GOG has reportedly cut dozens of jobs recently. Here are new details about the situation at CD Projekt’s subsidiary and the shortcomings of its business strategy.
Neither do I but it is. GOG doesn't support Linux. Heroic is a 3rd party community effort. Valve is currently the only company making financial investments into Linux gaming.
It does support Linux: it lets you download Linux installer for games that have a Linux port.
GOG lets publishers upload various installers but GOG does nothing to support them, let alone offer something like Proton (which is open source, so they could take and integrate it for free).
No one needs to "offer" Proton. It's available freely for anyone. I think some people think Proton is a Steam thing. It isn't. Yeah, Valve did a lot of work on it, which is great, but it isn't limited to them. Vlave has essentially unlimited resources, and I'm happy they spent some making improvements for WINE, but GOG does not have nearly the same resources. I wouldn't expect them to put their effort into that. Valve only did because they were building hardware that they wanted to run Linux.
No one needs to “offer” Proton. It’s available freely for anyone.
And that's how GOG does not support Linux: Paying customers need to figure it out on their own. They don't even value their customers to a degree to take and integrate existing open source solutions.
On steam I can click install and run and most games windows and Linux just work without further effort. This makes gog worthless to me. I could just use wine I don't know why I'd bother.
Many more companies than Valve are making financial investments into Linux gaming, including companies that own various Linux distributions (Red Hat, Canonical, etc.), CodeWeavers (who amongst other things have been contracted by Valve on a lot of Proton work) and to a lesser extent Humble Bundle.
What they mean is that technically you still are being granted a license to use it. The same was true for things like DVD movies. They're technically correct, but missing the point.
How is that different from backing up the game folder on steam? In both cases it's true that:
You're not doing anything illegal at the moment you do it
You can use it to play the game on a different computer (as long as the game is DRM free which is not granted on either platform)
The company (Valve/GOG) can't remotely erase your copy
If the company removes the license from you your backup is now technically illegal but it's unlikely to be enforced
I fail to see how GOGs approach is any different, they still sell you a license and you're backing up the installer in case the license gets removed and/or you're forbidden from redownloading the game.
On most games yes, like I said before I've copied games from my computer to others to play in lan to convince friends to buy a game.
Then there are badly implemented games, where you need to either delete the steam library from the game folder or replace it with an open implementation.
And the rest are the ones that have DRM (which are not available on GOG anyways so they don't matter for this discussion).
Actually, some games have DRM on steam and have a DRM free version on GOG. I even saw a game that had a DRM free epic and gog edition but the steam version had DRM. Might be a edge case, but still exists
We give you and other GOG users the personal right (known legally as a 'license') to use GOG services and to download, access and/or stream (depending on the content) and use GOG content. This license is for your personal use. We can stop or suspend this license in some situations, which are explained later on.
Which is very similar to Steam. In both cases you can keep the files you've downloaded on your machine, and on most cases you can copy those files to a different machine and keep playing it. GOG has better marketing on this regard, but they're both very similar, neither enforces DRM nor forbids it entirely, although GOG does tend to be a bit stricter (but they still allow it) whereas steam is a bit looser but knowingly implemented a weak DRM and let's you know in the game page if the game has any stronger form of DRM.
@Nibodhika@Evil_Shrubbery Stop Killing Games opened my eyes to the software "ownership" situation. In USA, apparently, noone ever owns any software. It's always licenced. Even if on physical media. Quite bizarre.
@Nibodhika@dbat Steam did the exact same thing when it was new when they would say "If Steam ever shuts down, we'll give you perpetual licenses to the games in your game library." Probably around the same time in their existence as GOG hyping DRM-free.
@obsurveyor@Nibodhika from what I have heard, they cannot give licences to Americans, at least. Perhaps to other countries, but they prob never will. I mean if Steam ever was closing down, they wouldn't care.
@Nibodhika It's freaking evil, but in their defence, it's more America's evil than any one business. They have set about systematically reducing freedom for decades.
I totally understand your point, but when people talk about "you own nothing" they don't really mean you "own" the content on physical media, they mean it doesn't have DRM that requires an online service. You're technically correct, but your pedantry is making you miss the forest for the trees, basically.
but your pedantry is making you miss the forest for the trees, basically.
No. People here claim, that just because GOG cannot remote wipe your drive, people buying off GOG have a perpetual right to the games they've bought. But they don't because that's not how copyright works. If a game's license is revoked, to keep playing the game is copyright violation.
Not only do so many people not grasp basic concepts of copyright, they claim Valve could take away all downloaded games. No, Valve cannot remote wipe my drive either. I can back up my Steam folder. Many games on Steam don't have DRM at all. It's opt-in and the actual Steam documentation outright says not to rely on Steam DRM because "it is easily removed by a motivated attacker." If games rely on crap like Denuvo, 3rd party launchers, or invasive anti-cheat, the publishers are required to clearly state so on the store page in one of those orange boxes. Users can make an informed decision on a per-game basis even with Steam. And those games that ship crap like Denuvo aren't on GOG in the first place.
So in the end GOG is a store that stretches the truth about game ownership in their marketing and despite all their Witcher and Cyberpunk money, they don't care about users of platforms competing against Windows at all.
This is a thread where someone claimed that you don't own the games on Steam but you do on GOG, this is the comment the person was replying to:
In case of Steam.
With GOG I get an actual license key & terms that state my ownership.
So yes, that's exactly what the person is saying. So the fact that GOG can't remotely wipe your drive is a strawman fallacy, because neither can Steam, and the differences between GOG and Steam is what's being discussed, so anything that is the same has no bearing on the discussion.
I think it’s pretty clear from context that they mean they have the ability to perpetually play the games because of the lack of DRM, not the right.
Plenty claim it's their right and with much ferocity while as vehemently ignoring that there are plenty of games on GOG that offer reduced content when playing offline (an extensive list was posted by someone). Also, because games on Steam must disclose their use of DRM (and anti-cheat), people can just buy DRM-free games which can be backed up just as well. Goldberg is a drop-in library for games that use Steam APIs. So everything is fine there as well for people who actually make informed buying decisions.