902

Steam's new disclaimer reminds everyone that you don't actually own your games, GOG moves in for the killshot: Its offline installers 'cannot be taken away from you' (www.pcgamer.com)

submitted 1 month ago by ooli@lemmy.world to c/games@lemmy.world

305 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Imhotep@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Can you sell them? or trade, give, even lend them? My guess is you can't. And when I was a kid I did all those things.

It's not anedoctal IMO, but a change in paradigm. I'm not saying it's all bad. I buy games on GOG. But I don't own them really

A 2015 study in France showed 54% where more willing to buy a game when they knew they could sell them when done

[-] histic@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 month ago

There is no drm so zip the installer and everything to your friend and call it a day

[-] Imhotep@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

We were talking about legal offers. Are you legally the owner of your game.

Of course you can share, reproduce, pirate ... but that's not the point here.

[-] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

I can see the functional difference there, with regards to sell/trade/loan. You could of course emulate the functionality, or rely on the honor system for abandon ware stuff, but that's clunky, inefficient, not worth the energy.

I hadn't considered the second hand aspect. Even as a kid, I was always more a "build a library" kind of person versus a "cycle my catalog" kind of person. I was considering things from an availability to play the game perspective alone. Thanks for the different perspective!

[-] pancakes@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago

I don't want to advocate for shoveling money into any company, but if you could sell your steam games it would screw over indie devs in a big way. Many games made by small studies or one person don't have as much content as AAA studies and would be far more prone to a small handful of copies being distributed back and forth on the used market instead of each being a sale that goes to the developer.

Some devs would see a drop in sales as much as 90% and I just don't think it's worth it to shoot the gaming industry in the foot like that.

[-] Imhotep@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Just to be clear: my main point was that you don't own any more the game bought on GOG than on Steam.

And there are definitely upsides to this type of market.
Although nowadays I wouldn't buy a just released triple A 70€ game knowing I can't sell or give it (not that I play those much anymore). The games I actually want to keep a few and far between.
I buy second hand Switch games for my nephews. It's cheap, I'm actually giving them something, and they can trade them with their friends or sell them to buy fortnite skins the little shits

Again, not hating on GOG, I've been a customer for a long time. Mainly because I don't want any kind of launcher. I play 99% solo games, don't need no updates or multiple clicks to launch a game.

[-] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

I would ABSOLUTELY argue that you more own a game purchased on gog, with an offline installer, than one purchased on steam. I now see the functional difference between owning a drm-free installer vs owning a physical game, but there's also a gulf of difference between steam and gog

Just to be entirely fair. The rest of what you said is absolutely spot on.