It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionGOG 2022 update #2: our commitment to DRM-free gaming(543 posts)(543 posts)
(543 posts)
Pages:
1
5
10
15
20
21
22
23
24
25
30
37
This is my favourite topic
Posted March 17, 2022
Thanks for all the feedback you gave us after the previous update. You’re awesome and it shows the GOG insights piques your interest. Today’s article is about a topic that we know is very important to you – our commitment to DRM-free gaming and what it exactly means.

GOG was built on trust, which is at the very core of our identity. It is evidenced by our 30-day refund policy or releasing games DRM-free, among other things. At the same time, we understand DRM-free might mean different things to different people, especially when modern games blend offline and online experiences.

When GOG first launched, the gaming market looked very different from what it is now – retail was the main place to buy games, and digital distribution was just taking baby steps. DRM, the copy protection software created to protect licenses against unauthorized disc copying, was a huge source of annoyance for gamers often restricting how they can access their content. From the beginning, part of GOG’s mission was to provide gamers with a simple way to access and play games, without the need to fiddle with files or deal with any DRM. Making sure you can play games purchased on GOG offline, make backup copies, and install them as many times as you need is even more relevant now, as things like game preservation become an important topic for the whole industry.

Today, while some of the most infamous DRMs of the past are thankfully long gone, it doesn’t mean the constraints are fully gone. They just have a different, more complex face.

Games are evolving and many titles offer features beyond single-player offline gameplay, like multiplayer, achievements, vanities, rewards. Many such games are already on GOG and will continue to join our catalog. But it also raises the question: is this a new frontier for DRM?

And this is the crux of the matter. Some think it is, some don’t. Some hate it, some don’t mind it. And to be fair, we didn’t comment on it ourselves for quite some time and feel this is the time to do so:

We believe you should have freedom of choice and the right to decide how you use, enjoy, and keep the games you bought. It manifests in three points:
1. The single-player mode has to be accessible offline.

2. Games you bought and downloaded can never be taken from you or altered against your will.

3. The GOG GALAXY client is and will remain optional for accessing single-player offline mode.


We fully commit to all those points. Aside from this, we reaffirm our continuous effort to make games compatible with future OSs and available for you for years to come.

As for multiplayer, achievements, and all that jazz – games with those features belong on GOG. Having said that, we believe that you have the right to make an informed choice about the content that you choose to enjoy and we won’t tell you how and where you can access or store your games. To make it easier to discover titles that include features like multiplayer, unlockable cosmetics, timed events, or user-generated content, we’re adding information about such functionalities on product pages. In short, you’ll always know.

We always took a lot of pride in the freedom we provide gamers. While we know DRM-free may have a different meaning to everyone, we believe you have the right to decide how you use, enjoy, and keep the titles you get on GOG. With games evolving towards adding more online features, we want you to understand our DRM-free approach and what it means to us. It is an important topic – let us know what you think.
Posted March 20, 2022
low rated
avatar
bombardier: Why is preservation binary? Why is it all or nothing?
I am quite ok if I could preserve the game with working single player component with broken multiplayer and no cosmetics.

If you have a car from 1950s, you changed the tires, break lines, leather seats,.. This car has some 20% of components that are basically fake. Some of the features that no longer work since it would be too expensive to replicate, but it still runs.

Did we preserve it or not?
I don't think most GOG users are as binary as you think they are. Many people in this thread, myself included, acknowledge that we can't ask developers or GOG to rebuild preservation-friendly online features and that we have to accept that it will either requires Galaxy or be stripped from the game. It's sad but the only way to overcome that situation is to ask developers to design preservation-friendly online features for their future games.

Also, we already have a lot of games in the catalog that have missing content or patches compared to Steam. The community is discussing with developers and publishers to bring to GOG the missing parts but I've seen many people expressing that despite the fact those games are missing some stuff, they prefer to have a partial DRM-free version on GOG rather than a complete DRM-enabled version on Steam.

So many of us were already ok to compromise by accepting no multiplayer, or multiplayer requiring Galaxy, or missing some content, or not having the latest patches but at least, we had the guaranty that whenever we are purchasing something on GOG, everything relating to single player mode would be DRM-free, no exception (at least that was the spirit).

