Steam's new disclaimer reminds everyone that you don't actually own your games, GOG moves in for the killshot: Its offline installers 'cannot be taken away from you'
Steam's new disclaimer reminds everyone that you don't actually own your games, GOG moves in for the killshot: Its offline installers 'cannot be taken away from you'
The concept of a "digital license" isn't new, but there's no pretending you didn't know about it anymore.
People use steam because it's good service, and a good product.
In fact, they also gave Linux a boost
They also have things like cloud saving
Developers use them because apparently they have some awesome features too for things like multiplayer and such and a great API
I like steam as a user but it's still proprietary software and I'm slightly concerned about what is going to happen when Gabe Newell steps down as president and ceo of Valve.
This has literally always been the case with Steam, the only difference is that people are told up front now. Things will likely continue to operate exactly the same as it has until now, I doubt Valve wants to disrupt the giant money train they have.
I love how this article takes shots at steam despite valve being THE company holding the bar up in the gaming space.
I could list examples but I honestly don't even think I need to
Absolutely. I mean, I love the fact that GOG has DRM-free games. It's really incredible how many games are available without DRM because of them.
But I'm not going to make Valve out to be the bad guy here. Valve is like 99% of the reason why gaming on Linux is viable right now.
Valve seems like a great example of how, if you don't sell your company to venture capitalists, you can just be cool nerds that make good products. As much as I want DRM-free to be the norm, I'm also not going to vilify a company that is one of the best examples of not enshittifying right now.
A lot of Steam games are also DRM free. It's up to the individual developers whether they enforce DRM checks or not.
I've copied files from Steam folders directly to a flash drive, plugged them into an offline, Steam-less computer that I don't have rights to install anything on, and ran them perfectly. But it is a game-by-game thing.
Valve is holding up the bar not because valve is great but because everyone else is so shit. I've had a ton of issues with steam throughout the years and it's just.. nothing else is better. I was actually excited for the epic store launch and it's... Well, not the worst, because being the worst is a challenge some places take seriously, but certainly not a good steam replacement especially for low data people.
Steam may not let me control the updates to steam, but it won't force refresh my library causing ping spikes all the time as an intended feature.
This isn't about what steam currently is. It's about what it will inevitably become.
I fucked up going with Steam. Should have just pirated everything Single player.
You didn't fuck up. You can always still pirate. Wait it out and see what happens, the moment it goes to shit put on your pirate hat and don't give a fuck.
valve being THE company holding the bar up in the gaming space.
I think you mean holding a monopoly in the gaming space.
I think you don't know what that word means.
Heck, even if you want to blatantly ignore every other platform and site you can buy games from, which there are plenty, Valve gives devs a supply of Steam keys they can sell anywhere they want, they don't even get a cut from those despite providing the bandwidth to distribute the files.
They aren't really a monopoly. You can purchase games elsewhere. They are simply the gold standard of gaming platforms.
The reason they hold most of the market share is not because of bad business practices it's because the opposite. People use their service cause it's the best.
The gov only considers a large business a monopoly if it's doing anti competitive practices to maintain or grow it's market share. That description in no way fits steam or valve.
A monopoly on what? PC game storefeonts? Itch.io, gog, epic, gamepass, some are better than others, but steam isn't anti-competition
Lmao, he is colluding with the rest, not holding up the bar.
There is nothing rhat differentiates Steam from Microsoft or Nintendo. The only difference between Gaben and Bezos is that valve has a really good advertising team that's managed to convince everyone he "isn't your average billionaire".
They charge 30% because they have a soft monopoly, it's basically robbery and it is affecting the indie scene and the quality and amount of games we receive.
Gaben has 6 mega yatchs and a number of submarines. The yatchs alone are worth around 1 billion and cost an estimated 75 to 100 million per year just to maintain.
Now I sit and wait for the Gaben simp squad to come compare him to Jesus and tell me how "he has the only good monopoly". Both of these things literally happened last time.
Downvote me you bootlickers.
No one thinks Gaben is the second coming. His platform just, actually doesn't suck, and genuinely functions as a service to its users. It's a low bar, sure, but it's a good one. Comparing it to Microsoft axeing any studio that produces something worth talking about while they force more datascraping malware and adware into Windows is just dishonest.
Your comment reads more like you get off on being controversial than having actual insightful thoughts and the comparisons in what these three companies you listed are actually doing.
