"If" every one of those votes was a new pre-order, that's $83,545.56.
Of course it's unlikely that all 4644 would be a new sale. Some wouldn't buy now, some may be pre-orders moved from here. Then again, that's just people taking the time to vote. It's entirely possible there could be many more sales than votes. It's an interesting thought.
Jalister, of course the more popular something is, the more pirated it's going to be. I made that point a while ago in response to the continued posting of links showing popular games which contained DRM are the most pirated. That's only logical. When something is AAA title expected to make millions in sales, it's more likely to include DRM (because the companies feel they need to protect their investment) and it's more likely to be pirated because it's more likely to be a higher quality game. That in itself does not speak to the wisdom of including DRM or not.
I am not certain of your argument that more money = higher standards. I will agree that a financial component is a large driver of piracy, but honestly, I think it has more to do with actually thinking about it. I know many people who have been affected by a loss of employment or income but very few who gave up their flat screen TV, their working vehicle, their cellphone, etc. just to afford food. People have to be pretty desperate to do those things, which also means that they've got income to afford a $20, yet they pirate it anyway. I do not believe that more money makes one more moral. If that were true, we would not have so many rich criminals running our country (in Congress and the Presidency). It does become easier to steal the poorer one gets, but in this case, we're not even talking about a necessity. I am not sure that the assumption that more poor people pirate than rich ones can be substantiated.
I think that the term DRM-free is deceiving. Clearly, you folks are willing to accept some limitations on your use of products, if they are reasonable and unobtrusive. So, DRM-like schemes such as what BG:EE has included should be totally acceptable to anyone here who does not absolutely insist on a DRM-free experience. I do not see any evidence though, that a total lack of DRM will be good for the consumer or the publisher. If sales and piracy both increase (in a DRM-free world) and I think that's a reasonable assumption, we should then expect to pay higher prices for games.
Torchlight 2 advertises offline single player, lan, and moddability. All features lacking in Diablo 3. I love this little mention too "no item sales". The auction house is the biggest turn off to Diablo 3 for me, well that and the DRM.
GOG annoys me sometimes, its lack of a sales tab and the games themselves not saying if the multiplayer is still working may seem like small problems but are very annoying issues.
But Complete lack of DRM is pretty awesome (Even if I exploit it all the time :0 )
we should then expect to pay higher prices for games.
And we already are paying higher prices for games. This is the main reason why buying a game digitally costs the same as buying it in the store (and sometimes more, if the store has reduced its prices but the digital store hasn't). It's totally counter-intuitive, of course, because more people will buy the game if it costs less, but that's the reasoning.
Vortican, based on the condition I stated about, BGEE falls into the DRM free category for me. Any game that is primarily meant to be single player cannot have any mechanism in place that requires an outside source to use the game, beyond what is obtained at the time of purchase. Download file, installation key, even a license file are fine. As I have stated, that puts all the control on me, and I don't have to be concerned that I won't be able to use my software due to internet or company outages.
I'm not sure that I stated more money = higher standards. I'm not sure of how much the financial affects piracy, but if people are tight on cash, piracy is one of the easiest ways to cut entertainment costs.
My point about more popular titles being pirated more was to point out that just because something is pirated more, it doesn't mean that you are necessarily losing money. 21 million pirated copies of Avatar, and they still made a killing in profits. Perhaps there is an average of how much something is pirated. Stuff will get pirated. People have always, and most likely will always steal. DRM is ineffective, or at least not anywhere close to effective enough to stop piracy.
Stop harassing the paying customers with DRM, unskippable warnings, and other hoops that negatively affect those that are paying for their media, it is doing nothing (or close enough to nothing) to stop piracy.
I just want to install the software that I paid for the right to use, and just use it. As I've said "do I look like a poodle?".
