Support NeoGAF

[HRK69]

What the heck are you talking about? Are you seriously comparing Steam's system to something essential? LOL
Literally in my post I said that I avoid it every time I can. It's obvious that if a great game is available only there I still want to support the developers.
Imagine being a fanboy and unable to criticize something just because you use it.

Yeah, you clearly not getting it.

Complaining that Steam requires a launcher is like complaining that Netflix requires an app or website. It’s literally the platform delivering what you paid for

If you don’t like Steam, don’t use it. But acting like it’s some unnecessary burden while still relying on it when needed is just absolutely fucking hilarious

 

[daxgame]

Yeah, you clearly not getting it.

Complaining that Steam requires a launcher is like complaining that Netflix requires an app or website. It’s literally the platform delivering what you paid for

If you don’t like Steam, don’t use it. But acting like it’s some unnecessary burden while still relying on it when needed is just absolutely fucking hilarious

Netflix is a streaming app so it has literally nothing to do with this, and I pay for the single game and not the platform - but either way, Steam as a store offers a lot of great functionalities (filters, recos, etc). Regarding the launcher, once again, I'm talking about a streamlined way to have it optional.
And I already explained by now 3 times when&why I "rely on it" but hey, keep playing your game.

Makes perfect sense when you look at the number of games on Steam vs GOG. You tell me why that is the case then.

I don't get the point here. There are way more games on Steam because the platform has a much bigger userbase. After all, it also launched way before than GOG and the Epic Store.
What is the point? What does this have to do with the launcher?

The phrase you quoted was meant to say that the launcher is not necessary, a single, digital, store point is what changed everything and the main reason for Steam's success. It was absolutely a great idea, even though I prefer buying physical, in general.
Are you suggesting that if Steam launched with the option to make the launcher optional it wouldn't have been so successful?

 

[Topher]

I don't get the point here. There are way more games on Steam because the platform has a much bigger userbase. After all, it also launched way before than GOG and the Epic Store.
What is the point? What does this have to do with the launcher?

The phrase you quoted was meant to say that the launcher is not necessary, a single, digital, store point is what changed everything and the main reason for Steam's success. It was absolutely a great idea, even though I prefer buying physical, in general.
Are you suggesting that if Steam launched with the option to make the launcher optional it wouldn't have been so successful?

On Steam, at the point of download, one must be logged into the software on that PC. So that provides a layer of protection against piracy that GOG simply doesn't have. That's why GOG doesn't get the games or if it does then it is usually some time after launch. Publishers do not like the freedom GOG provides due to fear of piracy. That's my understanding anyway. If you disagree then that is fine, but my assertion is that Steam wouldn't have the support it does without protections in place and GOG is missing that.

 

[Hawk The Slayer]

Steam is by far the biggest and best gaming platform ever and will continue to grow.

 

[daxgame]

On Steam, at the point of download, one must be logged into the software on that PC. So that provides a layer of protection against piracy that GOG simply doesn't have. That's why GOG doesn't get the games or if it does then it is usually some time after launch. Publishers do not like the freedom GOG provides due to fear of piracy. That's my understanding anyway. If you disagree then that is fine, but my assertion is that Steam wouldn't have the support it does without protections in place and GOG is missing that.

Sure, I agree with you, that's also playing a part.
My point and last post on the matter, was merely that from a customer's perspective, so the topic of the thread, it's hard for me to agree that "they put customers at the forefront of every decision". They still do things which I like (I mentioned a few previously).

 

[bender]

On Steam, at the point of download, one must be logged into the software on that PC. So that provides a layer of protection against piracy that GOG simply doesn't have. That's why GOG doesn't get the games or if it does then it is usually some time after launch. Publishers do not like the freedom GOG provides due to fear of piracy. That's my understanding anyway. If you disagree then that is fine, but my assertion is that Steam wouldn't have the support it does without protections in place and GOG is missing that.

I'd say that's a layer of protection that GoG doesn't want. If GoG's userbase were that of Steams, those publisher fears would probably go away and you wouldn't see other issues more common to GoG (games not being patched in a timely manner).

 

[KyoZz]

Many people here seem to forget that Valve will never totally close your account. The only exception is if you are posting extreme images like child abuse or murder, your account will then be deleted and you will lose everything.

Otherwise, you will be banned from multiplayer (at the discretion of the publisher concerned, as Valve makes no decisions about this except for its own games) or your right to post on community-related topics may also be revoked. But you won't lose your games or access to your account.

