Quite simple - because Steam-key resellers are a dime a dozen. If I wanted a Steam game, I could get it from GMG, Gamersgate, GameFly, Get Games, Amazon or one of the dozens of other obscure and endangered glorified Steam key resellers, or heaven forbid, from Steam itself. The market is oversaturated with Steam key resellers and becoming just another one of the crowd means that sooner or later - more likely sooner - they're likely to come toppling down.

GOG survives because it has a different business model that it sticks to.

If Shinyloot doesn't want to put the effort in towards ensuring that they offer games DRM-free that other sites only have as Steam keys, then they're superfluous. Sure, they've can now get Skyrim, Morrowind and whatever else, but people can get that just as easily from sites that they already have accounts on.

I'm disappointed, but not that much. I thought (and still think) that selling DRM-free games together with keys for other platforms (if available) is a worthwhile business concept, but ShinyLoot came late to an already crowded market, in which customers have grow accustomed to dumping prices. Heck, GreenMan had to burn through millions of investor money to get the market recognition they have today, and they still had to raise prices for certain regions, because the prices that customers are expecting just won't sustain a shop unless you have a massive userbase already (or extremely low operating costs). I didn't expect ShinyLoot to last long after they admitted to underperforming their expectations a while after their launch. I guess broadening the catalog is a natural reaction.

I don't really think much in terms of "broken promises", actually I pretty much stopped thinking in terms of "promises" at all with regard to businesses. If a friend promises to do something for me and then does not, yes, that's a matter of concern. If a business changes one of its core stances, it's business. Sure, it may make me less likely to buy their products if I supported the stance they changed, but the whole emotional layer of promises, betrayal, etc., just doesn't exist for me any more when businesses are concerned.

Next step: Regional pricing, to prevent Europeans from buying cheaper Steam keys. :P

Also, what kind of focus is "centered around game discovery and exploration" - what does it mean in the first place, and how is that a "compliment to the stores that are already out there", like e.g. Desura and Indievania? To me it seems they're doing the opposite of what they claim, by becoming just another of these stores without USP.

Another Steam reseller? oh well, nothing to be surprised, i better just take my games and escape. I never considered Shiny Loot to be long living store. Their transition to Steam just confirms that they sunking.

Another one really disappointed in this move. ShinyLoot was one of the very few (good) alternatives for DRM-free advocates - they even have games missing from GOG. I expect their Steam collection to pretty soon overshadow their DRM-free one.


And to think that not so long ago I was in contact with them and expressed how much I like what they're doing. I guess I have to correct this now.

Again. it was expectable. IGS folks too said previously "only DRM-free" but lately its turned that "on special occasion" they can sell Steam-only stuff. They dont allow, still, steam-only stuff in store, but...
Well, well, its sad news anyway.

What I get from all this is basically something like this:

Yeasterday:
ShinyLoot sells Gothic DRM-Free - Wheeee!!

Today:
ShinyLoot sells Gothic DRM-Free and Steam key for Crusader Kings - Booooo!!!


the difference for someone wanting to buy DRM free game is? (considering Crusader Kings will probably never be sold outside Steam)

And the more stores the better, competition is surely just good for the consumer.

As stated in my post, I'm rather indifferent to the change myself, but I think the answer to your question is already in the posts in this thread. A purchase is not only purchase, there is (to varying degrees, depending on the respective customer and the circumstances of the purchase) the "voting with your wallet" aspect, i.e. the wish to influence the direction of the market with the only tool we have, our wallets. So it's like this:

Yesterday:
I can buy Gothic at ShinyLoot and support a shop that advocates DRM-free games, which is the direction I want the market to take. Wheeeee!

Today:
I can buy Gothic at ShinyLoot and will make no statement regarding the market whatsoever since ShinyLoot is just copyng the practices of the majority of other shops in the business. Meh.

Not too difficult to understand, is it? :)

Actually no. I think that this more competition in this particular market at the current point in time rather leads to all shops (except the very large ones) becoming less profitable because there's one more party that wants a piece of a pie that isn't terribly large at this time already.

I guess this is what people don't like about it, as it's clearly not as simple as just selling Steam keys for games that "will probably never sold outside Steam". It's also encouraging publishers to just stick to Steam, or to only offer Steam keys when they were fine with offering DRM-free versions in the past.

You make the same statement by buying the DRM free games from that store, but not the DRM's ones... maybe even a bigger statement, as you have a distinct choice then. That is also not too difficult to understand, is it? :)

I do the same here on gOg, i buy classics here, but not new games. That is my choice. But if others want to buy new games here - meh. I made my statement.

edit - the message you send otherwise is "When DRM'd games get added to a store selling DRM-free games, the DRM-free games stop selling. Ergo, there is no point selling DRM-free games"
Then it becomes the survival of the fittests - i.e. the store which offers the best service. If one store buckle unders and another emerges victorious, then that it only leads to the stores with the best service and prices are left.

Well, I seem to have to rethink my statement. Apparently concepts like "voting with your wallet" _are_ more difficult to understand than I thought. ;)

I said: "I can buy Gothic at ShinyLoot and support a shop that advocates DRM-free games, which is the direction I want the market to take."
You said: "You make the same statement by buying the DRM free games from that store, but not the DRM's ones"

Which is obviously _not_ the same statement, since I'm _not_ any more supporting a store that advocates a movement that I want to support. I _would_ still make a statement, of course, but a different one, more focused on ShinyLoot than on the market as a whole. You can, of course, debate whether this second statement is as useful as the original one, but to the people who do want to make the original statement, it won't cut it to tell them that they can make a different one.

Which answers the question that you asked. Unless the question was simply rhetorical and your actual point was to criticize people for the type of statements they want to make - in which case I apologize for participating in the discussion.

It's not that simple. The shop that goes under has taken away potential revenue from the other shops, which may make the difference for them if they survive or not.

Yes, having competition is definitely better than having a monopoly, no doubt about that. I'm simply making the point that each market can only sustain a given level of competition before it becomes detrimental to the competitors. And I believe that the market for digital distribution, due to various contributing factors, may currently be in this state.

Chris is currently responding in the thread if anyone wants to follow up.

Yes, you tell that store that you want them to sell DRM-free games, and that it is that part of the catalogue you will support.

Disappearing, and not supporting the DRM free games, only meaning that the DRM'd games sell (as that client base comes) only tells the store that it was wrong going so strongly out for DRM free anyway, which may have influence on the next actors setting up a store - looking at what worked and what did not work elsewhere.

I like the way gOg deals with classic games, but not the newer games, so I will buy my classics from here and support that part of gOg. Disappearing and just buying my classics from for example Steam, sends the wrong message, in my opinion.

To be honest, I do not see how a store going under reduced the revenue of another store... I do agree that there is now too many actors, and some will fold, but I think it is those who do not get any support and/or have lower service. And I think that is fair. However, I am unsure how this leads to your conclusion.

Sounds like I really need to get on the SL bandwagon. GOG seems to reject quite a few games that I know I would like.