Recently, GOG added the Windows version of XCOM: Enemy Unknown to their store and since it has a Linux version on Steam, I reached out to the porter to see about their plans for the Linux version.
We've seen a lot of speculation in the past, with people wondering if Feral Interactive will ever get their Linux ports onto a store other than Steam. Here's their official stance, which they sent me this morning:
We don't have any plans to distribute our games through GoG. If this changes, we'll make announcements through our usual channels.
We can speculate all we like as to why they're not doing it, even if the decision does strike me as a little odd. Hopefully they will reevaluate this stance in future, considering it's not exactly a new game and the Linux port from 2014 isn't exactly new either.
A shame for everyone who prefers their games on GOG.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
Quoting: namikoMake it easier to buy than pirate and people will do it willingly, if they can afford it.
Yep, that's a common argument against DRM. Since digital stores are as well competing with pirate sources. If stores are encumbered with DRM restrictions (while pirate sources are not), it only hurts their potential user base.
It should be applicable to video too, but there is too much backwards thinking there, way worse than in the gaming industry. See here.
Last edited by Shmerl on 19 June 2018 at 6:29 pm UTC
0 Likes
@Shmerl
You seem to know a lot about DRM and GOG. May I ask you if GOG games come with an EULA?
Last edited by johndoe on 19 June 2018 at 7:14 pm UTC
You seem to know a lot about DRM and GOG. May I ask you if GOG games come with an EULA?
Last edited by johndoe on 19 June 2018 at 7:14 pm UTC
1 Likes, Who?
Shmerl, I, too, would still like direct, irrefutable proof from Feral that they're doing this for DRM reasons. Two... just... stop talking... you don't know what you're talking about and you're embarrassing yourself.
Post-purchase authentication was the original purpose of DRM in its earliest forms. Fucking around with your game's digital access, gameplay capabilities, not to mention data scraping from your machine without telling you, the more egregious DRM stuff all came later. Even Wikipedia's definition of DRM is defined as "access control".
Apparently, even Nintendo Entertainment System cartridges would make you look up things in their manuals to prove you had bought a game; I remember DOS and Windows games did that too. It was all about access control. It's still about access control, authentication, today.
Here's a funny story that shows my point: My partner rented Metal Gear Solid for the PlayStation. At one point a character in the game prompts you to look up Meryl's codec frequency on "the back of the CD case". He was mystified, did the character mean an in-game item? Something he'd missed? Turns out it was listed on the actual CD case that the game came with. (For young people who wouldn't know: video games were often rented without their original packaging or manuals.)
Ideally, the perfect DRM system only catches those who aren't legitimate buyers, but that doesn't happen. Doesn't mean I like it, but I'm sending my authentication data to Steam as permission to access my library. That's a restriction on how I can use the software, and I have to prove this to them with that email address, password and phone number, over and over, years after my initial purchase.
GOG will ask you for this access, too, repeatedly if you don't have cookies saved. How else do they create a business without some restrictions on who accesses their games? You have no online business if you don't place some restrictions on your assets.
By the definitions I've put forth so far, there isn't ANY online storefront that is effectively DRM-Free; so long as you're making a purchase and it isn't free (as in free beer). That's why the whole DRM argument is sort of pointless.
It's good that GOG aren't assholes with the DRM they've chosen, but they're just assholes in general to me, so nope. :P
Post-purchase authentication was the original purpose of DRM in its earliest forms. Fucking around with your game's digital access, gameplay capabilities, not to mention data scraping from your machine without telling you, the more egregious DRM stuff all came later. Even Wikipedia's definition of DRM is defined as "access control".
Apparently, even Nintendo Entertainment System cartridges would make you look up things in their manuals to prove you had bought a game; I remember DOS and Windows games did that too. It was all about access control. It's still about access control, authentication, today.
Here's a funny story that shows my point: My partner rented Metal Gear Solid for the PlayStation. At one point a character in the game prompts you to look up Meryl's codec frequency on "the back of the CD case". He was mystified, did the character mean an in-game item? Something he'd missed? Turns out it was listed on the actual CD case that the game came with. (For young people who wouldn't know: video games were often rented without their original packaging or manuals.)
Ideally, the perfect DRM system only catches those who aren't legitimate buyers, but that doesn't happen. Doesn't mean I like it, but I'm sending my authentication data to Steam as permission to access my library. That's a restriction on how I can use the software, and I have to prove this to them with that email address, password and phone number, over and over, years after my initial purchase.
GOG will ask you for this access, too, repeatedly if you don't have cookies saved. How else do they create a business without some restrictions on who accesses their games? You have no online business if you don't place some restrictions on your assets.
