GOG might be one of the very best things that have happened to PC videogames. Digital DRM-free distribution, a meeting point of new and good old games, an infinite (digital) bargain bin that holds more and more titles, and a community that is still helpful.

To be perfectly honest, we have it better now in some ways than we ever had.

Go back just over 15 years, before the advent of GOG, and it was mostly about DRM, certainly for AAA and many AA games. Old games were also difficult or impossible to buy, outside of secondhand options. Steam of course was in it ascendancy. It replaced or added to existing DRM in many cases.

GOG when it arrived was like a light in the dark, and while GOG has sure had its share of issues over the following 15 years, GOG customers and DRM-Free lovers have had access to many good, even great, games DRM-Free over that time, and GOG now has a very large library of games available to us.

It's not all roses, but it is better than it used to be, at least as far as DRM goes ... certainly as regards the more intrusive and worst kind of DRM. Sure, a lot of DRM back in the day was fairly easily overcome, but you had to be very wary of viruses etc.

Unhappiness now in relation to games, is proportional to your mental state. There are a lot of great games DRM-Free, but can you be satisfied with them, and wait patiently for others? Or do you struggle to accept that you cannot have other games not available at GOG, and so have to tolerate DRM if you buy them elsewhere?

Certainly, there are a good number of games I would like to have that aren't available at GOG, not yet, and maybe never. But with all that GOG have provided me, and all the freebies of the last few years, I am not short of games to play. All of those free games that Epic gives away, at least one every week, and many of them what I call DRM-Free Lite. Steam also has a lot of DRM-Free Lite games.

Then there are stores like IndieGala, with their regular free DRM-Free games, and especially Itch.io if you love Indie games. And there are others like the Zoom Platform and Fireflower games, etc, etc.

If you concentrate on the game at hand, and enjoy that and work through the list of what you own, and don't start bemoaning what you don't have, gaming life can be endless fun.

You don't really have to care about the latest and greatest, especially AAA games.

So in retrospect, in many ways it is a great time to be a gamer.

But some folk are never happy, unless they have it all. That seems very silly to me, as there is more than enough to have a great gaming life with, especially while you wait for future benefits.

I appreciate your pessimism, and I would agree that the potential for dystopia that the future could hold for the gaming industry is an unpleasant thought, but ultimately I disagree with your assessment of the present.
The current wealth of available games is staggering. If it were my inclination to do so, almost any game of the past from many consoles would be at my fingertips for no fee whatsoever, sufficient enough to engage me for many lifetimes over. As Timboli says, in there past there were many restrictions; PC gamers couldn't play console exclusive games for example. But today as a PC gamer, I can play them all. It's no longer the case that the dozen games my local store shelves, many of which are not worthwhile, and only one of which can be purchased, is the primary choice for most people. Even with modern games there is a wealth of choice that is free from the prying eyes of corporations if done with consideration, though I dislike immensely that this is not the default. The only price to pay is acceptance that something I know is good must be passed up.As with other mediums, once the fear of missing out on the latest title is lifted, I can simply play what is good and stop caring. If you dislike the state of the marketplace, perhaps it's time to stop holding onto trivial morals that only serve to spread sorrow and revolt for the sake of tomorrow. I don't like being a pirate myself, but if such an action helps in keeping malicious companies honest or gives me the freedom to enrich myself and experience things no longer available for sale, then who am I to remain detrimentally honest?

Adding extra challenges to a game is not a new idea - NetHack Conducts being a venerable example.

The two principal criticisms of current Achievements I would make though are (a) as you point out, the number of trivial ones (in particular, those for reaching a particular point in a game) and (b) multi-game achievements systems (exemplified by Steam and GOG Galaxy) whose principal purpose seems to be to allow those participating to festoon themselves with faux medals, like a wannabe war veteran.

I would also mention (c) developer time spent on creating/testing achievements is time not spent on gameplay, "proper" bug-fixing or enhanced content, but I'm unsure how great a factor this really is. Perhaps a developer might care to enlighten us?
Indeed - whoever came up with the idea of a disc version that just installed a Steam client and then expected you to go online, create an account and download the game (at a time when many Internet accounts had strict, and sometimes hidden, download limits) should have been dropped in a piranha-infested lake with concrete boots, and a dialup modem.
Agreed, but Steam still keeps on growing - and when Netflix clamped down on password sharing, what happened?
They gained 9.3 million customers.

So sadly, for every person willing to take a stand to protect their consumer rights, there seem to be 10+ "doormats" willing to roll over and take whatever abuse they're dealt. That doesn't make the DRM-free movement insignificant (as the marketplace becomes more competitive, potential lost sales become more significant) but it does mean we've some way to go before seeing things really improve (music seems to have been the standout with virtually all stores now offering DRM-free MP3s as a baseline, but video and books still seem to be dominated by DRM-mongers).

You can't really class them as doormats. You could maybe class them as kind of desperate, as many of them would have been partway through series. So what in all reality were they supposed to do? What could they really hope to achieve?

What remains to be seen, is how many of those folk continue with a Netflix subscription after a month or three.

It's a horrible state of affairs we have. Even if you avoid streaming, many of the shows are no longed being published to disc. And you need more than one subscription to cover all your bases, probably several.