I only accept DRM in games like Left 4 Dead and Killing Floor because they are online only multiplayer games. Those games continually use the resources of those publishers and costs them money. They also continue to add free content to their games. People freely using their servers is lost money (whether the pirate would have paid or not), and takes away from paying customers. Someone pirating a single player game does not take away from the player, and it may not be a lost sale if the pirate wouldn't have bought it anyway. Even if the pirate would have bought it, it's one lost sale, and not a continual loss like freely using maintained server resources.
Even considering the fact of the cost of publishers hosting servers, I was still very torn in making the decision to buy Left 4 Dead. I'm glad I did, it's been crazy fun. Plus I never would have tried Killing Floor if I wasn't finally on Steam. I bought those games cheap though, and I accept I may lose them someday.
I don't think DRM free is deceiving. Maybe not all of us, but many of us equate DRM to online activation, online requirements, or rootkit drivers for things like online activation and media checks. I also think many of us don't consider installation keys, normal media checks, or license files DRM. If it requires another party to work, or installing something bad on our computers, it's DRM. If it's keys, license files, or media checks, it's copy protection.
DRM is akin to renting for many of us. If I'm renting, I'm paying rental rates. $4 and I'm in for BGEE as it is now. If they want $17.99 or $19.99, it's activation free.
If sales and piracy both increase (in a DRM-free world) and I think that's a reasonable assumption, we should then expect to pay higher prices for games.
Just like it can't be proved removing DRM will increase sales or piracy, it also can't be proved that DRM is increasing sales or piracy. That is also not our only argument. We paid, we want a better or equal product to what the pirates are getting. We are paying customers not pirates, treat us like customers not pirates.
Even considering the fact of the cost of publishers hosting servers, I was still very torn in making the decision to buy Left 4 Dead. I'm glad I did, it's been crazy fun. Plus I never would have tried Killing Floor if I wasn't finally on Steam. I bought those games cheap though, and I accept I may lose them someday.
You shouldn't worry about that. It will rot your brain
Valve has promised, many times infact, that if Steam ever has to shut down they will remove all DMR requirements.
Also Valve is privately owned and care alot about their public view. They WILL keep that promise aslong as they remain a Private company.....if they are ever sold though "Shudders"
@ST4TICStriker - I have grown to like Steam. It may be DRM, but it also provides so much more. I refuse to user Origin or UPlay because EA and Ubisoft have proven to me that they don't really care about the customer. Plus Origin and UPlay don't really offer anything beyond DRM, and the ability to buy games. Even if Origin and UPlay somehow managed to add all the functionality of Steam (I say all to make a comparison), I still would not want to use Origin or UPlay because I am already invested in Steam. My games are there, my friends are there, etc., and I don't want to split up my games, friends, community between multiple platforms.
Steam has also proven themselves buy being the first, staying ahead of the rest, being around so many years, and appear to care about their customers and reputation. Now I'm not saying Beamdog doesn't care about their customers or reputation, but I also don't want to split my DRM up across multiple game clients. I also don't want DRM at all, and I will continue to pay rental prices on Steam.
I still buy my games really cheap on Steam, just in case. Many of my games were included in indie bundles, many of which also have DRM free copies included.
Also Valve is privately owned and care alot about their public view. They WILL keep that promise aslong as they remain a Private company.....if they are ever sold though "Shudders"
I agree. Look at what happened to Blizzard (Activision) and BioWare (EA). Sad days. Blizzard and BioWare should have joined forces instead. BioWare could have used Battle.net instead of Origin, and those two could have become a single power house of awesome.
The BioWare name is already being attached to games that are not made by BioWare. EA is going to poison the name BioWare like it's currently poisoning "Origin". The day may come when BioWare no longer exists as developers, look at what happened to the old Origin. Blizzard now has the auction house and always on DRM.
@ST4TICStriker You cannot say with any measure of certainty what Steam will or will not do in the future. I would never have thought Bioware would sell out to EA. But they did. I would never have thought Blizzard would sell out to Activision. But they did. Stuff happens. Sometimes it's a ship date that slips, sometimes it's a company being sold, sometimes it's a promise being broken. There are so many very plausible scenarios where Steam ends badly for the consumer. I'm not saying it will end badly. But don't confuse what probably will happen with what certainly will happen.
