You're right. The list of 'features' not wished for is longer and more severe than a mere site-redisign. No one asked to pay extra for bonus material. (remember 'only complete games'?) No one asked for regional censorship. No one asked to pay more for games than the US price. (less, sure. People always want to pay less. But no one asked to be ripped off). No one asked for a broken forum. Quite the contrary, people keep asking GOG to fix it. No one asked for single-player DRM. No one asked for multiplayer-DRM either, many just accept it because they (erroneously) think it necessary. No one asked GOG to stop communicating with us or to start lying. ... Those are all changes that GOG implemented contrary to community wishes, just because they wanted to.

Yes but gog
have spoken about beeing a drm free store
they have said there woudnt be any drm on any game and the client woud be optional

thats the issue here

For arguments sake
one can say that gog have put up some warning
or something like a tos on those games that have it

But i did mention a bit about that earlier in the thread
The problem isnt really just gog
but consumer practices in general
Most contrys and users as well maybe except users on gog dont care too much
and are willing to let basic human rigths slip or they doesnt know or care
Yes but you need a large number of people and staying power to make it effectfull
If loads of people do not join in the campaign can risk not being as effectfull as it shoud

Not many people are willing to listen to just 50 people in the polittical party of AGI to make an example
but if you get something like black lives matter
or maybe even 80000 or 50000 over a stretch of time
result will come
Im not saying that those numbers are needed here
but at least more than 5000 perhaps

I disagree. Even if they cannot fix it, it is still very much "on GOG".

GOG knows that these games contain locked single-player content and they do nothing to warn future buyers about it (e.g. mark it as such, remove it from store, etc.).

It's a shame that, that is what GOG has now become. I miss the days when they were community friendly, and about the games.

Now days its all about being ignored, backroom politics and trying to alienate their current users, whilst enticing/listening to people that will most likely never use GOG.

I wouldn't be surprised if they just removed the wishlist down the line tbh, as they don't really listen to it at all.

Well some might not care, but also some might not value every issue the same, due to many people being different in various ways.

This i can agree with 100 %

I meant it is on those game makers to fix the issue re: the content being made fully drm/"drm" free...sorry for not clarifying earlier.

Well I would rather the games be sold than not, so i'm against the latter to some degree....and they can't mark the games(at least on the game store pages/game cards) with such info.
(as I found out, from a talk with staffers awhile back to correct game card info, that the partners who sell each game are in near full control of the game page text/pics/etc & gog cannot change it without their permission)

=-=-=

Imo they likely won't do so, and for the same or similar reasons as why they allow these sorts of threads to remain open...to appear fair and good in the eyes of the user base as much as possible.

Opps
Nevermind

Well
Companys tasks arent really about beeing fair
even if they can take a reputation hit by not playing nice and fair
The first snd formost task is to make money

One can say that gog makes less money by losing it most loyal fans
but if they have more custtomers than people are boycotting or leaving or whatever
they will not care too much

Most complaints here are not directly about the existence of Galaxy, GOG-MP etc but rather how GOG poisoned them or other parts of GOG due to them, like:

Galaxy: Adding Galaxy-only stuff, neglecting offline installers, etc

Multiplayer: Doing it in such a manner that its DRM only. While adding MP is good they could have done it so that people could set up their own MP servers for example.

Of course its about making money. But you can have a successful business and make loads of money without alienating most of your active userbase, and getting in more people.

Take Galaxy for example. A lot of people dislike it and get annoyed that it gets pushed on the site more than the offline installers. A simple fix to this would be to add a option into account settings to disable or enable Galaxy.

Disabling it removes any mention from Galaxy from the site, and pushes offline installers to the front. Enabling it pretty much is as it is now.

Things like that gives GOG the best of both worlds having Galaxy there for people that use it and allowing it to be easily removed for those that don't.

While I understand the arguments for boycotting GOG -- and agree to some extent with the motivation -- I think it's important to acknowledge that...

... there are very few legitimate DRM-free marketplaces...

... and the loss of GOG could potentially be a death blow to legitimate DRM-free stores of any size.

So, with that said, is indeterminate boycotting of GOG the best strategy?

It's a hard question for me to answer

Why are you all so worried GOG may get out of business due to a boycott that (talking as a participant here, mind me) involves a percentage so small of users it has actually been completely ignored so far?

Also, isn't more reasonable thinking that the moment GOG is actually hurt by this it will start correcting its awful recent politics, hence making this initiative worthwhile, rather than not changing the course and sink?

If a forum boycott could kill GOG...




...then maybe it deserves to die.