Depends on the game. As I mentioned in another thread, there are many games on Steam which are DRM-free and do not require the client. GOG’s advertising suggests they are the only method for getting such games, but as always, the devil is in the details.
Mostly it comes down to how much you feel about one issue over the other, but I don’t see how they can be unrelated if there’s a monetary transaction involved.
Considering games with no DRM can have it added retroactively, that Steam pushes updates I may not want with no option to decline, and that that wiki can’t even load in its entirety without erroring out for me and comes down to user submitted data, GOG’s DRM free promise is more than just advertising.
Oh, I absolutely would – I’m just making a point based on a previous statement earlier in the thread:
Considering games with no DRM can have it added retroactively, that Steam pushes updates I may not want with no option to decline
If the practice is that you need local backups on purchase anyway, then I fail to see the difference between non-DRM games on Steam and those on GOG. It feels like a different goalpost is being used depending on what service is being discussed.
Undoing DRM-free quickly enough that I couldn’t download my remaining installers would be speedrunning the failure of a company faster than Unity, but other than that, they can’t take away what I and others have already downloaded.
The difference is that even with the convenience of a launcher, I can decline an update that would undo DRM-free rather than manually copying every vetted DRM-free game on Steam to another directory every time there’s a patch. And that’s only to entertain this apocalyptic what-if that would never happen because it would trigger false advertising law suits would instantly destroy the company.
I leave my Steam update settings to only update on Play. This allows me to pretty easily review what is being patched in to any particular game and choose if/when to apply it (true that choosing not to apply means no longer using the Steam client for that game).
It’s also trivial on Linux to keep the Proton prefixes and game installs backed up automatically. This has the added benefit of making all game installs portable.
Unfortunately GOG still has no official Linux client, though there are workarounds. The “apocalyptic scenario” would ultimately kill either company, so you’re right to think it is moot.
Depends on the game. As I mentioned in another thread, there are many games on Steam which are DRM-free and do not require the client. GOG’s advertising suggests they are the only method for getting such games, but as always, the devil is in the details.
Mostly it comes down to how much you feel about one issue over the other, but I don’t see how they can be unrelated if there’s a monetary transaction involved.
Considering games with no DRM can have it added retroactively, that Steam pushes updates I may not want with no option to decline, and that that wiki can’t even load in its entirety without erroring out for me and comes down to user submitted data, GOG’s DRM free promise is more than just advertising.
Maybe. If you trust them, though now… I don’t.
The reason why this doesn’t concern me at all is that the very nature of the business I run means that I explicitly don’t have to trust them.
Does it? What recourse do you have if they change their policy and you don’t have local backups of your games?
If ownership is what you’re worried about, why wouldn’t you already have the installers downloaded and backed up?
Oh, I absolutely would – I’m just making a point based on a previous statement earlier in the thread:
If the practice is that you need local backups on purchase anyway, then I fail to see the difference between non-DRM games on Steam and those on GOG. It feels like a different goalpost is being used depending on what service is being discussed.
Undoing DRM-free quickly enough that I couldn’t download my remaining installers would be speedrunning the failure of a company faster than Unity, but other than that, they can’t take away what I and others have already downloaded.
Neither can Steam. Then the difference is down to those games on Steam which are not DRM-free.
The difference is that even with the convenience of a launcher, I can decline an update that would undo DRM-free rather than manually copying every vetted DRM-free game on Steam to another directory every time there’s a patch. And that’s only to entertain this apocalyptic what-if that would never happen because it would trigger false advertising law suits would instantly destroy the company.
I leave my Steam update settings to only update on Play. This allows me to pretty easily review what is being patched in to any particular game and choose if/when to apply it (true that choosing not to apply means no longer using the Steam client for that game).
It’s also trivial on Linux to keep the Proton prefixes and game installs backed up automatically. This has the added benefit of making all game installs portable.
Unfortunately GOG still has no official Linux client, though there are workarounds. The “apocalyptic scenario” would ultimately kill either company, so you’re right to think it is moot.