Why is GfWL considered DRM, while Steam or Origin are not? For example, Trine 2's DRM is Steamworks (for now). According to the Game Article Layout, this kind of info can't be included. Should this policy be changed?
Topic on PCGamingWiki talk:Game Article Layout
There is some article conflict here; the Game Article Layout suggests that storefront-type services aren't considered DRM for the purposes of the wiki but the actual article on DRM lists them as DRM. The only distinction I can make is that Steam/Origin are considered 'acceptable' DRM - that is unobtrusive and conductive to the game.
Regarding them being acceptable, unobtrusive or conductive to the game, I disagree. It really depends on each person to say if it's acceptable or not, and that goes for GfWL too. Personally, I don't find Steamworks and Origin acceptable or unobtrusive when it forces you to install that 3rd party software, have an internet connection to install and play the game, makes you dependable of their online servers, etc...
Yes this is right, Steam and Origin are 'DRM' just as much as other services like TAGES.
The distinction is made because the storefront listed in the sidebar already tells what the DRM is. There's little purpose to listing it twice.
It would seem that way but not exactly. A game can be sold through Steam and not actually use Steamworks DRM - in which case you can run the executable direct from the steamapps folder and it won't use the steam overlay, etc. Additionally a game can be sold through Steam and use Steamworks for the Steam version only, with every other version being DRM-free or using different DRM.
And a game can be sold through other digital distribution services and have Steamworks or Origin DRM.
Agreed, this is helpful information. The PCGamingWiki:Game_Article_Layout is updated to reflect this.