However, the OP is now telling us that from now on, as long as "a significant portion of the single player is DRM-free", whatever that means, then they will consider the game to be DRM-free, and it's because they already had that in mind that they allowed a game like Hitman to be released here (and according to people who know the game only a very small part of the experience was accessible offline).

And again, the "It's just cosmetic" or "It doesn't affect gameplay" are not good arguments. A game experience comprises many things: art direction, gameplay, scenario, atmosphere... We are all different and we all value those various aspects differently but for many of us, what you would consider "It's just cosmetic" is a big part of how we experience the game. Why do you think so many games allow character customization? It's because "It's just cosmetic" maters to the experience. And again what the OP is telling is now on GOG it's OK for the publisher to gate that kind of single player content behind online access or game-specific online account.

At that stage, I'd have more respect for GOG if they were honest with us and say that they prefer to be a direct Steam competitor and to achieve that goal they will drop their strong DRM-free requirement because pretending that they care about DRM-free by bending the definition so much that it would allow something like Hitman to be release here... well, you see what I mean.
Posted March 20, 2022
low rated
avatar
bombardier: Why is preservation binary? Why is it all or nothing?
I am quite ok if I could preserve the game with working single player component with broken multiplayer and no cosmetics.
Because people have different preferences than you. However, I think a key distinction is in what is being defined. To me, a game with all modes intact and DRM-free is ideal; but, if a game had to strip out the multiplayer mode to come here DRM-free, I am relatively fine with that and certainly support it over having the multiplayer come here with an "optional client required" stipulation.

avatar
bombardier: If you have a car from 1950s, you changed the tires, break lines, leather seats,.. This car has some 20% of components that are basically fake. Some of the features that no longer work since it would be too expensive to replicate, but it still runs.
This topic is more like you want to buy a car from the 1950s that is in full working order, but the classic car dealer instead sells you a horse and buggy where part of the buggy is locked and you can't use it, and then the car dealer says opinions may vary but the horse and buggy is his own definition of a car, therefore he sold you a car.
Posted March 20, 2022
low rated
avatar
Linko64: '' relevant now, as things like game preservation become an important topic for the whole industry.''

Only now?

Yeeesh
That is not what they said. The original text was "even more relevant now". Don't change the context to make an argument.
Posted March 20, 2022
avatar
rjbuffchix: My point in bringing up Daymare was to show it is possible to get at least an AA level release completely DRM-free and that thus there is no need for GOG to weaken (if not outright destroy) their negotiating leverage by being, apparently, so permissive of DRM/DRM-like schemes going forward.
Which is kind of meaningless as 99% of AAA, AA, Indy games released on Gog are also completely, 100% DRM-free, and those who "aren't" cannot be found any "more" DRM-free anywhere else.

avatar
rjbuffchix: This is a classic false dilemma though, or at least it was prior to GOG continuing to erode any negotiation leverage they might have with devs/pubs (i.e. upon what basis can GOG now demand a prospective game be DRM-free?). The options do not have to be "accept the game with DRM, or remove it forever." In theory, the games could be fixed to work without DRM.
That's the issue: those bonus incentives are not considered as DRM by the devs.

For example Egosoft (devs of the X series) have always been a very DRM-free friendly devs even long before they started selling any of their games on Gog; since a very longtime they offered DRM-free EXE for peoples who purchased the Steam version allowing to backup the games and play them anytime without Steam.

Do you really thing that those devs somehow have decide to offer a couple of skins online as a weird convoluted way to push peoples to accept DRM ?

No that's stupid, they did that because they created a new multiplayer mode and wanted peoples to try it and to convince them to do so they gave a couple of minor items as incentive. Same thing for Dying Light and most others.

So convincing devs to release a game DRM-free is one thing, convincing them that some optional goodie that is not part of the base game is a "DRM" if it is not included in the offline installer is another totally.

Peoples have short memories and act like it's somehow a "new" thing but not too long ago having optional content locked behind pre-orders or the store where you purchase the game was something pretty common, heck even older Gog games are missing some optional content available only on Steam.

So yes, either Gog could refuse to sell those games or make said optional content totally unavailable on them (which could be complicated given that most of said content is not linked to Galaxy but directly to the devs) but I am not sure it would be a win for anybody.

