Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

gog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 574 posts

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#311

Post by pitched »

SXX wrote: post #159
pitched wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn’t look like GOG can afford to pay for that work. I think we all got very lucky that the success of the Steam Deck has put the incentives in the right place for Steam to be able to invest in Linux.

Valve started to invest in Linux and open source 10 years before releasing Steam Deck. They started hiring OSS developers back in 2012 and Deck released in 2022: https://www.phoronix.com/review/valve_linux_dampfnudeln

The Steam Machine (Steam Deck predecessor) had leaks/announcements in 2013 and shipped in 2015 so that lines up.

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#312

Post by m4rtink »

prmoustache wrote: post #171
dangus wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is basically never. They have no incentive to do that except for extreme circumstances, and they have all the leverage in the world over game publishers. Delisted games tend to stay in your library for redownload. I never understood the cynicism for digital media, it’s been multiple decades now and the model clearly works. Obviously I prefer zero DRM but it’s also not a hard line requirement for me personally.

They can't control the licenses rights for some assets like music that can expire and become undistributable. You may not know it until you install them on a new computer n years from now.

I find even just the possibility of this happening frankly insane - if the current licensing or copyright system allows something like this, the we need a new one.

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#313

Post by dark-star »

benoau wrote: post #93
dangus wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is basically never. They have no incentive to do that except for extreme circumstances, and they have all the leverage in the world over game publishers. Delisted games tend to stay in your library for redownload. I never understood the cynicism for digital media, it’s been multiple decades now and the model clearly works. Obviously I prefer zero DRM but it’s also not a hard line requirement for me personally.

All of this is based on the assumption that the way it was done is the way it will be done. Who will own and run Steam 30 years from now? Gabe Newell will be long-gone, his nepobaby next-CEO will be closing in on retirement if they don't check-out early to enjoy their vast wealth like Gabe has done. What does Steam look like 60 years from now? Adults using it today are mostly dead and all of their licenses revoked fo…

No. At least in some countries (e.g. Germany) they would be forced to reimburse every buyer if they removed access to a game someone bought.

The fact that somewhere deep down in their EULA there might be words that make it clear that you're not really "buying" anything, just renting/leasing/whatever, wouldn't stand in court since the important part is the big shiny "Buy now" button, and "buying" has a specific meaning here.

So yeah, the only way they could "take the games away from you" is if Steam went bancrupt

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#314

Post by MarsIronPI »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #73
roxolotl wrote: post #12

I always search GOG before Steam. It’s slightly less user friendly in the most minor ways and sometimes a bit more expensive. But getting DRM free games is worth every penny and extra few moments. Steam is really great for what it is but you’re not buying games you’re leasing them. Excited to hear GOG might get more focus and investment.

Same but I strangely miss the social aspect of achievements on Steam. I prefer GOG but wish the achievements synced.

It seems to me (speaking from a non-gamer perspective) that Steam has nailed down the "app store" vibe better than GOG. I haven't looked much at GOG Galaxy, but AFAIK it's not a Steam-like app to search, buy, install and update games and DLC. I think that's a big part (the only part, maybe?) of Steam's value proposition.

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#315

Post by MarsIronPI »

fernie wrote: post #144
benoau wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of this is based on the assumption that the way it was done is the way it will be done. Who will own and run Steam 30 years from now? Gabe Newell will be long-gone, his nepobaby next-CEO will be closing in on retirement if they don't check-out early to enjoy their vast wealth like Gabe has done. What does Steam look like 60 years from now? Adults using it today are mostly dead and all of their licenses revoked fo…

I can assure you that offline installer you got today from GOG will not work on Windows 20 or whatever OS will be the dominant for PC in 30 or 60 years time.

I bet it'll run on Wine.

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#316

Post by MarsIronPI »

dark-star wrote: post #313
benoau wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of this is based on the assumption that the way it was done is the way it will be done. Who will own and run Steam 30 years from now? Gabe Newell will be long-gone, his nepobaby next-CEO will be closing in on retirement if they don't check-out early to enjoy their vast wealth like Gabe has done. What does Steam look like 60 years from now? Adults using it today are mostly dead and all of their licenses revoked fo…

No. At least in some countries (e.g. Germany) they would be forced to reimburse every buyer if they removed access to a game someone bought. The fact that somewhere deep down in their EULA there might be words that make it clear that you're not really "buying" anything, just renting/leasing/whatever, wouldn't stand in court since the important part is the big shiny "Buy now" button, and "buying" has a specific meanin…

> So yeah, the only way they could "take the games away from you" is if Steam went bancrupt

Yeah, that's not impossible, and I'd rather keep what I buy even if the seller does go bankrupt.

