this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2025
479 points (88.3% liked)
PC Gaming
12892 readers
202 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Steam doesn't enforce the use of its DRM (which is super easy to bypass anyway but that's a side note).
Steam lets you publish your game on their platform and hand out as many keys as you like to resell on other platforms (at no cost) while still doing all the heavy lifting of hosting and distributing.
Steam doesn't decide what kinds of titles get published on their platform any more than GoG does, so the bit about remasters, etc. is a bit weird. Besides you the user should get to decide what you want to buy and play.
I love GoG, but I love Steam as well. They're not mutually exclusive and you can have both.
Steam is as much de facto a seller of DRM-free games as a electric appliances store is a seller of quake games machines: some people with the right skills might get quake to work in some of the smart fridges or smart TVs they sell, but they're definitelly not made for it, definitelly not sold as supporting that feature and definitelly no support whatsoever is provided for that feature.
When you're making a purchasing decision on their store, Steam doesn't tell you upfront if the game has or not their DRM hence you cannot make an informed decision on that factor: Steam most definitelly do not want potential customers to select games on the basis or absence of DRM.
Also the install process of a game in a new machine with Steam is always via their store which can arbitrarily refuse you access to the games you supposedly bought (only according to Steam, you only "licensed" them) whilst with GOG once you downloaded the offline installer it's de facto yours (even in legal environments where such sales are not treated the same as sales of games in physical media - which are treated as owned). The copying over of a Steam game is a hack, which even without the Steam phone-home DRM might not work, for example, if the game won't run properly when certain registry keys created during install are not present.
Did you just compare copying and pasting files to running Quake on a smart fridge?
From all that I wrote, somebody having that take is the equivalent for metaphors of being a Grammar Nazi.
Well no, your metaphor is based on the premise that copy and paste is difficult. You can compare it to something ridiculous, but it doesn't change that copying and pasting something is something actual children master.
My methaphor is explained in the pharagraph immediatelly following that first one:
I hoped this made it obvious that I was making an analogy about the way both things are sold, by, you know, me talking only about the way things are sold in the following paragraph and not at all about other things.
It's you who chose to treat the thing as a comparison between the details of characteristics I mentioned in passing and did not at all mention further in my explanation.
Your claim that my premise is about the technical difficulty in making one or the other support making them do something they are not officially supported to do is a Strawman.
Me answering the first paragraph you wrote of rambling screed is a 'strawman'? Who taught you to write?
Strawman recipe
Step 1 - Put up the strawman by stating that the other person was trying to do something they explicitly said they were not trying to do when they actually explained exactly what they were trying to do:
(No. My methaphor is based on how in multiple domains "selling things which can be altered to do something else by those who know how to do such alterations is not the same as selling things for that specific purpose", as I already explained before and you pointedly ignored. PS: anybody in doubt can just read my other posts here as they're all consistently about how things are sold, not how things are hacked)
--
Step 2 - Totally trash the very strawman you put up:
(Absolutely right! I was doing totally wrong that which you claimed I was trying to do. In fact, so totally and completely wrong was the way I was trying to do what you claimed I was trying to do, that intelligent individuals might even suspect I was not in fact trying to do that which you claim, but something else for which what I wrote wasn't such a mismatched comparison).
--
PS: Loved in this latest post the throwing of vague aspersions about my education level as a counter whilst not in fact addressing my argument. Really shows the strength of your argument and depth of reasoning.