Same here and I've got backups of the backups since my last data crash.
Two docking stations and two times 5 HDDs (4tb + 2tb + 2tb + 2tb + 2tb).
My GoG folder is by far the biggest one atm since I always download all languages etc... in order to actually own everything I bought and have it immediately available offline any time.

^ This, except that I do it for Win (and starting to for Linux) on two 3TBs external HDDs, and for all languages I understand/speak if the game was originally released in a language other than English.

There's no reason to rely on the availability/reliability of a service (be it GOG or an ISP) at the time I feel like playing any one of my games.

I backup my stuff on an external 500 GB hard drive, though it's almost full. The stuff I really wanna make sure and keep I make second backups of on USB flash drives.

The possibility to install (and run) a game on a computer that is completely cut from the net. 3 years ago, when I settled in my new appartment, I had 4 month without the net. I went to my parents' house during the weekend, DLed the installers there, put them on a USB key, and installed the games on my shiny new appartment desktop.

At that time, my game collection was 50% Steam, 50% GOG. Now, it's 70% GOG, 30% Steam. It's not a coincidence. ;)

As a former Steam user, I call this whole 'hundreds for sales' thingy bulls. Not much games are on sale, and even then they're not the very games I'm looking for, which is what Steam fanboi like to imply. Even then, I don't care what key sellers outside of Steam sell their keys at which prices, that's their prices and I don't care. I'm pretty sure as damn hell that I'm making rational decisions based on whether the games I'm buying will be something I 'own'. As in I can do whatever the hell I want with it without having to tell Mom Steam in the cloud that I own it. I'm not going to spend a dollar on a rental game when I'm uncertain of my internet existing, or the cloud existing.

Games you rented for 8 years ago are still available to play now, but there's no guarantee they'll be available to play further down the lane. As said games rely on external servers to verify that you own it, and then said servers going down, you'll be unable to play any of your games no matter the circumstances, unless you're willing to crack it. It doesn't matter whether the game is a repetitive and boring experience such as Five Nights at Freddy's or a great and excellent experience such as Grand Theft Auto. Ownership should still exist in one form.

No way. The value that the game gets from being DRM-free is greater than you expect. Again, it doesn't matter whether I'll replay or even play the games I buy. Most Steam purchases seems to be useless purchases as they end up unplayed, out of compulse purchases. I'd say that paying full price for a game and then having it for an indefinite period of time is worth it over buying at half the price, yet being forced to rent it under extra terms of agreements and server checks as if they somehow think I pirated their games. Heh, the vibe of treatment I get from DRM games, that I'm a potential pirate, is also a variable to increase the value of DRM-free games.

Its time that people stopped using the majority and the minority excuse to force us to go their way. And its time they woke up to the difference between ownership and rental.

There is nothing wrong with that, people should only support business policies that are acceptable imho,
but I guess having all the needed files available offline immediately on any system without hassle is one of the big reasons for many people.
If you live in censor-happy countries like Germany, Steam (and probably UPlay and Origin too?) has the big disadvantage of shutting you out of your games when you're in the "wrong" location, even if you already "bought" them.

I'm not saying that it's wrong. I'm just arguing the "renting" angle, and he keeps mixing arguments. There are certainly quite a few reasons to choose DRM-free, it's just that people tend to exaggerate their importance and aren't willing to accept that for many other people (or even for themselves) these reasons don't apply.

It's the same with companies and DRM. DRM is used (IMO) more due to emotional "how dare they take my games for free" than proven monetary damage. Which is completely understandable, but not that helpful in the end.

Both camps are able to find the flaws in the other side's logic, but not in their own.

Of course , buy a cheap external USB drive (or NAS storage) to store your files on :)

(I don't buy anything GOG without downloading install files to harddrive)

Pretty sure owning has a value, and decisions based on it are rational. That's pretty much the problem with digital games nowadays, DRM-free or not. There is no method of transfer that works properly until now. But until then, DRM-free games are simply more valuable than Steam games, due to their longevity, and their playability no matter the given situation. You were far from generous. There's all sorts of value in owning it far than having it forever. The DRM-free game simply can be played on as many devices as I own, can be played on a fully offline computer, can be reinstalled as many times as possible, do not need an account to run, etc. These pretty much should raise the value of a game tenfold. Yes it lowers the value in a big way. You don't own the game by any stretch. A Steam game is governed under the SSA, which deems that your games are okay for as long as the duration of your account. That and reverse all the things I said above about DRM-free games, plus add reliance on the publishers' services and being on good terms with them. Not that renting is inherently bad, but what's inherently bad is when the industry offers no way to own the game and instead force us to rent and make up excuses to back this thought up. I see a higher percentage of games being unplayed on Steam than on anywhere else because of the compulse purchases. Of course, it depends on whether I'll end up playing said game or not that my decision be logical or not. If I see no reason to play, I see no reason to either own it or rent it with my money. And if I want to play immediately, it is owning or nothing. I'm not the only one judging the value by the vibe here. Many do. Many prefer to pirate their games and be outright pirates than be treated by big companies as consumers with a great potential to be pirates. At least pirates enjoy cracked games, superior beings to DRM'd games.

I guess, this is one of the strongest arguments when it comes to the difference between owning and renting:
I've read about people that have been denied to play their games for even more silly reasons.

I guess that 'renting' is simply used as a catch-phrase for 'DRM-related problems'. That's a shitty use for the word, and it would be good if people stopped using it for that, but at least I understand its use better.

And yes, as I said before, for every DRM problem there's a small subset of people who suffer from it. And frankly I'd say that it's more a problem of Germany than a problem of DRM. (But of course, DRM does make it a more serious problem for some.)

I frankly have to say, that this is flatout wrong, since German law allows owning and playing those games, only the selling has some barriers (but is not forbidden in general and this only applies to selling it inside Germany anyway, importing is ok), so the problem is still just DRM.

Okay, I stand corrected. My suggestion would be for people affected to e-mail Gabe Newell.

Well it’s certainly a big draw for me personally. The site bills itself on being DRM-Free and offers an alternative platform for those of us who are concerned about such things. Not everyone is so interested though, and the value you’re assigning to ownership is somewhat nebulous and varies from individual to individual. I would tend to agree with ET3D’s claim that Steam prices are generally lower, and then refer back to your mention of price and value. When any service offers a cheaper price, the first question we should ask it how. Where is that difference coming from?

GoG tests the product, has a 30 day money back guarantee, and in the case of older games usually ends up retrofitting it for modern systems. Steam’s quality control is to put it mildly, a running joke. The store has hosted software breaking more copyright laws than a Pokemon party-thrower (isn’t it great when everything comes full circle?), and while its refund system is fantastic next to its previous policy, it’s still far from ideal. GoG offers safety, Steam offers a revolver with a bullet in the chamber. GoG offers quality assurance, Steam offers Day One: Garry’s incident, the aforementioned bullet.