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#317

Post by abustamam »

computerex wrote: post #110
georgeecollins wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, but the model that Valve pioneered is the model that supports 90% of all commercial PC games made today, a higher percentage if you cut out MMOs and free to play games, which you certainly don't own. I love GoG and I have worked closely with a lot of people there on projects they are great. This announcement seems like good news. No one has to sell games on Steam. No one has to use a model where they "rent licens…

People only pirate games because the publishers make it too painful to play games legally. I have pirated games that I own simply because it's easier to play. This pattern has been shown time and time again. When people pirate, it's usually due to a problem with the experience. People pay for convenience. Now a days a lot of people are pirating games because the quality of games has gone down the drain. Publishers ar…

I think a lot of people pirate for a lot of different reasons. I don't pirate games anymore because I just play PS5. But I definitely did so as a teenager because I was broke, not because the experience of buying games was bad.

Now I'll pirate if providers make it hard to do things right. I know I never "have" to pirate, but my wife once "bought" a movie on Amazon. A few years later, she was no longer able to access it. And she didn't get refunded for her purchase. So guess what? Screw you Amazon, I downloaded that movie and saved it on my home media server.

Another example, I was playing a mobile game that allowed me to watch ads to get a bonus. I'd always say no because they use one of the shittiest ad provider in existence. Then they started showing me ads even if I elected not to get the bonus, with a fun "pay $20 for ad free forever!"

Well screw you game dev, I'm pirating the ad-free version of your game.

> Consumers are pissed at the lack of value.

I think this is true, but I don't think this is necessarily causing piracy. Why would people want to pirate a shitty game?

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#318

Post by paxys »

Uvix wrote: post #272
mariusor wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I am a person interested in this specific thing (backing up my games) I would for sure check. Wouldn't you?

I would but since there's no way to know before buying, all games on Steam need to be treated as having DRM and not supporting backups.

There's also no way to know after buying. Games you own and have installed can be automatically updated in the background with new DRM.

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#319

Post by SOLAR_FIELDS »

dmantis wrote: post #190
cogogo wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up playing pirated games on the Apple II 35 years ago. The fact that many people pirate is not an opinion.

It doesn't prove that DRM free is not a viable business. I also grew up pirating, but I haven't been pirating games for more than 10 years now. A few bucks costs much less to me these days than a headache with finding a cracked version and installing potential malware on my computer. Not even talking about supporting the artists and developers. Gabe is right that piracy is a service problem. If you have proper easy i…

This is a valuable lesson I learned when I worked with someone, not at Elastic, but who had previously worked at Elastic. Elastic was one of the original companies who made FOSS but with enterprise licensing work well. We were discussing in a meeting at this place we worked how to design license checking into the product.

What the guy said I found very insightful: he said that you don’t really need to spend a bunch of time and effort creating sophisticated license checks, you just need perhaps a single phone call to a server or something else that can be trivially defeated for anyone with a reasonable amount of technical knowledge. Why? Because the people who would defeat it are the kind of people who make horrible enterprise customers anyway. So in a way it’s just like a cheap lock. Won’t defeat anyone determined, because it’s not designed to. It’s designed to keep already honest people honest

Re: GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder

#320

Post by tjpnz »

paxys wrote: post #62
dangus wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is basically never. They have no incentive to do that except for extreme circumstances, and they have all the leverage in the world over game publishers. Delisted games tend to stay in your library for redownload. I never understood the cynicism for digital media, it’s been multiple decades now and the model clearly works. Obviously I prefer zero DRM but it’s also not a hard line requirement for me personally.

Ever bought anything from MSN Music? Yahoo Music? Desura? Microsoft eBook Store? Walmart MP3s? Anything using Adobe Content Server? MusicNet? CinemaNow? UltraViolet? It is laughable to think that digital media "clearly works". Companies shut down and stores shutter all the time . In most cases there is no recourse for customers, because – surprise – you didn't actually own the rights to what you bought, just a revoca…

Censorship. Like GOG?
Post reply on HN