But as I said earlier I do hope that from time to time, after some time has passed, Gog tries to convince the devs to finally include those "bonus" thingy as part of the base game. For example now that Dying Light 2 is released is it really useful to have some "multiplayer-unlocked" weapons in the first game; it's not like it will convince many new peoples to start playing today. And keeping the Galaxy-incentive in Cyberpunk after more than a year if IMHO beyond stupid, I would have understood for one or two months but not for more.
Post edited March 20, 2022 by Gersen
Posted March 20, 2022
low rated
avatar
Linko64: '' relevant now, as things like game preservation become an important topic for the whole industry.''

Only now?

Yeeesh
avatar
Treehugger: That is not what they said. The original text was "even more relevant now". Don't change the context to make an argument.
It's always been relevant. There was no text change, the text is on every page. You can't talk about the importance of preservation when you actively withdraw a game from sale. Would you like to argue that mate? Would you like to argue the other points? Supporting a company that is in bed with WATA? Pricing out physical preservation in order to prop up wealthy people who have a history of gating off markets to inflate their income? Would you like to talk about that? You can't change the text when the text is on every single page, stop being silly.
Post edited March 20, 2022 by Linko64
Posted March 20, 2022
low rated
Can't please everyone GOG. But glad you're putting in the effort and are actively thinking about this.

I find it funny that the main proponents of DRM-free (like the absolutionists, the "old guard") are the ones who will likely sink the ship of the best DRM-free store out there. Like shooting yourself in the foot.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. There's plenty of good redeeming qualities in GOG.

It's true that their focus is no longer the offline installers, but let's consider for a moment how atrocious that experience is through the browser without 3rd party tools, and realise it was never an amazing experience. Hell, without lgogdownloader, I would never even consider GOG due to the clumsy download, install and update process offline without Galaxy. It's horrific on its own. It's like punishing the customer for buying something. Good business model right there.

Despite that, it's still the best we got.
Posted March 20, 2022
low rated
This seems very reasonable. Thank you for the update :-)
Posted March 20, 2022
avatar
Magnitus: I think it's a pessimistic view to say that all devs will become drm-pushers (with the full-drm argument).
The first game featuring "optional online" goodies is Dying Light which was released in 2016, nearly 6 years ago. Which mean that even at that time Gog was already considering that this kind of content was acceptable with their definition of DRM-free, so it is nothing new.

And in those six years we had a grand total of five more games having optional online items, one more which had multiplayer features added four years after release and maybe one where it is debatable whenever the offline single player part is worth it or not, grand total of ten or so if you increase the definition to considering having to click on a "play as guest" button as being a form of DRM. That out of 4000+ games total.

So yeah, maybe it's a "slippery" slope but it is definitely not a very step one.

Thinking that it means that the flood gate are now open and that suddenly thousands of DRM ridden games will start to appear on Gog is pretty silly.
Post edited March 20, 2022 by Gersen
Posted March 20, 2022
avatar
rojimboo: let's consider for a moment how atrocious that experience is through the browser without 3rd party tools, and realise it was never an amazing experience. Hell, without lgogdownloader, I would never even consider GOG due to the clumsy download, install and update process offline without Galaxy. It's horrific on its own. It's like punishing the customer for buying something. Good business model right there.
Browsers made huge strides in improving download experience (WEB API). Long story short, you can make a download button where it just downloads the whole game, all the while showing a progress bar in the browser, all native. World's spinning along, you know. Getting better every day. Not the worlds fault for people not seeing that.
Post edited March 20, 2022 by AlienMind
Posted March 20, 2022
low rated
avatar
rojimboo: Can't please everyone GOG. But glad you're putting in the effort and are actively thinking about this.

I find it funny that the main proponents of DRM-free (like the absolutionists, the "old guard") are the ones who will likely sink the ship of the best DRM-free store out there. Like shooting yourself in the foot.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. There's plenty of good redeeming qualities in GOG.

It's true that their focus is no longer the offline installers, but let's consider for a moment how atrocious that experience is through the browser without 3rd party tools, and realise it was never an amazing experience. Hell, without lgogdownloader, I would never even consider GOG due to the clumsy download, install and update process offline without Galaxy. It's horrific on its own. It's like punishing the customer for buying something. Good business model right there.