By the definitions I've put forth so far, there isn't ANY online storefront that is effectively DRM-Free; so long as you're making a purchase and it isn't free (as in free beer). That's why the whole DRM argument is sort of pointless.
It's good that GOG aren't assholes with the DRM they've chosen, but they're just assholes in general to me, so nope. :P
3 Likes, Who?
Quoting: johndoeMay I ask you if GOG games come with an EULA?
There is user agreement with GOG, and then game can potentially provide its own agreement with the user.
0 Likes
Quoting: namikoyou don't know what you're talking about and you're embarrassing yourself.
What was that about? Feral provided enough info about this, and it's clearly their decision to make, despite many above here blaming it on original publishers or other reasons. Those who excuse their DRM stance should ask themselves what's the point of doing it.
Quoting: namikoIdeally, the perfect DRM system only catches those who aren't legitimate buyers, but that doesn't happen. Doesn't mean I like it, but I'm sending my authentication data to Steam as permission to access my library. That's a restriction on how I can use the software, and I have to prove this to them with that email address, password and phone number, over and over, years after my initial purchase.
Only to the extent that you can't back it up first. Sure, that's an aspect of DRM in Steam. That's one of the points that DRM-free is avoiding. You can back up your DRM-free purchase (from GOG or whatever store), and then use it even if that store closes down and there is no one to authenticate with. I said it quite clearly above. DRM is a restriction after purchase.
Quoting: namikoGOG will ask you for this access, too, repeatedly if you don't have cookies saved. How else do they create a business without some restrictions on who accesses their games? You have no online business if you don't place some restrictions on your assets.
making a purchase and it isn't free (as in free beer). That's why the whole DRM argument is sort of pointless.
Very simple. Sell the game, get paid for it. No DRM garbage attached to restrict the user after that. Works pretty well for them, their store is growing.
Quoting: namikoBy the definitions I've put forth so far, there isn't ANY online storefront that is effectively DRM-Free; so long as you're making a purchase and it isn't free (as in free beer). That's why the whole DRM argument is sort of pointless.
Your definition is incorrect, I already explained to you how. Authenticating you for purchase is not DRM. Restricting your use after the purchase already is.
Last edited by Shmerl on 19 June 2018 at 7:32 pm UTC
0 Likes
Quoting: ShmerlQuoting: johndoeMay I ask you if GOG games come with an EULA?
There is user agreement with GOG, and then game can potentially provide its own agreement with the user.
Thank you. Please don't think I want to nail you down or something.
OK. So the EULA describes how many installations (maybe also backups) you are allowed to do inhouse and how many installations you can use at the "same time", right?
0 Likes
Quoting: johndoeOK. So the EULA describes how many installations (maybe also backups) you are allowed to do inhouse and how many installations you can use at the "same time", right?
No, the EULA doesn't restrict how many installations or backups you are allowed to make, as long as it's for your use. It's the point of DRM-free.
Last edited by Shmerl on 19 June 2018 at 7:35 pm UTC
0 Likes
Quoting: ShmerlQuoting: johndoeOK. So the EULA describes how many installations (maybe also backups) you are allowed to do inhouse and how many installations you can use at the "same time", right?
No, the EULA doesn't restrict how many installations or backups you are allowed to make, as long as it's for your use. It's the point of DRM-free.
OK, but are you allowed to use all these installations at the "same time"? This decision can only be made by the publisher and not GOG I think.
0 Likes
Quoting: johndoeOK, but are you allowed to use all these installations at the "same time"? This decision can only be made by the publisher and not GOG I think.
Normal publishers care about you not copying this to other people for instance, not about how you use it yourself. But they aren't putting any technical methods to restrict you. GOG can't force publishers of course, they need to agree to release with some terms first.
If you want to know details of the user agreement, you can see it here: https://support.gog.com/hc/en-us/articles/212632089-User-Agreement
Last edited by Shmerl on 19 June 2018 at 7:43 pm UTC
0 Likes
Quoting: ShmerlQuoting: johndoeOK, but are you allowed to use all these installations at the "same time"? This decision can only be made by the publisher and not GOG I think.
Normal publishers care about you not copying this to other people for instance, not about how you use it yourself. But they aren't putting any technical methods to restrict you. GOG can't force publishers of course, they need to agree to release with some terms first.
From the view of a publisher it would be not clever to release a game DRM-free if it means that "one purchase" can be used at the "same time" by a multitudinous family.
This would mean that they lose a lot of money.
Last edited by johndoe on 19 June 2018 at 7:52 pm UTC
0 Likes
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me