"You mean like people willing to pay $50+ for a retail copy of System Shock 2, despite it being available for ~$10?"

not the same thing. having it be $110 after the store owner checked your wishlist would be.

"Or willing to pay pre-order price for The Witcher 3, simply for being TW3?"

not remotely the same thing.

You mean like being denied entry on contests or GOG clubs due to reputation? Despite being a community member for a long time?

two wrongs don't make a right. however, here we run into a convoluted mess with regards to the validity of the rep system, and the integrity of certain aspects of gog culture. ignoring all of that, you could say here again, that data mining causes problems. if there was no rep system, you would eliminate this problem. but where do you draw the line? is the rep system bad information to keep? I think most would say no. but if it keeps a supportive vet out a of contest he was interested in, then maybe it is. is how much you've played a game bad information to keep? again, most would say no. but if it keeps a skilled, earnest player out of a clan because he has other things to see to, then maybe it too, is. I say two wrongs don't make a right but maybe you argue it isn't wrong. okay. but the rep system is also a different thing than time played in a game. rep is doled out not just for forums posts but also curated by the community. your game time has no such inherent element of merit. something like rep would be more like denying someone based on lack of skill-based achievements racked up in a game.

The practice has been around since the retail age, and gog uses it as well. I consider it a difficult point to argue for Steam rejecting PC players.

Ahhhhh.... American.

Just kidding.

They track it, and then they go on to publish it. Is there a button in your Steam profile that says: "Don't publish my statistics"? I'd love to know.

Valve has always been absolutely open about their business practices, and I've never thought they were dishonest towards their customers. But honesty and morality are not exactly the same thing.

See above.

They absolutely control the market and will one day be able to phase out the PC like Sony does the PS3. It should never have come to this.

Those massive sales bring indie developers down, and those devs are in a love-hate relationship with them because it's like playing Russian roulette. Those millions and millions of customers served would have sustained thousands of alternative game publishing services and thousands of additional jobs in the industry; Valve did not deserve all of these customers. The price reduction has turned into an absolute joke in the meantime, and the industry well knows that it can not survive on these kinds of prices (sure, EA, Rockstar and Ubisoft could). Hence the strong migration towards consoles and mobile.

"Hate" is a strong word. I refuse to use it. I'm not that angry at Valve - they saw a market niche and used it, always customer cuddling. I'm angry more at my PC gamer peers who have willingly maneuvered the PC platform into this absurd and destructive market situation. Those who ask for "Steam integration" and Steam keys from every single developer without considering the consequences (4,500 votes on the gog wishlist alone, an absolute disgrace). Those who ask for a GOG "Steam like" client because they're unable to use an .exe file. Those who get aggressive when they buy at the Telltale Store and only afterwards recognise that this doesn't bring them a Steam key. It's completely ridiculous.

You can be against something without hating it.

Really great points. Thanks for the input.

I don't drink coffee

I fully agree with you on that point.

I don't think it brings devs down per se, but rather strongly influence (read 'dictates') how games are made :
- shorter life cycle (completion time reduced),
- half-assed story (because "statistically" people don't finish games -> this is linked to Steam watching how you play)
- hype and more hype, because half-truths are allowed if that sells.
- you can start selling unfinished products thanks too early access ...

That's what on the top of my head. But the "gamers don't finish games is important", I don't remember who said in the thread "why should I care Steam if watches how I play ?", here's my answer : I care because they make their stats, probably sale their studies/reports to game devs (or should ....) and help them make average games for the widest range of customers possible. And that sucks, I want good games with good endings.

Edit : and I digressed, I started talking about sales and reduced life expectancy of games, finished ranting against Steam and big modern titles, sorry for that :(

I didn't assume anything. You did. I just decided to go along with it. You said "Most likely these people are uneducated, young, greedy, self centred, and probably spend the majority of their time poor."

I did not state anywhere in my comments that I thought you were rich. I have no way to justify a thought on that matter one way or another. And honestly I don't care if you are rich or not. My points still stand. Nowhere in your reply to me did you even touch on any points that I brought up. My points are valid, and please give me a rebuttal if you disagree.
I am a collector. I like knowing I have every aspect of a particular item, whether it is a movie series, a book series, a board game collection, or a digital download collection of add-ons for a game that i barely play.

I also disagree with the philosophy behind DLC, but I am at war with myself anyway, because when I bought Sleeping Dogs, it was on sale for 7.49, or 9.99 with all the DLC. That is one of the best games I have ever played, graphically and otherwise. So, I decided to pay the extra so I could tell myself that I had the whole game.

I know I am playing right into their hands when I do this, but, to me, it really is worth it. I could decide today to never buy another DLC pack, and it would not change a thing. It would take hundreds of thousands of people doing the exact same thing to change anything, and I am too tired and too greedy for revolution. (Cue people jumping on my case for admitting that I am greedy)

You may not call me an idiot, and yet I may still be one, because I read your comment, I agree with what you are saying, but I still don't care about the data they mine. I don't play multiplayer games anyways. I play single player ones, and I put time and energy into the ones I like. I don't care if I am rejected by a group for not having enough time in a game. That has been around since long before steam, and it will be there long after. Those types of people are the ones I try very hard to avoid anyways.

Those devs "that make average games for the widest range of customers as possible" would make such games anyway. You want them to accidentaly make games more to your tastes because they didn't have proper data? Me, I want devs that believe in their work, such devs wouldn't be swayed by the data about "majority" but would deliberately push towards their niche of choosing. There just needs to be business model for that and a culture of that. Just like with niche movies, art and such. Nothing to do with data. You don't need much data to know that you can't top charts with ambient music and yet there are bands making just that. I believe more data as such is good, for scientific purposes at least (the problem is how it is handled, but that's a completely different topic).

I give a f--k to the extent that I want to see it checked off the wishlist and for it to act as a mechanism to get other big publishers interested in GOG ("Wow, CDPR is selling their AAA game DRM-free; maybe we can at least sell our classics in that way to make some money...)

But I too am mostly interested in the GOG announcement.

Woot, time to re-play The Witcher 1 & 2 :)

I didn't play the Witcher games either, because of several things about the game that made me not want to play it. So, I'm afraid I can't quite muster up any enthusiasm for Witcher 3 either. So, for those who are fans, good for them and may they enjoy the surprises GOG is unveiling.

I'm more curious about Cyberpunk 2077, and would love more details, mainly to know if it will be a game for me, as I can't tell at this point. Overall, my current excitement is pegged for the GOG announcement. :)

Interesting. Can you share what were those things? I've heard various criticisms of the Witcher games, but usually from those who played it and didn't like for some reason.

No. I haven't played any of them, and I have no interest whatsoever in doing so, for some reason. They just don't spark my interest, and there isn't enough time in the universe to play every game people say I should, so I'm totally okay with the fact that I will likely never touch a single Witcher game.

Me too but mostly because I want some gameplay footage to hang onto and frankly something that isn't made to look more awesome than it actually is.