Despite that, it's still the best we got.
I'm sorry, but what the hell did I just read.

Let's deconstruct that, shall we.
avatar
rojimboo: Can't please everyone GOG
Especially when you're not even trying.
avatar
rojimboo: But glad you're putting in the effort and are actively thinking about this.
Regurgitating the same "WE'RE TOTALLY COMMITTED TO THE DRM-FREE YOU GUYS" for the umpteenth time while actively displaying the lack of such a commitment is not "putting in the effort".
avatar
rojimboo: I find it funny that the main proponents of DRM-free (like the absolutionists, the "old guard") are the ones who will likely sink the ship of the best DRM-free store out there. Like shooting yourself in the foot.
No, they aren't the ones sinking the ship, GOG is, by consistently alienating its existing customer base and trying to attract a new one... which couldn't care less.
avatar
rojimboo: Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. There's plenty of good redeeming qualities in GOG.
They aren't. Quite the contrary.
avatar
rojimboo: It's true that their focus is no longer the offline installers, but let's consider for a moment how atrocious that experience is through the browser without 3rd party tools, and realise it was never an amazing experience. Hell, without lgogdownloader, I would never even consider GOG due to the clumsy download, install and update process offline without Galaxy. It's horrific on its own. It's like punishing the customer for buying something. Good business model right there.
Now this is the part that actually got me baffled. "Atrocious", "horrific", etc, for Pete's sake, are you serious? Is this a bit? Downloading an installer and then putting in a few clicks is "atrocious" and "horrific" and "punishing"? OH NOES, I HAVE TO DOWNLOAD A THING AND THEN INSTALL IT, OH THE HUMANITY.
What in the living hell is wrong with you.
Posted March 20, 2022
low rated
GOG, you suck at PR. Do yourselves a favor and stop trying to convince us that your actions are less significant than your empty words.

Thanks.
Posted March 20, 2022
low rated
avatar
AlienMind: Browsers made huge strides in improving download experience (WEB API). Long story short, you can make a download button where it just downloads the whole game, all the while showing a progress bar in the browser, all native. World's spinning along, you know. Getting better every day. Not the worlds fault for people not seeing that.
Yeah, I was aware of that minor improvement if you put the effort in. You might apparently even get resumable downloads, and maybe even checksum matches if you're lucky. No thanks to GOG.

Then you get the "priviledge" of checking and downloading and installing any updates for your dozens of games, if not hundreds for some. Ya-yay.

Still grossly clumsy and an atrocious experience when 3rd party tools like lgogdownloader or gogrepoc exist. Singular devs working for free did a better job than the entity taking a 30% cut of every purchase. Pretty shameful in my opinion.

I personally believe they gave up on the offline installers and are mostly focusing on Galaxy. They must have statistics about how few actually download the offline installers I guess. But as it's one of their selling points, they won't get rid of them completely. Just neglect them and let others improve the experience.


avatar
KentGAllard: I'm sorry, but what the hell did I just read.

Let's deconstruct that, shall we.
Why? What is my opinion on this matter something that you need to deconstruct? What is there to "deconstruct" in someone's viewpoint of a digital distribution platform and their personal experiences? I said my piece, and you went frothing at the mouth to oppose it. I don't really care. ANd neither should you if a fellow gamer sees things differently than you.
avatar
rojimboo: Can't please everyone GOG
avatar
KentGAllard: Especially when you're not even trying.
avatar
rojimboo: But glad you're putting in the effort and are actively thinking about this.
avatar
KentGAllard: Regurgitating the same "WE'RE TOTALLY COMMITTED TO THE DRM-FREE YOU GUYS" for the umpteenth time while actively displaying the lack of such a commitment is not "putting in the effort".
avatar
rojimboo: I find it funny that the main proponents of DRM-free (like the absolutionists, the "old guard") are the ones who will likely sink the ship of the best DRM-free store out there. Like shooting yourself in the foot.
avatar
KentGAllard: No, they aren't the ones sinking the ship, GOG is, by consistently alienating its existing customer base and trying to attract a new one... which couldn't care less.
avatar
rojimboo: Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. There's plenty of good redeeming qualities in GOG.
avatar
KentGAllard: They aren't. Quite the contrary.
These are all completely useless retorts, you don't actually say anything else than "NAA-AAH". Well, good for you I guess in demonstrating that you have nothing to say.

