More games I buy there - more often I find that some of them feature something, that may be called as "steam leftovers" - steamworks libraries in installation. Moreover - sometimes devs dont even bother to unlink them (for example, Spore. Unlike some other games, for this one, steam libs are static dependency - if you will try to remove them, game will refuse to launch).
I kinda understand, when devs statically link galaxy libraries - galaxy features, all that. But steam's? No way.

Does anybody else feel like its rude or something like this?

why?

it is just libraries, there are games on steam with gOg libraries as well. whats the problem?

I have no problem having assgobbler.dll or some other name in the game directory. Good thread btw :-)

only ones with cross (steam<->gog) multiplayer - its necessary. But when there is no crossplay (or, moreover - game is singleplayer-only) - thats nothing but laziness. They charge money for it without bothering to remove other store's rudiments. Not cuz its hard dependency by its nature (as I've said above - "required for multiplayer" or something like that). But just coz they dont care.

Today they forget to unlink libraries, tomorrow they will be lazy to disable drm (Im overexaggerating there, obviously, but still)

no. if I remember correctly, games like Tomb Raider has gOg libriaries. I still don't see the problem... what is the issue? would it help if the library had another name? yes, that is a massive overexaggeraton....

This reminds me of my very first thread here on GOG and asking whether Steam is DRM. I got a lot of admonishment for even asking that but some of the more understanding folks said it was complicated.

Sometimes (or many times?) these games get to GOG after they have been on Steam and they were made using Steamworks. So that is why they have these Steam "elements" left over.

A game may have Steamworks coded so far up its ass that it becomes very hard to remove it. Have a look at this wiki:
http://steam.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_DRM-free_games.

Maybe you already know of it but the point is that many of these games have Steamworks embedded in them and removing such things as steam_api.dll will cripple the game (you could even try it and see, backup before you try, of course) even though they are able to run without the Steam client itself.

I do however, understand the concern but I'm almost positive it has nothing to do with laziness.

sounds reasonable. But some of these games were sold outside of steam on launch. If they included steam libraries too - it seems to be poor design choice, lol

I think the Steam libraries get added after the game updates. Like, let's say that Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas was sold outside of Steam on launch.

Rockstar for whatever reason decided to sell their game on Steam. They later decided to update the game. The Steam libraries could be required to even put the game on Steam or maybe Rockstar implemented Steamworks to make it easier to update the game. Now the game has Steam libraries in it. Now remember, this is all hypothetical but it does make sense.

San Andreas could run fine without the Steam client and Rockstar thought, our game is "DRM-Free" anyway. Let's see whether GOG would want to get in on our sales of the game and we could reach wider audience. So, all they have to do is give their copy of the game to GOG and start selling.

Most likely, an older game such as San Andreas or Spore will be all patched up, so everything would be updated. It most likely would be previously sold on Steam and no developer will touch a game this old unless but there are some cases where developers are nice enough to remove old files or even update the game.

When you're talking about Rockstar and EA. No way in hell are they going to bother, maybe with their newer games but that's it.