A disturbing announcement from Obsidian Entertainment was made a few weeks ago. The new Project:Eternity game has a native Linux version being made with the Unity engine. However the distribution download options may make it impossible for Linux supporters to get a truly DRM Free version.
It was announced that the distribution would done via Steam or gog.com. (no direct-download option mentioned) Steam clients are a form of DRM (you may be possibly able to surgically remove the installer once downloaded). Now Obsidian may not ADD DRM, but the Steam platform was designed as method of DRM. gog.com is indeed DRM Free (I've done a few tests), but they have never had Linux offerings (they have MacOS) and has no announcements regarding future plans. Could this loophole be used to push Linux fans/users into a DRM platform?
It seems clear that we have to get very specific promises in writing. The magic phrase being: "Do you promise to have a direct-download option available as 3rd party distribution offerings prove unacceptable in regards to platform availability, privacy or DRM-free options?"
What is your view on the obligations of game makers to sure their advertised promises are met? Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
It was announced that the distribution would done via Steam or gog.com. (no direct-download option mentioned) Steam clients are a form of DRM (you may be possibly able to surgically remove the installer once downloaded). Now Obsidian may not ADD DRM, but the Steam platform was designed as method of DRM. gog.com is indeed DRM Free (I've done a few tests), but they have never had Linux offerings (they have MacOS) and has no announcements regarding future plans. Could this loophole be used to push Linux fans/users into a DRM platform?
It seems clear that we have to get very specific promises in writing. The magic phrase being: "Do you promise to have a direct-download option available as 3rd party distribution offerings prove unacceptable in regards to platform availability, privacy or DRM-free options?"
What is your view on the obligations of game makers to sure their advertised promises are met? Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
0 Likes
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
Patreon
PayPal
It's also worth noting that we can (within Desura) vote with our wallets, as well. We can choose to further support developers who refuse to "wine-wrap" in favor of native Linux builds, and those who offer stand-alone downloads. Still, no other platform has that capability.
Further, as I mentioned, the desktop client is GPL3, and hosted on github (called "Desurium"). Why not go read the sources and see how "invasive" the "tracking" really is? Why not hook up a "don't track me, bro" option in the settings dialogues, and build one's own binary executable desktop client? Nobody is stopping us! :-)
Which game? Are you sure?
Nearly all of mine do not require the desktop client at all. And, I only say "nearly" because I quit looking after ~20 games in my library (all of which have stand-alone installers) and assume that there must be one somewhere, but I'm still at the office now, and haven't the time to check every one of them right this moment.
Point taken that not everybody is going to scour the code with a fine-toothed comb. GPL3 does not equal DRM-free, but it does equal transparency. We have to rely on our community to look, themselves, come to a consensus, and report the results to everyone else. Then, we have to rely on them to contribute back to the project, and help "steward" a proper path forward.
It may well be one that doesn't have a stand-alone download, but most do. Also, it may well have been before the feature was introduced! Desura customers (and some devs) asked for the feature, and they listened (it also lets them support Mac by offering standalone Mac downloads... in fact, the desktop client hasn't been ported to Mac, so the entire catalog of Mac games is essentially GOG-style).
I see no reason for you to log into an account you've dispensed with, when you could just tell us what game it was, and we could check on it for you. Why waste your time further?
If there is a stand-alone download, we can walk you through downloading it without the desktop client.
I am not "hardcore", but I do not accept GOG as an alternative. They do not to Linux, so I won't buy from them. Why reward that business decision? Desura has some stand-alone downloads (GOG-style). That immediately elevates the service above the others (to me, personally).
NO, I don't work for Desura. I can e-mail a developer like anyone else. I am not a shill. The Desura guys (there are ~4 of them), do respond to my e-mails directly on multiple occasions, including the founder, Scott. Not always, but it has happened multiple times.
Be aware that if your information is old or out of date, or in fact if there is a stand-alone download for that game which you missed, then misinformation could hurt the hard work of the volunteer community contributing to Desura and it's open-source community around the desktop client (for example, Cheese, an editor and frequent contributor here, is quite involved in the "Desurium" client as a community member). If you're still correct, and your game is "desktop client only"... well, maybe they'll just refund you the $10 if you ask (???). I have only beta-tested the client, and purchased games. I feel strongly about supporting them because nobody else offers their users a choice of a desktop client to keep games quickly, easily, and efficiently in sync and up-to-date, as well as offering direct downloads off the website.
Yes, I wish all games had both options, but this is extra work for the developer, and irate gamers rarely ask developers for these sorts of important changes. Every time the developer patches a bug or adds content to a game, they can create a patch with (basically) the differences, and the desktop client only fetches what is out of date (and does a final checksum over the game files to ensure they are intact). This saves a great deal of money and bandwidth for our friends in other countries with metered bandwidth (and quite a few in North America as well). So, what some see as nefarious, I see as a potential driver of efficiency. If it is done correctly, and with respect for the user/customer.
That said... I do, myself, keep copies of the stand alone downloads.
A thorough privacy/security reviewer for the Desurium code-base could be a welcome addition to the community. I would do so myself, but instead, I'm busy working to bring more cool, niche, indie games to Linux. I hope that somebody steps up, and has the credibility to do so, so that in the future, Desura doesn't have to be branded as "DRM as bad as Origin", which it seems that some are bent on implying.
As someone who has willingly opted out of using Steam, I am surprised to be the first one to mention that it is only games using Steamworks that are tied to the Steam client, which Project: Eternity has already confirmed to use with regards to its Steam version. So if you see a game with achievements support, steamplay, and other such miscellania, it is going to be tied to the Steam client. If it does not boast these features, the game itself is probably DRM free.
As for the whole platform war here, I must admit to Desura being my favourite for most of the reasons s_d described. No games depend on the client for anything other than potentially purchasing and the first download, but even that is rare thanks to the Purchased Downloads feature.
That being said, there are still a few problems I have with it - namely the fact that some games are being sold without proper labelling for their independent DRM (see Majesty) and the fact they willingly sell games that consist of nothing more than Steam keys, which just galls me. And I am not talking about merely having the Steam key as a side option with the main download as is the case with Postal 2, but having it as the only option, such as with Serious Sam 3 (although at least then it was clearly marked).
Gameolith suffers from that last one as well, although it seems more appropriate for them to be doing it somehow. Seems less like an assault on their own dignity.