hmm.... from the thread over on Shiny Loot -

"What's more, the massive loyalty to GOG by most of the DRM-free crowd truly made it difficult to thrive. I read the forums regularly there, and there have been numerous times I have read about a DRM-free version we sell that people would rather wait for GOG to sell than buy it from us. I'm very appreciative of how much support all of you have given to ShinyLoot in our short existence, so I'm very open to suggestions as how to blend these two effectively"

http://www.shinyloot.com/forum/index.php/topic,55.msg249.html#msg249

Hi Chris. :-P

How representative of the DRM-free gamers' market are vocal posters on GOG's own forum? I mean, if GOG loyalists are going to make themselves visible anywhere it's disproportionately likely to be here.

Yes. And that may or may not be the point you (as a customer) want to make. Or, making a different point (such as helping GOG or DotEmu as clear advocates of DRM-free games to gain a stronger position in the market) may be closer to what you want than telling ShinyLoot that you prefer the DRM-free part of their catalog.

I understand what you're saying, I just think that there isn't much point debating this, as it comes down to the personal feelings and intentions of the customers.

Well, I knew that I would sooner or later buy EU4, and I bought it at the shop of y preference when it had a good price there. If that shop didn't exist, then I may have bought it now from ShinyLoot. But it does exist, so I already own the game, so I have no reason to buy it from ShinyLoot, no matter how they price it. One shop gets the revenue from me buying EU4, the others don't. The others do not get the revenue that that one shop did.

Regarding the "too much competition may become detrimental" part, look a bit closer at what businesses are usually doing in a situation like that. Keep in mind that digital distribution of games is a growing market (gaining more customers over time due to people's increasing tendency to buy digital downloads instead of physical products). Thus, shops - even when their current situation is bad - tend to try and hold out until these "better times", hoping to get a fair share of these new customers that will undoubtedly enter the market. They try to get investors onboard, they try to get loans, they sell property they wanted to invest in, they run risky business practices, in short - they do things that wouldn't actually be advisable considering their current business situation, but that seem worth a try _if_ things improve in the future. In short, it's a bet, and a risky one at that. And like all risky bets, they may fail. At some time their bank or investor or whoever wants money, and then they have to fold.

And the problem is, each shop that will fail that way, has taken its share of customers and revenue away from other shops while it existed. This means that ultimately, there will be shops who will go down because of things they had to do to stay afloat while there still were more competitors. Shops which would have survived had they gotten a part of the revenue that these failed shops have claimed, but which can't survive because in order to compete with those and stay alive, they had to run risky practices as well, which bite them in the behind later. Which, in turn, causes a situation in which _less_ shops survive than if there had been less competition before. Even if you say that "competition is good, period", you should be aware that periods of over-competition in a crowded market may lead to eventually less companies surviving than compared to a market with a more healthy competitors-to-total-market-revenue ratio.

If they have a DRM-free section and DRM section, then I don't see the problem- whatever works for their business. That said, I think there should definitely more than one DRM-free games sellers, and honestly, I am mainly driven by wanting to save money.

Well I am not surprised by this move - not at all. It appears that they've been struggling to gain market-share despite their best intentions. Me, well, I'm going to see the half-full side of this glass while also checking each game card very carefully to make sure I get a drm-free copy. See, until lately, I've never had a problem with drm (most games I'm going to play once and then again maybe years from now, if ever), so as long as I get good value for that one play-through, I don't really care if I have a drm-free copy backed up some place.

All that being said, my most recent experience with a couple of Daedalic games (notably TWW Steam version won't run at all - yes, major troubleshooting was done), so my stance is shifting steadily towards more games on GOG and other sources of drm-free downloads. But I'm still going to support ShinyLoot. I'll still be checking their sales and gamecards for drm-free games on my wishlist.

On the plus side, I love how ShinyLoot really listens to input, has made numerous fixes to their site and maintains an amazingly cheerful attitude to all customers. If they've got to add Steam-only games to help increase their market-share, well hopefully the funds earned will help them build their drm-free game library as well.

Hey, it's a dog-eat-dog world out there and I can't really blame a business for hunting down every possible revenue source they can and trying to attract the widest possible customer-base. They're way too small to stand on principles and hope for the best - sad but true - so I'll still spend some of my dollars there.

~soap-box free~

Competition with GOG can´t be a proper argument. I mean, they go to sell Steam keys, how many other shops do that? Yes, it´s a larger market, but I think that proportionally there are more Steam sellers for consumers than DRM-free ones. They say that loyality to GOG cuts their deal. GOG is about 5 years old and SL started about when? They wanna build a customer field, they must work on it, with time and offering different, innovative things.

There is a difference between "no gOg, no sell" - as you can only buy the game on gOg

and

"No Steam, no sell" as you can buy Steam keys everywhere from anyone.

fair enough.

