GOG to go through some reorganization after suffering losses

It's not a technicality. There is a 30%/70% cut for everybody. If they had reduced the fees for big publishers like you say, they would have a 20%/80% cut as a default. That is not the case. How can you claim that they reduced the fees when they didn't?

Oh come on. If for a given group, their games get deal X 99% of the time, and 99% of the games getting deal X belong to that group, who was deal X made for?
Sure, this way it's future proofed for if someone else comes along and joins the group. And the deal has significantly better optics than "Companies A, B, C and D pay 20% and everyone else pays 30%". But the point of the policy was to appease the big publishers, not to give a bonus to indies with a flash in the pan.

Well many analysts and not only have predicted from the first very moment Epic started throwing trucks of (chinese) money in order to cannibalize the market that this would kill smaller stores sooner or later. Remember Swiney officialy told the court that they are expecting to see profits in 2024... remains to be seen if that will be proven right, all those years they are at loss, building armies of angry Fortnite teenagers while making ridiculous claims and being hypocritical. They are not competing head to head, despite them having tons of $ more than anyone else, sorry, they are just cannibalizing. It's the same thing M$ did reaching 95% userbase, that 95% is not a product of competition, we all know how they reached that %, from the days of CP/M 'til latest ".NET open-source" incident.


Last edited by sudoer on 2 Dec 2021 at 6:37 pm UTC

I once saw the "sweaty guy deciding between two buttons" meme with

"GOG: DRM-free games from a company that seemingly doesn't give two shits about Linux gaming."

"STEAM: DRM-filled games from a company that actively promotes Linux gaming."

I once saw the "sweaty guy deciding between two buttons" meme with

"GOG: DRM-free games from a company that seemingly doesn't give two shits about Linux gaming."

"STEAM: DRM-filled games from a company that actively promotes Linux gaming."

That's not a "sweaty guy" decision for me. Especially when I realise that not all Steam games actually have DRM. I guess we're all different though, which is no bad thing.

I have the same annoyance when the Humble Choice comes out each month, because while Humble allows Steam linking for redeeming the games, there's no library search function. So I have to grab the title, visit steampowered.com, enter it and see if I own it. Doing that for 10-12 games... it's just a bit tedious.

The Augmented Steam extension has a feature that adds a "Search Steam Store for <marked text>" entry to the right click menu. You can't use it everywhere (for example when you can't (easily) select text on a website), but it's usually pretty convenient and saves a lot of time.
But you're right of course, 3rd-party stores should have library syncing and (or at least) links to Steam.

Valve isn't publicly traded as far as I can tell, so they don't have to chase profits and forecasts at any cost like a lot of the "evil" companies do. That's not to say they won't become evil at some point, people in power and business practices change.

A monopoly is _never_ good, so it's always worth it to have some competition to turn to. Their dominance/monopoly in the Linux space is unfortunately insignificant, though I find it very hard these days to give money to GOG what with their Linux support being the afterthought that it is.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they dropped Linux support entirely now they're "restructuring".

It's unlikely, as even with the slow hype DRM free is getting, it's still disproportionately better selling point among us nutters than your average "gamer".

Valve's stranglehold on PC gaming

Seems to me more like Valve's plush pillow upon which PC gaming is comfortably enjoying itself.

GOG and by extension - GOG Galaxy, offers a better experience on Windows than Steam.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