You mean that Steam has better sales?

Because, I do go on Steam to check the user reviews of games I consider purchasing here and as far as the base price goes, it tends to be the same, at least here in Canada.

That sounds extremely hackish. Don't get me wrong, you're talking to a guy who designed his own custom client to download his games from GOG, so I understand where you are coming from, but you just can't sell that as a usable long term well supported solution to the masses.

They are, but the channels for distribution do matter. For example, I stopped purchasing from iTunes years ago (even though their music, once downloaded, was drm-free) when I switched to Linux, because they didn't have a Linux client or website to purchase and download music.

You can have discrimination against certain platforms here.

Also, the method of fetching can have a heavy bias against certain use-cases. For example, if the client downloads & install in a single step, there is a clear bias here against backing up your installers (maybe you can still achieve it, but you have to work around the intended functionality of the client).

And for something closer to home, the fact that GOG doesn't provide an official quality client dedicated to mass-backuping your games sounds to me like they are not fully committed to their drm-free slogan (the advantage of drm-free can only be fully realized if you backup your software).

Not to mention that SteamCMD is not exactly a "micro" client, cut-down yes but not micro, peoples make it sound like it's a tiny WGET equivalent, it is not. It's a proprietary 200+ MB client with more than two hundreds files that works like the full fledged client except it doesn't have an UI.

I'd argue that once a client (Galaxy, gogrepo, web browser or what have you) requires a login to access a download, that technically constitutes some amount of DRM. The distinction here IMO is that it doesn't necessarily mean the game that you download has any DRM. It's just the tech used by GOG on their website to make sure the right people get the right files.

Nope, unless it is mandatory and requires, not only the client, but also online connection or authentication to run / install. There are plenty of game that uses client / server architecture while being 100% offline and DRM-free.

Ok then following your very own definition, you would be perfectly ok if it was mandatory to use Galaxy to download the offline installers as it just be needing to connect to a remote server to obtain a digitally distributed game.

More seriously, I don't think anybody said or imply that it was DRM, this whole discussion was about what is a client or not. Technically it IS impossible to obtain a DRM-free (or DRM using for that matter) game without using a client, the only difference is whenever said client is a dedicated one (e.g. Galaxy, Steam, SteamCMD, etc...) or a standard one (Web browser).

I think there are some points about DRM that do need to be addressed, so here's my position on it:

In the case of downloads from GOG, the server verifies that you have the rights to download a digital work by managing your user account and the downloads you do, and authorizing you before you can access anything. Hence Digital Rights Management. All other debate and confusion about how far the definition of DRM extends aside, this is a textbook example of the core idea: "Did you pay for the digital content that you're trying to use?"

There are also other related ideas involved, such as "Are you legally allowed in your country to use this digital content?", "Did you hack/cheat/whatever and lose your rights to use this digital content?" and the like.

In simple, practical, reductionist terms it's the combination of authorization and denying access when not authorized, but specifically when the thing being accessed is digital content (such as video games, movies, e-books, apps etc).


With today's technologies, authorization can be achieved through these basic means:
* Encryption
* Communication
* Obscurity

They all come down to the same basic mechanism: "I know or have something nobody else does, so if you check that I do, you'll know it's me."

All are weak on their own to different extents, so they're usually combined. This is why you get things like encrypted connections to servers using proprietary protocols. Before the Internet became a common commodity, what was then usually known as "copy protection" systems were doing their best to rely heavily on encryption and obscurity, and failing pretty badly at it as they were regularly cracked.

DRM in TV broadcasting is sometimes referred to as CA (Conditional Access), but it's really the same basic concept regardless of the moniker (both are used). For example in many cases it uses smart cards, which are themselves a combination of encryption and obscurity, and rely on one-way communication (the TV broadcast) to complete the picture. In this case the smart card takes the place of your user account and password. And the purpose is to not let you watch that movie unless you've paid for it.

Even a USB dongle you connect so you can use your favorite CAD program or software synthesizer will communicate with your main system, obscure its own secrets and likely encrypt all its communication so as to authorize you, and thus help manage your rights to that digital content.


Here's the thing.