I'm guessing you don't remember what the market was like for indie games before Steam. Valve's platform has done a lot of work to expose small game developers, and made it economically viable to work on and publish games independently. Before this it was very difficult for small titles without the advertising budget of a AAA publisher to get any attention at all, let alone actual sales. There's nothing else like Steam for small studios trying to find buyers for their games, and Valve does deserve credit for that because it's improved the video game market overall to have more people making more games and able to earn a living doing it.
The other major effort that Valve has made is Linux compatibility. Even before their work on Proton, Valve released native Linux versions of their games (they were one of very few publishers to do so at the time). I've been gaming on Linux since 2006, and Wine was great but rarely easy or complete. Proton has made things so straightforward that people have forgotten just how difficult it was before.
Credit where it's due. No other major publisher has contributed to the gaming community the way Valve has, except maybe id Software when they just handed the entire Quake 3 Arena source code to the open source community in 2005 which spawned countless new open source game projects.
Downvote me you bootlickers.
No, you'll enjoy the attention too much.
Gaben has the only good monopoly, he's pretty much Jesus.
Preach brother!
I like GOG, but this is just weasel-words to take advantage of the ignorance of the public. Whether you receive the installs directly or not, you still don't own your games, you are just licensing them, same as Steam.
This doesn't tip the scales into the "this is wrong" territory for me, but I do think this kind of word manipulation exploiting an unknowledgeable public is a little bit slimy.
edit: I had a bit of knee-jerk reaction to the sensationalism of the headline; what GOG actually says is fine and doesn't imply anything beyond licensing in my eyes.
I think it is fair. When you buy games through GOG, you get the offline installer. Nobody can take that away from you.
When you buy games through Steam, you can only install them via the Steam client. If the Steam servers are offline, you cannot install your games. In theory, some games are without any DRM, and you can just zip them up, but even then that doesn't always work, and you shouldn't have to. That's not to take away from Steam, of course, it is great at what it does.
Providing an offline installer that works no matter what is as good as "owning" the game IMO, even if "technically" you are just purchasing a license to use the game.
I just like calling it "the kill shot", as though GOG is about to take all of Steam's market share some time next week.
please let this be true it would be really funny
I don't think "weasel words" is the right term here.
You own the GOG games like you own a book you bought, and like you don't own a DRM-crippled book, even though you might be entitled to read it under certain circumstances. The difference between downloading an installer and downloading a game on Steam is, the installer will continue to work even if GOG folds or decides they don't like you anymore. But if Steam blocks your account, all the games you bought are gone, and Steam is fully in the right to do so since you don't own their games.
That's not true. You still only receive a license to play the game, you do not own it. Directly from GOG's website:
We give you and other GOG users the personal right (known legally as a 'license') to use GOG services and to download, access and/or stream (depending on the content) and use GOG content. This license is for your personal use. We can stop or suspend this license in some situations, which are explained later on.
Practically this means you cannot resell your GOG installer in the way you could resell a physical book.
I don’t think “weasel words” is the right term here.
I agree with you. GOG's wording is fine, I was hasty in my reaction.
The amount of people thinking they are getting ripped off by steam now is astounding.
They are the reason this step is incredibly necessary.
I mean I've always had an issue that digital goods could always be revoked/taken back. That's why I didn't buy things on steam until it became basically the only way (as consoles have less physical media). This is just a great reminder for the public that we're consistently loosing control over our digital lives.
I've been an advocate for forcing companies to change the wording for digital goofs to "lease" rather than "buy". Cause at the end of the day, no one owns their steam library.
I mean, we are... Gabe became a billionaire that owns a yacht collection, his money came from somewhere, there's no reason to defend any billionaires or their companies unless you are a billionaire yourself.
Gabe heads a company which is successful because it respects its employees, customers, and suppliers instead of constantly trying to marginalize and abuse them. They are not perfect by any means, but they do fit into the definition of ethical capitalism, which should not be understated. They don't employ anticompetitive tactics like bribing/coercing developers into exclusivity contracts. They don't operate with a bunch of 1099 contractors so they can avoid providing benefits. Etc.
Here's another reminder to sign this initiative if you live in the EU.
I'd totally sign....if the Russian funded tory party hadn't decided we should leave because they were scared of the far right taking votes.
Spread the word, then.
