They polled people to see if they wanted new games here and iirc like 75% of responses were in favor of this.

Just my 2cts. Regarding the "who boycotts wants to hurt a business" part. If I would like to HURT a business I would simply do so. No need to say that I'll do. I always thought this thread was to SHOW GOG something - maybe to make them think - not to hurt them. This is about goals and not about revenge.

Let's agree that we disagree.
They created a business to address a specific market Old Games. Fine.
They created a number of values and told themselves to live up to them. Fine.
Then, one by one, they dismantled these values to be substituted with... nothing.

Do you want to sell new games? Fine.
How about creating a better website to support both business model: new and old games?
Perhaps using gog.com as a portal to multiple store pages.
For example: there is no option to filter "dos era" games! This is just retarded.

Fixed price... went out of the window substituted by wild regional pricing. Worse than steam.
And so on and so forth.

With every downturn of one of their self-proclaimed values they simply substituted it with the cheapest, shaddy option.
No ethic. No effort. No investment. No quality.

Well Well Well....

I was hoping for GOG to simply release Devotion as they promised they would before stabbing Red Candle Games and ourselves in the back. However the concerning statements on DRM means that even if they release devotion I can not see myself getting games from GOG anymore. To say I am disappointed by this turn of events is a big understatement.
For clarity I'm referring to:

/www.gog.com/forum/general/drm_on_gog_list_of_singleplayer_games_with_drm/post413

I knew this would be the case.

It all boils back into this.

People wants GOG to go back to the year 2007-8 where it was only a place to purchase older games priced at 5-10 dollars and DRM Free and that's it.

No new games thus no increase in prices and no new games means no new Indie games either only the classic PC games from the 1980s to 2010-ish, no Early Access/In-Development games, no Pre-Order Bonuses/Special Editions of games. And no DLCs. And no GOG Galaxy

I don't think you can quote one guy and then state what "people" want. I came here primarly for new games (though getting some classics is also great).

I just noticed again that it is curiously relaxing to be boycotting GOG. I used to be a somewhat compulsive buyer when something decent was discounted. Now I don't have to worry to miss any good deal, since I am set to miss them all anyhow. I Don't have to think whether I should get a game that is currently cheap because I might want to play it later. My backlog is finally not growing anymore but slowly getting smaller. And I'm saving a lot of money.

Oh, are you requiring people to list ALL THEIR PERSONAL BELIEFS in a thread to "prove" that they "care" about "this very cause"?
What are you, the "I don't know about it so it must not exist" / "X hasn't explicitly reported Z so they must not agree / not have done it" kind of person?
Do you think that just because people don't publicly voice beliefs unrelated to thread's cause then they must "not care"?

Since you seem to have some special desire to write your implied name (or the name you want people here to call you) twice within 5 posts you will *SURELY* not mind me pointing out the obvious here.
So which one is it? Or do you imply we may malform thy name?

Let's get something clear so that those who don't know well enough don't get a wrong idea:
Valve pushed for "online digital distribution platform with mandatory assignment of key to a personal account with mandatory usage of said account to download and play the game".
That's a TYPE of DRM. Valve doesn't push for just ANY DRM.
There's PLENTY of true "DRM-free after downloaded" games there.
Valve created some "casual" kinds of DRM, examples being SteamStub, Steamworks (which isn't DRM by itself!) to a degree, CEG (more advanced kind of DRM but still pretty casual).
But they infact DON'T force ANY developer publishing their games there to use ANY DRM at all!
I just want this to be clear for everyone that just blatantly ignores this and goes all "Steam is pro DRM" because when you cut the account requirement out of the picture Valve is not so "pro DRM" anymore.

Maybe filtering by "year released" or "original platform" (as in, the platform it was ORIGINALLY released on, example being DOS) would be a better idea.
Something to request from blues I guess (tho given how they cannot be bothered to fix even simple REPORTED bugs in forum CMS I am not sure if they would implement these any time soon).

That's a great thing isn't it? We (some of us anyway) can finally focus on playing what we've got instead of getting disctracted by discounts to lie to ourselves that we "need it now so that we can play it someday" ;)

Mandatory usage of an account to play the game *is* DRM.

Also, the problem with Steam is that:
* They provide DRM to developers.
* They encourage said use of DRM.
* They don't clearly state which games use DRM and which don't.

That's enough of a reason for me to consider it unethical to buy games on that service, or to even use the service for free games.

itch.io, while it doesn't outright forbid DRM, is better on at least two of these points:
* They don't provide DRM.
* They don't encourage DRM, and the itch.io community doesn't encourage it eiter; in fact, developers that do use DRM there are looked down upon (resulting in DRM-encumbered games there being rare).

Havent been on this site in a while,im not boycotting,no...there was just nothing to buy in a couple of recent years.Bought classic titles that i like,waiting for a dozen of others which gog cant get their hans on (and probably never will as it is).gog was about classic games,now they are about indie titles.i have zero interest in indie titles and i wont buy them just to support gog.this is just not the place i visit anymore.just my two cents.