Maybe, but that is just how it works in a free enterprise. The only other option is to 'protect' certain stores, and that is really not viable. Whenever you shop like this, it is taking a small punt each time that the store do not buckle under in the near future...

I think part of the problem was that ShinyLoot never really seemed to put much effort into providing a unique service in the first place. I never had the impression that anyone was overly loyal to GOG over ShinyLoot, but I did have the sense from the forums - and hold the sentiment myself - that ShinyLoot's DRM-free range didn't really offer much that GOG, DotEmu, Humble Store and Desura didn't already offer.

I buy from GOG, I buy from Desura, and on the odd occasion I buy from DotEmu owing to their exclusives, but despite regularly browsing the ShinyLoot site, I never really found much that I couldn't already have DRM-free on GOG, Humble Store or Desura. And I really don't fancy splitting up my collection any more than necessary.

When you consider the work that GOG has put in to getting previously DRM'd games DRM-free like Alan Wake, Chains of Satinav and Riddick, the fact that ShinyLoot only stocked low-grade indie titles that were all already DRM-free is an indicator that the ShinyLoot team were either too lazy to make a real effort to get the exclusive stuff on board or too incapable to negotiate such terms.

I think you do the loyal GOG customer base a bit of a disservice. You would have seen the amount of times customers who bother posting on forums (irrespective of whether it represents the bulk of majority or not), people have said they willing to wait for a given game to be sold on GOG, and many rebuying a game when it comes here. Sure theres a few people who shop around (it seems a lot of the regulars) - hell ive had a SL account since way back, but i rarely find anything worth buying there personally (a lot of it seems to be middle ground games Desura sells). Yes its a shame SL is going to become yet another Steam key reseller like Humble, GMG, GG etc but hey sounds like they want to try and make more money and dont feel they can compete vs GOG...or at least it seems to me. At least they are honest and make an announcement (Desura snuck Steam only stuff onto their catalogue without any such announcement or that i can remember)

I was really looking forward to buying Supreme Commander DRM-free, until I actually read their e-mail, not just looking at the pictures. I think getting upset with SL is a little short sighted though.
They have not said they will be dropping DRM-free games, and their game-cards are easy enough to read that I can spot what type of DRM they have without a problem. So as long as they continue to support the sale of DRM-free games I will continue to buy from them when the price is right.

The argument with GOG holding the lions share of the DRM-free market also worries me. _Not_ because I think SL is not trying hard enough, but becasue if that is true (as we all believed anyway) then DRM-free gaming, still more then 5 years on, has such a mountain to climb that we might well be using oxygen tanks to breath before it really gets anywhere near the peak.
I can see why a company would want to hide behind the vail of DRMed games, but I cannot see how people can be so blind still, as to willingly buy games at more then $5 which can and eventually will be turned off. If it cost you more then a pint to buy and gives you less satisfaction then the number of pints you could have had, then it just is not worth it.

SL is doing what it must to survive and grow, they stuck to their ideal of DRM-free / lite and found that they could not get into the market as they had hoped. Yet we also know that DotEMU has issues with bringing games to the table as does GOG and even HB struggled.
As the DRM-free stores cave one after another (GOG has show they could cave too), I do sometimes worry. I would like to think that gamers would pay and play games DRM-free as their first choice, I know that I do. Yet there seems to be a fundmental pivot in the gaming industry that leans too far to Steam and no one ever feels the need to bring it up, even with GfWL and GameSpy ending, with Origin stopping people accessing games they own because of a blip in the internet speeds, SecureROM, Tages and et al all causing more issues then they fix for the gamer (not the companies making, distrubuting or selling) none of the people premoting games appears to address the issue.
The issue is that gamers are getting screwed over by companies that care so little about them and their rights that they basicly tell us to take it "as is" and then go away so they can count their money.

The problem is that the companies selling DRM-free games are not only looking to their right at the table and seeing others eating from a much bigger pie, they see how small theirs appears and that they cannot all sell the same games and survive.
What they all appear to be missing out on is that the Steam pie is limited too and that as they play for a much bigger pot, that there is also a much larger fall. Steam is only more conveniant in the short term;
-DRM-free games come with the problem of high overheads, they have to keep the servers running - no turing them off for a few hours.
-Once a game is sold that is it, I actually own it.
-Users could upload games to a file server.
-You need to have some kind of customer support.
Just to name a few. Yet there is little proportionate reward for DRM-free sellers. They can make a higher markup on a lower cost game via Steam and hopefully get in enough revenue to survive through all the 90% off sales.

I wish that digital gaming did not have this cut-throat culture of deep discounts, but I also enjoy it as a customer.
The problem is that the head of GOG was right when he said that too deep sales were a bad thing, but then even GOG could not compete with Steam, so they began to do the same deep sales. Occasional sales with better normal priceing would be better, but both the publishers and the stores know that they need to be able to discount at a true price so the "normal" price is set much too high. Just look at many new releases now and then again in 6 months to see how much it really cost them to make and the price they really tink the game is worth,
Steam used its already inplaced customer base and cheap games to try and knock out the competition, who in turn were forced to take the option of deep discounts or else be run out of business. Here GOG seems to have a fairly large user base which can accomodate the loss in price from sales by shere quantity of the sale. They also have CDP behind them who I feel could not afford at the time to see them fail. Maybe unlike GG's old owners who seporated from GG, GOG and CDP are still close. You only need to look at the images of the offices to see that there is a big CDP sign outside the GOG office.
SL does not have that same luxury at the moment and whilst I only came to know of them because of their deals with Groupees I can safely say they are the smaller store here.
So Steam continues to grind up the unwary, who are forced into the old addage of "if you cannot beat them, join them" and will begin to sell Steam only games. It is a loss without doubt, but not one I will sit by quietly watching.

I will continue to buy games from SL when they are DRM-free and at a price right for me. I did not stop buying from GamersGate, I do buy from Desura and IGS, HB and Groupees. I will continue to buy games that I want, and that match my life, I will not be forced under by Steam and although I do not live _for_ the day they decide to close off peoples games because they cannot be bothered to support them, I do live knowing it will happen.

In the end SL is doing what it must, as have many other stores including GOG. We cannot blame them. The staff there just want to do something enjoyable with their lives and hopefully have a thriving business. When they are barely making even then I cannot judge them for trying a new direction to stay in business. It will not suit many people out there, but it will unfortunately (for me and my dreams) suit many more people out there then me.


In the end though this all falls down to us, as the consumer, to amend the market. I like many others write e-mails to the development studios and publishers of games I would like to play and point out that I enjoy DRM-free games. That I will happily buy their game for a reasonable price if it is DRM-free. Yet if they wish to sell their game caked in DRM I will wait until it is in a bundle or given away free with a magazine before I play.
They will miss out on a decent amount of proffit as I only intend to buy Steam games at $1-5, but will happily pay a fair price ($10-20) for a DRM-free game.
I feel all the hoops I have to jump through as a paying customer to be immoral. So I do admit to downloading cracks for nearly every SecureROM, Tages and Steam game I own, just so I can play without the DRM. I do not see it as immorel when I gave them a dollar. I have even rebought several games on GG and GOG just because the version available was DRM-free.

Maybe the DRM-free revolution everyone bangs on about is not going very fast, but one day there will be a true backlash against being cornered with DRM as people feel the pinch.
It has happened to the banks who now find investment shallow and peoples confidence even less. The press has suffered for years with misstrust because they were cought peddling too many and too deep a lies.



Slow and steady win the race, and the human race will be a long one.
:-) Going to bed now. Sweet DRM-free dreams.

They've responded to this part of the issue:

Introducing the 85/15 Rule

"Based on feedback received thus far and a look at our long term plans, we are enacting the '85/15 rule'.

What is this? Quite simply, we will guarantee that at any time we will guarantee our library is at least 85% DRM-free or DRM-lite. I know there are concerns we will become a generic Steam key reseller and while I can say we won't, the only way you can know for sure is to watch our actions. However, I do hope that this action shows we are committed to providing a largely DRM-free/lite library.

In practice we will target closer to 90% DRM-free/lite, but an 85% minimum guarantees we will provide a strong DRM-free/lite library while still allowing customers access to quality 'no extra DRM' Steambox titles as well as Early Access indie titles.

For those interested, ~93.5% of our library is currently DRM-free/lite."

They've also rolled out the first of those "game discovery/exploration" tools, VidXplore.

VidXplore in a nutshell...
Watch videos. Click 'yes' if it was interesting, click 'no' if not. Using backend direct and related traits, we'll gradually select more games that better and better fit your interests. Then we'll store the latest game trailers you've liked for easy browsing later. This is a brand new feature so we are currently looking for your feedback.

Thanks for the heads up, going over to ShinyLoot to look into all the new details.

Strictly speaking that gives them an edge up on GOG imo. (though I haven't bothered with Shinyloot at all so far and don't see myself doing it soon).

While a lot of people here are looking for DRM-free games, there are still games that are simply impossible to get that way, and ignoring the ones that just pirate them then, there's plenty of mention on these forums of those people still buying some games they're interested in with some DRM (usually when it's cheap).

With the way Shinyloot has it set up then, it can not only cater to the DRM-free crowd, but also pick up their sales for the titles they simply cannot get DRM-free. In the meantime those same customers can have all their games in the same spot, and looking at the future, if the games ever do become DRM-free, they're pretty much guaranteed to get them added to their library for free.