Now if we could just have GOG Galaxy for Linux. It would make my life so much easier.
Heroic Game Launcher is pretty cool. It does game save sync with GOG games too.
I know, I use it. I'd prefer an official Galaxy port though.
Lutris lets you add your GOG account and download/install games directly. its not Galaxy, but its pretty flawless.
Lutris is awesome.
Open source games, games with their own launcher, games on steam, gog, etc are all in it. Can pick to run things natively on Linux, use proton (pick your version or just use latest), wine, or choose from others, and it does it seamlessly. For games you already have installed on steam, you don't need to reinstall them, it finds them and makes them runnable from within lutris once you connect your steam account, you can also install games that you own on any of your connected launchers, and browse/download your undownloaded games from themExamples for some of the stuff I have all in it now:
Catacyslm: DDA catapult launcher (free and open source game - highly recommend you try it out. Takes some getting used to, but there isn't much you can't do. Also, make sure you get cataclysm-tiles or use a launcher. ASCII is pure, but hard to get used to. Also, DO NOT buy it on steam.)
All of my installed steam games
Cyberpunk 2077 and the witcher 3 via gog
FFXIV (the official launcher, not steam)
Vintage story (open source but not free - highly recommend if you like open world survival crafting games with a big emphasis on survival)
I feel you. Installing Fallout London was such a pain in the ass for Linux.
I wrote a guide for getting fallout london up and running if you need a hand
100% agreed. just wish GOG was more linux friendly.
best of both worlds: piracy.
Much of the pirated games though will be GOG installers so might as well just install it with lutris/wine
yes
i wouldn't pirate an indie game tho
Unless you already bought it
Now can we get proton support for GoG that is as convient and reliable as it is in Steam?
Lutris + GE-Proton + umu works. If you use GE-Proton as the runner, Lutris automatically uses umu to launch the game which launches within the Steam Pressure Vessel container.
You can manage GE-Proton downloads using Protonplus. The latest version, last I checked, is GE-Proton9-15.
I've been playing more GoG games with Lutris + Wine in Linux than Steam games with Proton and I even have one situation of a game were the copy I bought in Steam doesn't work with Proton, but the pirated copy I downloaded to see if that would work runs absolutely fine with Lutris + Wine.
For me at least it's actually easier to sort problems out with games when using Lutris + Wine than it is with Proton and I can even make sure all games I run from Lutris are wrapped in a "firejail" sandbox, which amongst other things blocks all network access, something I can't do with Proton.
It's a vendor-tied solution meant to keep you in the Steam ecosystem, so for all the great work they did in past getting it to have broad compatibility, the future is not Proton, it's Wine.
Proton in Steam is absolutely easier. Lutris just automates work that some other user did, and if you're doing it in something like Heroic launcher instead, you have to figure that out yourself. It often involves things like installing other Microsoft components that are bundled with the application on Steam, and in one case, even though the game was verified on Steam, there was no Lutris script, and I just couldn't get it working on the GOG version.
All online storefronts doing business in California will soon be forbidden by law to lie to customers with words like "buy" when they really mean "license". GOG is no exception.
https://digitaldemocracy.calmatters.org/bills/ca_202320240ab2426
My understanding is that GOG is an exception to this. Here is a quote that I got from an Ars Technica article
California's AB2426 law, signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom Sept. 26, excludes subscription-only services, free games, and digital goods that offer "permanent offline download to an external storage source to be used without a connection to the internet." Otherwise, sellers of digital goods cannot use the terms "buy, purchase," or related terms that would "confer an unrestricted ownership interest in the digital good." And they must explain, conspicuously, in plain language, that "the digital good is a license" and link to terms and conditions.
Since GOG does offer permanent offline installers that can be used without an internet connection, GOG's sales are exempt from this new law.
As long as you understand the terms of your agreement with Steam as a platform, everything is fine. Physical media for games are outdated anyway, especially with frequent updates, patches, and DLC releases. Regarding older titles that are no longer supported, well, as the saying goes: "If buying isn't owing..."
Does GOG work on Linux?
Many of their games do have native linux versions, and a lot do work under wine or proton, which can be used as a Non-steam game in Steam or even without Steam.
Their launcher doesn't yet have a native linux version but it's completely optional, and does still run under wine if you really want it.
I like GOG and I like steam too. While it is true that GOG can't take the offline installer from me, this does not make it true I can play the game forever since many games are dynamically linked to libraries that may not be available in the future. This happened to me with games I just had bought. Steam also dynamically links to libraries but what I like about the way they are doing it is that these are part of the base installation so as long as you keep these files, the games should keep working. Nothing being perfect, I think they both try to do things in their own way and try to convince us that it is the best one.
Doesn't owning something mean you can sell it? That doesn't apply to GOG, though.
By the definition of this California law, they seem to count as offering ownership.
Put the installer on a USB stick and sell it. I assume you've never gone back to the electronics store where you bought your dishwasher and expected to sell your used dishwasher there.
But that’s against the User Agreement with GOG. You don’t have that right, DRM or not.
GOG are not selling you something you own, just like the rest of the gaming platforms. They just give you the right to download and keep DRM-free installers (for the most part) for games you license / purchase.
I like GOG, don’t get me wrong, but you don’t own anything you buy from them, you just possess. Ownership means you have control over that possession too which is only really true of a minuscule fraction of FOSS games that are licensed with MIT-0, 0BSD, Unlicense, CC0 or some other public domain license (which doesn’t include GPL, MIT, Apache licenses).
NGL This feels disingenuous coming from GOG, Yes, you can keep the installers, but you do NOT own the game.
Seriously not trying to just be contradictory:
What's the difference? In practical terms, what does this mean for me as the consumer? We don't own the intellectual property, but may use the software as-is? From a practical, consumer standpoint that feels the same as the days of owning your software on a disc, unable to be taken as long as you have physical control over the device. I'm fine with calling this "owning" personally.
I'm absolutely willing to be wrong on this. I'm by no means an expert. Please, if I have missed something, let me know.
Can you sell them? or trade, give, even lend them? My guess is you can't. And when I was a kid I did all those things.
It's not anedoctal IMO, but a change in paradigm. I'm not saying it's all bad. I buy games on GOG. But I don't own them really
A 2015 study in France showed 54% where more willing to buy a game when they knew they could sell them when done
Yeah? And whats the difference in practice?
Plus, unless the installers have the full package, it'll still require an internet connection. Usually installers download the files and then install them.
They’re called offline installers for a reason.
I'll give gog this, I have never seen an installer from them that needed an internet connection, That being said, they actively call it licensing in their own agreement
When have they not had the full package on GOG?
Even DRM-free, all digital purchases are still just a license, legally speaking.
Pragmatically speaking, they can't forcibly take the bits off my hard drive. But it also bears pointing out that these days most games on Steam don't bother enabling Steamworks DRM either.
The vast majority of the bestsellers on steam either have normal DRM or DRM via being an online service. At least the bestsellers in 2023.
I'll stick with my Steam cloud saves and game notes and community forums and community guides and custom controller configurations and community controller configurations and overlay and workshop and screenshots and steam deck and steam link and ...
Also, the very first game I ever bought on Steam was almost 15 years ago, and it was delisted and has not been available on Steam for over 10 years. Yet I can still re-download and play it right now.
Steam is not the evil corporation people pretend it is. Take your rage to Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo.
Steam is not the evil corporation people pretend it is.
Indeed. They're not saints either but for my personal demands, they offer the best arguments right now. I rank funding improvements to the FOSS Linux stack higher than a DRM-free pile of shame. That may change in the future but for now I prefer Steam over GOG. CD Project is a rich company. They could make a Linux version of Galaxy, put it onto Flathub, make it behave well under Steam Deck Game Mode, and put a tiny fraction of their revenue into Linux improvements.
GOG is funding the FOSS Heroic Games Launcher through an affiliate partnership: https://heroicgameslauncher.com/donate
Meanwhile I'm over here thinking about how I greatly prefer to put my saves in my own cloud storage (too many games these days not giving me as many slots as I'd like), the community forums are some of the most toxic places on the Internet right now, it's a coin flip whether Steam's going to give me a problem with my DualShock4, I hate how the Workshop is a walled garden, and I'm so much happier with my streaming now that I've dropped Steam Link and moved to Moonlight.
I guess the guides and Big Picture Mode can be nice?
Steam's still the #2 best option for me on PC storefronts; the battle.net launcher has some aggressive advertising, as an example of hellscape we're avoiding here. But Steam continues to not offer me much added value. I go there only because some of my games aren't available on GOG.