DRM is a bad thing for consumers. I understand that Steam dresses it up with enough customer service that many are willing to make the trade. Good for them. But Steam could do all those things without DRM. It doesn't make DRM a good thing. It just makes Steam worth it to many people. I am not one of those people myself, but to each his own. I'm a GOG and Indie Bundle man through and through. And the Indie bundles offer many Steam keys without DRM.
The relevant question for me continues to be whether this game would make more money without DRM. I still believe that it would. No one has come close to swaying my opinion on this one all important fact. I concede that no DRM may lead to more piracy. I don't see why anyone should care if it also leads to more profit. Let the dirty pirates do what they want while Trent and his friends count their hard earned money, of which they will have more if they go no DRM.
@Aosaw Haha! Not cynical at all. I just know that I can't predict the future and that if the control doesn't rest with me than I don't really have control. I agree with many that at the crazy prices Steam offers it is probably worth it to roll the dice. But a good value proposition doesn't change the fact that you don't have any control over the product. I just think it is important to call things what they are so an informed choice can be made.
I have yet to dip my toe into the Steam waters. But if I had more time on my hands this summer I probably would have taken the plunge with some of those deals. But I would have known exactly what I was buying. I'm really not trying to hate on Steam. I just hate seeing it presented as something it's not. Steam is very much a DRM system.
Is it Steam keys, is it DRM free, is it Mac or Linux, is it the selection of games, or is it just a mix of everything.
The HB games can be easily pirated, and even a large selection of the games can be had for a penny. The make money, lots of money, and continue to release them.
Just noticed all 6 games are making their Linux debut.
@Jalister: Thanks for the tip! I just bought one. I didn't even bother to look at the games, but I liked one of the old bundles so much that I'm willing to bet I won't regret it.
Torchlight!!!!!!!! I knew not to buy this when it went on sale over at GOG. I just had a feeling it would end up in the next Humble Bundle. No big deal as I do want to support both organizations. This game is DRM free and I'll now have paid for it twice. If it had DRM I wouldn't have paid for it even once. That does seem like a point in favor of my arguments.
In an effort to change the conversation a little I'd like to ask a question to the crowd that feels DRM is necessary. Do you think the Humble Bundle business model is flawed in some way? If so, how? And if you don't think it is flawed, why do you feel BG:EE is incompatible with this type of distribution? Can you answer the same questions about GOG? I'm not asking if you think piracy is good or bad. I'm just asking from a business perspective, like I'm a sixty five year old stockholder who doesn't care at all about games, just dividends.
The question is academic since I am aware of the contract requirements at this time. But as I've stated many times I would like Trent and company to push back on this requirement for future releases. This is an honest attempt to learn the thoughts on the other side of the issue.
I don't know that DRM is necessary, per se, but I do think that developers have a right to protect their products, and I'm willing to accept a modest amount of DRM (install-time authentication is a good example) to support those developers. If a developer doesn't want to use any DRM, that's okay too, but I'm not going to begrudge a developer their rights.
I think the Humble Indie Bundle business model is nice, and DRM-free games are just swell. But just as DRM isn't necessary, I don't think it's necessary to always be DRM-free. I think that as long as it has a minimal effect on the consumer, it should be the choice of the developer.
For me DRM has never been a choice. I want steam games and games I want need steam. It's that simple.
GOG VS STEAM/NO-DRM VS DRM+BENEFITS
GOG, for me, just doesn't provide the same service as steam. GOG sells games and thats all they do.....
Steam sells games and it's also like a social network. It has Party chat; Text AND voice chat with multiple people playing differnt games. Achievements, trading games, friends lists and auto updates these are all things Steam has and GOG does not.
The catch (theres always one) is the DRM. In exchange for all these features we have to put up with (Light) DRM and not being able to play our games without internet. (Unless you setup offline mode)
However me, and many many many many others, view this as a necessary compromise. We deal with DRM and in exchange we get to accesses to a great service. After a while you forget about the DRM and it fades into the backround.
You give up your rights and let the "man" win, willingly, because the "man" finally treats you right. (and lets you buy games super cheap )
Is the exchange worth it? For me and many others: Yes, yes it is.
I'm not sure what question I was meant to answer anymore......Something about DRM being worth it if it benefits the customer or such and such.........
I belive no, it gives me no benefits and I do not profit from it in anyway. However Steam has softend my Heart to DRM and I will buy this game (or any others I want) regardless of how agressive or non-existent the DRM is.
@ST4TICStriker I appreciate your post, but it doesn't address DRM directly. The Humble Bundles are all DRM free and still offer Steam keys. The two don't have to be mutually exclusive. It sounds like from your post that a DRM free release from Beamdog and/or GOG with a Steam key would solve all of your problems.
I was hoping to get feedback on why people seem to feel that BG:EE isn't compatible with the Humble Bundle method or the GOG method. I know that the developer has the right to release any way they want. They could release it only in Portugal with a license that says you cannot play if you speak Portuguese. I'm not arguing that fact. I'd like to know why people think they shouldn't release DRM free. In particular, I'd like to frame the conversation in terms of the existing examples of this type of release.
GOG VS STEAM/NO-DRM+BENEFITS VS DRM+BENEFITS <-fixed it for you.
GOG does provide additional benefits. They may not be the benefits you want, but they are there.
You can download you purchase as many times as you want. The GOG downloaded is not a mandatory client, and works very well as a downloader. They often provide many extras with games, like PDF manuals, soundtracks, art books, books, avatars, guide books, and other things. They have a nice forum that is used by many. You can maintain a wishlist, much like Steam. You can vote for games you would like to see on GOG. Many sales, though none at 75% or 80% (GOG has a 65% sale now).
Both provide benefits, and I prefer GOG over Steam.
It sounds like from your post that a DRM free release from Beamdog and/or GOG with a Steam key would solve all of your problems.
I have no problem at all if they want to include a Steam key with a DRM free version. I know a lot of people love Steam, and many more like Steam. Even I will register a Steam key if I get one with my DRM free version. I may even play the Steam version of the DRM version since I have never had a problem with Steam. However, I'm comforted to know that I have my DRM free version to use if I want it on my netbook or laptop, if my internet goes down, or if Steam ever does go away.
I bought Trine 2 and Legend of Grimrock direct from the developers. Both use the Humble Store. On my Humble Store download page, I have my DRM free copy to download, my extras to download, my Steam key for both, and a Desura key for Trine 2. Deals like those make me happy, and both were purchased at full price.
This would be another example of value added service. There is certainly a self serving agenda behind that article, but it does offer a legitimate value added service to their customers without resorting to DRM.
I would still love to see some discussion about the merits and/or failings of the business model used by GOG and the Humble Bundle. That is where we can really address the issue of revenue in relation to DRM.
@ST4TICStriker I appreciate your post, but it doesn't address DRM directly. The Humble Bundles are all DRM free and still offer Steam keys. The two don't have to be mutually exclusive. It sounds like from your post that a DRM free release from Beamdog and/or GOG with a Steam key would solve all of your problems.
Including a Steam key means that while I benefit from the service Valve does not.
It's the perfect solution to the problem but Valve(Steam) would have no reason to agree to it.
@ST4TICStriker This is beside the point, but Steam has every reason to encourage people to stay with their service. Allowing a third party, like say the Humble Bundle, to include a Steam key has a tremendous value to Valve. Just like Google wants you to start on their page even if you aren't using just their services. Yahoo built a web portal leading to everywhere, but always bringing you back to Yahoo. Microsoft wants EVERYTHING to run on Windows even if they don't get a piece of the action directly. Steam is trying to build a platform and having other developers support their platform is a home run for them. Otherwise, why release keys for the Humble bundles when they undercut even the best Steam sales?
@ST4TICStriker This is beside the point, but Steam has every reason to encourage people to stay with their service. Allowing a third party, like say the Humble Bundle, to include a Steam key has a tremendous value to Valve. Just like Google wants you to start on their page even if you aren't using just their services. Yahoo built a web portal leading to everywhere, but always bringing you back to Yahoo. Microsoft wants EVERYTHING to run on Windows even if they don't get a piece of the action directly. Steam is trying to build a platform and having other developers support their platform is a home run for them. Otherwise, why release keys for the Humble bundles when they undercut even the best Steam sales?
I don't think it is "Beside the point" That soultion can't be used on EVERY game.
The Humble bundle while a great offer to the consumer, cannot be applied to every single game realeased on Steam. That is the flaw within the business model. It is quite litteraly unsustainable.
Valve has to make money somehow and that 20% cut is a huge part of their earnings.
(It is alot like those offers in shops where they give you free food just for walking up to the stand. It's meant to intice you, to make you atleast try it and hopefully make you purchase it in the future. The store can't make ALL the food free forever just like Steam can''t make ALL games come with free keys.)
You are perfectly right to prefer GOG because of no DRM. Which is reason enough on its own, but you have to admit steam does provide more benefits.
I just wanted to be clear that GOG does have benefits. Steam does have more features, but whether Steam has more benefits depends on what each individual user wants as a benefit. Remember, I do use both, I just prefer GOG for always being DRM free.
Comments
"If" every one of those votes was a new pre-order, that's $83,545.56.
Of course it's unlikely that all 4644 would be a new sale. Some wouldn't buy now, some may be pre-orders moved from here. Then again, that's just people taking the time to vote. It's entirely possible there could be many more sales than votes. It's an interesting thought.
Edit - 4647 votes now.
I am not certain of your argument that more money = higher standards. I will agree that a financial component is a large driver of piracy, but honestly, I think it has more to do with actually thinking about it. I know many people who have been affected by a loss of employment or income but very few who gave up their flat screen TV, their working vehicle, their cellphone, etc. just to afford food. People have to be pretty desperate to do those things, which also means that they've got income to afford a $20, yet they pirate it anyway. I do not believe that more money makes one more moral. If that were true, we would not have so many rich criminals running our country (in Congress and the Presidency). It does become easier to steal the poorer one gets, but in this case, we're not even talking about a necessity. I am not sure that the assumption that more poor people pirate than rich ones can be substantiated.
I think that the term DRM-free is deceiving. Clearly, you folks are willing to accept some limitations on your use of products, if they are reasonable and unobtrusive. So, DRM-like schemes such as what BG:EE has included should be totally acceptable to anyone here who does not absolutely insist on a DRM-free experience. I do not see any evidence though, that a total lack of DRM will be good for the consumer or the publisher. If sales and piracy both increase (in a DRM-free world) and I think that's a reasonable assumption, we should then expect to pay higher prices for games.
GOG annoys me sometimes, its lack of a sales tab and the games themselves not saying if the multiplayer is still working may seem like small problems but are very annoying issues.
But Complete lack of DRM is pretty awesome (Even if I exploit it all the time :0 )
I'm not sure that I stated more money = higher standards. I'm not sure of how much the financial affects piracy, but if people are tight on cash, piracy is one of the easiest ways to cut entertainment costs.
My point about more popular titles being pirated more was to point out that just because something is pirated more, it doesn't mean that you are necessarily losing money. 21 million pirated copies of Avatar, and they still made a killing in profits. Perhaps there is an average of how much something is pirated. Stuff will get pirated. People have always, and most likely will always steal. DRM is ineffective, or at least not anywhere close to effective enough to stop piracy.
Stop harassing the paying customers with DRM, unskippable warnings, and other hoops that negatively affect those that are paying for their media, it is doing nothing (or close enough to nothing) to stop piracy.
I just want to install the software that I paid for the right to use, and just use it. As I've said "do I look like a poodle?".
I only accept DRM in games like Left 4 Dead and Killing Floor because they are online only multiplayer games. Those games continually use the resources of those publishers and costs them money. They also continue to add free content to their games. People freely using their servers is lost money (whether the pirate would have paid or not), and takes away from paying customers. Someone pirating a single player game does not take away from the player, and it may not be a lost sale if the pirate wouldn't have bought it anyway. Even if the pirate would have bought it, it's one lost sale, and not a continual loss like freely using maintained server resources.
Even considering the fact of the cost of publishers hosting servers, I was still very torn in making the decision to buy Left 4 Dead. I'm glad I did, it's been crazy fun. Plus I never would have tried Killing Floor if I wasn't finally on Steam. I bought those games cheap though, and I accept I may lose them someday.
I don't think DRM free is deceiving. Maybe not all of us, but many of us equate DRM to online activation, online requirements, or rootkit drivers for things like online activation and media checks. I also think many of us don't consider installation keys, normal media checks, or license files DRM. If it requires another party to work, or installing something bad on our computers, it's DRM. If it's keys, license files, or media checks, it's copy protection.
DRM is akin to renting for many of us. If I'm renting, I'm paying rental rates. $4 and I'm in for BGEE as it is now. If they want $17.99 or $19.99, it's activation free.
Valve has promised, many times infact, that if Steam ever has to shut down they will remove all DMR requirements.
Also Valve is privately owned and care alot about their public view. They WILL keep that promise aslong as they remain a Private company.....if they are ever sold though "Shudders"
Steam has also proven themselves buy being the first, staying ahead of the rest, being around so many years, and appear to care about their customers and reputation. Now I'm not saying Beamdog doesn't care about their customers or reputation, but I also don't want to split my DRM up across multiple game clients. I also don't want DRM at all, and I will continue to pay rental prices on Steam.
I still buy my games really cheap on Steam, just in case. Many of my games were included in indie bundles, many of which also have DRM free copies included.
The BioWare name is already being attached to games that are not made by BioWare. EA is going to poison the name BioWare like it's currently poisoning "Origin". The day may come when BioWare no longer exists as developers, look at what happened to the old Origin. Blizzard now has the auction house and always on DRM.
DRM is a bad thing for consumers. I understand that Steam dresses it up with enough customer service that many are willing to make the trade. Good for them. But Steam could do all those things without DRM. It doesn't make DRM a good thing. It just makes Steam worth it to many people. I am not one of those people myself, but to each his own. I'm a GOG and Indie Bundle man through and through. And the Indie bundles offer many Steam keys without DRM.
The relevant question for me continues to be whether this game would make more money without DRM. I still believe that it would. No one has come close to swaying my opinion on this one all important fact. I concede that no DRM may lead to more piracy. I don't see why anyone should care if it also leads to more profit. Let the dirty pirates do what they want while Trent and his friends count their hard earned money, of which they will have more if they go no DRM.
I have yet to dip my toe into the Steam waters. But if I had more time on my hands this summer I probably would have taken the plunge with some of those deals. But I would have known exactly what I was buying. I'm really not trying to hate on Steam. I just hate seeing it presented as something it's not. Steam is very much a DRM system.
Is it Steam keys, is it DRM free, is it Mac or Linux, is it the selection of games, or is it just a mix of everything.
The HB games can be easily pirated, and even a large selection of the games can be had for a penny. The make money, lots of money, and continue to release them.
Just noticed all 6 games are making their Linux debut.
The question is academic since I am aware of the contract requirements at this time. But as I've stated many times I would like Trent and company to push back on this requirement for future releases. This is an honest attempt to learn the thoughts on the other side of the issue.
I think the Humble Indie Bundle business model is nice, and DRM-free games are just swell. But just as DRM isn't necessary, I don't think it's necessary to always be DRM-free. I think that as long as it has a minimal effect on the consumer, it should be the choice of the developer.
For me DRM has never been a choice. I want steam games and games I want need steam. It's that simple.
GOG VS STEAM/NO-DRM VS DRM+BENEFITS
GOG, for me, just doesn't provide the same service as steam. GOG sells games and thats all they do.....
Steam sells games and it's also like a social network.
It has Party chat; Text AND voice chat with multiple people playing differnt games.
Achievements, trading games, friends lists and auto updates these are all things Steam has and GOG does not.
The catch (theres always one) is the DRM.
In exchange for all these features we have to put up with (Light) DRM and not being able to play our games without internet. (Unless you setup offline mode)
However me, and many many many many others, view this as a necessary compromise.
We deal with DRM and in exchange we get to accesses to a great service.
After a while you forget about the DRM and it fades into the backround.
You give up your rights and let the "man" win, willingly, because the "man" finally treats you right.
(and lets you buy games super cheap
Is the exchange worth it? For me and many others: Yes, yes it is.
I'm not sure what question I was meant to answer anymore......Something about DRM being worth it if it benefits the customer or such and such.........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyway!
BG:EE should it have DRM?
I belive no, it gives me no benefits and I do not profit from it in anyway. However Steam has softend my Heart to DRM and I will buy this game (or any others I want) regardless of how agressive or non-existent the DRM is.
==================================================================
QUESTION: Will DRM increase sales?
ANSWER: No, unless the DRM stops a pirate version being created, Sales Will not increase because of DRM.
(That Answer works for any game that includes DRM)
I was hoping to get feedback on why people seem to feel that BG:EE isn't compatible with the Humble Bundle method or the GOG method. I know that the developer has the right to release any way they want. They could release it only in Portugal with a license that says you cannot play if you speak Portuguese. I'm not arguing that fact. I'd like to know why people think they shouldn't release DRM free. In particular, I'd like to frame the conversation in terms of the existing examples of this type of release.
GOG does provide additional benefits. They may not be the benefits you want, but they are there.
You can download you purchase as many times as you want.
The GOG downloaded is not a mandatory client, and works very well as a downloader.
They often provide many extras with games, like PDF manuals, soundtracks, art books, books, avatars, guide books, and other things.
They have a nice forum that is used by many.
You can maintain a wishlist, much like Steam.
You can vote for games you would like to see on GOG.
Many sales, though none at 75% or 80% (GOG has a 65% sale now).
Both provide benefits, and I prefer GOG over Steam.
I bought Trine 2 and Legend of Grimrock direct from the developers. Both use the Humble Store. On my Humble Store download page, I have my DRM free copy to download, my extras to download, my Steam key for both, and a Desura key for Trine 2. Deals like those make me happy, and both were purchased at full price.
Just posted - http://www.gog.com/en/news/enhance_the_gameplay_in_your_edition_of_baldurs_gate_from_gogcom
Plus the sale is still on.
I would still love to see some discussion about the merits and/or failings of the business model used by GOG and the Humble Bundle. That is where we can really address the issue of revenue in relation to DRM.
It's the perfect solution to the problem but Valve(Steam) would have no reason to agree to it.
You are perfectly right to prefer GOG because of no DRM. Which is reason enough on its own, but you have to admit steam does provide more benefits.
The Humble bundle while a great offer to the consumer, cannot be applied to every single game realeased on Steam. That is the flaw within the business model. It is quite litteraly unsustainable.
Valve has to make money somehow and that 20% cut is a huge part of their earnings.
(It is alot like those offers in shops where they give you free food just for walking up to the stand. It's meant to intice you, to make you atleast try it and hopefully make you purchase it in the future. The store can't make ALL the food free forever just like Steam can''t make ALL games come with free keys.)