of platform, is a business decision and they will choose what they feel is best for their business. In most cases, DRM to maximize profits in the first few months, when the game makes the most money.

So I don't see Valve changing their policy any time soon and forcing developer to have DRM free games. They will likely continue to let developers choose if they wish to include DRM with their game or not and that, imho, is how it should be.

So if you want to see a game DRM free on Steam, then I suggest asking the developer as it is not Valve's decision to make.

I then stand corrected concerning DRM on steam then; I simply figured that because so few games on steam have DRM-free versions, all games sold on steam require to have DRM, even when you are a developer selling a game, because you can only get a DRM-free version of Don't Starve, for example, if you go to Klei's own website to retrieve a standalone copy, at least to my knowledge.

Also an additional question; is it possible for a developer to change whether the game requires DRM or being DRM-free?

[Crazy Tiger]

Shame님이 먼저 게시:

Crazy Tiger님이 먼저 게시:

The issue with GoG is that it has a much smaller catalog due to their DRM policy. People won't go over, people will use GoG next to Steam just as people have been doing for years.

Question though, OP. Are you aware that GoG isn't doing that well financially?

They catalogue is substantial, they even have Rain World, a game I wish I had known I could have got DRM-free.

I wasn't aware of them not doing well financially, but they ought to do better over time given larger library of game availability going forward, and clearly there are plenty of people interested in DRM-free games.

I've been using GoG for years and no, their catalog isn't substantial. Personally I merely use it for retro games as those versions often are better, which is logical considering the background of GoG. But other than that, no, not a big catalog.

They limit themselves with their DRM-free stance. They won't do better over time unless they make radical changes. The fact that they aren't doing well financially also shows that being DRM-free isn't enough of a unique selling point. Now with the Epic store buying themselves a place in the market, it'll only become harder for GoG to keep its place.

[Shame]

Crazy Tiger님이 먼저 게시:

Shame님이 먼저 게시:

They catalogue is substantial, they even have Rain World, a game I wish I had known I could have got DRM-free.

I wasn't aware of them not doing well financially, but they ought to do better over time given larger library of game availability going forward, and clearly there are plenty of people interested in DRM-free games.

I've been using GoG for years and no, their catalog isn't substantial. Personally I merely use it for retro games as those versions often are better, which is logical considering the background of GoG. But other than that, no, not a big catalog.

They limit themselves with their DRM-free stance. They won't do better over time unless they make radical changes. The fact that they aren't doing well financially also shows that being DRM-free isn't enough of a unique selling point. Now with the Epic store buying themselves a place in the market, it'll only become harder for GoG to keep its place.

Why would Epic be doing well? Stupid exclusive crap? Well that's an instant no-thank-you from me. PC was standing out as something that had no exclusives, unlike any console in existence, but now Epic is bridging that gap?

@DA|Astelan you mentioned that Epic's model isn't sustainable, what did you mean by that?

[Yasahi]

Shame님이 먼저 게시:

Why would Epic be doing well? Stupid exclusive crap? Well that's an instant no-thank-you from me. PC was standing out as something that had no exclusives, unlike any console in existence, but now Epic is bridging that gap?

@DA|Astelan you mentioned that Epic's model isn't sustainable, what did you mean by that?

Epic is handing out free games in order to "buy" customers. They've been at it for quite some time and announced they'll be giving one away every week this year. They're paying for those games, burning money in order to gain market share.

Free games pull in people, market share goes up. In that regard Epic is doing okay. They can't sustain that business model in the long term though. But for the short term it's fine since Fortnite brings in enough money still.