I like Steam, but I am trying to shop at GOG more and more. No DRM has become a big selling feature for me. I remember the days when Google was one of the "cool" companies that made tech better. Now I am suspicious of all tech companies.
I'd use GoG much more if they caught up on the Linux support side. Even their client doesn't work on Linux, and last time I downloaded cyberpunk through a third-party launcher, it took hours because they limit the speed of downloads through the API.
When I still used windows, I'd use Steam to search for games and then buy them on Gog if they were available, but the convenience gap is just too large now :(
Just use heroic for gog games. It isn't that big of an issue. You can launch games using proton through heroic without relying on steam.
Or if you're really lazy, just add gog games to steam and then play them.
Point is if you actually want to buy more from gog then there's nothing stopping you from doing that.
I think Steam vs GOG is an actual healthy competition
Long term that's possibly wise. Track record being what it is I think steam is broadly ok, but definitely less safe than something you can download and keep forever.
I think as long as Gabe runs the show, it will be fine, but you know that there are venture capitalists and mega-corps all ready to maximize stakeholder value.
At least with GoG, you can at least download your installers if it ever begins the enshittification slide. Steam will take everything with it should it start down that path.
The question is whether or not whoever or whatever Gabe puts into his place when he steps down will act like him.
I see it as a serious likelihood he'll proof the company against venture capital and going public
What I dislike about Steam is that Valve doesn't allow you to leave your account to somebody else upon your death.
Neither does GOG
How will steam know if I've done that?
That's irrelevant. It's the rule itself I don't like.
Damn right I'll give my game collection to my kid.
Can you just give them the passwords?
Yeah you can.
But Steam doesn't want it, according to a support rep:
Unfortunately, Steam accounts and games are non-transferable. Steam Support can’t provide someone else with access to the account or merge its contents with another account. I regret to inform you that your Steam account cannot be transferred via a will.
This means you can leave your login details in your will, but Steam can block the account. Also, in case the login details in your will are not correct anymore or no login details were shared, Steam will not give access.
eh, idk, I think people worrying about passing down their antique game collections to the younger generation are sorta like all the old people thinking their kids are gonna want their stamp collections or old timey 'country rose' antique dish sets. Even worse, because it's not like you can even re-sell those games to make a tiny profit at a flea market or whatever.
What if a 30 year old dies and their 10 year old kid can't play the games anymore that they were playing by using family sharing?
I haven't purchased anything in months because my job pays badly, and fuck this capitalist hellscape, but if I was going to buy more games steam is the most likely source. Linux support, cloud saves, game recording, remote play, fairly unobtrusive client, drm at the seller's discretion.
Plus with rare exceptions you will always be able to continue to play all of those games on any hardware you can install steam at no additional cost.
Glares at FF7 Rebirth with an Nvidia GPU
That worked for me fine on Linux (pop!_os). Remake worked on the steam deck, too.
Which GPU? Anything above I think a 10xx has an issue with the shaders the game uses. There's supposedly a workaround for arch (CachyOS) but I couldn't get it working.
Not the other person, but I'm using a 4090 on Ubuntu 26.04 and haven't had any issues with Remake or Rebirth.
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER. Got it before I got laid off and before prices went super crazy.
I'm only playing on a ~~1k~~ 1080p monitor so i wasn't pushing it very hard, but it ran without issue.
And solid customer service.
I bought 2 things today, totalling £3.47, and one was a 6 dlc pack for a game I've got 1000ish hours in. Honestly should have just saved the £2 on the dlc pack, it's just a bunch of furniture.
And they raised the price on the required subscription service, are closing game studios, and forcing people to only buy games through them. Oh, wait; that's Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo...
You got me in the first half, no gonna lie.
Aaaallllmost downvoted you then, lol. My apologies.
They are ridiculously profitable though, yet they still maintain their 30% cut.
There are very very few for profit companies in the world that would even fleetingly think about reducing their profit for no reason.
In the ideal world they'd do it oppositely, low/no cut on the first income and then increase it for the bigger productions.
But capitalism gonna capitalism, and the whales could be legitimate competitions. So they get it cheap, while the fish pay 30% to be on the biggest market
Captain: the figure is gross revenue, profit margin is ~40%
In the month after the Sony disc debacle and Microsoft slamming a katana into its own belly?
Absolutely shocking.
Obviously, releasing an expensive piece of hardware that is in high demand reflects in the numbers.
I've had 1500€ put aside for the Steam Frame since January. I expected I'd be waiting till the next spring to get a chance to buy it. To my surprise and absolute delight, I was apparently at the front of the line. I've received my unit three days ago and it's been a blast.
I'm sure the steam frame helped a bit. They also have an ever increasing consumer base.
Yet, no Half-life 3 😢
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules: