this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2024
725 points (98.9% liked)

Games

16748 readers
1336 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world 38 points 1 month ago (23 children)

It should because their use agreement makes it clear that you don't own the games but are licensing them. That's pretty much why they had to clarify what they said I'd imagine. IMO, proving the point of the law, really.

[–] TheEntity@lemmy.world 31 points 1 month ago (22 children)

This is equally true for almost any game ever sold, including physical ones. You only ever own a license that specifies what you can and cannot do with the game. The difference is in what this license is tied to, for example either a physical copy of a given game or an account that can be remotely deactivated taking away all your games. In GOG's case once you grab the installer, the game license cannot be easily forcibly revoked, just as with the physical copy.

[–] minimalfootprint@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Thanks for saying this.

With recent campaigns and rants against digital media, people often claim that "you own the game if you buy a physical copy". That always makes me sigh, because it's false.

Not saying there are some advantages for some use cases, but I dislike hyperbole and untruths.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's just semantics.

When you buy a CD, you don't own the songs.

But you do have some item that belongs to you.

With Steam, you have a ticket that will let you into Steam to download the game for as long as your account is in good standing and as long as Steam exists.

With GOG, you have a file you can use to install the game on any machine INDEFINITELY. GOG can't revoke your access for any reason, and if GOG shuts down, you can still install the games.

[–] fushuan@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I have plenty drm free games in steam where I copied the game folder into other computers and it ran offline. At that point, there's no difference between an installer and a compressed copy of that game. For reference, Grim dawn but there's plenty more.

"Installing" is just semantics for decompressing a file in specific folders, you can the collect that data and "install" the game wherever. As long as you can run the game without steam, it doesn't matter that you used steam to buy it.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago

You're right! Some games on Steam are DRM-free.

All games on GOG are DRM-free as a rule.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)