avatar
rojimboo: It's true that their focus is no longer the offline installers, but let's consider for a moment how atrocious that experience is through the browser without 3rd party tools, and realise it was never an amazing experience. Hell, without lgogdownloader, I would never even consider GOG due to the clumsy download, install and update process offline without Galaxy. It's horrific on its own. It's like punishing the customer for buying something. Good business model right there.
avatar
KentGAllard: Now this is the part that actually got me baffled. "Atrocious", "horrific", etc, for Pete's sake, are you serious? Is this a bit? Downloading an installer and then putting in a few clicks is "atrocious" and "horrific" and "punishing"? OH NOES, I HAVE TO DOWNLOAD A THING AND THEN INSTALL IT, OH THE HUMANITY.
Yes, I'm standing by my statements. It's a horrific experience to click on all the parts of XCOM2 offline installer files (i believe there are 22 parts for the full experience). This is not OK. You basically HAVE to have 3rd party tools or some browser extensions, anything to make this bearable. The vanilla browser GOG experience is horrific. That's just the way it is, and I'm not the only one who thinks this.

avatar
KentGAllard: What in the living hell is wrong with you.
Yeah, we're done here. You can't even calmly express your opinion and preferences for a vidya gaming store. I'm going to slowly back away now...
Post edited March 20, 2022 by rojimboo
Posted March 20, 2022
low rated
avatar
rojimboo: Yes, I'm standing by my statements. It's a horrific experience to click on all the parts of XCOM2 offline installer files (i believe there are 22 parts for the full experience). This is not OK. You basically HAVE to have 3rd party tools or some browser extensions, anything to make this bearable. The vanilla browser GOG experience is horrific. That's just the way it is, and I'm not the only one who thinks this.
Yeah, it's the idea of downloading installers itself that is horrible and not the way GOG intentionally made them in order to make you use their useless goddamn launcher, thus passively aggressively turning it into a case of "I Can't Believe It's Not DRM!".

There's no discernible reason for it to be 22 parts. I made some installlers in my day, they can be any size you want, down to the last gig. Back in the old days all installers were just a single .exe file. They could just make them like this. Or had them all pre-packaged into a self-extracting ZIP archive. The installer experience for bigger games is now being made mildly inconvenient on purpose.

That being said... it's still mildly inconvenient at worst.
avatar
rojimboo: Why? What is my opinion on this matter something that you need to deconstruct? What is there to "deconstruct" in someone's viewpoint of a digital distribution platform and their personal experiences? I said my piece, and you went frothing at the mouth to oppose it. I don't really care. ANd neither should you if a fellow gamer sees things differently than you.
I just went to the mirror and I don't see any froth at my mouth, you sure you got the right guy? And if you don't realy care, then I guess I'm free to keep deconstructing your statements, am I?
avatar
rojimboo: These are all completely useless retorts, you don't actually say anything else than "NAA-AAH". Well, good for you I guess in demonstrating that you have nothing to say.
Actually I just pointed out that some of your statements are wrong and why. That's useful for the rest of the people here.
Post edited March 20, 2022 by KentGAllard
Posted March 20, 2022
low rated
avatar
rojimboo: Yes, I'm standing by my statements. It's a horrific experience to click on all the parts of XCOM2 offline installer files (i believe there are 22 parts for the full experience). This is not OK. You basically HAVE to have 3rd party tools or some browser extensions, anything to make this bearable. The vanilla browser GOG experience is horrific. That's just the way it is, and I'm not the only one who thinks this.
The standard game's 9 parts.



17:06
Post edited March 23, 2022 by §pec†re
Posted March 20, 2022
low rated
My suggestion for GOG 2022 update #3: Quake Enhanced Edition is coming soon, guise! Pinky swear!
Pages:
1
5
10
15
20
21
22
23
24
25
30
37
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionGOG 2022 update #2: our commitment to DRM-free gaming(543 posts)(543 posts)
(543 posts)