GOG被甩卖，玩家其实并不介意“租游戏”

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the ongoing debate about whether digital games are merely rentals rather than purchases, with Steam's recent clarification fueling player outrage and highlighting the contrasting approach of GOG, which emphasizes true ownership of games [1][3]. Group 1: Steam's Position - Steam has explicitly stated that digital games are considered rentals, not purchases, leading to significant backlash from the gaming community across various platforms [1][3]. - Despite this revelation, Steam's user engagement remains high, with record numbers of concurrent users, indicating that many players accept the reality of purchasing usage rights rather than ownership [4][6]. Group 2: GOG's Unique Approach - GOG differentiates itself by allowing players to have true ownership of games, offering DRM-free titles that can be downloaded, backed up, and reinstalled without restrictions [3][7]. - CD Projekt, the parent company of GOG, recently sold the platform to its co-founder for 177 million RMB, indicating a strategic shift despite GOG's unique selling proposition [3][4]. Group 3: Market Dynamics - GOG's revenue was approximately 47 million euros last year, with a net profit of only 268,000 euros, raising questions about its long-term viability compared to Steam's estimated revenue of over 16 billion USD [3][4]. - The gaming community's emotional connection to games often overshadows concerns about ownership, as most players do not mind whether they are renting or buying, unless a game is announced for shutdown [6][9]. Group 4: Community and Experience - The experience provided by distribution platforms is crucial, with Steam being viewed as a community hub, while Epic Games is seen merely as a storefront [9][11]. - GOG's lack of community engagement and reliance on its DRM-free model may not be sufficient to attract players away from more community-oriented platforms like Steam [11].