I sad, driver san Francisco will almost never be relisted. So, how are you sport?

2.5k posts do not really look like boycotting, We are all Supporters here! ^

but we are... I want more games here... If the game isn`t here and I want to play it, I do play it anyway, I don`t care for DRM or something... I will buy it once it is here : )

but if there is a game that the Developer/Publisher wants to bring here, and the only big DRM-free store says no, yop that`s where the tension grows...

Hope we will avoid it in the future. I have learned that this game store is not able to provide me everything I want from the gaming world. I want more gaming news, access to all games I want, and a gaming bed... I don`t blame them anymore just helping myself to achieve goals... ; )

I wish you all the best! ^

Okay? But I already said that, even in the very text you left in your quote of my message.
I said:
So what are you trying to pull here? Trying to make me look bad? Implying I implied it's not DRM?
Too bad you failed :P

They provide a number of toolkits to developers, among them there is few pretty casual (as in, easily overridable, short of CEG which is SOMEWHAT harder but actually DEAD by now and nobody uses it for new games anymore) forms of DRM. I already said that in my previous message.
All other forms of DRM come from 3rd party companies.
You can't blame Valve for "putting DRM in games". It's entirely on developers/publishers.
Valve only provides the platform, which naturally comes at a cost of account requirement for usage.
But apart from that they don't enforce ANY DRM at all.

A lie.

According to my info from talks with Valve employees (not support) the product card page accuracy is 100% on developer/publisher.
The product card can be edited in a special place in admin panel for game uploader.
Are you seriously expecting Valve to manually check product card for EVERY game after EVERY update? (such as Valve MANUALLY themselves changing Denuvo > none, after it gets removed)
It would be insane considering the number of games there are published there. And this CANNOT be automated.
It's entirely on developer to keep that info precise.
If you see any errors on a product page you are encouraged to report them to Steam Support who should then forward it to appropriate department.
That is, of course, unless you want to just keep wining about a problem without doing anything in your power to force someone responsible to fix it.

I would like to note that Steam is other a decade old, Valve pioneered certain aspects of current game distribution, and therefore considering both their age and their achievements the situation of theirs is in no way comparable to itch .io .
Itch .io is a much younger platform that came in when there was already an actual niche for DRM-free indie gaming and filled it upon arrival.

At the times when Valve created Steam it was still a golden age of CD-checks as a very bare MINIMUM, with the likes of SecuROM being popular, others being things like TAGES and many many many other ones.

You and many others are trying to discredit Valve and dismiss everything positive they have done and keep doing for the industry, out of pure hate, and you completely ignore that they forced industry into some actual STANDARDS.
Before Steam it was all a fest of "who can make more intrusive DRM faster".
For very popular back in the day SecuROM you needed internet access, for some titles you had to rebuy the game every few installs as for some of SecuROM protected titles there never sufraced deauthorisation tool.
Most existing DRMs back in the day were a heavy burden. Most were worse than what we have now. Some of the older ones were even literal "legal rootkits".

Valve came in and created a platform that allowed cheaper method of game distribution (digitally) with added many benefits.
A centralised hub for games.
It does require an account. But how do you want to create something like this without it?
GOG requires an ACCOUNT to DOWNLOAD games too. The only difference is that Steam does not provide offline installers.
That's LITERALLY the only difference for download-install account authorisation process between them.

And after you install games on Steam you don't actually have to have internet connection to play almost all of them, assuming they only contain Valve-provided forms of DRM.
Steam stub is so casual you can move your entire install of Steam with games between computers.
You then have offline mode.
Many games don't even contain Steam Stub and can be directly played from exe.

Also developers generally stopped mixing different DRMs and for example when Denuvo gets removed then it often turns out there is NOTHING left - example being DMC5 before Virgil update or RE2Remake before (I think) "RE3 advert" update.
Most new games with external DRM are like that.

Saying Valve "encourages DRM" is a LIE. Stop lying.
They provide the means and it's entirely up to the developer if they use them or not.
Most in fact don't and instead go for external DRMs that Valve has nothing to do with.
There is nothing in the agreement forcing you to use Valve provided ones, or any at all for that matter.
Also Valve is in no way responsible for 3rd party DRMs being put into games. If developer decides to put Denuvo into their game Valve has NOTHING to do with that.
In fact Valve's own games are basically DRM-free if you know specific cvars.
So, nice try, but Valve isn't that bad as some people are trying to paint it.

So you basically just came here to say that you don't care about GOG breaking their own proclaimed (even publicly boasted about to the point of publicly roasting competition with certain website) principles (such as lack of DRM ANYWHERE)?
Great /s

Wait, driver SAN FRANCISCO was here?
I guess I must have missed it then :/

edit: fixed something

I meant that Ubisoft stopped licensing the game and is not available in any digital stores and now only purchasable in shady code shops or physical copies. That means it is now almost a guaranteed to never come to GOG. :(