I will say I appreciate what Valve is doing with the Steam Deck, and I'm really hoping it continues to grow an ecosystem that directly competes with Nintendo. They are actively burning up banked goodwill right now, and that segment of the market is getting unhealthy without someone keeping them in check.
Steam colludes with Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo. It's all one big club meant to extract as much profit as possible.
Steam could charge 2% and Gaben would still be able to afford the 75 to 100 million he spends every year to maintained his fleet of 6 mega yatchs, worth an estimated 1 billion.
Stop defending billionaires.
What a weird hill to die on.
Anyway, enjoy being wrong.
Chad GOG
Doesn't steam have a clause to the effect of "if we go out of business, you'll get X period to download your games so you can manage them yourself"?
I don't know if it's a clause but Gabe said it at one point. Is that legally binding though? It wouldn't surprise me one bit that whatever VC eventually buys steam and then runs it into the ground would have no problem changing the user agreement to whatever suited them....
It's not legally binding, since it isn't part of the user agreement you review when buying games on Steam.
I think I read in the steam agreement itself - I could be wrong, but I generally have a source tagged to my knowledge, and the knowledge is tagged as a direct quote from the document
And yes, if a VC buys out steam I'd be horrified, but it's structurally resistant to that. It's largely employee owned and heavily employee managed, their handbook helped me understand the concept of how employee owned businesses could be the answer to many of society's problems
If there’s a grace period, perhaps, however:
- Steam does not provide installers for games, this means that whatever game you want, needs to be 100% functional and already be parsed/deployed/installed by steam on your hard drive.
- That game needs to be DRM free, meaning that it has an executable available that can be launched without steam running or requiring any sort of authentication or input from the steam servers/services before being able to launch, play or even interact with the menus
So only the DRM free games will remain, and only the installed ones at that. Anything that wasn’t will be lost to the wind the moment the distribution service or storage (yours or theirs) bits the dust…
-
installers for games are usually just a script that unzips the game and makes some shortcuts. Steam installs all your games in a standard way in a folder of your choice. You can straight up copy that folder to another computer. You can use another launcher and just play your games, there are already many that can read steam's standardized format. I've done it multiple times to avoid redownloading my library
-
It depends how steam sunsets their DRM, but yes - obviously if a game has 3rd party DRM, that third party is in control. Steam could choose a user hostile way to sunset their own DRM, but they could release ways to deactivate it
DRM is bad, steam provides an easy way for developers to use steam DRM, and it's generally less user hostile than most DRM. To me, this seems like harm reduction
Ultimately, it's not up to steam what, if any, DRM a game uses. They manage their in house offering, but the developer doesn't have to use it if they don't want to
-
Even if that's not the case, the drm is very easy to crack.
Okay steam, if its just a digital license and not ownership.. Then surely you'll be significantly lowering prices, Since you charge full ownership prices for games, not license prices.. Right?
G*mers really don’t want the industry to evaluate the $60 price point and apply inflationary adjustments going back to when it became the standard.
2.1 We give you and other GOG users the personal right (known legally as a 'license') to use GOG services and to download, access and/or stream (depending on the content) and use GOG content. This license is for your personal use. We can stop or suspend this license in some situations, which are explained later on.
https://support.gog.com/hc/en-us/articles/212632089-GOG-User-Agreement?product=gog
GOG has the same drawbacks as Steam without any of the useful features. They should cut down on their "owning games" lies and spend time improving their platform instead.
It does not. You can download and backup all your GOG installers, making the games functionally equal to games you purchased on CD ROMs back in the day. They can revoke your license all they want, they wouldn't be able to keep you from using the software you acquired this way. That makes all the difference.
That's for the gog service itself.
No, that's for all content:
and to download, access and/or stream (depending on the content) and use GOG content.
Which they define as:
1.3 Also, when we're talking about games, in-game content, virtual items or currency or GOG videos or other content or services which you can purchase or access via GOG services, we’ll just call them “GOG games” or “GOG videos” respectively and when we talk about them all together they are “GOG content”.
You legally didn't "own" your physical games either if you haven't noticed.
Unfortunately the VR game selection in GOG seems pretty slim and they might still need steam VR to run anyways so either way i don't have much choice.
What the hell happened to Steam's built in offline backup system, anyway? It used to have that when it was brand new.
