@marcus

Nothing you have presented here materially alters what I have stated. Feel free to keep parsing through company user agreements all you want. It is clear that you are unable to comprehend what I have been trying to explain and, frankly, I am not interested in clarifying my thoughts any further for you.

As you said, in the end it doesn't matter as both you and I are going to manage our game files as we see fit. We can agree to disagree on the other details.

Cheers.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

@marcus
Now I find myself needing to be as particular as I have accused @CatKiller of being.

You can just take the game directory of any game that is not tied to Steam hard (i.e. uses it as DRM) and run it wherever you like.

This presupposes that the game has already been installed. I am well aware that a game without DRM can be run without the Steam client. I have done this myself. But to install that game in the first place requires the Steam client.

While you may be *able* to install the software with an offline installer if your license gets revoked (often that license is from the publisher and not actually from GOG or Steam) then you are using the software illegally.

To be clear to other readers, I am not advocating to do anything deemed illegal.

While I am not saying it is impossible, I have never heard of a publisher revoking someone's right to install and play a game for which they have purchased a license. Delisting a game or shutting down online servers -- yes -- but never revoking a license without the user having violated the license agreement. With physical media, they have no way to enforce or prevent it. I see little difference between physical media and offline installers.

I would be surprised if such a revocation would even be legal. I do not recall seeing such a clause in any license agreement I have read (and I read them all at least once). The publisher is as much bound by that agreement as the user. I am not a lawyer, however, just a businessman who has had to review a number of legal agreements.

But in all cases that is a receipt for a license which is *not* perpetual.

Nonsense. A legal agreement without a start and/or finish date is automatically deemed to be perpetual. In fact, a license agreement is in force for as long as the two parties deem it to be in force. So, yes, it can be seen to be "perpetual". Some legal agreements even include clauses of that nature. The receipt simply shows that the user has legally purchased the license.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Well, @CatKiller, you've just demonstrated that my point, made in the quote you chose, stands. This is simply a matter of perspective. You seem to be so hung up on the meaning of the word "ownership" that you are unable to see beyond it.

As a result, you are missing the whole point of the matter. It is not the question of ownership as you define it. The actual point is that, with GOG (and Itch.io for that matter), the offline installers are independent of a software client. Regardless of DRM-free status of the game software, the Steam and Epic launchers add another layer of DRM to installing and playing the games. To my knowledge, it is not possible to install a game purchased from Steam or Epic without their respective launchers.

Piracy is not part of the question as @wytrabbit has already stipulated that ownership of a legal license (via a digital receipt) is an essential concern. This receipt, coupled with the offline installer, is, effectively, a perpetual right to install and play the game legally.

Is this perpetual right, by your definition, ownership? No. But, from the perspective of the licensee, "ownership" is not the software code and assets, it is the right to install and play the game whenever they want.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I think that @CatKiller and @wytrabbit are arguing at cross-purposes here.

@CatKiller is correct in the interpretation that the user is purchasing a license to use the software (in this case, to play the game), not actual ownership of the software. This is the same no matter which digital game store (Epic, Steam, GOG, etc.) you purchase the license (or key, if you will) from. I suspect that the point @CatKiller is trying to make is that the customer is purchasing the license not the software itself.

However, I feel that @CatKiller is being technical and, IMO, is wilfully ignoring the point @wytrabbit is trying to make. I wonder, did @CatKiller read the article that @wytrabbit linked to? GOG's primary point was as follows:

GOG's big selling point that more people should shout about is that it sells games DRM-free. When you buy a game on GOG, you get access to an offline installer for it, which you can use to install and play your games even in the event a license for it ends. It essentially uncouples the license from the game and lets you have some actual ownership of the things you buy.

Even in the event a license for it ends ...
In essence, GOG is not only selling you a license but also a backup installer that is not dependent on the digital store to function, much like the physical CD/DVD we used to get when purchasing at a brick & mortar store. Just as Developer-X cannot prevent me from installing from a DRM-free CD/DVD, Developer-Y cannot prevent me from using a DRM-free offline installer for the same purpose. While, technically, this is not ownership of the software it is, effectively, a perpetual right to install and play the game.

In the end, @wytrabbit and @CatKiller are both right. You are just looking at the issue from different angles and arguing over semantics.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Ooh, another bloated, ad-riddled, telemetry tracker linked to a specific hardware profile that you have to pay a license fee to install. That versus a relatively universal SteamOS for FREE.

An Xbox branded gaming handheld is still a closed ecosystem. By comparison, the Steam Deck is not.

Somehow, I just can't see M$ having the vision or the ability anymore to make overcoming the Steam Deck a success.

-------

I still believe that, at some point in the future, M$ is going to abandon the Windows O/S and just start producing a proprietary Windows desktop environment on top of a Linux base.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

@CatKiller

the biggest flaw of the Deck has always been that people that want one can't get one.

To borrow from Gabe himself:

"It's a service supply issue"

:grin:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I understand that Kepler support in NVK is going to be a while. Is there a timeline for the Maxwell chipset?

Edit: Oops. I actually meant to ask about the Pascal chipset but knowing the timeline for Maxwell would be great too.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Bag of Holding is a new game development studio founded by Roll20 co-creator Riley Dutton, focused on "creating sustainable games for passionate communitie"s.

What exactly is a sustainable game? Are they just throwing buzzwords around?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

@rivalary

Let's see. In addition to Heroic Games Launcher and Lutris, there is also the Minigalaxy GOG client. Read here:

https://www.gamingonlinux.com/2025/02/simple-gog-client-for-linux-minigalaxy-v1-3-2-released-with-improved-game-installs/

The community has provided what GOG has not. Why does the client have to be official? Frankly, I think the community solutions do a better job than the official ones.

Personally, I favour GOG because they give me the ability to download offline installers. I like being able to keep a personal archive of my game installers. I also like not having to depend on the Steam client (or GOG Galaxy, for that matter) in order to install my games.

It's not one or the other, you know. I do still buy games on Steam. Sometimes, Steam will have a native Linux version that isn't available on GOG. I just tend to favour GOG if the game is available on both platforms. Like @Shmerl, I also want to show my support for DRM-free gaming.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

@bepop

Why not put high quality assets as a free DLC. People can choose to download it if they can take advantage and skip it if not.

I really like this idea (and how @BladePupper expanded on it). Didn't CDPR do something like that not that long ago with The Witcher III?

View this comment - View article - View full comments