 

[Topher]

Sure, I agree with you, that's also playing a part.
My point and last post on the matter, was merely that from a customer's perspective, so the topic of the thread, it's hard for me to agree that "they put customers at the forefront of every decision". They still do things which I like (I mentioned a few previously).

That's fair.

I'd say that's a layer of protection that GoG doesn't want. If GoG's userbase were that of Steams, those publisher fears would probably go away and you wouldn't see other issues more common to GoG (games not being patched in a timely manner).

GOG definitely doesn't want that. That's the underlying principle of their store. Suggesting publisher's fears are unwarranted may very well be valid, but I guess they just don't see it that way.

 

[bender]

GOG definitely doesn't want that. That's the underlying principle of their store. Suggesting publisher's fears are unwarranted may very well be valid, but I guess they just don't see it that way.

I'm just saying that the sales potential would outweigh the fears in that hypothetical.

GoG's evolution from their humble beginnings of selling inexpensive, DRM-free games probably means that isn't a sustainable practice as they now sell current games, have a launcher in Galaxy, and have raised community kerfuffle around DRM with the likes of the modern Hitman games (always connected games were always going to be a challenge for thee DRM-free stance).

 

[pudel]

GoG's evolution from their humble beginnings of selling inexpensive, DRM-free games probably means that isn't a sustainable practice as they now sell current games, have a launcher in Galaxy, and have raised community kerfuffle around DRM with the likes of the modern Hitman games (always connected games were always going to be a challenge for thee DRM-free stance).

Thats all great developments (except Hitman). The galaxy launcher is optional for everyone who wants extra "services" or simply more convenience while people like me can still grab only the game files and be done with it. Its....perfection! Hope they can stick to it. The store barely makes a coin for CDPR.

 

[Parazels]

if you navigate the local files, many have a "Steam-less" executable in their folder.

I'm sorry, but soon you will no longer troubleshoot your personal calculator, because Steam OS migrates on consoles, where everything just works!

 

[Topher]

I'm just saying that the sales potential would outweigh the fears in that hypothetical.

GoG's evolution from their humble beginnings of selling inexpensive, DRM-free games probably means that isn't a sustainable practice as they now sell current games, have a launcher in Galaxy, and have raised community kerfuffle around DRM with the likes of the modern Hitman games (always connected games were always going to be a challenge for thee DRM-free stance).

Yeah, I agree with what you are saying, but just seems like publishers are the ones needing convincing.

 

[Kataploom]

Probably Microsoft's cultists who'd die to see them acquire Valve.

I don't even think those exist at all

 

[YeulEmeralda]

Yeah, I agree with what you are saying, but just seems like publishers are the ones needing convincing.

Steam allows games with Denuvo while GOG don't.
DRM won. Gamers themselves are whining when an online game doesn't have kernel level anti cheat.

 

[Lucie Goosey]

Steam is good but if they really were players first, they'd sell games and not licenses.

This

 

[Topher]

Steam allows games with Denuvo while GOG don't.
DRM won. Gamers themselves are whining when an online game doesn't have kernel level anti cheat.

Gamers don't like cheaters.

 

[ArtHands]

Steam is growing because of China, let's not get confused.

Why is Steam the only one platform who is growing because of China?

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

Steam is good but if they really were players first, they'd sell games and not licenses.

Who sells games?

No, seriously. Legally who sells games?

I am sure it would be great if they sell games, but if legal grounds for this doesn't exist then how do you even sell it?

 

[Topher]

Who sells games?

No, seriously. Legally who sells games?

I am sure it would be great if they sell games, but if legal grounds for this doesn't exist then how do you even sell it?

Everyone buy's licenses to games. Even on GOG.

 

[Paasei]

And then you have companies like EA and Ubitrash forcing their garbage digital platforms on everyone.

I've never met a single person who said, "Oh wow, I can't wait to buy their games on their platform!"

I respect the attempt, but it’s completely out of touch with reality

As much as I dislike those platforms, I do understand why people get it on their platforms.

Why? Well, if I buy an EA/Ubi game on Steam, I still need their platform to run it. That’s 2 platforms to run (essentially DRM) for just 2 game. That’s too much for me.

I really like Steam, simply because it was the first to open a digital store where you are not fucked over with retarded prices, discounts and a good customer service. All its other features don’t interest me so much. Maybe the workshop.

If I can play any PC game without any platform up and running, I’d do that. Otherwise as few as possible.

Edit: forgot to mention I solved that platform issue by simply not buying games that require more than 1 platform to run.