It technically still exists in the game properties -> installed files tab, but it doesn't really work. The backup files you get require you to be online to meaningfully restore and will trigger a patch to the latest game version.
Practically speaking it's better to just make a copy of the game install directory manually, gives you a better chance of things working (even though most games require some kind of external tooling for that).
It's still there. But I never tried it and it probably won't work with DRMed games.
I don't remember that ever being a thing. It's had an offline mode for decades, but for the longest time it never worked properly.
It had a way of packing a game into a CD/DVD when it launched. I used it all of two times. It was slow as fuck. If it still has it, as another commenter suggests, I don't know how to access it.
Sure, and if you don't uninstall Galaxy, go through some hidden menus and download the installers then your GOG games will be gone regardless.
You don't need to ever interact with Galaxy to play your games, not even to download the offline installer. And the download option is not hidden on the website.
That's a failure to download the installers to begin with, not them being taken away from you after the fact.
wdym you can play steam games offline the only exception is needing the steam client?
To install a game you have bought on steam you need the steam client, the steam servers, internet and your steam account. If any of those stops being available you can no longer install the games you have bought. So while you can play the games once installed without most of the above, you can lose access to your not currently installed games.
Also, on steam you purchase licenses to the games which they can revoke. I.e. if steam turned evil they could take away games from your library and you couldn't do anything about it really.
Comparatively on GOG, you get a binary installer you can download and can keep forever without DRM so you don't need anything else to install the game in the future, even if it disappeared from your GOG account for some reason, you could still install and play the game.
If Steam stops working, you could replace the Steam API with the Goldberg emulator, and an already installed game should work, if there is no other DRM.
But yes, GOG is definitely better.
I just wish GOG Galaxy worked on Linux.
thank you for the detailed explanations i just thought steam only needs the client to work
You also need a Steam account, to which all your games are linked. If you somehow get perma-banned off of Steam, you lose everything.
ohh yeah i forgot
Offline installer. So a game gets removed from your library for any reason. Now you get a new PC and can't play the game anymore. At GoG you get an installer that doesn't check servers and can work with no internet connection etc. So even if they were forced to remove a game from your library, you still have the installer and can install it whenever you want. So if you keep a hard drive of installers, you will forever own the game as long as you don't lose that data.
ohh
Unpopular opinion: if I have to fudge with Wine instead of Proton, I simply will not bother. It's 2024. I'm not going to fiddle with configs, or get a setup together just to play a single game. That's ridiculous. A game should 100% be one click to run, whether it's native or not. and if that's not what is expected in 2024, Linux get it together. sincerely: a full time Linux gamer that is a single parent and doesn't have time to fiddle just to play a game. Wine and most of its front ends need a major overhaul.
Then just use Proton? You don't need Steam for it. And sitting there and demanding "Linux" to get it "together" because it is 2024 is rather ignorant due to the fact that it is not Linux' fault that the software in question needs additional workarounds in order to make it run. People out there are using their freetime to come up with solutions for problems caused by corporations using proprietary libraries and software. I don't think that your opinion is unpopular. I get what you want, I do wish the same, and a lot of peoole would agree with it as well, but the context in which we operate here matters a lot.
I test games for a living and most of the time wine runs perfectly fine. You can also just use umu laucher which does everything for you.
Also I don't really get your point. Who's forcing you to use wine instead of proton?
I'm not aware of how things are now, but at least previously you couldn't really use Proton outside of Steam.
So I assume OC defends Steam as the only platform that can smoothly run games with Proton instead of regular Wine, which does not work as well for certain games and/or requires tedious configuration.
You need to "get it together" and buy games for your platform.
"That's ridiculous"
Heroic is decent imo. It lets you download Wine, manage prefixes, enable/disable dxvk/vkd3d, configure gamescope & mangohud and so on.
So does lutris and bottles. Don't know what OP is talking about.
Linux get it together
Who are you making demands to, precisely?
Which neatly sums up why I do not and will not even have a Steam account, but buy many games from GOG.
Love gog but fuck them for spamming my email. I found out to claim the new games it'll auto subscribe you to the news letter. So I stopped claiming the games. But still I get emails for promotions and crap. More annoying then freaking scam callers. I've unsubscribed every time I get one and stopped claiming free games. I'm so close to just cut my loses and delete my account but I feel like that still won't stop those parasites