When a game has DRM in it, this implies there has to be some code in there that is able to authorize the user and verify their rights. Generally it'll be something proprietary, which means it opens up an opportunity for companies to make it highly intrusive and access all sorts of things in your system, an opportunity that can be very hard to resist. To make matters worse, this intrusive technology tends to cause all the more havoc in your system when it ultimately runs into a software bug. Add to that, that DRM systems that install locally tend to get cracked eventually and fail to do the job they were designed for. And the requirement of an online connection that usually comes with DRM these days means that if the server is taken down, you can't verify anything, so you can't play the game.

Those are the reasons that DRM in games is bad, IMO. It doesn't mean DRM as a whole is necessarily bad. If you want to extend the concept of DRM to include any online requirement even without user authorization, fine. It has the same effect anyway in practical terms, and is equally anti-consumer, at least for single-player content.


By contrast, running an online digital storefront without some kind of rights verification to access the things you bought would be insanity. DRM is a necessity there. It's as important as it is to have security in a physical goods store.

There exist standardized web technologies that are perfectly viable and that allow a server to authorize a user without being any more intrusive on the client side than any other account-based website. An online store can be implemented as a service you can access with a standard web browser to handle the client-side part of the authorization. It is unavoidable by nature that it requires an online connection, but this is only true while you access the site or download the content.


IMO, there's nothing wrong with GOG having a modicum of DRM on the website itself, in fact that's where I would want all their DRM to be. But when I buy a game on GOG, they had better:

* Let me download the game without using proprietary bloatware like Galaxy - let me use a standard, open source web client like Firefox or curl, thank you very much

* Let me keep the downloaded content around on a hard drive and install/uninstall it whenever I want, with or without an online connection, and long after GOG is gone

* Include no DRM in the downloaded content (installer, game, etc) whatsoever

My take on GOG's "DRM-free store" isn't that there's no DRM anywhere on their website. I take it to mean that all games sold on the store should be DRM-free.


By the way, there is another anti-piracy technology that, if done right, is not at all intrusive and is very consumer-friendly: Watermarking. The idea is to mark your individual copy in some way so that if the developer/publisher/store or whoever added it manages to obtain a copy made from your copy, they can tell who broke the EULA and use that in a lawsuit. It's kind of a backwards use of the "I have something nobody else does" idea. It's not perfect though, and can be difficult to pull off reliably in a way that's not too easy to remove or obscure.

But if they got it perfected, I would have no issue with watermarking being used as the only anti-piracy measure for games bought on GOG.


Sorry for the wall of text. But I think it needed to be said.

No. That's not what I meant.

Steam and GOG's sales do indeed tend to be comparable. However, Steam allows other sites to sell keys (without Steam getting a cut from it) and GOG (with rare exceptions) does not. This leads to the phenomenon called "bundling" in which a group of (often related) Steam games are sold together (outside steam) for a ridiculously low price.

For example, I recently bought a bundle called "Digitized" from Humble Bundle. It contained 8 games for $10. It contained 6 games I was interested in:
- Solitairica (full price: $10; full price: best historical standalone price on Steam: $2.5)
- Meteorfall: Krumit's Tale (full price: $15; best historical standalone price on Steam: $6.5)
- Wartile (full price: $20; best historical standalone price on Steam and GOG: $7)
- Trials of Fire (full price: $20; best historical standalone price on Steam: $8, on GOG: $13.5)
- The Amazing American Circus (full price: $20; best historical standalone price on Steam and GOG: $10)
- DungeonTop (full price: $16; best historical standalone price on Steam: $11)
And 2 I wasn't (so I gifted them to finkleroy's non-GOG giveaway here on the forum):
- 100% Orange Juice + 9 DLCs
- Talisman: Digital Edition + 3 DLCs

If we take only the 6 I was interested in, they cost me $10 as a bundle, compared to $45 if I were to buy them at their bottom historical (not current discounted) price on Steam, which is by itself quite reduced from the $101 for full price. The difference between $10 (90% off) and $45 (55% off) is very significant for me. The difference would have been even bigger had I wanted the other two games (which seemed interesting, but which I lost interest in as soon as I saw the tens of DLCs they have) --- but even these weren't lost --- someone will get them from the non-GOG giveaway (which is nice).

