https://www.gog.com/forum/general/drm_on_gog_list_of_singleplayer_games_with_drm

What kind of 'effort' do you suggest this 'bunch of elitists' should put in 'to make a change'?

That's the worst, everyone identifies this group of users with the problematic and minority group of users of the gog forum.

I do not deny that this cannot be true but in some things they are saying they are quite right.

A head's up: the user y'all replied to is one of a handful that have recently(past few months) been(to varying degrees) "stirring the pot" in threads that criticize gog.

Precisely. It is hard to imagine that GOG is not making money off those games, if they have agreed to provide tech support for them. The whole deal is obviously a front for GOG to start profiting from DRMed games, which allows them to maintain a level of 'plausible deniability'. They insult our intelligence, as usual, as well as lacking the decency to just come clean and be honest about what they are doing.

For one thing, take there grivencese OUTSIDE this forum.
Start a community outside these closed of talk boxes.

Secondly, gather information, links and articles that would allow people to learn about what they are trying to achieve. Most of the time these kind of boycotts stop on "Trust me bro!" and people tend to fall of after like a month if not sooner.

Seriously anything than being a crybaby on a game store forum.
If you read the article, GOG wants Galaxy to be. besides there stores app, a hub where people would connect ALL there store fronts to have an easer way to segregate and play them.

The GOG store will still be DRM free, while the other stores would follow there own rules. No one is forcing you buy from the Epic Games store. The DRM games ARE NOT PART OF THE GOG STORE FRONT! Galaxy is suppose to allow you to axes these other store front to make purchases without opening and closing other apps.
Again Galaxy was always marketed as a hub for ALL the store fronts where you have games. Just buy games from GOG don't use the other store fronts.

You are sirously misrepresenting the provided info to confirm your bias.
If by stirring the pot you mean asking questions and pointing out logical fallacies in what has become a one sided circklejerk, than yes I am stirring the pot.

More like "List of games that require the GOG Galaxy to play multiplayer that was disclosed way back".

Post #2 is about multiplayer. Post #1 is about singleplayer.

The "Singleplayer DRM" is multiplayer/co-op features and bonus items from promotions that require an internet connection to validate them. You have full access to the singleplayer.

Some of these "DRM" claims are just pathetic. Like the FEAR one where it's a bug do to Securom being a tough nut to crack and what I gather very few people actually experience any problems with it. Installed the game just to check, no problem with getting it to run.

Instead of talking in general, let's take two examples:
- In Absolver, you cannot replay boss battles in single player mode unless you go online. This is singleplayer content that you have no access to unless you submit to the "DRM".
- In CP2077, you cannot use the "rewards" items in the single-player campaign unless you log in and authenticate via galaxy. This is singleplayer content that you have no access to unless you submit to the "DRM".

I believe that calling this anything other than singleplayer content, or stating that one has "full" access to singleplayer content, would be a "logical fallacy".

I appreciate you mentioning that, though I like to give people the benefit of the doubt if possible (and I know you do as well from our interactions on here). That is to say, I'm not accusing anyone in this topic of anything, or absolving them either :) I have to catch up on the discussion and see what they have to say before adding more direct responses to what I was discussing there.

To bring it back to the general discussion in this topic, that reminds me. Absolver. To my knowledge GOG hasn't addressed the issues with that but from some of your descriptions in here, it's pretty egregious. Separate from that game, a user brought up a point earlier (perhaps in a different topic, I'm not remembering) that GOG has responded pretty quickly in fixing "actual" DRM issues such as the Deus Ex Mankind Divided DLC that wouldn't start without Galaxy, while GOG has responded glacially or not at all in fixing more cosmetic type issues (I'm also lumping F.E.A.R. Securom remnants in this). I thought that was an interesting point/theory, however, don't the issues with Absolver kind of refute it? Food for thought.

Edit: And I see as I made my post mrkgnao was elaborating more about Absolver, so evidently GOG is still taking their time rectifying that situation.

Okay, I believe we may be talking past one another on some level? But this was essentially something I referenced in my earlier post.

GOG-the-company is making (what I call) an arbitrary distinction between GOG.com - the DRM-free gaming webstore, and GOG Galaxy - the client that also lets you purchase DRMed games. The reason why I say it's arbitrary is because GOG, meaning GOG-the-company, has both of these things under its umbrella. So, if someone says GOG, meaning GOG-the-company, is selling DRMed games, due to DRMed games being sold through Galaxy 2.0's store app, that seems to be the plain reality of the situation.

You seem very concentrated on the idea that since GOG (allegedly) isn't the one selling the games, and since Galaxy is (allegedly) just a middle man to get you to the other stores, it's all cool. And on a practical level I'd even agree in that I'd rather any DRM games (from any store) be confined to Galaxy-land instead of being on the GOG.com website. But ultimately, I view the shift as GOG as a company supporting the existence and proliferation of DRMed games, so that's still not enough even if I accept your claims as presented.

As an aside, could you please try to refrain from these sorts of little jabs? I find it unproductive to a good discussion. If I can improve any of my language/wording feel free to let me know too.

What is that going to achieve? How will that be more effective than a user boycott? Why does it matter where the GOG-boycotting community chooses to discuss matters? This is a complete red herring.

The first post of this thread has a clear list of greiviances and contains several links to other threads that provide a considerable amount of further details about the issues at hand. Perhaps you should try reading it?

You totally failed to address rjbuffchix' point about GOG providing support for Epic games sold through Galaxy. If, as you claim, Galaxy is simply providing a link to EGS, why would GOG be providing technical support for those games? Because, the reality is that they are clearly GOG sales.

I'm sorry fella, but again it seems you are the one who is badly misinformed. Besides, quoting GOG's own articles and PR tatements as if they somehow prove they are squeaky-clean and innocent is rather naive, don't you think?

In my personal opinion I don't see the Cyberpunk stuff as "Rewards", I see them more as Advertising as it is mostly stuff promoting The Witcher and Galaxy, and honestly why would someone who doesn't want anything to do with Galaxy want a shirt that supports Galaxy?. It is an honest question not an attack or anything.