Video streaming was supposed to be about saving money and gaining variety etc. I bet there are many folk now who pay more per week, than they used to to hire videos (VHS or DVD or Blu-ray) each week ... probably more than what they would have spent buying discs each week on average. Sure you would now have a huge amount of extra stuff to watch, but there are only so many hours in a day, and hours you can devote to watching stuff, So I bet many are paying a lot for services they barely use. The only real benefit maybe, is you might discover stuff you never would have in the past, because you now have it at your fingertips and can watch at a whim. And there would be a large number of folk now forcing themselves to watch more than they naturally would have, to get their money's worth. And we thought we had plenty of couch potatoes before.

I really hate where we've ended up, especially as the focus is now on not owning, and DRM is more prevalent than ever in the movie industry, and is extremely unlikely to turn around. Even GOG are destined to fail eventually, music downloads eventually too, as the streaming model eventually becomes the only option ... other than piracy.

What sucks is at least a notable number of Netflix original can sometimes get a BR or DVD release while Amazon almost NEVER has done this. I would rather pay 3-5 times more my sub fee for that month to get that show as maybe THAT is the one reason I keep it. This is why some like Amazon NEVER want to make it available on physical.

So, their attempt to gain more paying customers worked?
Good for them.

Sorry, but which "consumer right" exactly, do you think, allows you to share a Netflix account?
And what exactly is the "abuse", you're talking about, and which some "doormats" apparently are "willing to take"?

The two statments: "a notable number [of Netflix originals]...[get a physical release] sometimes"
and
"[Amazon originals] almost never [get a physical release]" mean basically the same.
Just saying. ;)

Apart from that: you have a list of that "notable number"?

Because last time I checked, Netflix ONLY allows DVD/BR releases of their "originals", IF the movie/series was done in cooperation with another company/ other companies, that carried a part of the financial weight.

Examples: the Mike Flanagan stuff - "The Haunting of Hill House" and "The Haunting of Bly Manor" received a DVD release...both series were coproductions with Paramount TV and Amblin TV.

"Midnight Mass", "The Midnight Club" and "The Fall of the House of Usher" on the other hand, were Netflix exclusives (well, coproduced with Intrepid Pictures, which was, of course, involved with all series (since Flanagan is a partner))...and they did NOT receive DVD releases.

Btw: Flanagan has now signed a contract with Amazon.

"Stranger Things": Coproduction with 21 Laps Entertainment / Monkey Massacre Productions (owned by the writers of "S.T.").

"Orange is the new Black": Coproduction with Lionsgate Production / Tilted Production.

"House of Cards": Coproduction with Media Rights Capital / Trigger Street Productions.

"The Babysitter": Produced by Boies/Schiller Film Group Production / Wonderland Sound and Vision (McG). Netflix is only the distributor.

If you know of others - please don't hesitate to name them.
Yeah, but the same goes for Netflix: see above.
Why butcher the cow only to sell her meat once, when you can sell the milk that she gives, constantly?

I've never really kept tabs on what they do or don't release to disc, other than what I am interested in myself or what I read about.

I am still hoping the Season 2 or The Wheel Of Time will come to disc, just like Season 1, which I went the extra money for with Blu-ray, as I loved it. Season 2 I loved just as much, and I am looking forward to further seasons, but I will need to sail the high seas if they don't bring them all to disc.

I refuse to have my viewing curtailed by the whims of another.

I also don't pay for any streaming services, never have. That said, my daughter who still lives with us, does have a few, so we use hers, which she and her brother pay for ... only in my instance to watch a small handful of TV Series, not movies.

We do similar with my oldest son who lives in another state. He's the one with Amazon Prime and Paramount.

I'd consider paying for Prime myself, as they have a good few shows I am or would be interested in. However, I am not going to support any service that prevents me owning what I really care about. And the only way not to care, is to not watch in the first place.

My favorite series right now, is Silo, which I read the ebooks of years ago. That is the most perfect book to TV Series I have ever watched, and I am still hoping it will come to disc, but that seems doubtful from what I have heard.

In any case, I have a huge backlog of movies and TV Series on disc, that I still haven't ever watched, so I am good if I want to be.

I had NO idea "Wheel Of Time" got a DVD release so I stand correct on Amazon as I thought the Japanese Prime exclusive was the only one that held that distinction with "Kyoto Love Story" getting a DVD and BR LE release.
I still want Sens8 by Netflix on DVD and BR and they consider it a failure so it is reasonable we should get it.

Reacher, another Prime exclusive, also got a DVD/Blu-ray release for the first season.

And no doubt many others. This no release to disc thing has been a fairly recent initiative, spear-headed by Disney doing it, I seem to recall.

And I initially thought you were joking! We are really travelling towards the Existenz world...

There also seems to be a trend now of devs patching away content in the game that you paid for.
A noticeable example was Skullgirls, where they removed content from the game that made a lot of players upset (which was then covered up by Steam) and just now they changed Valentine's design.

A more major example seems to be Stellar blade, where it's revealed that a lot of costumes got changed in a day one patch.

I don't like this precedent. That's something mods or a toggle should cover, not a company outright deleting it from the game without warning or customer input.