I expect their wrapper to contain as much DRM as DOSBox does. Meaning none whatsoever.

Looking more into this it looks like they want to provide methods to bring console games to the PC using wrappers for Emulators and such to make installation convenient without needing to look for the emulation program, console core, and such.

Stop the ridiculous jumping to conclusions. What on earth brings you to believe Bleem is DRM? It's the name of a PSX emulator, there's no reason to assume they've just decided to use the name of a PSX emulator for a new DRM-scheme.

So, they just made RetroArch and slapped the name of a failed emulator from the 90s on it to justify yet more market fragmentation. Cool.

You say "justify" as if decentralization ("market fragmentation"/"competition") is a bad thing.

I NEED all my games in one place on Steam or GOG or Epic or Ba'noodle, otherwise I poo and pee. (not really meant as a dig at gibbeynator, just being goofy as usual)

As long as they're willing to support the platform for years to come (and of course are DRM-Free). After Desura, IndieGameStand and Playism, I'm a bit weary of spending money on a potentially fly-by-night marketplace.

It's not even A marketplace atm....as OP's link shows an under construction page.
(this means they likely either failed quickly or haven't gotten it running in nearly half a year...both don't seem too good)

The whole point of DRM-free is that you don't have to worry about that, though. DRM-free is about returning us to the times back when we could install and run agame from a CD without internet, even if some of those games had some weak DRM on them. It's not like i contact gog for the games that i haven't gotten running that i bought from them. I could, but I doubt GOG would actually help. How can they help me make Rainbow Six work when they can't even make their damn site work?

There is one major difference to the retail times though:

We (normally) have to rely on the digital store, from which we originally bought the game, for any updates and fixes for the game.

In the retail times, those updates could be obtained from anywhere, e.g. the publisher's homepage, from Patches Scrolls, other gaming-related sites... irrespective in which store you had originally bought your game. Well, at least usually, sometimes there were special versions of the game (normally from some digital store like Dirext2Drive or something) that had separate patches, but they were usually offered at those same places, along with the vanilla patches.

Nowadays we have to go to the original store to get those patches, for our store-specific version of the game. Updates to the Steam version do not work on the GOG version, and vice versa (at least not directly, sure it might be possible by manually copying changed files over the different versions, but still...).

Same of course goes to any additional content like DLCs and expansion packs, you have to get them through the store from which you bought the game.

But, after the game has received all relevant expansion packs and updates, then I guess it can be considered "store-free", ie. just download and keep the installer on your hard drive, and you don't have to care if the DRM-free store you bought it from perishes.

Not true. A few gog games need patches external to gog. You can still get updates through developers and such if they choose to put the updates on their sites. You can usually mix as long as the game itself is DRM-free. Mods, expansions, and DLC for The Quest, here on gog, will work with steam. I've also managed to get the android DLCs i bought to transfer to PC. I think this is how the things, change, though. Many games now actually get updates whre they would not have before.I remember a couple games getting patches from their devs that caused trouble. (Ever heard of Halo Custom Edition?)

That's correct. I had 3 bleem! titles for the Dreamcast. GT2,MGS, and Tekken....3? It was kind of the opposite of DRM. Get great games working on any hardware. Since you still had to have the Playstation disc Sony got some money and so did the publisher, but you weren't limited to only PSX hardware. I don't know if it ever even got to trial. Sony flooded them with lawsuits until they were just broke. Hope the comeback goes better.

I wouldn't call it ill-fated, unless being assimilated by Sony, who then used their code as the basis for the PS2's backward compatibility, is a fate worse than death. Actually, now that I think about it, yeah, maybe you're right.

Well, the PS2 also had a PS1 Graphics Synthesizer under the hood, so there is that.

Interesting.

If I find myself with more free time will definitely look into it.