And this is not the best bundle I've bought (because these games are fairly new). I've previously bought bundles that were 95-97% off from full price.

The fact that GOG does not allow others to sell its keys locks it at the (very) high price range.

The drawback of bundles is that they are effectively non-refundable. But I don't really refund games anyhow (including on GOG).

I'm not sure what "hackish" means (I'm old and do not keep abreast of online language).

If you mean that I am using Steam not the way it was intended, then you are absolutely right. Steam is clearly designed to be used with a client. Using it otherwise is not trivial, nor is it easy.

I use:
- SteamCMD to download and install single-player games, whereas it is intended for multi-player server maintenance
- The Goldberg DLL to disable non-DRM client dependencies (e.g. achievements, workshops), if necessary
- Steamless to automatically disable basic generic steam DRM (not other forms of DRM), if necessary (only had to use it once or twice, so don't have much experience with it yet)
- scripts I have written to automate some of this

I am not trying to "sell" anything. I am trying to offer information that I wish someone had offered me years ago. It would have saved me a lot of money and a lot of heartache. For years, I lived under the false impression that I could not use steam without a client (a real client --- I don't consider a download command-line app to be a client) and begrudgingly continued to use GOG despite being increasingly dissatisfied by it. I know better now.

I greatly prefer to use steam "not as intended" and have up-to-date backupable client-free games at a ridiculously low price than to use GOG "as intended" and have many outdated or lacking games (vis-a-vis galaxy and vis-a-vis steam) at a much higher price.

The problem with Goldberg DLLs, in my experience, is that it fails to emulate Steam server only activities.
In some games, which you're required to connect online for a first time launch, Goldberg emulator can't fool this request, with a "offline answer" or something, and you're still unable to play them without connecting online at least once. Still, this can be my ignorance, because I haven't tested everything it has to offer, so sorry If there's a way to activate some kind of "Steam is offline" response inside the emulator files.

For fully offline games, though, it does work flawlessly, with a couple of file management annoyances (Because it defaults everything to common Steam used folders).

But it's a good option if you're willing to play your steam games, legally, without steam running.
The best right now, I'd say.

About the "What is DRM?" topic:

Digital Rights Management implies that someone must Manage the Digital Right of a Digital product, so at least a Web Page/Server would be necessary to athenticate the user and give him the download option of said product. Like Time4Tea said, considering the E-Store a "Bad DRM" is kinda of absurd. This opens a dangerous precedent about getting digital products.

What we're agaisn't is the anti consumer DRM, just like Time4Tea said: DRM as means of controlling the user (a.k.a "You can't play this game if you don't use my client!"), harvesting his data, etc. Right?

I didn't come across this issue yet, but I'm still new.

As far as I'm concerned, that's exactly it, plus the risk of bugs causing unintended anti-consumer behaviors in systems that need not be there in the first place. It's bad enough already when the games have them.

I do apologize for sounding like a broken record, which I'm sure I do to some. This isn't the first time I've brought up that subject.

And one also needs internet and a browser to DL from ANY game store.....the point to note, though, is that once said Steam games are DLed via such methods then they are essentially DRM free.

=-=-=-=

Well said

I don't.....not only does it treat customers like potential cryminals, but it might interfere with compatibility in the future(like some other DRM does nowadays), and might also potentially return a false positive & get a legit customer in trouble.

=-=-=

But then why post that bit......was it just to point out your view/stance(on both being clients) and nothing else? Or did you have another reason for stating such as well?

(I ask, as it could[key word] be viewed as an attempt to paint Steam and Gog as more or less the same due them both using "clients")

edit: nvm, I saw you replied to this in post 3591 :)

=-=-=-=

That's the problem with the masses,.....many these days are(or seem to be) very lazy & want everything spoon fed to them. Imo doing such steps shouldn't be too hard, and people should get used to not having everything(generally speaking) done for them all the time.

Example: some on these forums can't even figure out dosbox config file editing, and in each .conf file there are instructions as to what each setting does

I suspect they do it because they believe it will reduce their income.

The partners and/or Gog? Either way, I think you may be onto something there.

GOG.

Tbh, I think it's a bit of both....that said: thanks for the clarification :)
(also hope you're having a happy holiday season...same to all itt)