Hey, I'm sorry to hear you've been banned (I don't know how/why that's happened). I'll have a look at the voting options later on today. It seems like most who have responded so far are in favor of doing some sort of continuation of this thread, possibly making a new one to start a 'clean page'.

Yes, what I want at this point is clarity on that as well. I'm so fed up with having to research the status of local support for multiplayer for many releases that have a multiplayer option.

I'm not even sure why I should have to do that for a store that advertises itself as DRM-free. The least they could do is let me know when something isn't (I don't care what, just be transparent about it already).

At this point, I'm putting a soft boycott on games that have online-only multiplayer on general principle. I'm not buying any of those until they are discounted at 50% at least (and then, only if the game really wows me, otherwise make it 75%+). If I'm getting half the game, I should be paying half the price.


I'd add something to that: Open-source a server-side implementation of the Galaxy protocol (at least for the multiplayer part of it) or otherwise at the very least publish the protocol specs and give the community the permission to implement their own open-source server-side implementation.

Basically, make it as friction-less as possible for a game developer to simultaneously support the official Galaxy servers and self-hosted alternatives.

IMO this applies equally if we extend and keep using the same thread, because the scope (i.e. 2021) under which everyone has consented to be on these lists would still change.

Looks like "Boycotting GOG 2022" was boycotted by GOG. :)

D, leave gog before it sinks

E: have a whip round for a polish lawyer to resolve the rep scam once and for all.

twice

C or B, but would prefer C, as this thread is really long and new folks need a lot of time to read any of it.

And you could name this new thread: "Boycotting GOG 2022-20XY"

Forgot to vote so my choice is C.

Hey everyone. Alright, seeing as option A has fallen through with that other thread getting locked, I am going to propose that we 'reset' the voting to try to get more clarity on where people want to take the thread. Option C seems to be the most popular, based on the responses so far, which would be to start a new thread for 2022 but keep as much continuity with the old one as possible.

There was also a suggestion that we could just keep this thread going, but ask a forum mod to change the title to remove the year. I think that idea has some merit, since it would maintain good continuity and the record of the discussion that has taken place so far. I am a little concerned that if we start a new thread, we might just have a repeat of much of the discussion that has taken place already in this thread. But I don't know, maybe that would be a good thing, for the benefit of newcomers who may not have been involved in the boycott last year?

So, let's do a new vote on the following options. Transferable preference vote system, like before, until we reach a majority decision:

A) Create a new thread for a 2022 boycott (with 2022 in the title)

B) Create a new boycott thread with no year in the title

C) Keep this thread going, no change to the title

D) Keep this thread going, change title to remove the year

Hopefully this will give some better clarity as to what direction we will go with the boycott thread in the new year. I'll count votes on Friday, unless it becomes very obvious before then that there is a large majority for one option.

I think we're ok to just roll over the existing list. I mean, very little has changed since this time last year, so it seems reasonable to assume it's more likely people who signed up would continue boycotting. If anyone wants to be removed from the list, they can easily request it and I'll happily take them off.

If there are people on the list who don't frequent the forum any more and so don't see a new thread, that may be because they have left the site altogether (so again, probably more accurate to keep them on the list).

Just a thought from someone who isn't involved: Keeping the thread title might be a good idea. You guys don't know if and when things will change. Having a 2021 in the title will be a visible sign for how long this thing is going already (and I agree with fronzel: "Boycotting GOG" sounds too much like a whiny rant).

Optional: Keep the list clean. Having someone on there who left GOG long ago looks kinda stupid. So maybe split the list into "Still actively boycotting in 2022" and "Users who didn't answer if they're still boycotting". Having a growing list of inactive users is another sign that could tell something. But this could be an unreasonable amount of work.

So... If someone who isn't on the list (btw. I'm soft-boycotting GOG for a long time already, since I can't be bothered to check if games on GOG receive patches and are kept up to date) has the right to vote, I'd vote for C.

F) I think our best bet to be heard and offer a solid show is to make each boycott reason a separate thread, which you can join if you agree with. It keeps our causes active and showing. (hopefully displacing forum games)

E) Keep thread and title, just add current year "Boycotting GOG 2021-22"

C)

It’s way too much effort. I can follow one thread once in a while but that’s really it. The issues have all been listed out in thread after thread for years now, none, not a single one has been responded to, fixed, or even mentioned. Nothing is going to change now, if anything with reduced staff and covid pressures, it’s going to get worse. So I am not going to be following 30 odd threads which are going nowhere.

DEC >>> BAF